Bush decries border project

Washington Times ^ | March 24, 2005 | James G. Lakely

[mikemikemikecubed]

WACO, Texas -- President Bush yesterday said he opposes a civilian project to monitor illegal aliens crossing the border, characterizing them as "vigilantes." He said he would pressure Congress to further loosen immigration law. More than 1,000 people -- including 30 pilots and their private planes -- have volunteered for the Minuteman Project, beginning next month along the Arizona-Mexico border. Civilians will monitor the movement of illegal aliens for the month of April and report them to the Border Patrol. Mr. Bush said after yesterday's continental summit, with Mexican President Vicente Fox and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin at Baylor University, that he finds such actions unacceptable. "I'm against vigilantes in the United States of America," Mr. Bush said at a joint press conference. "I'm for enforcing the law in a rational way." The Minuteman Project was born out of a long-held perception among many residents that more Border Patrol agents are needed to handle the flow of illegal immigrants. Mr. Bush was criticized by both Republicans and Democrats earlier this month for failing to add 2,000 agents to the Border Patrol, as set out in the intelligence overhaul legislation he signed in December. The president's 2006 budget allows enough money to add only 210 agents for the U.S. borders with Canada and Mexico. Mr. Bush said he will "continue to push for reasonable, common-sense immigration policy." He has proposed legislation to grant guest-worker status to millions of illegal aliens already in the United States. The legislation has attracted scant support in Congress, where it is widely regarded as another amnesty that will encourage even more illegal immigration.

[La Enchiladita]

They get better treatment as illegals ... at least in Mexifornia.

Here's what I will do... I'll go to Mexico, then sneak back across the border into the U.S. (if I can get past those 'vigilantes')... and then... life will be good!!!

[Double Tap]

LOL!!!

But I doubt many will get it.

[ken21]

armed civilians at the border are an accident waiting to happen.

no one here will like the results.

[La Enchiladita]

Watch how long it takes for a vigilante drunkard to commit a felonious assault and false imprisonment upon a citizen whose crime is "walking while brown."

Okay... I'm watching ... you watch too, okay? Say, that doesn't make us 'vigilantes', does it?

[La Enchiladita]

Well I guess we know whose side Bush is on.

He's gotten too citified to recognize a real hombre when he sees one. Or, maybe real hombres worry him...

[k2blader]

Well, it's not like this is surprising...

[janetgreen]

life will be good!!!

And the stupid American taxpayers will pay for everything!

[La Enchiladita]

I read you and I copy.

[AnOldCowhand]

Ping

[international american]

ROTFLMAO....watch out for those terrorist vigilantes!!

[Ghost of Philip Marlowe]

I doubt it. Who offers a better solution, the Dems? They'd be 10 times worse.

The GOP is betraying us on this one because it is one of those issues that they know we have nowhere else to turn. They're burning the candle at both ends for votes and to maintain an artificial economy.

They know what they're doing vote-wise. Shame the rest of us have to suffer for politics, though.

[af_vet_rr]

And they keep moving in the wrong direction....

Although I'm not a libertarian, nor do I care for Harry Browne, he had a fairly decent article recently, that somebody sent me : Can This Marriage Be Saved. From time to time articles appear on the Internet urging Republicans and Libertarians to come together, put aside their differences, recognize their common interests, and form a coalition to fight those awful big-government liberals who are destroying America.

Have you noticed that such suggestions always seem to come from Republicans, and not from Libertarians? And that the solution is always that Libertarians should join the Republican Party, not that Republicans should join the Libertarian Party?

If you substitute the word "Conservative" for the word "Libertarian", that would just about sum up my views these days.

I've seen numerous people here and elsewhere basically say to people who try and maintain Conservative beliefs that are at odds with one of President Bush's or the GOP's policies "just keep supporting President Bush and the GOP". I don't hear these same people saying "the GOP needs to support your conservative beliefs".

The front page of Free Republic states this: Free Republic is the premiere online gathering place for independent, grass-roots conservatism on the web. It doesn't say Free Republic is the premiere online gathering place for Republicans on the web. I can't say for sure, as to whether or not that was deliberately worded by JR, but from posts of his on here, and on usenet in the past, I believe that he worded it that way for a reason.

It's been a struggle, because my family runs Republican, I grew up calling myself a Republican, and have done so for over 30 years, ever since I could vote. My wife and I have volunteered our time and even money, when possible, in local GOP efforts.

The past few years though, it's been hard, very hard. I can compromise my beliefs and stick with the GOP, or I can turn to a third party that has no political clout. Sometimes I even buy into the "well, it's better to pick the lesser of two evils, than to pick a third party, and have the worst evil win" arguments.

I'm sure I've probably upset more than a few people with this little rant o' mine, but oh well.

[La Enchiladita]

The GOP is betraying us on this one because it is one of those issues that they know we have nowhere else to turn. They're burning the candle at both ends for votes and to maintain an artificial economy.

Perfectly stated. However, who are "we?" Are we not "We the People?" How long do we continue to employ these traitors?

[Ghost of Philip Marlowe]

Until there is a viable third party. That's why we should busy in the off-season getting one together that can split the vote three ways. Until then, I'm one of those who believes that going third-party is as good as a vote for the other side. With Hillary on-deck and warming up her swing, we especially can't risk this.

[inquest]

You must be correct. There are no party groupie apologists showing up to try to spin this treasonous crap into some ingenious plan to preserve our Republic.

It's probably wearing them out by now. I certainly don't envy them for their task. It's never-ending, and Bush isn't making it any easier for them.

[Ghost of Philip Marlowe]

I agree with you, Speed. Kerry wouldn't be talking about an economic hemisphere, it would be a reality by now -- open borders, interchangeable passports and citizenship, talking of mandated dual languages, maybe even talk of a new monetary standard like the Euro.

[inquest]

With Hillary on-deck and warming up her swing, we especially can't risk this.

Actually, this is especially the time we can risk it. Believe me, it's would be better to have her in the White House than some RINO who'll pursue much the same policies she would, but without serious conservative opposition (I'm thinking McCain, Romney, Giuliani in particular, but there are more).

[who knows what evil?]

Between murdering Terry Schiavo and kowtowing to our enemies, I've just about lost interest in the continued government of the United States.

Join the club.

[who knows what evil?]

Don't blame me. I threw my vote away.

Not me...I voted for Michael Peroutka.

[international american]

George Bush gave the NEA(public enemy of conservatism)an extra 8 billion dollars to play with.
George Bush is NOT protecting us from enemies, foreign
and domestic.
No conservative alive would do these things.
Ergo, Bush is NOT a conservative.