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

To: kellynla

Someone answer this.

From everything I have read, the title of this thread is true - "not enough votes" in favor of a "marriage" amendment in the U.S. Senate. Even most conservative "analysts" I read say the same thing.

Bush, I think, knows that too.

So, don't flame me, but is his recent public notice of approval for that amendment different, politically, than his sending national guard troops to the border in the 11th hour of our "national immigration debate"?

In fact, I will go one step further; are we being bated to "come back to the fold" on immigration because: "see, he really is" "with us" on this issue?

I want him to know that he can appeal to us on any "conservative" topic he wants to, but he will not buy my vote on his and the Senate's immigration non-reforms, no matter what.


8 posted on 06/05/2006 10:17:15 AM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Wuli
In fact, I will go one step further; are we being bated to "come back to the fold" on immigration because: "see, he really is" "with us" on this issue?

Same type of rope a dope that the rat's have pulled on black voters for years.

28 posted on 06/05/2006 11:18:22 AM PDT by org.whodat (Never let the facts get in the way of a good assumption.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: Wuli
So, don't flame me, but is his recent public notice of approval for that amendment different, politically, than his sending national guard troops to the border in the 11th hour of our "national immigration debate"?

No, it is no different politically. It's window dressing so that one can appear to try and solve a problem that one doesn't really want a solution to. If Bush had been behind this it would have (1) Been pushed sooner and more consistently during his presidency and (2) John Bolton would not have cast his most recent pro-homosexual vote at the UN. It took Iran to save us from that one.
34 posted on 06/05/2006 11:37:05 AM PDT by Old_Mil (http://www.constitutionparty.org - Forging a Rebirth of Freedom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: Wuli

If the Senate cannot pass this, it was a safe, winking gesture for Bush. "That was for the base," Dole would say, winking at the press. They smiled back. Of course, he lost big time.

One big roadblock is Arlen Spectre. Let's see. Who pushed for him to be re-elected? That was Bush. Who backed him to be chair when he did not deserve to be chair of Judiary? Oh, Bush again. So this was pre-determined. Very clever, I will think when I fail to give the GOP money.


85 posted on 06/05/2006 12:50:34 PM PDT by sine_nomine (The Constitution requires secure borders, not welfare and amnesty for illegals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: Wuli

This was arranged long ago. The date was actually set in January.

Frist said it was his intention to bring it up again before the november election long before the immigration.

What I want to know is how the votes have changed.

McCain is obviously pro-homosexual on this.

It seems democrates up for reelection make themselves vulnerable by voting for homosexuals. (ie Bill Nelson in FL despite the fact he has a 30 point lead)


303 posted on 06/06/2006 10:59:22 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

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