Posted on 06/01/2007 4:34:31 AM PDT by Marathoner
When it comes to dealing with the illegal immigration issue, President Bush and his administration are their own worst enemies. On other issues, the president is sugar and spice when it comes to Democrat opponents. But when it comes to rule-of-law conservative opposition to his amnesty proposal, the preferred method of operation is akin to thwacking the hornets nest with a stick.
You may recall that when the Minutemen first brought this issue to major public attention a few years ago with their volunteer border patrols, President Bush called them vigilantes. And its been pretty much all downhill from there, leading to his big May 29 speech on the current immigration reform proposal at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) in Georgia.
The president began his remarks by introducing two Hispanic members of his administration, Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez and former Cabinet member Mel Martinez, now a U.S. Senator from Florida. Both were born in Cuba. I want to mention those two men because, to me, they represent what the immigration debate is all about, the president said.
So right out of the chute the president misrepresents the issue. I dont believe Gutierrez and Martinez are illegal immigrants. They and/or their families immigrated here legally. And it appears both came here to escape the oppression of the Castro regime, not to simply get a higher-paying job. So Gutierrez and Martinez are NOT what this immigration debate is about. The issue is over those who break the law to get here.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
nativist, xenophobic/xenophobes [Press Secretary Tony Snow, et al]
bigots [Senator Lindsey Graham]
vigilantes [President George W Bush]
This is what the Washington globalist elites call those in fly-over country who want to preserve the sovereignty of the nation.
The author provides an excellent line by line rebuttal to the President’s speech.
It is amazing to me that President Bush never has unkind words for Democrats who have undermined his Presidency and the war in Iraq for seven years, but likes to talk tough to conservatives.
Between immigration, the Law of the Sea Treaty, and carbon taxes, Bush is making a major swing to the left. Maybe we don’t want him nominating anyone else to the Supreme Court. If the Democrats want to impeach (convict) him, I’d recommend that Republican Congressman (Senators) vote “Present.”
“Does anyone know Tony’s position on illegals before he joined the White House?
I was disappointed to hear Michael Medved support this bill 100% - he just doesn’t get it. (sigh)”
+1
Michael’s logic/rational thinking has a black hole when it comes to illegals invading the U.S.
I have to fast forward the program stream when he ignores the fact that we need to enforce our laws.
George Bush is doing to the Republican Party,
what Jimmy Carter did to the Democrat Party.
NO AMNESTY.
Medved is quite bizarre on this issue. I really cannot listen to his whiny condescension on this issue.
To trust the gov’t the way he does in this is incredibly naive and foolish.
Well, perhaps I’m giving Tony Snow too much credit.
He always truck me as far too common-sense to embrace the open borders insanity.
He should be impeached,if anyone had balls. He has become the dems best friends, and no friend to the USA.
You’re not talking about immigration, are you? This isn’t even the first go round on this issue, and I think he’s been pretty clear about it from the start. Anyway, loyalty to a politician is foolish.
Our illegal immigration reality:
I don’t see what’s so “complex” about the situation.
Close the border to all unauthorized crossing.
Enforce employment verification laws.
Allow law enforcement to check the legal status of anyone they have contact with, and deport the illegals immediately.
Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus
Fool and traitor to do what? This man has kept your rear end safe since 911 and you call him a fool. Everytime he tries to do anything he is run down by both sides. Talk about having no friends. What do you want done with those people that are here? I personally want them deported, but how do you do that without wasting a lot of resources? Who judges who comes here and who decides who comes here and when? Where did your family come from and how did they get here? Don’t give the legal stuff because I heard that one before. Do you want these people shot at the border while they cross ? What happens with the lawsuits when they start ? They are going on now. But as far as Bush being a fool he has more education then anyone in hollyweird and congress put together. As far as being a traitor , I hope he continues to keep us safe from attack. Don’t think they have not tried and were busted. WHAT DO YOU WANT DONE? ARE YOU WILLING TO BE SHOT AND SUED TO DO IT?
The man only has an MBA.
“Dont think they have not tried and were busted.”
The only ones “busted” were the BP agents attempting to do their jobs. This President never had any intention of defending our borders. I believe it was Tancredo who said Bush doesn’t see the United States as an actual place, he only talks about this idea of “America”. Notice he hardly ever says “United States?”
There is no way Bush will back down on Amnesty... Please read below
Council on Foreign Relations:
In 2005, CFR task force co-chairman Pastor testified in Congress in front of the Foreign Relations Committee: "The best way to secure the United States today is not at our two borders with Mexico and Canada, but at the borders of North America as a whole."[43]
The CFR task force he headed called for one border around North America, freer travel within it, and cooperation among Canadian, Mexican and American military forces and law enforcement for greater security. It called for full mobility of labor among the three countries within five years, similar to the European Union.[5] He also appeared at a CFR forum called "The Future of North American Integration in the Wake of the Terrorist Attacks" on October 17, 2001, discussing the prospect of North American integration in the wake of the September 11 attacks.[44]
Conservative commentator Phyllis Schlafly wrote of the 2005 report, "This CFR document, called 'Building a North American Community,' asserts that George W. Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin 'committed their governments' to this goal when they met at Bush's ranch and at Waco, Texas on March 23, 2005.
The three adopted the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America and assigned 'working groups' to fill in the details."[45] The document advocated allowing companies to recruit workers from anywhere within North America and called for large loans and aid to Mexico from the US. It called for a court system for North American dispute resolution and said that illegal aliens should be allowed into the United States Social Security system through the Social Security Totalization Agreement. The report called for a fund to be created by the US to allow 60,000 Mexican students to attend US colleges. The report says the plan can be carried out within five years. Other members of the task force included former Massachusetts governor William Weld and immigration chief for President Clinton, Doris Meissner.
Pastor wrote in a piece for Foreign Affairs: "The U.S., Mexican, and Canadian governments remain zealous defenders of an outdated conception of sovereignty even though their citizens are ready for a new approach. Each nation's leadership has stressed differences rather than common interests. North America needs leaders who can articulate and pursue a broader vision...
Countries are benefited when they changed these [national sovereignty] policies, and evidence suggests that North Americans are ready for a new relationship that renders this old definition of sovereignty obsolete."[46] Pastor appeared at a CFR-sponsored symposium at Arizona State University on issues that would face the next president.[47]
Link: wikipedia
I’ve never listened to Medved for an extended period of time because I’ve never heard him say anything I agree with. And his movie reviews are some of the worst I’ve ever read.
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.