Bush's Attack on Amnesty Opponents

We had amnesty for illegal immigrants under Reagan. We've got amnesty for them under Bush. From your post, the only difference I can see is meetings.

For Bush, you want impeachment. For Reagan, you give a pass. All for meetings.

I don't get it.

Meeting . Reagan had an OPEN debate IN THE HALLS OF CONGRESS the nation. Bush and Rove conspired behind closed doors WITH TED KENNEDY AND LA RAZA to RAM THRU a amnesty bill before the American citizens were informed of the merits and draw backs of the bill in an open debate in the halls of Congress !
A debate which includes the costs and the social impact of 20 million new Democrat voters should be held out in the open ! If you and the WH don’t know the difference an open debate versus secret meeting and quietly trying sneak a bill thru in five days , what more can I say .

This country is too far gone . I have never seen people so rude to each other since the records of the civil war. It is disgusting to see how separated we are. Pretty soon we will have either side screaming to secede from the union. Oh that’s right I saw yesterday Vermont already wants to do that. This is a shame on America. Thank you Pat Buchanan and the hoods.

If having millions of cheap workers were the way to build wealth, most of Africa, Asia, and South America would be rich now. In reality, a large supply of low-skilled laborers is merely a way to have a class system where the monied and connected elites can stay on top and have little worry about the underclass removing them. There are PLENTY of such examples in Africa, Asia, and South America. Is this what Bush really wants?

Well must not be about building wealth but a 'compassionate' method of spreading and maintaining some peoples wealth. Because the liberal minded are NOT going to ignore the supposed plight of the underclass, they will find a way to transfer the wealth using the tax code.

must not be about building wealth but a 'compassionate' method of spreading and maintaining some peoples wealth

And despite the vile taste that idea puts in my mouth, we still do a FAR better job of it than Mexico. Mexico has a GDP of over $1 trillion. Their per capita income is 10% above the global average. The problem is that a handful of families take the majority of it, and use it to maintain their position by buying police and politicians.

And despite the vile taste that idea puts in my mouth, we still do a FAR better job of it than Mexico. Mexico has a GDP of over $1 trillion. Their per capita income is 10% above the global average. The problem is that a handful of families take the majority of it, and use it to maintain their position by buying police and politicians.

Welllll, look at our political upper class, our economic upper class, educated upper class, and last but certainly not the least, our religious upper class. So the trend we are taking seems to be more about emulating Mexico's method of operation than encouraging Mexico to be 'compassionate' to its own citizenry.

How can you equate the (unavoidable) existence of an upper-class with the idea that our upper class skews the rules too far in their favor?

Of course, EVERY upper-class group will try to entrench themselves... that's human anture. The problem is how much assistance they get from the laws of the land. Upward mobility is easier here than in any nation on earth. I don't see many indications of laws that prevent others from joining the upper-crust club... or that protect the foolish rich from falling on their arses. Heck, I've never seen any reports on this idea, but I'd be willing to guess that America has the greatest percentage of wealthy folk who migrate downwards, as well.

How can you equate the (unavoidable) existence of an upper-class with the idea that our upper class skews the rules too far in their favor? Of course, EVERY upper-class group will try to entrench themselves...

The ever continuing distortion of the 'Bill of Rights', the non-stop evolution of government becoming the omnipotent power giving and taking rights is about more than just a natural existence of hard working achievements of 'upper-class'.

McCain was not interested in 'equality' of access to his political world when he divined his campaign finance reform, it was about protecting his own status. Those who use cheap labor to build themselves prosperity or to maintain their prosperity live separated in walled off gated high estates so their daily affairs are not mixed with the lower class and it gets called diversity.

Personally, I see hardworking achievers as mentors to learn from, what I reject is the using of we the people government as their tools to divide and conquer.

didn’t the libs come up with a “JesusLand” map after the 2004 election ? Somehow splitting off the red states (read: South) and incorporating the blue states with Canada ? Of course, now Canada’s getting more conservative (as is Germany and France and much of Europe)so I’m not sure where they’d find sanctuary.

You may think it is so good to have the split ,but what do we do when we all need each other? You are forgetting one thing,there is an enemy out there waiting in the wings. How can we stick together when we are so far apart in this country?Sooner or later whether the blues or the reds like it we may have to. Then what?Who is going to give a little to per serve this union. A union that has survived longer then you and I have been alive. They did not lose the union then, I would hate to lose it in my lifetime. Bending and talking to each other does not mean you give in. It just means you are smart enough to talk. Talking to each other would never hurt anybody > Ideas are what moves mankind. There might be good people with good ideas on how to handle this issue, but the more people are treated horrible like some of the posts to me in this forum by some pretty nasty people only make enemies.Then no one wins ,not the minutemen, not the citizens and not the illegals.Nobody!

Sorry, I think you took my #149 too seriously. It was meant to be a joke.

I have a million reasons not to want any kind of split in the US, not the least of which is that I live in a border state, surrounded within miles by sites from the Civil War. Our family had folks on both sides then. We may have our profound political battles today, but pray nothing like that happens again, in my lifetime or ever. I don’t see it happening.

To put the original comment in context: You may have forgotten that following the 2004 election, the libs were so angry with the Kerry loss, theoretically based on the “Christian values vote,” that someone came up with a map showing all the red states as “Jesus Land” and then the blue states were combined with Canada which then, under Cretien, was very anti-US.

Since 2004, US-friendly Hunter was elected Canada’s Prime Minister; pro-Americans Merkel in Germany and Sarkozy in France won their national elections. The anti-American Left, which insists the US is despised throughout the world, has fewer options of countries friendly to their thinking.

The rest of the world is ‘getting it.’ Western Culture, with the USA its most visible entity, is at risk and we must all hang together or surely we will hang separately. (with thanks and proper attribution to your friend, Ben)

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.