Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mark Belling On Rush - apologist for do nothing on the border
RushLimbaugh Show ^ | May 23, 2006 | Mark Belling on Rush

Posted on 05/23/2006 11:33:17 AM PDT by BJungNan

Mark Belling On Rush - apologist for do nothing on the border Congress and Bush.

On the border control discussion on Rush's show, stand-in host Mark Belling was a clear example of what is wrong with our past immigration policy and especially what is wrong with it now.

His lame excuses don't cut it. A caller to the show pointed out the laws that are in place now that could be enforced and all Belling did was make more excuses. The same caller pointed out all the programs and welfare that are in place for illegals and lure them to the U.S. and Belling again made excuses.

In the final word, Belling kept falling back on a "its a very difficult situation."

No, it is only difficult if you do not want to do something about it. There are laws to be enforced. Enforce them. There are benefits being offered to illegals. take them away.

There is a wide open border. Bush has the authority now to put troops on the border. DO IT and DO IT NOW! All Bush needs to say it that it is for national security and move the troop there.

If Congress wants to try and stop him, let them have at it. I bet they don't have the courage. Just like Bush does not have the courage to do it.

Belling is so wrong on this I turned off the radio and won't listen to Rush any time that idiot is stepping in as a subsitute host. I don't tune in for BS on the border issue. I can see plenty of that from Bush and Congress (a very few Congressman excepted).

(Sorry for this vanity. I needed to vent).

(Excerpt) Read more at rushlimbaugh.com ...


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: belling; bellingisaquisling; bush; effeminite; limbaugh; lispy; ratingskiller; rush; talkradio
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 181-190 next last
To: sinkspur

"This issue wasn't even on the radar in the 2004 elections. "

Not true. Both sides staked out public positions on immigration during the Presidential race.

For example, see here:



http://www.migrationinformation.org/Feature/display.cfm?ID=202
http://www.migrationinformation.org/feature/display.cfm?ID=232


61 posted on 05/23/2006 12:07:26 PM PDT by Prokopton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
You and BJung need to go back and look at the timeline. Bush outlined a plan in early 2004, then again in 2005, indicating it was a priority of his.

I think you better go back and rethink your political spin on this. If border control was indeed a priority of Bush since early 2004, then the results of his efforts show him to be quite inept in his effort.

Please, don't insult everyone's intellegence. If they wanted to control the border, they could do it. If you think otherwise, then say so. But don't come here and suggest that some sort of effort has been in place. We know that if there was a will, it would of (and could of) been done.

Do you disagree with that?

62 posted on 05/23/2006 12:07:46 PM PDT by BJungNan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Fiji Hill
I wish Rush would stick with Walter Williams as his backup quarterback.

The protectionists rant and rave every time Williams scoffs at the significance of the trade deficit.

It doesn't matter who Rush brings in. Some faction on FR is going to get its panties in a wad.

63 posted on 05/23/2006 12:07:56 PM PDT by sinkspur ( Don Cheech. Vito Corleone would like to meet you......Vito Corleone.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Prokopton
Not true. Both sides staked out public positions on immigration during the Presidential race.

Which the public proceeded to ignore.

64 posted on 05/23/2006 12:08:25 PM PDT by BeHoldAPaleHorse ( ~()):~)>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
You and BJung need to go back and look at the timeline. Bush outlined a plan in early 2004, then again in 2005, indicating it was a priority of his.

I think you better go back and rethink your political spin on this. If border control was indeed a priority of Bush since early 2004, then the results of his efforts show him to be quite inept in his effort.

Please, don't insult everyone's intellegence. If they wanted to control the border, they could do it. If you think otherwise, then say so. But don't come here and suggest that some sort of effort has been in place. We know that if there was a will, it would of (and could of) been done.

Do you disagree with that?

65 posted on 05/23/2006 12:08:38 PM PDT by BJungNan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur

Yeah, conservatives should just shut up. And stay home.


66 posted on 05/23/2006 12:08:58 PM PDT by Mamzelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: BJungNan
Same here - I like to listen to Rush but this person was abysmal ... what part of illegal doesn't he understand, and why is it ok for Mexico to deal with its illegals the way we should be doing?????

Rush had better screen his sub's a bit better .....
67 posted on 05/23/2006 12:09:44 PM PDT by SkyDancer ("The Americans on Flight 93 did more to counter terrorism than the Democrats have done in 4 years")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
Boy, are you ever spinning.

It was the Minutemen that caused the issue to be "addressed" by CONgress.

68 posted on 05/23/2006 12:10:19 PM PDT by sauropod ("Heaven on my left, Hell on my right and the Angel of Death behind me" - Dune)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Mamzelle
Yeah, conservatives should just shut up. And stay home.

LOL!!! Playing the victim does not become you.

69 posted on 05/23/2006 12:10:39 PM PDT by sinkspur ( Don Cheech. Vito Corleone would like to meet you......Vito Corleone.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Luke21

Just getting repeat shows from WIND in Chicago.


70 posted on 05/23/2006 12:11:24 PM PDT by HoosierHawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: BJungNan

But who then do we vote for? This will be my first time to vote. Both parties are hopeless and pander to whoever makes the mose noise, ie, the bigger the march the better the voice ...


71 posted on 05/23/2006 12:12:14 PM PDT by SkyDancer ("The Americans on Flight 93 did more to counter terrorism than the Democrats have done in 4 years")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: sauropod
It was the Minutemen that caused the issue to be "addressed" by CONgress.

Got evidence of that? Until Sensenbrenner got on board in late 2005, Tancredo was a lone wolf on immigration, and it was not even a voting issue in 2004.

72 posted on 05/23/2006 12:12:16 PM PDT by sinkspur ( Don Cheech. Vito Corleone would like to meet you......Vito Corleone.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: BJungNan

It IS a difficult situation...and Mark described it as such. Mainly because Sick Willie did nothing all those years. This administration has had to clean up the disgusting messes left over from those 8 horrible years...fighting republicans as well as dems!

I would like one of the shouters here to actually deport 14 million men women and children...who came, have worked, paid taxes, been arrested and let go, ad nauseum.

Get a grip everybody.


73 posted on 05/23/2006 12:14:16 PM PDT by eleni121 ('Thou hast conquered, O Galilean!' (Julian the Apostate))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._presidential_election_debates,_2004#Questions_for_President_Bush

October 13, Debate No. 3,
Question 6. "At least 8,000 people cross our borders illegally every day . . . "


74 posted on 05/23/2006 12:14:45 PM PDT by tumblindice (But TD, it's `comprehensive immigration reform' don't you see? Yes, yes I do see. It's amnesty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: BJungNan

Why does Rush have a no-name liberal substituting for him?


75 posted on 05/23/2006 12:15:59 PM PDT by piceapungens
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
"No, Belling is correct. There was nothing on either the House or Senate calendars this session to deal with immigration until Bush reiterated his desire in early 2005 for immigration reform."

hahahaha, thanks for the laugh Sink, I definately needed one today.

Bush's "immigration reform" = AMNESTY, open borders, Mexican truckers blasting through the borders hundreds of times per day: (Bush trucking deal with Mexico, Nov. 29, 2001).

76 posted on 05/23/2006 12:16:39 PM PDT by TheCrusader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: BJungNan
I too turned him off after he said we must pass this Senate Bill (something is better than nothing logic???) However, the caller indicated the Government could make a dent in illegal imigration if we would enforce the laws already on the books

Well said.

77 posted on 05/23/2006 12:16:47 PM PDT by Osprey (,/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
This issue wasn't even on the radar in the 2004 elections. To say that Americans forced it is preposterous.

I'll bet you're not from California, where illegal immigration has been an issue for decades. In 1994, California voters forced this issue by passing Proposition 187, which sought to prevent illegal aliens from receiving taxpayer-subsidized benefits.

78 posted on 05/23/2006 12:17:21 PM PDT by Fiji Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: eleni121

Sorry, but this is one we can't pin on Clinton. Enforcement has dropped dramatically in the US since 2002 (statistics have been posted numerous times). This is official malfeasance by the Bush admin. plain and simple.


79 posted on 05/23/2006 12:17:50 PM PDT by piceapungens
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: BeHoldAPaleHorse
Which the public proceeded to ignore.

Some did, that I will grant you. Interesting though how the protests of the illegals ramped up this issue. I wonder why?


80 posted on 05/23/2006 12:18:16 PM PDT by BJungNan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 181-190 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson