Posted on 05/19/2006 9:18:31 AM PDT by Bob J
Ths was never going to work. The House and Senate simply have too many RINO's to effect the kind of change that reformists dreamed of. Anyone who thought it would was blind. Thanks for the effort, but the strategery wasn't thought all the way through.
By bringing the immigration question to the top of the table, they have handed the dems a bat with which to beat us over the head for the next 20 years. Conservative and pub reformists looking for real progress and change will be characterized in the media as meanspirited racists and bigots while the dems nickel and dime the legislation and take the teeth out of any new law. They will be portrayed as the real champions.
The pubs should be all over the TV right now talking about how the dems are blocking any chance at real reform on the immigration issue. The don't and won't because they don't know how to play the game and quite frankily, have gotten comfortable with snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory.
lol lol
Not sure about the "shooting on sight" issue, but all illegals are commiting a crime just by being in the US. The criminal issue is not disputable.
Couldn't agree more and if they tuned in to O'Reilly, they would have heard Gingrich recommend precisely that. I pray with the bleak prospects we keep hearing about come November, they grow some spine.
Perhaps they're doing just that as I see that Rep. Charlie Norwood (R) will debate immigration with Lindsey Graham on MTP Sunday. I would have preferred Charlie debate a dem Senator but the RINO is a close second. However on Face The Nation, the debate will be between Sensenbrenner and Durbin which, IMHO is must see TV.
The lessons of George Washington always come in handy when stuck in traffic.
Not unless they shot first.
Acid rain.
Well. Two pearls of wisdom. I vote for both. Change today to hold the line and if you can find Chafee/Snowe/Collins/Hagel/McCain/Voinovich/DeWine voters that are educatable (good luck) lets make a plan to teach them the truth. This issue certainly has enough substance.
The truth? Is that the gage you want to measure this by?
If so, then you're finally at the root of the problem. 80% of us may see the truth differently than you do.
Now what?
I'm part of that 80% - a lifetime of voting for the GOP candidates, now complete disillusionment after realizing there's not really a "two party system" anymore. It's all smoke and mirrors, and many see through it now.
I never thought I would see the day when an American president put the demands of a third world dump over the wishes of the voters who elected him. This president's goal is clear now, and it's not what the majority of Americans want for our country.
"Come on, man, stand strong! The fat lady hasn't sung yet."
No, but she's warming up.
Be clear, I'm not sure which side of the debate you are on. You don't want the RINOs dumped out of the cart? Are you party driven or ideology driven? Truth isn't a matter of perception though actions are clearly framed by perception of the truth.
Actually President Bush did, when he proposed immigration reform in the form of his "not-an-amnesty" amnesty.
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.