And yes, Bush and Fox are markcing in lockstep on this issue, among others.
And I never said that the words "The Minutemen are vigilantes" escaped President Bush's mouth.
My point is that there is no way to parse his words in which the "vigilantes" he is referring to are not the Minutemen.
And Bush-bashing-as you inartfully describe criticism of his horrendous policy on this subject-is absolutely called for.
No matter what the fault of Congress-and they share partial responsibility for the disastrous situation on our So. border-it is up to the president to send an unambiguous message that he will enforce the law.
That he will not allow anyone to abrogate our laws in any way whatsoever.
By encouraging illegal immigration at every opportunity all he does is erode his administration's credibility on this issue.
I took Bush's comments to mean that he would not support a mission by the minutemen that went oustside their mission statement. He did not call the minutemen or what they were doing vigilantes. He did say what he thought vigilantes actions consisted of. You can take it to mean something else if you want to.
Some here have and do claim that W said something he did not say. On this issue there is plenty of firepower to bring to bare against W's position. There is no need to augment anything. Claiming W called the minutemen,or what they are doing, vigilante is simply inaccurate. It is needless augmentation.
Vincente Fox is not for ANY kind of border enforcement. He did say not all that long that these folks were not illegal in any way, simply that they were migrant workers that remained undocumented.
W understands the flow has to be legal or not at all. He understands that border enforcement needs to and will happen. TO claim Fox and W are on the exact same page about this is more augmentation. Do they agree on some stuff? Sure they do. Hardly lock step IMHO.
I blame congress for drafting so many laws that pertain to this issue ( and that get tied wrongly to this issue by trial laywers) For the bulk of the problem. It is an extension of trying to gain what you want by producing inaction.
Example: Laci's law. You know, the law passed so that a person can be charged with two murders if he kills a pregnant woman? Some immigration lawyers instantly tried to make the case that this applied to Illegals.....making their unborn into americans citizens....engame being avoiding deportation.
Congress does not need the president to pass laws. The president however does need the congress to do that same thing.
I stand with you in the notion that W could do a whole lot more. I stand aside of you when you claim it is all on him ( or any other president).
Ronald Reagan pushed thru an amnesty that was supposed to end this problem once and for all. Congress dropped the ball afterwords. Keep in mind some of the folks there at the time are still there now.....hint hint hint......for things to change......congress has to change. Either they get off their butts and do something about this or we vote them out.