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
Whoooops...Thanks for catching that...Here's one from tonight...Tancredo's response is farther down the page...
http://www.swissinfo.org/eng/international/ticker/detail/Bush_admits_broken_border_to_send_Guard_troops.html?siteSect=143&sid=6720101&cKey=1147744433000
"Well, I LIVE THERE!"
Dear Sir:
Sorry -- there are arias were people DO behave this way.
I thought Wallace T. was using the aria as a vehicle to make a point.
Apparently he chose the wrong area.
I was rash to jump in without do research: but these threads move fast and sometimes mistakes are made.
As I said: there are arias were people DO behave as characterized by Wallace T. However, if the shoe doesn't fit; then you needn't wear it.
I told you just to google "Bush Hispanic vote". I don't even know what Vdare is - it is the second one that comes up and it has lots of links.
If you don't like the links then find your own.
"It makes you think people, like many of our political elite, really are not interested in controlling our border."
Well OF COURSE they don't want to control the border!
Democrats see, correctly, the demographic salvation that will propel them to quasi-permanent majority status as this century continues. So Democrats have no interest in REALLY closing the border. They just have to throw some red meat to their dwindling private-sector labor union base (note that illegal immigrants don't compete with GOVERNMENT unionized workers, which is most unions now).
Republican business interests see cheap, exploitable labor that has no legal protections or access to the courts. They have to throw some red meat to BorderBot conservatives, but the GOP leaders do NOT want to offend the Republican moneymen.
Neither wants to close the border.
So it's not being closed.
When people are this angry, you have to sound like you're doing a lot without, however, really doing anything.
That's what I heard tonight.
What I don't know, yet, is whether BorderBots, having really be outright DEFEATED on their core issue, will care enough about the War on Terror, abortion, other social issues, and taxes to vote for Republicans this fall anyway, and preserve the Republican majority.
Right now, I'd say "No", but I'll be watching the polls to see what happens.
Unfortunately, all of the media polling agencies also want an open border (because they are virtually all Democratic in sympathy, and open borders eventually favor Democrats), so they may skew the results to give Bush a boost. What will the BorderBots do? That's the question.
But there are also verses about the aliens living among the Jews observing the Sabbath restrictions and other Jewish LAW.
# Exodus 12:49
The same law applies to the native-born and to the alien living among you."
# Leviticus 18:26
But you must keep my decrees and my laws. The native-born and the aliens living among you must not do any of these detestable things,...
# Leviticus 24:22
You are to have the same law for the alien and the native-born. I am the LORD your God.' "
# Numbers 15:16
The same laws and regulations will apply both to you and to the alien living among you.' "
If someone steals $5000 and starts what looks like a wonderful ministry, so what? The first step he or she took was ILLEGAL. Unfortunately all illegals must compound their law-breaking in order to stay here. They end up living a lie.
I know plenty of whites and blacks - AMERICANS - who were vying for jobs in chicken processing plants in West Virginia.
It was the company that drew in and to all appearances set up housing for the illegal aliens.
Jobs Americans won't do my A**!
Westport.
Of course none of them LIVE in Westport!
I believe you, O ... I've never seen it before. My curiosity is related to those who think it should be a simple and effective thing to build an impenetrable 2,000+ mi. fence, which I wonder if Congress would vote in. You think that'll ever happen? And I don't believe any fence is truly impenetrable.
There is nothing that Bush needs to "demand" from Congress and he has every law needed, now, to "crack down on employers" and every measure of that enforcement activity, which is his resonsibility and his alone, has been on a downward trend since he took office.
In a direct, defacto manner Bush has created the impulse towards amnesty by doing absoultely nothing for six years but fail to enforce the law, fail to defend the border and appease Vicente Fox. That is not a record on which one can find good intentions on the part of Bush on any immigration matter.
Unwillingness to absolutely enforce current law, together with unwillingness to recoup from that failure first will be seen, by millions overseas, as direct indication of lack of intent to enforce the law, reformed or otherwise, in the future.
The course set in the House - first do one thing right, establish the means to enforce the current law and control the border - then, in a couple years, if that is starting to work, go back to how much "compassion" we owe those already here illegally.
That sets the priorities in the right order, without executing any one-time massive deportation and sends the signal to future potential illegal immigrants that we are closing that option. When we know they are getting that signal, we can then address questions like higher legal immigration quotas and for what catgeories - not before; because lack of enforcement trumps all laws and all "reforms".
What?
Reagan gave them green cards.
Nice try. The link you provided went to VDARE. It was not a mistake.
I remember, lived most of my life in California, and maybe that is why I'm so depressed about what I've been reading here tonight.
This issue is so much bigger than one-upsman-ship and how much more some one loves George W. Bush than another Freeper. I loved Reagan, too, but realized he wasn't perfect.
This is a crisis and too many people eiher don't realize or don't care... and it will be the undoing of this country as most of us know it and the start of a Socialistic America....
The communist party always knew they could not beat the USA from outside, that they had to win by effecting changes from within. The ACLU has gone a long way towards doing so and this assisted invasion from Mexico is the last nail in our coffin.
---No solution is perfect. But a wall/fence makes a lot more sense than nothing at all. And it will not cost anywhere close to half a trillion dollars nor take 20 years to build. And I'll bet you know that. ---
It worked well for Hadrian and the Romans in northern Britain. They put one up there not to deter an armed invasion but to regulate the flow of goods and people on a frontier too long and rugged to patrol effectively.
We only have 12,000 border patrol agents total. By contrast there are almost 40,000 officers in the NYPD alone.
That's the "WALL" that the FORTRESS AMERICA FREEPERS want built?
fine - the poster wanted a link and I did the googling for him. That link had all of the links in one place. I don't even know what vdare is. The first google link was the Washington Post and I knew the poster would have a fit over that.
You know it's hard to know what sites are permitted here as any link to any newssource would just be labeled as leftist MSM and any link to a blog would be labled as profane.
Is there a link to sites are are acceptable/ not acceptable?
Interestingly, someone did steal the head of one of my deer, and kicked a few of them into pretty messy shapes.
But it wasn't illegal immigrants.
"Causing division in a family or a church or a political party or movement on account of a disagreement on one issue is acceptable only in the rarest of circumstances."
And who decides what those circumstances are. Let's see, you memtioned "division in a church" and "rarest of circumstances" in the same sentence. Taking a little trek back into history we have:
The Great Schism of 1054, separating the Orthodox East from the Roman Catholic West.
Luther broke off from Catholicism, as did Calvin, Henry VIII, and establshed other religions. Then divisions really took off and we ended up with all sorts of Protestant churches, then Evangelical, and on and on. And of course the Catholic Church itself broke off from Judaism. And don't forget the breaking away from paganism. Sounds like an awful lot of division based on not agreeing with others in the same church "family." And I'm talking only about the Western world. Check out how many sects broke off from Asian religions also, in fact all religions.
Then, of course, in families we have divorces, incest, murder, not speaking to each other for years, shunning, etc.
In politics, there is constant division and breaking away from other parties. That's how the Whig Party ended and the Republican Party began. Need I go on. Your idealism is to be admired, but your lack of touch with the reality of the world needs a bit of improvement. When most people get to a particular issue (like the anti-abortionists) on which they cannot bend anymore on principle, they tend to make a stand, and then you get schism and new parties form when a group of like-minded individuals get unhappy enough. It is a natural human phenomena.
When I was very young and very foolish, I thought I was a Democrat. Luckily I wised up young (younger than when Ronald Reagan switched from Dem to Pub), and went 180 degrees in the other direction, as did many others of my age group. Holding true only holds true until you have absolutely had it, and then you change your position, church, political party, voting pattern, etc. I'm sure you will agree with the above, assuming you have some principles of your own which you will not bend on. Otherwise, those that always bend in the wind are what I call Independents, those that have few to no principles and will change them at whim. Or RINO's, especially in Congress.
In general, most single issues are not so great that they override all others, but occasionally one rears its head. Abortion was one of those issues, as is illegal immigration policy for some. You work within your Party as best you can until it appears intractable to your basic principle, and then you either don't vote for that Party, knowing that you might lose a next election, but are willing to do so in hopes that when things get even worse, you make your comeback, and everyone hails you as the principled hero you were at the time when they weren't. Of course, one can always be wrong on a principle, but I find it hard to find how one could be wrong about abortion, or wrong about losing one's country's national identity on the altar of multi-culturalism and political correctness. Many of the early Christians lost their lives for the principle of their belief in Jesus Christ, martyrs for their principle. So, at some point you make a stand, right or wrong, and stick to it. I think a lot of Freepers have come to this point on the illegal immigration issue, as they are farsighted, and see what's coming for our country if a stand isnt taken on this issue, come what may. There will be no recognizable country left. To do otherwise than take a stand would be cowardly.
"Uhhh..I don't think anyone is proposing that are they? If they are they are insane."
With some fava beans and a nice chianti...
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.