Posted on 06/01/2007 5:41:16 PM PDT by Clintonfatigued
However, now I do not feel alone. Peggy Noonan has a new column up in the Wall Street Journal Opinion Journal. She has clearly said what has been getting me down. I think I knew what was up, but couldn't put a finger on it. I knew it centered around the immigration debate, and the way our congressional leaders are behaving. That sentiment especially includes Mr. Bush too, but when I read this column, I felt like Charlie Brown yelling at Lucy at her Psychology booth when he yells, "That's it!" when trying to identify why he can't get into the Christmas spirit.
Try this clip on for size :
The White House doesn't need its traditional supporters anymore, because its problems are way beyond being solved by the base. And the people in the administration don't even much like the base. Desperate straits have left them liberated, and they are acting out their disdain. Leading Democrats often think their base is slightly mad but at least their heart is in the right place. This White House thinks its base is stupid and that its heart is in the wrong place.
For almost three years, arguably longer, conservative Bush supporters have felt like sufferers of battered wife syndrome. You don't like endless gushing spending, the kind that assumes a high and unstoppable affluence will always exist, and the tax receipts will always flow in? Too bad! You don't like expanding governmental authority and power? Too bad. You think the war was wrong or is wrong? Too bad.
But on immigration it has changed from "Too bad" to "You're bad."
The president has taken to suggesting that opponents of his immigration bill are unpatriotic--they "don't want to do what's right for America." His ally Sen. Lindsey Graham has said,
(Excerpt) Read more at redstate.com ...
Yes, I was thinking of the the Californian. I didn’t realize you were talking about the Sec. I don’t know about the illegals in her house, so I don’t want to speak.
I commend your statement 100%.
Nut the party in WA state has been for so long, and with our demographics, in the hands of liberals, I despair.
We have really good folks involved and I work on their campaigns, but between the absolute non-involvement of the vast majority of local FReepers on local/regional/state campaigns, I'm not sure why I bother. They could make a major difference but their non-involvement shifts little (if anything), and for all my remarks on the state board, nobody does a thing.
Maybe it's time for me to retire to Bermuda or someplace else and let the rest of this state's FR Republicans live with what they got. Enough of them get quite p****y the instant you mention "campaign volunteers." But not a one of them wants to do a thing.
“Okay, we got your hint that you don’t think Hunter is ‘honest’. Then you say you like him. Please, we’re tired of dishonest politicians, maybe you aren’t. So, tell us what ‘dishonesty’ is it we should know about Hunter?”
Well, obviously you didn’t get anything. I most certainly did not say Duncan wasn’t honest. Far from it. Let me reinerate. I would have backed him if he had a chance. I even said he’d make a good VP. You should re-read my post.
I don’t like dishonesty any more than you do. Perhaps you got me mixed up with someone else.
Last night I watched those ridiculous democrats try to kiss up to Hillary and then Kucinich made the mistake of mentioning NAFTA. He might as well have fallen off the stage. There was no follow up on his statement because no one wants to talk about it.
NAFTA was passed just before the 94 republican congress took office because they knew it wouldn't pass once the new congress came in. Likewise no one wants to talk about the NAU being created while we are looking the other way. The Birch Society managed to stop CAFTA last year and no one heard about it in the "news." But if that had gone into effect it would have expanded NAFTA into South America.
Nobody agrees with you.
Loretta Sanchez was the woman who beat "B-1" Bob Dornan in California.
Linda Chavez was selected by President Bush to be Secretary of Labor, but she withdrew when it was discovered that she befriended a woman, housed her for a while, and helped her out financially, and how turned out to be an illegal.
The truly coincidental thing about this is...
Bush nominated Elaine Chao to replace Chavez. Chao is one of the few Cabinet members to continue from the first term, and...
Elaine Chao is married to Senator Mitch McConnell. The MSM is now positioning (pressuring) McConnell as the key Senator in getting the GOP to side with Democrats to rush the immigration bill through the Senate.
-PJ
Yes, and she's been talking up 'it's not amnesty' right along with the rest of them.
Let me ask it of you this way: Given President Bush's stance on the illegal immigration issue, are you now questioning his decision to go into Iraq? Isn't that question the same thing as questioning the validity of the interpretations based on jv's position on immigration?
And one final point for all: I've posted on a lot of hot threads, including 2nd amendment threads. If I took an alternative position on 2nd amendment individual vs. collective rights, would that have invalidated everything I might have ever posted on, say, federal elections? Let's not start character assassination over single-issue disputes.
-PJ
Thank you very much again PJ, I hope we have more of you on FR during this time in particular.
“If anyone broke the 11th Commandment it was this administration.”
That was an outstanding point.
-PJ
Yes.
When you legalize all of these folks all you will be doing is creating a market for another batch of cheaper workers. All of a sudden those workers who had been doing those jobs that Americans won't do will be transformed into Americans who won't do the jobs that Illegals do.
If you think that Tyson foods, Mohawk and the rest of the big names in the illegals hiring department are going to stop then you are smoking the good stuff and need to pass it around.
No I question his execution of the decision. Invading Iraq should have occured at the same time that Afghanistan was attacked. But we couldnt do it because President Bush had not mobilized the country to war. Instead he spent his time dining with muslims and telling us that Islam was the religion of peace...the man has absolutely no sense of history. Instead of mobilizing this country Military Spending was kept near the lowest levels of the Clinton Years. Instead of mobilizing this country he signed idiotic bills that had nothing to do with this existential battle we find ourselves in.
No attacking Saddam was EXACTLY the right strategy. Bush should not have asked for permission from the UN. He should not have sought allies in the fight...except for those willing to join us at a moments notice. We should have fallen on those bastards like the fist of god...instead we went in apologizing for your boldness in avenging the deaths of our countrymen.
Thanks for the info. You know it is so businesses who hire cheap labor illegal immigrants that are demanding them to be legalized and pushing for the illegal immigraiton bill. I think they did their calculations and they found out that they will still make profit even when they legalize them.
What this sort of law breaking does to the fabric of this country is another story indeed. In fact in one way it points directly towards why the Bush administration cannot Iraq under control. They do not understand the connections between morality and the law.
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.