Posted on 09/17/2006 8:50:55 AM PDT by EveningStar
Republican firebrand Patrick Buchanan said yesterday that President Bush should be impeached for failing to stem the "invasion" of illegal immigrants across America's Southern border...
(Excerpt) Read more at nydailynews.com ...
To reveal your ignorance, both parties had both liberals and conservatives... back then.
New England was full of Liberal Republicans and up until 1964 they were the majority.
The south was full of Conservative Democrats. Most of the Midwest was made up of Moderate Republicans. Mr. Republican was Robert A Taft and he was conservative.. at least by Eisenhower's standards. Lots of us in Ohio thought he was too liberal for us. But there were no true conservatives in the leadership. So Mr Republican Robert A Taft had to do.. I remember warning Ohio Republicans in 1998 that Bob Taft was way to liberal for Ohio.. but no one listened to me. Bob Taft was just like his ancestor and namesake.
In fact it may surprise you to learn there were few if any consevative Republicans in the leadership prior to Barry Goldwater. And that fool drove all the moderates out of the party.
It may surprise you to know that Eisenhower was the only man in history to be offered the nomination by both political parties. President Truman offered the nomination to Eisenhower. Len Hall then offered the Republican nomination to Eisenhower. Ike took the Republican nomination because he thought it was bad for one party to be on power for 28 years. It made Truman so angry that he released the report on Ike's cheating on Mamie.
So if Eisenhower was a Conservative then so was Truman. Ike was Truman's first choice for President. And incase you never noticed Truman was a Democrat.
and is rabidly, frothing at the mouth, antisemitic.
were he born a few years ago in Germany, I don't have much trouble figuring what side he would have joined.
chew on that one.
Yeah, the confederate consitution.
Gotta keep the negros and the jooooooooooooooows in their place.
or too many are too tight? :O)
NewLand sez Buchanan should be incarcerated.
as is stupidity, it's close cousin :O)
thanks for that post - proves my point in myh post No. 158 - per:
this is an issue Clinton and Carter simply ignored, knowing what a hornet's nest it would break open. So the cowards get a free pass for doing nothind, and the man that is brave enough to whack the nest is getting vilified from all sides. I really do not know why he puts himself through all he does to protect our sorry as*ses. He has done more to protect out safety than anyone in most of our lifetimes - he gets 99 things right and done and because he tries to get congress and the senate to move on this one issue 0 but cannot force them as we are still a Republic, not a dictatorship, everyone is ready to hang him high. Keep up the hizzy fits, the libs love you for it. Hand them the elections.,,and see how far you get. They will grant everyone citizenship to gain a voters block they know they can control. (Talk about aiding and abetting the enemy)
I can't stand the ground Pat walks on, but this is just waaay too much.
I can agree with Pat that Bush should be doing at least SOMETHING to close the southern border and expel illegals wherever they can be found. Article II sec. 3 of the U.S. Constitution states that it is the chief executive's duty to "take care that the laws be faithfully executed". That clause makes Bush the chief law enforcement officer of the USA from whom all other law enforcement agents draw their authority, and it's true that Bush took an oath to fulfill that constitutional duty. But failing to effectively carry out that duty doesn't qualify as "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors," which is the Constitutional standard for impeachment.
OTOH Clinton committed both treason and multiple high crimes by giving classified ICBM technology to a hostile nation in exchange for political campaign money, crimes for which he should have been convicted by the Senate and then evicted from office and sent to prison. Just like Pat and his supporters on this thread, I hate seeing my country being overrun by illegal 3rd world immigrants. But not nearly as much as I hate knowing that thanks to Clinton's greed and treachery Red China now has the ability to incinerate every major city in the US with nuclear armed ICBMs guided to their targets by technology bought from no less than a traitor, draft dodger, and all around scumbag who also happened to be president of the United States.
Actually, I would say that the real problem vis-a-vis fences is that the very people who scream the loudest for them, in their heart of hearts, simply don't realize the herculean effort required to erect them and guard them (on the one hand), and the complete apathy of government for them (on the other).
I seriously doubt that ANY Congresscritter (of either party) actually wants any kind of fence if they receive as much as $1 in campaign donations from any industry which relies on illegal or immigrant labor (which is pretty much ALL of them). If anyone was serious about "border security" they wouldn't have had to wait until hijacked airliners brought down the two biggest buildings in New York City, it would have been done way before that.
The truth of the matter is that politicians of all stripes are bought and soild before the issue even has a fair hearing -- if it isn't the construction industry buying republicans, it's the agricultural industry buying off democrats. What I find totally disgusting about this entire argument is that it in states where illegal immigration has had the worst effects, you will also find the largest offenders; farmers, local businessmen and their communities, made this bed and then they expect everyone else to lie in it.
Until it gets out of hand, of course. THEN something has to be done about it, so long as someone else PAYS for it.
Enforce the friggin'laws; against the illegal imigrants, against the industries who can't seem to live without them, against the politicians who take a dime from any offender. I THOUGHT that was what Campaign Finance Reform (three lies for the price of one) was supposed to be about, wasn't it-- keeping the "Special Interests" out of politics? (/sarcasm tage DEFINITELY ON). I'd call a bunch of farmers, restauranteurs, hotel owners and landscapers who simply can't survive without slave-labor-in-everything-but-name a "special interest", wouldn't you?
Maybe you can't. YOu need to put an "I" before your statement - as it is, though your opinion, not a fact for everyone else.
I for one, CAN argue with that.
I shudder to think what trouble we'd be in by now had Gore or Kerry been in office - or the dimRAts in control. I can pretty much guarantee you that we wouldn't be nattering on about the border - we'd be worrying about when the next suicide or truck bomb was going off in which one of our cities and would've already had more disastrous attacks.
Go ahead, keep up the rhetoric on your johnny one-note issue. Let the dimRats in office again - and watch how fast they grant the illegals citizenship to get that huge voting block for insurance.
I don't remember any of you vilifying Clinton or Carter who did NADA on the border issue...the third rail issue they were too chicken to even mention. So they get a free pass and an issue that has been with us for decades suddenly becomes all Bush's fault.
Puke
That was great. But can you cite one action above that ANYONE today would be allowed to carry out?
Ike didn't have to contend with the ICLU, and all the other uber-lib bleeding heart laws and groups since then...
Exactly!
And whose responsibility is it to enforce laws already on the books?
We should all be railing at THEM
Yup...Yer right...I was in error...Sorry about that...
Weasels guarding the hen house and all that...
So yer sayin' back then, the Democrats didn't want the illegal aliens either...
Actually, I would love to shove this National Review article and the congressional investigation right up the MSM's @## and everyone else who criticizes Bush on immigration. I remember seeing new "citizens" in droves, basically just off the boat being asked by reporters who they were going to vote for, their response was "Beeel Cleeeenton."
I disagree with Bush's handling of the illegal immigration issue. Not a lot else that I disagree with. Since Bush has not acted to enforce our countries immigration laws, there isn't much in his defense. Bush took on the WOT despite democratic carping...he could have taken on this issue, but chose not to. It is a fact.
*Yawn*
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.