Posted on 02/20/2006 11:43:35 AM PST by SwinneySwitch
MILWAUKEE -- President Bush and President Vicente Fox of Mexico exchanged ideas Monday on how to stop violence and improve security along the two countries' mutual border, the White House said.
Press secretary Scott McClellan said that Bush telephoned Fox while traveling here to give a speech and said the pair "talked about working together" to improve conditions that have been a source of friction between the two countries.
McClellan told reporters that Bush has designated Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff to talk to his counterpart in Mexico about the problem and said that Bush and Fox also talked about pending immigration legislation in Congress
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
"bots"
???
LOL!!!!!!
" I just don't understand his thinking."
Ever get involved in local politics? I've got a feeling there's some little deals back in Texas that he is still paying off.
As you can see, a cite has already been provided, although this is a long been a well-established fact which really doesn't require a cite.
What the article in the link provided by SwinneySwitch didn't explain was what Bush tried to do to get the site shut down.
In addition to threatening a copyright infringement lawsuit for using photos and images off the 'official' Bush campaign web site, Bush filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission, asserting that the site's owner had violated election laws by not registering as a political committee, and urged that the site's "fair market value" put the endeavor well over the $1000 threshold that defines a political (action) committee under election law.
It was only after the FEC told Bush to go pound sand that he uttered his famous phrase showing exactly what his opinion is on the freedoms we enjoy --he thinks we have too much freedom.
Instead of using private means to resolve his dispute, such as buying out the domain's owner or suing in civil court, Bush tried to sic the federal government on the site's owner and have him labeled as a PAC.
You don't get around much do you? If you did, you'd find out the anger is increasing across the board on this issue. Americans that are truly informed on this march to national suicide are solidly against illegal immigration for many reasons that should be obvious to anyone with half a brain. I know that leaves out many folks who listen/watch to the MSM useful idiots or those working for "the race". If your #'s were even close (which they aren't) initiatives like PROP 200 in AZ would never have passed (which it did).
Same old, same old.
Talk is cheap, nothing ever happens.
Nothing to see here, please move along.
Have you Googled it yet? It is sourced all over.
I don't know where you got that 5% number, every number that comes up in a search is above 2/3 to 70% to 90%. For example, just one link:
"Moreover, public opinion polls taken over the last five years have consistently found that roughly 70 percent of Americans think the United States should not make it easier for illegal aliens to become citizens (Figure 4)."
By now you should be aware that anything said that is critical of Bush will be challenged by one or more of the FR resident GOP/RNC Big Tenters. So cites are always necessary when dealing with these people.
"...what Bush tried to do to get the site shut down."
I appreciate the additional information which you provided here. It certainly does not make Bush look good. Very unwise behavior. If you're a public figure, you have to take this kind of crap.
"It was only after the FEC told Bush to go pound sand that he uttered his famous phrase showing exactly what his opinion is on the freedoms we enjoy --he thinks we have too much freedom."
Anyone who believes we have too much freedom, and wants to curtail it, is not fit to be president.
"...Bush tried to sic the federal government on the site's owner and have him labeled as a PAC."
I can understand Bush's frustration with what must have been on that anti-Bush site. Still, freedom of speech is too precious to trust its safekeeping to politicians. Any politician. And, with his refusal to deal with CFR (he punted to SCOTUS rather than veto it), Bush failed the freedom of speech test.
Right. They are screwing us.
As someone who is extremely critical of Bush, I know this all too well.
I appreciate the additional information which you provided here. It certainly does not make Bush look good. Very unwise behavior. If you're a public figure, you have to take this kind of crap.
You're welcome.
Yup. Unless your name is George W. Bush.
In this case, his solution to having protestors criticize him was to lock them up in chain-link-fence-surrounded, razor-wire-topped areas guarded by armed US military personnel, then label this a "Free Speech Zone".
Once again, this starkly demonstrates Bush's hatred of the freedom of speech (where it's critical of him) and the means he will use to curtail it.
Anyone who believes we have too much freedom, and wants to curtail it, is not fit to be president.
This was one of the big reasons I didn't vote for him in 2000. His non-amnesty amnesty and Social Security Totalization Agreement with Mexico (signed June, 2004) are the main reasons why I didn't vote for him in 2004.
I can understand Bush's frustration with what must have been on that anti-Bush site. Still, freedom of speech is too precious to trust its safekeeping to politicians. Any politician. And, with his refusal to deal with CFR (he punted to SCOTUS rather than veto it), Bush failed the freedom of speech test.
Failed it many times over.
Did that along with the request form so they will know who it is from...one of the guys on the ground that phoned, put up posters and stuffed envelopes for GW.
I already gave it.
A Harris on-line poll of .004% of US "Adults" - not "voters", much less "likely voters" - does not tell us anything. Especially when sampling cross-referential categories weighted by demographic expectations. You'll get a much better idea of what people think about immigration by going to three or four local pubs and taking a hand count.
"Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost." --John Quincy Adams
You chose a truly great quote for your homepage.
Words to live by, if only we would.
After studying this poll for a while, I have come to the conclusion that either rank and file Americans are pretty stupid, or that Harris deliberately went after the dumbest folks in the universe.
Anyone in this day and age who puts national security that far near the bottom of their "issues" is not, IMO, working with a full deck.
This whole thing is about our National Sovereignty; and our ability to live free! This issue of Immigration is certainly worth bashing the President over. Many frustrating hours of pleading for sanity and reason have gone down the toilet for the inefficient manner he himself has encouraged. This issue is going to signal defeat if allowed to continue to be politicized. We either have a secure border and and a secure future or we have a porous sieve laced with tunnels pretending it is a border when its not. This is deadly serious business for every American. Your "FREE REPUBLIC"?; is at stake and our enemies are depending on us to deal and do business with a snake in the grass down south. Bush is not so much dangerous for what he does but rather for what we allow him to get away with!
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.