Sir, I never insinuated that at all about Ronald Reagan, and your remarks towards George W are inflammatory, derogatory, and inaccurate.
And if you find my remarks tiresome, I'd suggest a few cups of expresso if you choose to read any in the future.
Because I've no intent of changing my tune.
Oh, you hurt my feelings when you talk to me that way. Puhh..leeze. You're free to say what ever you think, but when you make remarks like the one below about someone who blows anyone away as a President in the 20th century, I'll do my best to refute it.
Now let me tell you what Reagan did believe: he believed that America, unlike places as the USSR or Red China didn't have to build walls, real or symbolic, to keep people in, or keep out those seeking economic liberty and freedom.
Again, Ronald Reagan, like most of us I suspect believed in some form of legal immigration. But Mr. Reagan was clear that did not extend to illegals. Bush is attempting to legalize hundreds of thousands or more of illegal immigrants. That's what they are, and he justifies it not on some political compromise Reagan made in 1986, which was coupled with strong guarantees the borders would be better enforced, as well as the laws against those hiring illegals. No Bush bases his desire to legitimize illegals on some teary-eyed "family values don't stop at the Rio Grande" goobledygook.
You are implying that Bush is doing it for the same reasons as Reagan had, and that's not true. Reagan's actions, however mistaken, were political, Bush's are ideological. He has a vision in my opinion of open borders, and a North American union similar to Europe's. That is scary, and not Reagan's vision by any standard.