Posted on 05/09/2006 7:50:33 AM PDT by Incorrigible
I often hear from readers who wonder why I so thoroughly dislike George W. Bush.
It's simple. Living in New Jersey, as I do, I spend a lot of time arguing politics with liberals. In the pre-Bush era, I found it easy to win such arguments. I have fond memories of defending the policies of Ronald Reagan back in the good old days. "He called the Soviet Union an evil empire!" the liberal would say.
"But it is an evil empire," I would point out...
...Before George W. came along, conservatives were on the winning side of every major issue. We were the ones who disdained the Beltway class, who pushed for smaller, more responsible government. Remember term limits? The balanced-budget amendment? In the Clinton era, the GOP promised such reforms...
...But to call Bush a traitor to his political philosophy is to imply that he had one. He didn't. You can read through Bush's various speeches over the years without coming up with the slightest hint of a coherent system of thought. In this, he's the opposite of Reagan...
...That's George W. to a T, an entertainer past his prime. Only his fellow entertainers -- Rush Limbaugh et al. -- still pretend he knows what he's doing...
As I am fond of reminding readers, I was onto this fraud from the first. In November of 1999 I urged that he drop out of the GOP primary. In the spring of 2004, I suggested that renominating him would lead to disaster for the party. The only good I can see coming out of this mess is that it opens a whole new line of argument against the liberals: After Bush, no president will ever be trusted again.
(Excerpt) Read more at nj.com ...
I think that has to be the starting point of the process. I am willing to wait to figure out what to do with the illegal alien population in place until we get the border secured. That does not mean we should stop domestic enforcement - IMO we should step it up. But we first have to work to arrest the inbound flow.
See, it isn't all that hard to reach some kind of consensus. I wonder why it is so hard for our elected leaders to come to a common-sense point of agreement?
Actually, a total ban on any government aid to illegals, combined with prison sentences for employers who hire illegals, would solve most of the problem. Without subsidies or jobs, most of the illegals would simply return to where they came from.
Nothing will happen, though, because both parties have decided that America will become a multi-cultural nation where we celebrate "diversity". We're in a real bind on this one. If the 'Rats take Congress this year, they'll kill any proposal to do anything at all to secure the borders, and will pass an amnesty bill which President Bush will likely sign. If the GOP holds Congress, we'll be told that it's because the voters like the President's lax management on this issue and his "guest worker" plan, so it'll be business as usual.
Like NAFTA, this is a bi-partisan sell-out. It was decided for us, by both parties, that the old melting-pot America is passe, and a new multi-cultural, multi-lingual America is the future. Just as both parties decided for us that our manufacturing base would be outsourced.
That's what I'm afraid of.
though, because both parties have decided that America will become a multi-cultural nation where we celebrate "diversity"
I don't think the Pubs have any problem imposing assimilation, but that's not what's on the table. I see two groups that I'm afraid are going to cut each others' throats in the GOP -- the hardnose nationalists and business.
Both sides have fair points, but if they can't find a compromise the status quo remains.
What I'd like to see pushed for is the do-no-harm stuff -- ending bennies, boarder security -- that nobody can disagree with unless it's a Dem who wants illegals to be given the right to vote. (and that's what I'm really afraid of)
I'm surprised Mulshine hasn't lost his job. He is a real jerk, and rude to his readers.
Paul Mulshine arrived from Philadelphia with Richard Aregood who was the Editorial Page Editor but I see now that he has been replaced. (http://www.starledger.com/editOpinion.asp)
Now that I know that, I'm surprised he hasn't been fired as well!
I'm a fan of Paul Mulshine despite his abrasiveness. He really was my FR before FR!
Before he arrived at the (red)Star Ledger, they used to run James Lileks' columns.
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.