It seems to have something to do with the way Congress thinks.
Sorta-kinda like they view the United States Constitution, their sworn oath of office and their duty to the citizens of the U.S.A..
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
Absolutely, Peach. In fact, I don't think anyone can bash President Bush and be an "honest" conservative at the same time. "Conservatism" is not just about where one stands on every particular issue, but also about standing by and supporting those leaders who have demonstrated their committment to conservative principles over long periods of time, even at the risk of their own political careers. This describes Reagan, even though he too offered an "amnesty" program and raised taxes. It describes our current president as well.
Those who bash him are not true conservatives. They are political one-trick ponies.
It seems to have something to do with the way Congress thinks.
Sorta-kinda like they view the United States Constitution, their sworn oath of office and their duty to the citizens of the U.S.A..
Baloney. Americans are freer today and relying less on their government than ever before. You people can't see the forest for the tree. (And I do mean "tree.")
"If you still contend he supports amnesty, then you're beyond talking to really."
Apparently you didn't read my post. Or else you are not living in the real world.
ANY program that allows people who are living here illegally (and breaking multiple laws in the process) to gain citizenship is amnesty.
If you broke a bunch of laws and got caught, would you expect the D.A. to just let you go? Of course not. You would not get a pass, you would not get some sort of amnesty to not answer for your crimes just because you screamed loudly, would you?
Bush is letting these people go, in fact he is rewarding them with eventual citizenship. If he allows these people to gain citizenship without having to go through the normal required procedures which are in place, how can you possibly say that that's not amnesty? If he is allowing people here illegally to move to the front of the line for citizenship when there are thousands already in line with the normal, legal process, how can you say that's not amnesty?
Bush might say that this is not amnesty but that's no different than calling taxes "contributions" like Clinton did. Reminds me of Orwell's Newspeak.
President Bush has done more to advance a realistic conservative agenda than any president since Reagan, whom by your standard would have been a failure as well.
This country is simply not going to become some Ayn Randian utopia in any foreseeable future. The only way you and your political ilk would ever be able to realize the society you seek is via the concentration camp.
Exactly, zook. I've had disagreements with the president in the past, but I'm not about to bash him. Conservatives always eat their own.
Republicans aren't called the stupid party for nothing; democrats depend on it.
Well tell you what Reverend Al, why don't you just close the border, fine businesses that use illegal labor, and see if we fall into line? Short of that, I'd say you were demagogueing as hard as you can.
You're right about that. They almost completely heal the rift with pro-lifers that almost cost them the 2000 election and now they go and open another one with law and order conservatives.
Well said.
what chance would there be with the National Reign of Terror that would be a Democrat majority? Perish the thought! Anyone on this board who professes to be a conservative and utters such blasphemy doesn't belong here.
I vote for the conservative in the race. If there isn't one, I really don't have a dog in that fight.
Well said.
I'll not be a party to electing liberals no matter the letter behind their names.
>>>You're a small man.<<<
Afte reading through your posts on this issue, I consider that somewhat of a compliment. I was expecting to be labeled a "vigilante", a "racist", "anti-immigrant", or one of the other slanders you "open-border types" have been using to smear us "national-sovereignty types".
BTW, are you clueless, or are you on the take?
Yes, that is true.
To satisfy the Border Conservatives, a wall needed to be built.
The President said no. A "virtual wall" is not a wall.
Period.
There will not be truly effective border control, there will not be serious domestic enforcement, and there will be backdoor amnesty, if the President gets his way.
If he doesn't, there will be status quo, which is an unchecked flow of illegals.
Those are the two choices, and the ONLY two choices, that the Republican Party (or the Democratic Party) is going to allow.
The sole question remaining is whether or not you retaliate against the Republican Party by withholding your vote in November. That's all you have left. Each Border Conservative has to decide that for himself.
That's not defeatism.
It's realism.
1,341 posted on 05/11/2006 6:08:29 PM EDT by Jim Robinson
Quite! And it is exactly that thinking that has led us to where we are today....very little difference in the parties except the methods they use to grab more power for themselves while sticking it to their base who feel they have nowhere else to go.
Very little difference in the parties? I'm not delighted with Congressional Republicans, but you do realize there are substantial differences between the parties, don't you?
Judicial nominations
National security
Tax cuts
Abortion
Etc.
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.