Posted on 12/09/2004 6:55:41 AM PST by STARWISE
Oh my God ... how .. how could this be?
Oh, yeah...........and he's a self-absorbed egotist on top of that.......
That argument carries little weight.
And Mineta makes those decisions huh? You believe that? Cabinet Secretaries can recommend but they implement the policies of the President and nothing as controverial as profiling or not profiling is going to be decided on until the President agrees.
Once again, facts must NEVER get in the way of accusations. It doesn't fit into the Bush-Bashers template.
Mineta was not a Clinton holdover. He was first appointed as a cabinet secretary by Bush.
That is an understatement!!
Mineta is by far the more pro-destruction of US borders. All we can do is to keep harping at the White House, our congressrats and praying to God that this "Republic" can manage to get through thie past 40 years of utter socialist nonsense without complete destruction.
Well, Dave. You're right. He merely acts like a Clinton holdover.
Yep, I know, that's why I was throwing their argument back in their face.
Since when did the Department of Transportation get the job of controlling the borders? That's a new one on me.
I understand your point but, maybe, there should be a different argument, as this is the way we also had to handle the old Soviet Union.
(Nothing.)
OK, fine, don't answer the question, typical fare of knee-jerk FReepers. Mr. Mineta can say all he wants about the southern border and what can be done about illegal aliens, and that's it. It's not his job to oversee the borders, because it's not the job of DOT.
< snip >
President Bush needs a token Democrat in the cabinet, M'nta is better than Albright or some other liberal talking fool.
Wow. It seems that some FReepers don't even bother with adding the water anymore - they're just snorting lines of Koolaid right out of the package.
Mineta's an ass. He needs to be gone yesterday, and we need some rationality injected into TSA now, before the airline industry collapses. And no, we don't need any 'Rats, not anywhere.
Really? What other "Illinois Republicans" have you spoken with?
I maintain the Chicagoland chapter for Free Republic and if there's one thing all of u agree on, there were a number of hardcore conservatives IN Illinois who interviewed with the SCC, it's just that none of them had an name recognition.
Check the 2004 Illinois primary candidates and you will find a guy named Jonathan Wright who is ideologically identical to Keyes. If they wanted a conservative "purist" they would have simply went with him. He was from Illinois, had already ran for the U.S. Senate, and had a base of support as the only downstate candidate.
Obama had become a national celebrity and was an articulate black politician. The Illinois GOP wanted an equally articulate black politician who was a national celebrity. Unfortunately we didn't have ANYONE in this state who fit that profile at the time. So they looked to Maryland and Alan Keyes. We did get some great debates between the two, but obviously if an in-state candidate couldn't beat Obama, there was no way anyone else could do it.
Even I could have told you that. But you ran Keyes anyway.
Matter of fact I was saying that in the Obama/Keyes threads all Summer long from many Illinois FReepers. I even took some flak for saying what exactly what you said. Now the job of running a Republican against Obama will be ten times as hard, because Obama will have put some experience and national recognition under his belt.
JustADemocrat.
Nice vocabulary you have there. Might want to go back and play in your sandbox till you grow up. If you can't back something up with facts you revert to name calling, wonder who that reminds me of.
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.