Posted on 04/26/2006 2:52:21 AM PDT by goldstategop
We had a President in the 1990s who didn't always mean what he said and didn't always say what he meant.
Once he even questioned the meaning of the word "is."
Now we have another President who tells us he opposes "amnesty," but his definition of that term has little to do with what it says in the dictionary.
Just for the record – and to spare you the time of looking it up – Webster's New World defines amnesty as follows: 1. a pardon, especially for political offenses against a government; 2. a deliberate overlooking, as of an offense;
Asked at a recent press briefing what the President means by amnesty, White House spokesman Scott McClellan explained it is anything that "put someone on an automatic path toward citizenship."
Maybe now we can see why the President is speaking a different language when he says he opposes amnesty.
He is clearly not against pardoning millions, even tens of millions, of illegal aliens who broke the law by entering this country, and who continue to break our laws by living and working here. President Bush doesn't consider such a blanket pardon "amnesty."
He only considers a blanket decision to put those people on an "automatic path toward citizenship" amnesty.
Personally, I'm sick and tired of Presidents who can't speak or understand plain English. I'm sick and tired of Presidents – Democrats and Republicans – who choose to obfuscate and confuse issues rather than execute the laws of the land and heed the will of the people. I'm sick and tired of Presidents – and other elected officials – who twist and bend not only our duly enacted laws to suit their own agendas but even the meaning of simple words.
I'm also sick of hearing this President tell the American people that we would never be able to deport all the illegal aliens in this country.
"Massive deportation of the people here is not going to work," he said again this week. "It's just not going to work."
Now, I have to tell you this sounds a little strange coming from a man who says we can and will defeat terrorism, that we can and will bring "democracy" to the Middle East, that Islam is and can be a religion of peace.
To further confuse the issue, Bush went on to say the following: "I know this is an emotional debate. But one thing we can't lose sight of is that we are talking about human beings, decent human beings."
Can I ask how we know that, given that these people, we are told, are "undocumented"? We don't know who they are, but we are certain they are all "decent human beings." Do I have this right?
But Bush's obfuscation gets even worse.
After telling us how wonderful these people are and how we don't want to deport them and can't, he then boasted that 6 million have already been captured and turned back since he took office.
Now, which is it? Are you as confused as I am?
Then, he shifted gears again: "You can be a nation of law and a compassionate nation at the same time."
In other words, as I read this quote, laws are not meant to be enforced uniformly because that wouldn't be compassionate. Instead, we should enforce them arbitrarily in order to be compassionate.
All of this leaves me with a few questions:
If we can capture and deport 6 million illegals since 2001, why can't we capture and deport another 12 million to 20 million with no time limit – no statute of limitations?
If it is compassionate to capture and deport 6 million illegals since 2001, why is it not compassionate to do the same to the 12 million to 20 million illegals who have taken up permanent residency here in violation of our laws?
If we can send a man to the moon, if we can overthrow Saddam Hussein, if we can defeat international terrorism, why can't we get control of our borders? Why can't we prosecute lawbreakers?
If we can identify the "undocumented," if we can make provisions for them and bring them into the system, why can't we deport them?
Won't amnesty, no matter what you call it, only encourage millions more to come to America illegally?
If President Bush can't be trusted to define amnesty honestly, can we continue to trust him with the security of the country? Can we trust him any more with the lives of Americans? Can we trust him to serve the people and the Constitution in other ways for remainder of his term?
LOL!! Amateur historians, calling Bush a failure even though he's freed 50 million Muslims.
Just wait, soon the kool-aid drinkers will be screaming "Hillary!".
It's not just the Dims who think We're stupid! Who here, would like to take a politician to a nice dinner and then kick his ass?
The current Senate immigration proposal would NOT exclued felons from the amnesty. Dingy Harry Reid killed that bill to prevent amendments that would exclude felons.
save
I like Eisenhower's definition.
"Amnesty" isn't the confusing word, we all understand the word, it's that deceitful little word "is" that presents the trickery, as in: amnesty "is".
I believe we know exactly what the meaning of "is" is this time, it's "si" written backwards.
You obviously haven't read many polls then. Most Americans do want illegal aliens deported. And, yes, they do support a guest worker program.
I see very few posts calling for Bush's impeachment. But, he has been a failure as a President from a Conservative perspective. He is the biggest spender since LBJ. He hasn't vetoed one spending bill. He has left our children with a massive federal deficit which continues to grow. He has refused to protect our borders from invasion. And in Iraq where he proclaimed victory years ago and spent approximately 320 Billion dollars, solders and civilians are still dying. He instituted a massive socialist prescription drug program. His approval ratings are extremely low and he is dragging down the GOP with him. It is President Bush that is a blight on the GOP.
We'd get in big trouble for answering that question honestly, Wolfcreek. How about just a grin of agreement and a wink.
It's not the duty of we the people of this nation to explain to the likes of Boortz or even our well paid servants in DC,who sat on their collective @$$e$ and allowed the invasion to happen, how to deport 12 million illegal aliens.
It is our duty to tell them that if they are too d@mn stupid or too lazy or too pro-invasion to fix the problem they created, we will fire their @$$e$ and hire people who can.
You are not an American, are you? I care more about American than Muslims. Apparent Bush is the opposite.
"...we will fire their @$$e$ and hire people who can."
Best wishes. I think it's a pipe dream. Finding viable candidates to carry out your dream seems about as realistic as deporting 11 million illegals.
Which American would that be? Seriously, I believe President Bush showed how much he cares about America by waging war against Islamotarianism.
Would you care to explain?
You give yourself away with that perspective.
Another 2004 signup among the many 2004 signups who came from DU.
Except that the people you want to hire (by voting out Republicans) would be Democrats.
You think Democrats are going to repatriate 12 million illegals?
You don't care about anybody but yourself.
You'd have better luck flying to the moon by flapping your arms than repealing the 14th amendment.
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.