Posted on 06/18/2007 7:33:22 AM PDT by SwinneySwitch
Dubya
Get Out OF
Dick Cheney’s House!
LOL! Well put.
It’s hilarious, but they don’t have an alternative. Imagine having to post “I was too stupid to make note of Bush’s campaign platform” every day.
You are not alone. Bush seems to be a typical politician.
* Poll the public to see what they want
* Morph into the publics ideal candidate
* Say what the public wants to hear
* Get elected.
**** When you get to the point of not needing the electorate, let your true self reappear. Happens every election.
Thanks.
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) - In the past 10 years, new Mexican beach resorts have attracted a flood of American expatriates to retirement and second home communities.
Last year, the Dallas Morning News reported that more than 1 million Americans now live in Mexico, at least part time, five times the number of 10 years ago. The U.S. State Department reported in October 2004 that 385,000 live there year round. That number is almost certainly higher today.
“Mexico is a foreign setting with a familiar accent,” Bruce Greenberg, an appraiser/market consultant for Mexican real estate, who cites Mexico’s proximity and hospitality as two big draws for Americans.
Mexican beach resorts have another big factor going for them: weather. Winters are warm and summer heat is tempered by the waters of the Pacific, the Sea of Cortez, or the Caribbean. And, even though property prices in Mexico have increased, the costs of homes are still low. In addition, according to Greenberg, there are low property taxes averaging about $300 a year on property of $300,000 and low monthly costs.
What’s more, creature comforts of American life are increasingly becoming available south of the border. Satellite and cable television bring news and entertainment right into ex-pat’s living rooms, the Internet keeps them in touch with hometown newspapers, and American food brands are available at the supermarket.
There may even be a Wal-Mart not far away.
With so many migrants, however, resorts of choice are getting crowded, and other, even newer developments, are springing forth to take up the overflow.
Well, gee, even Bush would prefer retirement in Paraguay.
http://www.issues2000.org/2008/George_W__Bush_Immigration.htm#36
Temporary workers ok, but no amnesty
Q: What should we do about the 8,000 people cross our borders illegally every day?
BUSH: We’re increasing the border security of the US. There ought to be a temporary worker card that allows a willing worker and a willing employer, so long as there’s not an American willing to do that job, to join up. I don’t believe we ought to have amnesty. I don’t think we ought to reward illegal behavior. There are plenty of people standing in line to become a citizen. If they want to become a citizen, they can stand in line, too. And here is where my opponent and I differ. In September 2003, he supported amnesty for illegal aliens.
KERRY: We need a guest-worker program. We need is to crack down on illegal hiring. And thirdly, we need an earned-legalization program for people who have been here for a long time, stayed out of trouble, got a job, paid their taxes, and their kids are American. We got to start moving them toward full citizenship, out of the shadows.
Source: Third Bush-Kerry Debate, in Tempe Arizona Oct 13, 2004
80% of the votes FOR the Immigration bill came from Democrats
Suppose you all could remember who the real enemy is ONE time instead of spending ALL your time fragging your own side?
Does it occur to you that Bush is *not* on our side when he is aligned with 80% of Senate *Democrats*?
What's wrong with this picture, Johnnie? You seem to be one of the few who just don't get it.
to read later
I don’t know who you are talking about, but it ain’t me.
And the main one doing the whining around here is...YOU.
Bush campaigned for a "guest-worker program," not amnesty.
ping
You’re right. In my second post you can see that in 2004 Bush clearly accused Kerry of supporting “amnesty” in 2003.
And did you notice that both of these SS Bush-bots used the word “stupid” in their ‘arguments’?
That’s standard liberal operating procedure. Am I surprised? No.
In 2007 they have assumed the Dims’ and Kerry’s position: amnesty.
Not since the man showed his full hand in this immigration fiasco. I'm done with him and agree with the idea of early retirement
and about half the Senate can go with him
Last I heard you had to go in partnership with a Mexican in order to buy in Mexico. Is that still true?
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.