Posted on 02/07/2007 5:16:42 PM PST by Ladycalif
(CNSNews.com) - Weeks after accusing President Bush of "shameful" behavior over the imprisonment of two Border Patrol agents who shot an unarmed suspected drug smuggler along the U.S.-Mexico border, a federal lawmaker turned up the heat further Wednesday, suggesting the president should be impeached if either of the two men is murdered in prison.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
The Mexican drug cartels. Everyone from Sutton to Justice Department to Homeland Security to Oval Office must be either taking money from the cartels or are scared for their and their family's lives.
How else to explain what's been happening on our border with Mexico during Bush's administration??? At the rate they're going, we'll find out before Bush's term ends that regarding corruption, Clinton was an altar boy compared to Bush and his cronies. Impeach his a** NOW!!!
I agree. I have this awful feeling we will get our first woman president. No one hopes I am wrong more than me, but I am scared to death we might see Hillary in the White House.
Not to deny that he has any. But asides from the marginal tax cut, and the hopefully strict constructionist judges, I am forced to ask: Such as?
For balance's sake, it needs to be pointed out that his liberalism greatly transcends the issues you alluded to, the running roughshod over a balanced budget with his deficits, and his trampling of fiscal sanity with the prescription meds, and his misconcieved increased federalizing of education...not to mention the McCain/Feingold constitutional travesty. No, these are merely the Tip of the Iceberg. His multiculturalism is clearly liberal. His endorsement and continued pushing for totalization with Mexico is clearly liberal. His illegal alien scoff-lawism is difficult to reconcile as "conservative". His SPP is at best, suspicious. His Feminist rights stance in the military is clearly liberal...catering unseemly to the PC lobby. Same with his don't ask, don't tell policies. His use of the liberal Harriet Meiers for his General Counsel for 6 years has severely damaged countless conservative causes, from sabotaging the reversing of affirmative action, to creating a climate where the Kelo decision could even happen.
His pushing for the Law of the Sea Treaty, which Reagan terminated and fired its negotiators, is Globalist Marxism on Steroids. It will allow the UN to directly tax the U.S.
His defense of the World Trade Organization...letting it's cabal of anti-Americans cavalierly disregard the factual findings of U.S. bodies authorized to investigate foreign market manipulations, such as dumping, and recommend appropriate self-defense policies. All "rights" supposedly guaranteed in the WTO's Bylaws, which are now shown to be worthless.
Egregious from the get-go was his "New Tone" keeping on Clinton-holdovers, en mass, who then returned the favor: from their Federal sinecures they were able to successfully sabotage and frustrate W's policies with political sniping and monkey-wrenches thrown into the works. And then still-ongoing refusal to enforce laws against any of the Clintons, such as Sandy Berger, is just plain "whack." More liberal than conservative.
Meanwhile, the core conservative value is national defense, not phoney free trade, and he has been unilaterally disarming the United States of its primary strategic deterrents, such as the land based missiles, and the bomber forces, and even our submarine deterrent. The Navy has been allowed to atrophy frm the 344 ships he inherited, down to 286 ships...with most of the retirements being of ships still having over half their service life. He has proven remarkably and obtusely unwilling to recognize...and logically respond with a comprehensive Reagan approach to China's Declaration of intent to deploy a Blue Water Navy which can only have as its purpose...the sinking of the remaining U.S. Navy.
Bush has consistently refused to deploy an robust missile defense, but intentionally keeps it "limited" to far under what is needed to protect the American populace against the vast majority of missile attack avenues. He killed "Brilliant Pebbles 2". He killed Theater Ballistic Missile Defense. He killed deploying dedicated Aegis Missile Defense ships as a functional NMD bulwark (22 recommended by NMD advocates). He killed deploying (despite repeated Navy insistence on it being needed) Aegis SM Mark 3 Flight IIa, which would have been an inexpensive replacement for the killed-TBMD. He killed deploying Patriot missile and air-defense batteries around our cities. All to "reassure" the Russians and Chi-Comms? Reagan would not have done this...remember him walking out on Gorbachev over their demand that SDI stop? Bush's "limits" are a defacto "stop." Such "limits" to ineffectualness, are nothing if not liberal.
I will give Bush credit for appointing Donald Rumsfeld and John Bolton in the first place. But then, when confronted with a Liberal Congress... he fired them. Those were not volunteered resignations. They were asked for. Not the behavior of a staunch conservative. He's doing the liberal's dirty work. Reagan successfully kept his seriously conservative Cabinet members onboard in the face of a Democrat Congress.
And these faults are the Short List.
His de facto globalism is much more evident than you credence. Not so different from his father after all.
And btw, the vast majority of these "immigrants" vote Democratic.
A'hem, and that's just the New Orleans emigres, heh! /s
The mind numbed, personality cultists who blindly kneel before those who refuse to defend the borders are enablers and are as responsible for atrocities committed against citizens by illegals across the land. I go so far as to accuse them of treason. God help their wretched carcasses for we will not, when, and if, it becomes necessary to defend the nation ourselves.
For ONE thing, since being elected congressman, he's been very outspoken on the border-control issue and has been fighting for a secure border here in Texas.
He's very pro-life, pro-family. From his webpage: Congressman Poe supports our men and women in uniform as we continue to deal with the real threat of terrorism in a post 9/11 world and believes it is important to turn the governing of Iraq to Iraqi Security Forces as soon as they are able to take over the responsibility. Congressman Poe serves on the Terrorism Subcommittee of the International Relations Committee and believes the United States should secure its borders and pursue all potential threats. Poe supports making our national defense second to none - both in manpower and intelligence...
Congressman Poe supports replacing the IRS and the current federal income tax system with a fairer and simpler tax system. The current income tax system cost Americans hundreds of millions of dollars a year just to administer. Congressman Poe believes in debating the merits of the Fair Tax on the House floor and taking serious steps to improve our tax system....
Ted Poe supports limited government and lower taxes. President Bush’s tax cuts, which are set to expire in 2010, should be made permanent. Working families in our country deserve to keep more of their money. Additionally, we must move to a simpler and fairer tax structure. The consumption tax should be considered...
Congressman Poe offered an amendment to the Interior Appropriations Bill that would remove the moratorium placed on all off shore drilling outside of the western Gulf of Mexico. Poe supported the Gasoline for America's Security Act of 2005 that calls for an increase in the refining capacity in the United States by streamlining the licensing procedures for refineries...
Congressman Poe believes in the definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman. No exceptions. He would support a Constitutional amendment if that's what was necessary to preserve the sanctity of this union....
Congressman Poe is pro-life. The only exception is to save the life of the mother. Congressman Poe opposes government funding for abortion or abortion clinics and also opposes partial-birth abortions....
As a member of the NRA and the Texas State Rifle Association, Congressman Poe staunchly supports the 2nd Amendment and is a strong advocate of its protection. Congressman Poe believes the Right to Bear Arms is as important as any other right in the Constitution. It is an individual right. It is not just a right for states to form militias or National Guard units. Poe has received an “A” rating from the National Rifle Association for his “commitment to defending the rights of law abiding gun owners and sportsmen,” according to Charles Cunningham, Director of NRA Federal Affairs.
Does that help a little??
Thanks, Investigateworld.
That helps a LOT. He hits all the right notes.
We have got to start drilling for oil in the U.S. and off of our shores.
Screw the Saudis.
I live in L.A. and I am not laughing.
Do you think that Victor Davis Hanson is a conspiracy kook or do you think his observations on the change in culture with increasing and unassimilable Central American populations in the US might have a touch of reason in them?
To be sure, with illegal immigration we're not talking about an American vs. an Islamic civilization.
Let me relate a story to you. My friends had come to visit me just outside of DC (two black and I'm mixed.) We were in the food court of a nearby mall. Nothing but Spanish was spoken, women with 3-4 kids (some of the mothers looked like kids themselves) pushing strollers, very few people could have understood us if we wanted to make our thoughts known (or asked for directions.) We said to ourselves, "Where are we?"
That's not xenophobia, by the way, this wasn't an 'enclave' or "ethnic neighborhood."
It's called increased drunk driving, unlicensed and uninsured and irresponsible drivers, sexual assaults (especially on children, seem to be popular,) violent criminality, gangs, drug running, a low value on education and a socialist-ingrained mentality from Mexico (or wherever.)
THAT is what we are importing. We're not bringing in people from Mexico City (a different story altogether.) Notice that no one talks about the little Asian or East Indian enclaves or neighborhoods.
YOu want to know why? Because they are law-abiding, they follow the rules (mainly) and don't engage in criminality and they value education for their sons AND daughters.
When was the last time you saw an 'illegal' or legal Asian on television for a sexual assault against a child? An East Indian?
OH come now, don't you know all those hard-working MS-13, child rapists, gang members, welfare and health care-abusers, drug runners and drunk drivers are Republicans-in-waiting?
The more you learn about Poe the more you like him.
My allegiance is to the United States of America. You have called me a freak. In my opinion, there are a few freaks on this forum who support the Illegal Invasion of this once Sovereign Nation.
My allegience to the USA as well. But those that buy into the hairbrained "one world order", Bilderberger's control the world, Bush is a globalist, illuminati nonsense are removed from reality, on par with those that think our technology came from space aliens.
I'm not a seminar poster and I don't think april5Bendovr is either. I voted for President Bush twice. I vote straight Repub. I'm trying to keep my calm about President Bush, but he's not making it easy. He's off in Bush's world and absolutely refuses to do anything meaningful about the border. He was disappointing in the last part of his first term over many issues, but his second term is a disaster. Something is seriously wrong with this Administration, and I'm to the point where I can't wait for it to be over.
These recitations of reality from this article several years ago are pointed and especially worth reading. It is clearly neither hairbrained or removed from reality:
Bush's Wilsonian internationalism: How radical is President Bush''s globalist agenda?Establishment pundits approvingly compare him to President Woodrow Wilson, the icon of modern one-worldism. (Cover Story: False Conservatism).(President George W. Bush is proving to be an internationalist)
Publication Date: 09-SEP-02 Publication Title: The New American
Author: Jasper, William F.As the 2000 presidential election campaign was heading into its final weeks, Foreign Affairs, the house organ of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), sent a message to its prestigious readership. Writing in the September/October issue of that journal (which Time magazine has called "the most influential periodical in print"), James M. Lindsay of the Brookings Institution noted that "both Al Gore and George W. Bush are internationalists by inclination." It was an important communication (one of many) signaling to organized one-worlders that, rhetoric notwithstanding, the Democrat and Republican contenders were both reliably in the "internationalist" camp. All except the most obstinately blind recognized Vice President Al Gore as an arch-internationalist, one who embraced all of Bill Clinton's one-world agenda and who supported every United Nations treaty and every UN "empowerment" scheme. But Governor George Bush? Why, he was a strident nationalist, a vociferous "America First" champion, a conservative, and a notorious UN basher.
Now fast forward nearly two years. In a July 1, 2002 column, the Wall Street Journal's editorial features editor, Max Boot (a CFR member), offered an important confirmation of Lindsay's earlier assessment of the Bush "inclination." Boot's title was anything but subtle: "George W. Bush: The 'W' Stands for Woodrow." That's Woodrow as in Woodrow Wilson, of course. Woodrow Wilson, the notoriously liberaleft Democrat. Woodrow Wilson, the U.S. resident who championed world government through the League of Nations. Thanks to the "isolationists"--those who believed in national sovereignty and the Constitution--the U.S. Senate refused to make the United States a party to that misbegotten venture.)
Woodrow Wilson's vision of "world order" under an international government and his relentless zeal in pursuing that objective gave rise to the expression "Wilsonian internationalism." The term describes the worldview, goals, policies, and methods of the network of power elites who dominate globalist bastions like the CFR. Boot unabashedly identifies himself with the Wilsonian camp. More importantly, he identifies President George W. Bush as a Wilsonian. Boot applauds Bush's Wilsonian policies in building a UN posse against terrorism and praises the president's speeches that point toward a forthcoming U.S. attack on Iraq. "These speeches have radical, though as yet unrealized, implications," says Boot, while urging the president onward.
The implications are radical indeed, and fraught with danger for the survival of limited, constitutional government. But Boot's column did not even scratch the surface of George Bush's Wilsonian credentials. In the nearly two years bracketed by the Lindsay and Boot signals, the Bush administration has proven one of the most activist internationalist administrations in our country's history. Yet, George "Woodrow" Bush is still being hailed in Republican circles as the "conservative" godsend that saved America from Al Gore's liberalism and internationalism.
The Bush speechwriters have carefully crafted, at regular intervals, ear-pleasing applause lines for the GOP's conservative core constituency, confident that the applause and cheers will cover the contradictory speeches and policies that George Woodrow delivers to his Wilsonian constituency. Rhetoric and popular delusions notwithstanding, Team Bush has carried forward a full-throttled program of radical Wilsonian internationalism covering the entire globalist waterfront:
* Payment of U.S. "back dues" to the UN;* Endorsement of and praise for the UN Charter crafted by Soviet spy Alger Hiss;
* Huge funding increases for the IMF and World Bank;
* Support for further empowering the World Trade Organization;
* Support for creating the sovereignty-destroying Free Trade Area of the Americas;
* Strategic disarmament vis-a-vis Russia;
* Signing the UN's Persistent Organic Pollutants Convention;
* Strategic cave-in on the International Criminal Court;
* Embracing Russia, China, Syria, Iran, Libya, and other terrorist-sponsoring states in the bogus UN-led war on terrorism;
* Pushing a "Homeland Security" program that represents, arguably, the most far-reaching assault on American federalism since Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal era.
For those capable of reading between the lines, George W.'s internationalist inclinations were obvious early on. Even before Mr. Lindsay's abovecited pronouncement in Foreign Affairs, the Establishment media supplied numerous clues to Bush's real allegiance. The New York Times provided an important one in a December 24, 1999 article by Eric Schmidt, entitled "A Cadre of Familiar Foreign Policy Experts Is Putting Its Imprint on Bush." The Times article deceitfully referred to this Bush brain trust as "a small group of conservative experts," "hawkish advisers," and "ex-Cold Warriors."
All 10 of the "conservative" advisers listed in the Times article are confirmed one-world internationalists and 9 of the 10 are CFR members: Condoleezza Rice; Robert Blackwill; Richard Cheney; Stephen Hadley; Richard Perle; George Shultz; Paul Wolfowitz; Dov Zakheim; and Robert Zoellick. The only non-CFR member in that Times list of candidate Bush's inner circle of advisers was Richard Armitage, a longtime handyman for his CFR superiors, whom he unswervingly served in the CIA, State Department, and Defense Department.
At a May 23, 2000 press conference on his proposed foreign policy, "Woodrow" Bush was accompanied by an entourage of Wilsonian advisers from America's foreign policy establishment: Henry Kissinger; Condoleezza Rice; Brent Scowcroft; Donald Rumsfeld; Colin Powell; and George Shultz. All of these political heavyweights are CFR members--except Rumsfeld, who is former CFR.
White House-Pratt House Axis
When George W. moved into the Oval Office and began naming Cabinet officials, he repeated a sickeningly familiar pattern: Many of the most important posts went to the CFR globalists. As in past administrations--both Democrat and Republican, stretching back to FDR--the Cabinet selections appeared to be made, not at the White House, but at Pratt House, the New York City headquarters of the CFR.
The accompanying list (see page 21) presents a painful truth that many conservatives arid GOP faithful have too long ignored: The top echelons of the "conservative" Bush administration are larded with the same CFR internationalists responsible for an unbroken, half-century chain of betrayals and disasters.
According to the CFR's 2001 annual report, 503 of its members are government officials. The majority of these officials undoubtedly serve in the Bush administration; others serve in Congress, the Judiciary, and state government. Which means that well over 400 Pratt House regulars are manning Team Bush's top posts.
Many believe Vice President Dick Cheney, a longtime CFR member with an undeserved image as a political conservative, is the real power wielder behind the throne. "Cheney is unique in American history," says Douglas Brinkley (CFR), a presidential historian at the University of New Orleans, in a July 29, 2002 interview in USA Today. "He is the vortex in the White House on foreign policy making. Everything comes through him." Mr. Cheney's record in the previous Bush administration and his performance at a February 15, 2002 CFR confab supports the claim that Cheney is the one calling the shots for Team Bush.
"It's good to be back at the Council on Foreign Relations," Cheney declared in an address at the group's headquarters. "I've been a member for a long time, and was actually a director for some period of time. I never mentioned that when I was campaigning for reelection back home in Wyoming...." That remark about deceiving the dumb rubes back home elicited a ripple of knowing laughter from the assembled one-worlders. These notables are accustomed to presenting a conservative, pro-American image to the voters while pursuing policies aimed at undermining American sovereignty. Cheney's speech presented the first major articulation of the Bush administration's proposal to launch a new military attack on Iraq. It was natural for him to do so: He was, after all, secretary of defense when Bush Sr. launched Operation Desert Storm. That U.S.-UN operation against Saddam, said Bush, was being fought to establish "a new world order," one that would help establish an empowered United Nations as envisioned by its founders.
The elder Bush was a longtime functionary in the CFR and remains a committed internationalist. He continues to exert considerable influence over the current occupant of the Oval Office, reportedly conferring with his son and other Cabinet officials and top White House staffers on a daily basis.
Revolving Door Deception
In his acceptance speech at the 1992 Democratic National Convention, White House aspirant Bill Clinton paid homage to history professor Carroll Quigley, his mentor at Georgetown University. This doff of the hat to Quigley was a conscious signal to members of the internationalist power elite that the former Arkansas governor was a fellow one-worlder. It also told those in the know that a transition from Bush to Clinton would not mean any substantive change in internationalist policies. Professor Quigley was one of the very few academics ever granted access to the secret records of this power elite, which he and other observers have often referred to as the "Eastern Establishment." In his monumental work Tragedy and Hope, he provided important details on the operations of this elite network, its gradual takeover of many of America's political and economic institutions, and its plans for subverting America's constitutional government and submerging our republic in a new international order. Quigley noted that th ese immensely wealthy internationalists had gained control of both major political parties through financial contributions. The control has become nearly absolute and the parties almost identical, according to the professor, "so that the American people can 'throw the rascals out' at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy." Thus, noted Quigley, "it should be possible to replace [the party in power], every four years if necessary, by the other party ... which will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies."
Professor Quigley's scenario of a planned, quadrennial "revolving door" turnover has held true for decades. George "Woodrow" Bush is proving, by both word and deed, that his administration is continuing that deadly pattern.
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.