Posted on 01/22/2004 6:28:21 PM PST by foreverfree
Edited on 05/07/2004 7:03:17 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
The president made many valid points as he went on the offensive in this final State of the Union speech of his first term in office. He defended his policies and decisions, including the right of the United States to defend itself.
(Excerpt) Read more at delmarvanow.com ...
I'm not a Bush hater. I volunteered for his 2000 campaign and again this time around. I've also contributed generously both to that campaign and the one now. If you had a clue, which you obviously don't, you'd know I'm just one of many Bush supporters (and FReepers) who are against his faulty amnesty proposal.
Let me educate you, though you're probably beyond help.
Check here
And here
Give me an ECONOMIC arguement WHY registering illegal aliens as guest workers IS BAD...
Why? You're obviously intent on defending the man and his faulty proposal regardless what evidence is presented. But, I'll humor you, just for the hell of it.
There are plenty good arguments against amnesty for lawbreakers.
This is about as good as any.
Thanks. You sound like Michael Moore.
The proposal I read on the White House Website is not amnesty, it's an offer to those who are here illegally and wish to register and pay a processing fee, to get a permit to work here for three years with conditions, It's clear that this is just a proposal and it's also clear that President Bush is asking for input from Congress, and it's our job to voice our concerns to Congress, But at least this problem will be addressed, and I sure hope the same vigor that is expressed here on FR is also expressed in Faxes and letters to our elected Representatives.
Dividing the GOP over this proposal is juvenile at best and suicidal at worst, Some of the comments I have seen on these threads can only be compared to those losers over at DU, and I think we are much better than that.
I'm on your side and I am a staunch conservative, but I am also someone who understands how legislation works and this country's policies are based on compromise, otherwise we would simply dismiss the other party from Congress after we win the White House. President Bush took an oath to be the President of all the people, not just his base or the republican party. The sooner some of these hot heads around here figure that out, the sooner we will take this nation back from the liberals
Jim, I included you in my response because my pinging you to my first post on this thread was questioned
Yes, it is amnesty.
Amnesty is defined as "A general pardon granted by a government, especially for political offenses."
Our immigration laws are federal laws, and violating them is an affront to the sovereignty of our nation, as well as the individual states. To forgive that offense by granting legal status to these criminals is an amnesty. Deny it all you want, but you cant change that simple fact.
Dividing the GOP over this proposal is juvenile at best and suicidal at worst, Some of the comments I have seen on these threads can only be compared to those losers over at DU, and I think we are much better than that.
If anyone is dividing the GOP is is the president; it's certainly not me. And if you think we should all walk the same walk it is you who belongs at DU.
That was an economic argument. Had you read it you'd know. And, like I said, you're probably discount it and you have.
No loss.
This is a Sociological Thesis Statement. This is not an Economic Argument. This is an article about VIOLENT illegal immigrants and their relations with INS and LA PD (with a smattering of info from NY). AND A XENOPHOBIC NUT WHO IS CLEARLY AFRAID OF HER OWN SHADOW. The story has more loose ends then a brothel in Nevada....
If the proposal said: all illegals in the USA are hereby notified that you must come forth and face hefty fines, deportation and a good old fashion Caning by the 20 or so Freepers who hate your guts. After that we invite you to enroll in our guest worker program that denies you any path to become a citizen of this country despite the fact that you already faced justice."
The plain fact is that they are already here and they all didn't come here on January 20th, 2001. We can't possibly think we can dragnet the entire country and deport them all, we need to urge all those who have personal knowledge of this problem to come forth and exchange their views on how we address this problem, But condemning President Bush for having the courage to get this debate started is counter productive and IMHO, the chicken shit way dealing with a problem that has to be addressed
I'm just one of majority of FReepers and Americans who think there is something that can be done other than raising the white flag...in fact...I'm sure of it. If you don't agree...fine. But I would never tell you you shouldn't post your thoughts on this or any subject in any thread. That's just not me.
The fact is, and it's one only you would deny, there is simply no economic reason to import foreign workers.
If the supply of foreign workers were to dry up (say, through actually enforcing the immigration law, for starters), employers would respond to this new, tighter, labor market in two ways. One, they would offer higher wages, increased benefits, and improved working conditions, so as to recruit and retain people from the remaining pool of workers. At the same time, the same employers would look for ways to eliminate some of the jobs they now are having trouble filling. The result would be a new equilibrium, with blue-collar workers making somewhat better money, but each one of those workers being more productive.
Illegals take jobs from Americans (construction industry for example) and depress wages for those who still work. That's wrong, and it's indefensible. But you're waaaay too smart for that argument, I'm sure.
It's been fun educating you but my time here has been limited lately and I'd rather spend it engaging those with intelligent debate, not with blind-Bush supporters who dare not question a thing he does.
Later.
Wasn't that an intelligent thought.
Firstly, I can't beleive I'm having to repeat this for anyone, especially someone who was part of that debate. I was not "all for him". There were only two realistic choices in the recall election...Arnold and bustamechA. Arnold got my vote because he was a better choice than bustamechA.
If you've got anything intelligent to say by all means do. Otherwise, please don't private message me again with your absurd statements.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.