I could care less what DUmmies think. Welcome to FR. You seem to have the lingo down pat right off the bat.
I wonder why that is...
Posted on 08/30/2005 10:34:44 PM PDT by goldstategop
Pat Buchanan, former communications director to President Ronald Reagan, former presidential candidate and WND commentator, has come to the conclusion that a courageous Republican legislator should move a bill for impeachment of President Bush.
I reluctantly agree – and for the same reasons.
President Bush has had nearly six years in office to honor his oath of office and enforce immigration laws in this country.
He has not only failed, he has intentionally neglected this sworn duty, instead claiming he prefers to promote a vague immigration "reform" plan that involved a "guest worker" program that has served as an encouragement to the most massive influx of illegal immigration this country has ever seen.
Some will tell me this can't be done and that it is irresponsible to propose it because Bush is a wartime president.
My response? It is precisely because this nation finds itself in a desperate war declared by a formidable foe determined to use our open borders to destroy this country that we must act now.
Some will remind me I endorsed Bush just two years ago for re-election.
My response? I made it very clear at the time that I was not really endorsing Bush, per se, but seeking the only practical way to defeat his reckless and irresponsible and treasonous opponent. There is no contradiction here. Kerry had to be defeated. Now Bush must go. America can do better.
I don't agree with many of Pat Buchanan's foreign policy ideas. But on the border, he is 100 percent right. Bush has been a disaster. No matter how successful we might be in our campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan, we can lose this war against jihadist Islam right here at home.
Our enemies have already used the open border to penetrate this country – and they will do so again.
When Bush placed the old Immigration and Naturalization Service under the new Department of Homeland Security, I actually believed he recognized how critical border security was to the defense of our homeland. I was fooled.
In the current issue of my premium, online, intelligence newsletter, G2 Bulletin, author Paul Williams recounts in extravagant detail how al-Qaida operatives have already used the open Mexican border not only to sneak operatives into the country but to smuggle in nuclear weapons with the help of the MS-13 (Mara Salvatrucha) street gang.
The fuse has been lit.
The war in Iraq, which I have supported, will mean little when, not if, a nuclear weapon is detonated inside our own country.
When that happens, we will no longer be having debates about who has more culpability for Sept. 11 – Bush or his predecessor. Bush has had ample opportunity to address the mistakes of the past. Instead, he has repeated them. They say hindsight is 20-20. Not for Bush.
Even if the border issue and the tsunami of illegal immigration was not strictly speaking the No. 1 national security issue we face, enforcing the laws of the land would be the right thing to do – the only moral and right thing to do.
Americans are dealing with more joblessness, higher crime, skyrocketing taxes, a crippled medical system, overcrowded jails, an overburdened judicial and law enforcement system, costly and divisive language barriers and changing demographics that are permanently transforming the U.S. culture.
Why?
Bush claims it is because America needs cheap labor. That's what the law of supply and demand is all about. It's not his duty or responsibility to acquire workers for big corporations and other fat cats below what the market will support.
I don't even believe Bush is being honest when he makes this argument. I am convinced there are international agreements behind this. I am persuaded the systematic destruction of the American way of life through uncontrolled and illegal immigration is part of a master plan for merger and global consolidation – first with our neighbors in this hemisphere and later worldwide.
This secretive plot must end here and now.
America was founded on the principle of independence and sovereignty. The president is betraying our most sacred national heritage.
Bush is ignoring the will of the people and he is violating the law of the land.
It's time to turn up the heat.
As Buchanan suggested: Will even one courageous Republican member of Congress have the guts to sponsor a bill of impeachment?
I could care less what DUmmies think. Welcome to FR. You seem to have the lingo down pat right off the bat.
I wonder why that is...
I didn't say that Bush was a wimp, you must be confusing me with someone else
Last time Pat Buchanan ran for President, he chose for
his running mate a marxist.
I didn't know he is still doing their work.
The sky is falling!
Local, and state elected officials have nothing to do with the Federal Government refusing to address the Border Problems. While I agree that many local and state incumbants need to be fired, a blanket firing of all incumbants isn't going to happen.
Things on the Border are rapidly getting more intense, things are about to boil over, something has to be done soon.
The solution is to get the attention of those in charge. Those in charge have continued to ignore the problem, knowing their position is very unpopular, I don't believe anything short of a bill if impeachment will get their attention.
"I think that congress needs to pass a law so the blame gets spread around by everyone. (I notice Clinton didn't do it during his 8)"
Neither party is willing to risk offending hispanic voters, or employers.
And both parties are willing to toy with voters, as if they expect us to forever be placated by hollow words.
Reagan's 1986 amnesty was a carefully crafted scam. It should be called the "great fraudulent Document Amnesty."
Illegal immigrants entered the citizenship process, with false documents, and employers merely have to stuff their employee files with fraudulent documents.
Government agencies likewise fill their folders with false documents.
Zero interior enforcement. Zero employer penalties.
I have never understood the opposition to a national identification system. But it would matter not a twit, under the present level of enforcement.
Fencing the borders will do very little, compared to enforcing proof of legal right to be in the country.
Whatever.
Actually, they seem to be doing (legislating), or trying to do, much more than I thought . . . though not enough. Rep. Mike Rogers, chairman of the House Homeland Security subcommittee on management and oversight, said Congress must approve funding for additional Border Patrol agents. “Americans would be outraged if they really knew how porous that border is down there and how grossly understaffed the Border Patrol and Customs people are,” Rogers told reporters during a conference call. [. . .] The Homeland Security subcommittee has oversight of federal spending for border-related programs, and Rogers said more is needed to improve conditions for federal law enforcement to effectively fight an onslaught of undocumented immigrants. An increase in funding for new Border Patrol agents is included in the $30.8 billion spending bill for the Department of Homeland Security. House and Senate lawmakers are trying to resolve differences in the bill in a conference committee. Congress has authorized spending for an additional 10,000 new Border Patrol agents over the next five years. Rogers urged conferees to approve as least 1,000 of those positions in the Homeland Security bill for fiscal year 2006, which begins Oct. 1. In addition, Rogers said the Department of Homeland Security must work quickly to implement the $2.5 billion program that establishes infrared cameras along the border to track undocumented crossers and smugglers.
I don't want to vote out Congressional or Senate Republicans, nor do I want a Democratic President.
The solution is to get the attention of those in charge.
I absolutely agree!
My little one vote at the local and state level, if joined by others, just might send the right message to and get the attention of their brothers and sisters in the federal government.
PING
Impeachment of a president is a serious matter. Does he deserve it?
2-4:
Sect. 4. The President, Vice President and all civil
Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on
impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other
high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
"Bribery" is bribery and corruption. Black defines "corruption" thusly:
¦ Corruption. ¦ ¦ An act done with an intent to give some advantage inconsistent ¦ with official duty and the rights of others. The act of an ¦ official or fiduciary person who unlawfully and wrongfully uses hi ¦ station or character to procure some benefit for himself or for ¦ another person, contrary to duty and the rights of others. See ¦ Bribe; Extortion.
Wartime? I see a lot of military operatons under UN sanction. I've looked carefully and I don't find any legislation citing 1-8-11 as authority. 
Our borders are vast.
It would take far more than "doubling the size of the Border Patrol" to make the slightest dent in the problem. If your goal is to stop terrorists from getting in, you will fail.
And, yes, something else doesn't add up. I was incorrect- the congress authorized 2000 per year, Bush hired 210.
If a bill of impeachment will get Bush to get off the pot then it will be worth it.
Should the Democrats capitalize on illegal immigration and ride it as an issue into the White House, a lot of Republican automatons are going to be mighty sick.
Sorry, did not provide url:http://www.washtimes.com/national/20050303-123638-7500r.htm
Right on!
he is nuts
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.