Posted on 05/15/2006 4:13:02 PM PDT by devane617
Edited on 05/15/2006 4:38:26 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
I searched but did not see a thread already open for tonights speech. I think this is the most important speech the President will probably make for the remainder of his term.
Mod Note:
This could turn into a whack-a-troll thread. All immigration trolls that would like to participate should post here. It'll be interesting to see if we mods can whack the trolls faster than they can sign up new accounts.
Jim
These are the bots who don't even know it. They're making a concerted effort it seems to banish you for perfectly rational sentiments. Look beyond them (but remember their handles). Someday you may be able to help them beyond theit terrible beyond.
>>A newbie calling a respected Freeper a troll.<<
Established FReepers are calling established FReepers "trolls" lately. Have you noticed?
It is disengenuous and desperate.
And it's not working.
I wonder what our teenagers are doing for work now?
I know a lot of young men and women who are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan now. One soldier went back after a year in Iraq to spend another year there but the second tour was as a highly paid civilian contractor. He earned enough money to pay for all his college tuition to become an electronics engineer.
Contrary to popular opinion, a lot of the people demonstrating on May 1st were actually LEGAL immigrants, here legally, working legally. Some stores had to shut down because their LEGAL immigrant workers walked out.
My hometown, Takoma Park, MD, is an illegal alien sanctuary. Cops are bound by city leaders' vote, to offer zero assistance, information, manpower, etc., to ICE.
Takoma Park and cities with similar laws should be stripped of eligibility for any federal funding, grants, etc.
According to some who dismiss my concerns (while courting my vote), I'm just an unappeasable, nut-job.
Let's see if I have this right.
Tancredo likes the speech.
Lou Dobbs likes the speech.
But the complainers on FR didn't like it. Nothing is ever good enough for them. We need to realize that a good portion of these people never supported the president to begin with. And a good portion of those aren't even conservatives or Republicans.
yes, but, the legacy of Reagan will still be O'Connor and Kennedy, who disagreed with him on 90 percent of matters.
I was proud to have served in the Army under President Reagan. I'm still waiting for the "love of country" to come back NATIONWIDE, and with full hearts. I only wish EVERYONE teared up at the sound of the Anthem, what it stands for, the lives lost in the past wars fought for our country, and the pride we all share to live here in the United States...if any of my "candor" offended anyone, that was not my intention. I love my country, and will defend it...God Bless Our Troops!:)
Yes. It's good that it doesn't make a distinction, isn't it?
What really is sad is that even simple objections are getting people pasted with labels like "rabid", "radical", "emotional", etc.
We got torqued when the Clintons snubbed the Law and skated; we got torqued when Kennedy snubbed the Law and skated; we got torqued with Al Gore's bladerdash about "no controlling legal authority"; but NOW, when some actually express their desire that existing law be enforced, and that violators get the due punishment prescribed under the Law, now, instead of, "Amen" suddenly people who say such things make us "sad".
What's so bloody wrong with simply enforcing the Law in each and every case where it comes to light that it has been violated? Let Law enforcement AT ALL LEVELS do that as part of their sworn duty to uphold the Law.
My gut-level is that had Bush come out tonight and just said that THAT would happen immediately, he wouldn't have had to do or say ANYTHING else.
Just come out and say, point-blank, "We're a Nation of Laws and we are going to begin enforcing them 100% at all levels beginning NOW. Period."
No wall. No amnesty. No coddling of employers. No big agenda that needs Congressional approval. No new spending. No new programs. Just an Executive Branch affirmation of the Rule of Law and the simple expression of a clear doctrine of enforcement.
That would have been plenty; it would have been more than almost everyone expected, and it would have been more than enough to placate almost everyone. It would have certainly been enough for me.
Instead there's this plan that leaves us with uncertainties about how it will work, when it'll get implemented...
I'd have really preferred something far more simple and definite, for once, not more ideas that will create more need for more bureaucrats to expand the expansive expanses of my already-overly-expanded government.
One thing's plain: our modern political types would NEVER have found it in themselves to craft a simple and eloquent document like our Constitution. Todays breed would have produced a self-conflicted 4,000 page doorstop.
I agree completely. And with all due respect to the President, I'm not sure why a complete lockdown didn't happen within days after 9/11.
And I say this as a native-born American citizen, living in Canada, who would be happy to jump through any hoops to visit my family and friends back home.
All I have to do is remember how I tried frantically, for example, to call my Dad, that morning, who worked, at the time, within blocks of the Sears Tower.
For some reason, it appears that security hasn't been really taken seriously since 9/11. But it must be.
"That's amnesty, no matter how you slice it, buy you'll refuse to see that as you have your blinders on mighty tight. No thinking necessary on your part, just be a good little Bushbot."
First, let's get something clear - - I am NOT a Bushbot. I like some of the things he's done and disagree w him on some issues. I do have a lot of respect for President Bush, because he's had to deal with more in office than most other Presidents, all the while getting constant bashing by the Dims, MSM, and some so-called "Conservatives", not to mention all the leaks to try to smear the the Admin and him and disrail the WOT, etc.
Unlike some on this thread and others, I'm not a one issue voter. I also don't have blinders on - I have done a lot of reading, discussing, and listening on this issue (unlike some on this thread have appeared to do - -with their, 1 stance, it's my way or the highway). I have some strong feelings about this issue and don't like when people break our laws. Before I'm prepared to call it amnesty, I'll see what the bills look like when they come out of office. So far, what the President proposed is different than what many consider to be amnesty- - -that President Regan granted. I will continue to be blinder-free and keep an open mind as much as I can on this and other issues. It would be nice if you and some of the others would do the same. But, I suspect you wouldn't be happy unless the President said he was sending in the military to round up all illegals like Reno did to Elian Gonzales. Have a nice day....
"A massive guest worker program is a time bomb inside a trojan horse."
That's funny.
Tancredo doesn't think it's amnesty.
Lou Dobbs doesn't think it's amnesty.
Just the unappeasables here on FR think it's amnesty.
I didn't read what you are referring to, but kudos to you for your humility.
It means you are a person of integrity.
Bingo
I agree again. President Bush stands head and shoulders over the competition, no doubt about it. I do wish he was perfect though.
The reason we have 12 million plus illegal aliens in this country is we have not enforced the law codified in Title VIII, Section 1325 U. S. Code. Neither the current House or Senate version of the Immigration Act repeals this provision. The question is will this provision be enforced in meaningful way. I have serious doubts that will happen.
I think he was being a tad sarcastic there lol. A little frustration showing through that I can relate to. However I think at times that Malkin is a tad extreme. I think she does this on purpose. She is sort like a Coulter -lite. She says what she says so get the discussion going and in part to enjoy the debate itself. I am just getting tired of her taking such a predictable course on all the hot topics and her being on TV all the time speaking for all conservatives.. Why can't we have the actual Senators and Representatives in the chair being interviewed more. There is like what 635 of them. She is to the the Right of the Washington Times and one day will make a good editor of Human Events that is proclaiming it seems the sky is falling every 10 minutes.
That is just one more reason this 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.