Posted on 03/13/2002 2:47:41 PM PST by Michael2001
Well I'm mad and I'm angry, and maybe that's why I can't think of an appropriate response. While all of us were prasing him for how he was dealing with the war on terror, Bush passes this Amnesty Bill, something that not even the sneaky Bill Clinton would do. This is one of the worse Bills to pass through Congress, it will hurt us in many ways, and ten years from now we will still be feeling it's effects.
Bush has, without a doubt in my mind, sold us out for the Hispanic vote. He sold us out because he can take our vote for granted (who will we vote for Al Gore?). Is he wrong? What do we do when the Republicans stop looking out for our interests? Is it time for a new party, or do we work within the party and try to root out the Republicans In Name Only (of which there are many)?
Illegals are not so much of a problem since they should be kicked out asap. The problem is with legal immigration. I'm biased and would rather see my own people be allowed in legally - white Europeans, preferably Christians.
You have every right to want to live around whomever you wish. And everyone but whites can express that wish openly. Courage, whiteguy! LOL!
Man! I'm slow. But now it makes sense. You have been given permission to kick it up a notch. So you escalate from "reasonable" patriotic and sovereignty issues to "reasonable" ethnic/racial issues. Some of your cohorts have been trying to convey "reasonable" demands that we march on Washington. You know, those guys that joined within the past month and are always congratulating each other on a point well made?
(digging around in threads, muttering...)
Don't be so sure. Hispanic have more (from my own experiences) conservative values than liberal values. Strong sense of family and community loyalty. They are very industrious, independent and dedicated people. They don't believe that abortion is the right choice.
They work a hell of a lot harder than the soft white kids in California that think the world owes them a life. They constantly want to learn more, to make more.
Where I live, they line up on the street looking for day labor every day. Across the bay, the black community bitches and moans about how Whitey is screwing them over, while they kill each other in turf wars and drink thunderbird.
I don't buy this line that these are instant Democrats. As soon as these people learn that liberals are about big government, taxes and loss of freedom...they won't be leftist chad punching drones.
Believe me, Buckeroo. I wouldn't ever try to equate you with Medved.
The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, Reagan said, would "regain control of our borders and thereby preserve the value of one of the most sacred possessions of our people, American citizenship."
I am going to take pity on you and give you a thread to follow. Start with 1980, look for the Canadian free trade agreement, then look at the economics of Mexico at the time and why Mexico was not ready for a similar agreement and then you may see that Ronald Reagan, the father of what we now call NAFTA wanted to provide an economic "stimulus" to the Mexican economy in order to implement his vision. He acted as a politician and while I loved the guy I had no illusions about him as a political animal.
My, aren't we condescending. I am well aware that NAFTA was hatched under the Reagan administration. Like everything else in life the devil is in the details. With Bush I it was "lets just do this deal". With Clinton it was "let’s do any deal". Don't worry. I'll get back with you on it. You peaked my interest on this old subject.
Move to the head of the class.
Ok. But in all fairness, answer me (us) this:
Why is it that after ISSUE AFTER ISSUE that Bush et al sell conservatives out on, we are basically told, "It could be Gore, so SHUT UP!"
I'm here to tell you, pal, that in many ways the whole frustration is that Bush might as well BE Gore!! Does it really make it any easier to take that it's Bush that is slamming Israel and backing a new "Palestinian State" (which he KNOWS is palpably bull crap and has said as much)? Is it any better that AFTER 9/11 BUSH is pushing illegal immigration amnesty extension instead of Gore? Does it make it any easier to take that it was BUSH who basically backed McGreevey (a Democrat) in NJ by his virtual neglect of Brett Schundler (whom Bush could have caused to win handily if he'd only shown up to support him)? Does Ted Kennedy really give a rip that it was BUSH and not Gore that pushed that stupid Education Bill??
Listen, friends, when will the Republicans stop attempting to make rest of us conservatives "feel bad" for simply expecting Bush to uphold the conservative values that caused us to vote for him?? Why are we suddenly the bad guys because we have the audacity to expect him to behave in accordance with his avowed conservative beliefs?
The question shouldn't be "Can you deal with 4 years of not criticising Gore" (ostensibly it would be our fault if he gets elected) but:
Conservative friend, can YOU deal with yourself after failing to hold a "conservative" president accountable for his missteps? I didn't vote for Bush to make Republicans "feel good". I voted for Bush because he talked the talk and espoused values I thought were worth supporting. Am I now become the enemy when I cry foul over his betrayal of those values?? What gives??
My question for all of the it-coulda-been-Gore-so-shut-up crowd is: if Bush enacts 70% of the Gore agenda, does that make it somehow better than if Gore did it? Is it just somehow easier to take for you people?
Isn't the essence of the pain of betrayal the fact that it is a FRIEND who is doing you wrong? After all, we EXPECT our enemies to wrong us.
"Et tu, Dubya?"
No offense but, I'm kinda at a loss as to what YOUR facts are. I haven't seen anything from you either.
What's so great about Medved? He's a walking encyclopedia of facts (witness his game show appearance at the tender age of 16), but he has an irrational hatred of Alan Keyes, third parties or anyone that disagrees with him on, well...ANYTHING and can't bring himself to criticize Republicans.
I live in Seattle and have listened to him for a long time. Nothing to see there. Move along, folks...Hugh Hewitt is MUCH better in my estimation, but of course, different strokes...
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.