Posted on 05/17/2006 12:15:13 AM PDT by Ranald S. MacKenzie
Well, using reason and facts are better than getting suspended for reacting like the babies do; even if doing so is rather tempting. ;^)
What bothers me is how Bush plans to clean up what's spilled.
Blanket amnesty? No way. If Bush builds a tall wall, I want to see criminals tossed back over it, on a catapult if need be. I want to see the laws enforced that we have. There is no need to make new unenforced laws. I don't want illegal criminals getting welfare, free education and health care.
I want to see employers charged for hiring illegal criminals, as they should be. If we make the tit taste bad, many will go back the way they came. Will that get rid of all of them? No, of course not. How about something sensible, like giving employers, who say they need these workers, an pportunity to sponser as many as they need, then, if they pass criminal screens and the normal health checks, they can be given work permits and fast tracked for citizenship. Allow those who claim refugee status to stay and work while their claim is verified.
At least this way we will know who they are, and they will pay taxes. The way Bush is going about things is all wrong.
For those who say we are handing Bush over for impeachment, that's just silly, unless you are talking about his not upholding hi oath to protect our borders nd uphold the constitution and laws of the land.
I've always been a strong Bush supporter, but this has really got me P O'd. Would i 'sit home november? No way, and i would NEVER vote for a RAT. But, I would vote for an alternative to get rid of a rino if possible, and I hope that there are a few willing to put their hats in the ring in states where we have them, as I'm sure there are many other conservatives thinking the same as I am.
When pigs fly.
Garbage in, garbage out. The writer's premises suck.
That's what I said. It's far better to strengthen the team than to split it between both parties. The writer has faulty logic (or wishfull thinking)
Please stop using the term RINO to mean a politician who isn't a faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar right Conservative. That is NOT the meaning of the term!
President Bush, unlike President Reagan, is NOT offering any illegal BLANKET AMNSESTY.
And now, I'll tell YOU what I want. I want all new members and all old members and everyone who wants to be a member of FR to have to take and pass a very simple test on how our political system actually works, the powers delegated to each branch of our government, and a section on American and world history. You don't pass the test with at least a 75%, you can't post anything. THAT'S WHAT I WANT, BUT I'M ABOUT TO GET THAT, ABOUT AS MUCH AS YOU ARE GOING TO GET YOUR CHILDISH DEMANDS.
...she shouted petulantly.
And as far as aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaamesty goes, that IS what Bush is offering. READ his SPEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEECH.
I read it, I heard it, I know and understand the meaning of the word "amnesty"; unlike you.
Get back to me, child, when you've finally attained some graces, civility, maturity, and intellect. Until then, go play outside and let the adults do the debating.
Your solution is downright stupid. The President has done nothing to be warrant impeachment.
Ya'll STOP THIS CARPING!!!!!
Thanks for defining conservatism. And here I'd thought that it was about adhering to the constitution as written, smaller government and that throwing money at a problem wasn't always the best solution. 40 plus years of working for something and it turns out I didn't even understand what it was.
What remains unsaid is that the problem isn't people sitting on their hands come election time but the thousands of die hard foot soldiers that stuff envelopes, make telephone calls and get people to the polls on voting day. You seem to be saying that they should somehow get enthused and ignore the big spending constitution ignoring party and work like dogs, for free mind you, anyway.
Oh, they, like me, will hold their nose and vote republican but I'm interested in how you propose to motivate them to put in 20 hour days for a party that seems to spit on their values. Scare them that unless they work hard they'll be electing democrats? Convince them that the last six years has been a dream? Or maybe just a head fake to confuse the media and that republicans have been "just kidding"? Oh, how about calling them names and telling them they're not conservatives? That's always a good way of encouraging people to work really hard for you; insult them.
In the past, as far back as Nixon, it was about party building and how hard work would eventually yield a conservative party and for decades that was good enough but then the future was here, we had a majority and many feel that we met the enemy and he was us.
So I'll be looking forward to your plan for convincing those people to get back to work so they can work to elect big government, big spending, constitution ignoring legislators because if you know of a way you're smarter than anyone in the republican party.
Careful what you dare, there's real anger at Bush. Except for two justices whose worth is yet to be proven, Bush has crossed his voting base in a way no president has done in a hundred years. These voters aren't going to vote Democrat, married women with kids aren't going liberal but will just pass on this election.
There's no doubt a Pelousi House will go for impeachment. There's no telling what mischief a Reid Senate will get into.
There would be one great satisfaction in this. Dems regard Hagel and McCain as traitors, Dems NEVER tolerate speaking out of turn in their own ranks. Hagel McCain etal will be stripped of all perks, their offices replaced by broom closets, and will never see the light of television again. As will Hastert and the rest of the compromisers will not even be invited to C list parties.
Bush is pulling a Bob Dole, deliberately throwing this election. That speech was just dumbfounding.
The author makes the same mistake most people do when discussing "evangelicals". He acts like they/we are all one-issue voters. I would probably fall under the evangelical umbrella, but I'm far from a one-issue voter. A gay marriage ban is WAY, WAY down on the list of issues that I care about. Even abortion probably isn't in my top 5.
He assumes that the 25% of voters who are classified as evangelicals will stay home if so called leaders tell them to. The number is MUCH smaller than that.
"Conservative evangelicals find themselves in a political predicament of their own creation. They have chosen to put all of their eggs in the Republican basket..."
And the other basket is the CPUSA. Evangelicals are our Blacks.
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.