Oh, I see. Loyalty to the group or to the common ideology becomes more important than fealty to the rule of law, albeit simple forum rules.
|
| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 01/11/2004 7:18:13 AM PST by Lead Moderator, reason:
OK, we are getting back into the old patterns of things, so maybe this will snap people back to the fact that I am determined to not have the old pattern return. On this thread, there was a ton of baiting, a ton of personal attacks, some veiled racism, and quite a few posts that striked me as literally indicative of insanity on the part of the poster— if the poster meant what he said. Y’all have to do a better job self-policing or these discussions won’t happen. And I do not buy the argument that one side wants that to happen. I see threasds where one side starts it, I see threads where the other side starts it. I see threads started where it seem the person posting the thread is the one who is doing things to start the thread down the path to being pulled, backroomed, or locked. I’m going to post to the individuals I see doing these unconstructive things but anyone who thinks “I am talking about them not me” is not getting the point. Everyone can do their part to make these threads better. Even someone who never has posted anything which is bad can help by helping to tell those they agree with on issues to back off when they are doing things like flaming or tinfoiling or baiting. This is going to take effort, and some are making it and some are not. Please make it. |
Posted on 01/10/2004 9:33:03 PM PST by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
President Bush's proposal to give temporary legal status to millions of undocumented immigrants is running into stiff resistance from both left and right on Capitol Hill and stands little chance of enactment this year, according to supporters and opponents. While this assessment is based on early responses, with the lobbying effort barely begun, some lawmakers say the measure's only chance of passage this year would require an all-out push by the president, and even that might not be enough.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Is that statement ever a case of psychological projection
You are the worst whiner and abuse button cry-baby on this forum.
What is it about you that makes you averse to free speeech?
Could it be lack of confidence in your ideas or your skill in argument?
Could it be that you are continually routed in argument?
Could it be you have an ideology that is averse to free speech and spent many centuries repressing it?
He didn't need to, The Patriot Act did that but I'll bet you hate the Patriot Act too.
Your speech has been very free around here so stop whining. You seem to feel that "free speech" means you can verbalize any thing and the moment you are called on it you are being censored.
Well for one thing he pisses off all the right people. When he has the loony right and the loonier left foaming at the mouth in epileptic seizures it tells me that he is spot on. I gauge a politician by the enemies he makes and all of Bush’s enemies are the ones I would choose for myself.
How can you support something you haven't read? I am not here to tutor you ...it is out there. I see a lot of this around here, opinions expressed out of willful ignorance and it is troubling.
Reminds me of the tale SofS Colin Powell told about one of his early conversations with President Bush. (I paraphrase)
"Mr. President, I don't know what do do, people on the left say I am too conservative and the people on the right say I am too liberal.
President Bush replied, 'That's exactly where I want you.'"
President Bush's first three years have been a wonderful ride for anyone truly interested in the "Conservative" cause. If he goes down to defeat this year (which if History repeats, which it often does in US Politics, tells us he will) this time will be remembered as being one of the most exciting Political times in our History.
And if you think you've got it bad now, just wait. The AgJobs bill, which Bush's plan co-opts, will make them Citizens.
I guess if that history is limited to his father then you could be right but real history bodes well for GW and the GOP. These folks around here calling themselves he "base" are in deep denial. Their definition of "base" was factored out in 1996 when they sat on their hands and let Dole lose to Clinton. After they did it in 92 with Perot and the 2 million that sat at home in 2000 they were written off completely. There is a new "base" in town and it is not the one the FR unappeasables are talking about.
Of course! It's a reasoned, rational, realistic measure. No RAT would have the guts or integrity to propose it.
Oh, I see. Loyalty to the group or to the common ideology becomes more important than fealty to the rule of law, albeit simple forum rules.
|
But you are correct, I think (hope?) the "Conservative" nature of the "moment of truth" in the polling booth will carry the day. The marginalization of the "base" has been factored in. I'm seeing alot of Dean Bumper Stickers, but this is CA.
I am really worried about Florida, though. I just don't think it's the "lock" people think it is, due in part, to the "Radicalization" of the Granny set, which the Demos have done well.
Geeze, I can't type anymore. Need rest. I must go and bow before the Shrine of the Bushbot, check my messages from M.E.Ch.A., send a transcipt of this to the Illuminati and hit the rack.
Later, Gentlemen, it's been a pleasure.
I think not. IMO, President Bush even suggesting this "plan" is ludicrous and should be an eye opener to anyone that's awake. Criminals and law breakers should never be rewarded, and the mere suggestion of rewarding them should be met with contempt.
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.