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

Skip to comments.

Bush declines to meet with border officials
San Bernardino Sun ^ | 06/16/2006 | Sara A. Carter

Posted on 06/16/2006 10:41:38 AM PDT by Small-L

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 621-627 next last
To: Steve_Seattle

I agree. I doubt that either Gore or Kerry would have done much to stop the influx. The Democrats have a vested interest in promoting the mass immigration by irregular migrants (to use the politically correct UN term).

I also believe George Bush has no desire to make a serious effort to stem the flow of "irregular migrants" because of his social upbringing and relationship with business interests (Chamber of Commerce, etc.).


141 posted on 06/16/2006 12:24:16 PM PDT by BW2221
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: wolfcreek
"Alas, he has forsaken us too! I'm about sick of his attitude."

Bush has always been a pro-business guy, and - as another poster said - business wants us to wink at open borders. So I'm not surprised by Bush's position - it seems generally consistent with his approach.
142 posted on 06/16/2006 12:24:47 PM PDT by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: HuntsvilleTxVeteran
If you are going to lie, do so someplace else.

I just sat through the five minute video. At the end, in a montage of video clips, GWB is holding a small Mexican flag obviously given to him by the little girl he is standing with.

Early in the video he talks about how 15 years before the Civil War most of our western states were part of Mexico. He also states how THOSE Mexicans became good Americans and assimilated into our culture - fought our wars with us, started businesses, became productive CITIZENS.

No where in the video does he mention illegals. It was a campaign video aimed at Latinos and I thought it was pretty good. Remember, without the Latino vote, we would all be pissing and moaning about President Kerry now.
143 posted on 06/16/2006 12:25:02 PM PDT by Crusher138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Small-L

Julie Myers was on F&F this morning. She's really cute. Just as cute as a bug. Just as cute as her pictures. Did I say she's cute?


144 posted on 06/16/2006 12:25:48 PM PDT by ichabod1 (Let us not flinch from identifying liberalism as the opposition party to God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasTaysor

it is for real.


145 posted on 06/16/2006 12:26:10 PM PDT by HuntsvilleTxVeteran ("Remember the Alamo, Goliad and WACO, It is Time for a new San Jacinto")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Crusher138

Thanks for your description of the video. In light of what you said, I think some of the claims previously made about that video were grossly misleading.


146 posted on 06/16/2006 12:26:52 PM PDT by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: Bikers4Bush

"If you would allow our sovereignty to be surrendered you are no patriot."

No? If the United States of America, through its constitutional system, forms an alliance with other nations, then nothing is surrendered. There's nothing in the Constitution regarding the extent of the USA. The USA could easily be comprised of the current states, plus the states of Mexico and the provinces of Canada, and the Constitution would still be in place.

The USA has changed a great deal since 1776. A great deal. It's much larger now, and may well grow larger still. If it happens according to the Constitution, then patriots will be those who continue to defend the Constitution.

We already have a couple of states that were once part of Mexico. We may, one day, have more. Baja California could be the 51st state, perhaps. So it goes.

The USA has never been static in its makeup. Hawaii and Alaska were added as states within my memory, and perhaps yours.

Again, so it goes.

The Constitution does not prohibit adding additional states to the USA. If it is done according to the Constitution, then I must defend that, having sworn an oath to do so.


147 posted on 06/16/2006 12:27:20 PM PDT by MineralMan (non-evangelical atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

Well said dirtboy, great comments as usual.


148 posted on 06/16/2006 12:28:00 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist (PENCE BASHERS WILL BE CALLED OUT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
I guess President Bush is winning this one.

And the United States of America loses while you cheer him on. Amazing.

149 posted on 06/16/2006 12:29:44 PM PDT by WatchingInAmazement ("Nothing is more expensive than cheap labor," prof. Vernon Briggs, labor economist Cornell Un.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: ichabod1
She may be cute, but she's also totally unqualified for the post she holds (kind of the Harriet Meier of immigration). She has come connection - her father or uncle was a high-ranking general who pulled some strings.

I saw her on Scarborough last night. If you consider the "deer in the headlights" look cute, then she's really, really cute.
150 posted on 06/16/2006 12:31:00 PM PDT by BW2221
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: Crusher138
"If you are going to lie, do so someplace else."

I do not lie!

The video is the one sent only to Spanish people.
They seldom call themselves Americans.
I have no use for CRIMINALS who overstay their visas, those who simply INVADE or those who support giving away our Constitutional Republic.
151 posted on 06/16/2006 12:31:44 PM PDT by HuntsvilleTxVeteran ("Remember the Alamo, Goliad and WACO, It is Time for a new San Jacinto")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: sheana
okay I get it. lol You are like those Brits that follow every move the royalty makes.

No, you don't get it. I'm one of a group of volunteers who post one of the daily threads here. I research the President's schedule for that reason -- to inform other FReepers who are interested in the info.

152 posted on 06/16/2006 12:32:53 PM PDT by Wolfstar (So tired of the straight line, and everywhere you turn, There's vultures and thieves at your back...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: WatchingInAmazement

"And the United States of America loses while you cheer him on. Amazing."

Who's cheering him on? I'm just saying what is going on. The progress of globalism has been going on for a long time, now. Are you surprised? Why?

Again, the American people will speak in November, then again in 2008. My expectation is that they will, as they have done for a long, long time, vote for moderates. They have done it again and again, for a long time.

I'm not cheering. I'm telling you how it is. If you see any evidence that it's about to change, please let me know. Just look at who is being proposed for the 2008 election from both parties. More of the same.

Don't mistake my cynicism about realpolitik as it is in the USA with praise.


153 posted on 06/16/2006 12:33:48 PM PDT by MineralMan (non-evangelical atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan

And if the formation of a North American superstate would mean the abandonment of the Constitution?

Canada and Mexcio would never allow their governments to be dissolved and their provinces to become states of the Republic. Nor would they allow their sovereign countries to be considered only states.

Assuming that's the case our Constitution (or at the very least significant parts of it) would have to be abandoned in order to create a superstate.

That is something that no patriot could allow so I'm glad to hear that you would defend to Constitution.


154 posted on 06/16/2006 12:34:14 PM PDT by Bikers4Bush (Flood waters rising, heading for more conservative ground. Vote for true conservatives!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan

I think Bush is an economic globalist who also happens to believe in American POLITICAL sovereignty. I admit that at times there are conflicts between these two positions, as when provisions of NAFTA or the WTO agreements seem to impinge upon our sovereingty. But Bush has stood against Kyoto, the World Criminal Court, the U.N., and other aspects of political globalism. Moreover, he doesn't give a rip about world opinion of the European elites. So, on the whole, he is preferable to any Democrat I can think of. But he is most definity not a Patrick Buchanan.


155 posted on 06/16/2006 12:34:23 PM PDT by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy

They are already pi$$ing and moaning, one said "Well it is only a small Mexican flag President Bush is waving"


156 posted on 06/16/2006 12:36:07 PM PDT by HuntsvilleTxVeteran ("Remember the Alamo, Goliad and WACO, It is Time for a new San Jacinto")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
The next President will be moderate to liberal,

I have a feeling the next election is going to be very hard to predict. Both parties are on the verge of splitting, both are beset with weak leadership, and both are ignoring key concerns in this country along with looming problems - heck, they're making them worse.

We're going to reach a tipping point eventually that will probably toss the Dems into a junk heap. What might emerge would probably be hard to classify as either liberal or conservative by today's labels - a lot of folks across the board are getting concerned about labor and security issues and don't share the globalist vision any longer.

157 posted on 06/16/2006 12:37:52 PM PDT by dirtboy (When Bush is on the same side as Ted the Swimmer on an issue, you know he's up to no good...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: ritewingwarrior
Have all of you anti immigration people done the same?



Kudos to the MM for their efforts but, they can't do it alone. The task is overwhelming.

WHAT IS THIS CRAP ABOUT ANTI-IMMIGRATION PEOPLE? As far as I can see, there are 2 types of people on this board; People who are ANTI-ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION and people who are for open borders and amnesty. (the Pres. and Senate's plan)

Only the LEFT is spouting the ANTI-IMMIGRATION rhetoric. You wouldn't be a Lefty, would ya?
158 posted on 06/16/2006 12:39:46 PM PDT by wolfcreek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: wolfcreek

Who on the Left is spouting anti-immigration rhetoric?


159 posted on 06/16/2006 12:40:43 PM PDT by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: Bikers4Bush

"And if the formation of a North American superstate would mean the abandonment of the Constitution?

Canada and Mexcio would never allow their governments to be dissolved and their provinces to become states of the Republic. Nor would they allow their sovereign countries to be considered only states.
"

Nonsense. Canada and Mexico would as easily do so as the USA would. However, an alliance does not mean a loss of sovereignty. My expectation is that the three countries will retain their political independence, but form economic alliances that include free travel and work for citizens of all three. That's not unconstitutional by any definition. Indeed, our Constitution has provisions for treaties of all sorts.

We are headed, unstoppably, I think, toward a EU-type of an alliance, with at least Canada and Mexico, and probably with more nations to the south. The stage has been slowly set for decades, now. I do not see any way it will not happen at some point, given the momentum already established.

I'm an old man of 60, but I expect to see this in my lifetime. It will be very interesting, to be sure. In my lifetime, I have seen enormous changes in the geo-political spectrum. Europe is a very different place than it was when I was born. Asia is even more different than it was. I expect North America to follow. It seems to be the direction things are going.

You want to fight this change. OK. Go for it. I'm just telling you that your battle will be a losing one. Momentum is on the other side.


160 posted on 06/16/2006 12:41:47 PM PDT by MineralMan (non-evangelical atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 621-627 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