Posted on 08/30/2005 10:34:44 PM PDT by goldstategop
Pat Buchanan, former communications director to President Ronald Reagan, former presidential candidate and WND commentator, has come to the conclusion that a courageous Republican legislator should move a bill for impeachment of President Bush.
I reluctantly agree – and for the same reasons.
President Bush has had nearly six years in office to honor his oath of office and enforce immigration laws in this country.
He has not only failed, he has intentionally neglected this sworn duty, instead claiming he prefers to promote a vague immigration "reform" plan that involved a "guest worker" program that has served as an encouragement to the most massive influx of illegal immigration this country has ever seen.
Some will tell me this can't be done and that it is irresponsible to propose it because Bush is a wartime president.
My response? It is precisely because this nation finds itself in a desperate war declared by a formidable foe determined to use our open borders to destroy this country that we must act now.
Some will remind me I endorsed Bush just two years ago for re-election.
My response? I made it very clear at the time that I was not really endorsing Bush, per se, but seeking the only practical way to defeat his reckless and irresponsible and treasonous opponent. There is no contradiction here. Kerry had to be defeated. Now Bush must go. America can do better.
I don't agree with many of Pat Buchanan's foreign policy ideas. But on the border, he is 100 percent right. Bush has been a disaster. No matter how successful we might be in our campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan, we can lose this war against jihadist Islam right here at home.
Our enemies have already used the open border to penetrate this country – and they will do so again.
When Bush placed the old Immigration and Naturalization Service under the new Department of Homeland Security, I actually believed he recognized how critical border security was to the defense of our homeland. I was fooled.
In the current issue of my premium, online, intelligence newsletter, G2 Bulletin, author Paul Williams recounts in extravagant detail how al-Qaida operatives have already used the open Mexican border not only to sneak operatives into the country but to smuggle in nuclear weapons with the help of the MS-13 (Mara Salvatrucha) street gang.
The fuse has been lit.
The war in Iraq, which I have supported, will mean little when, not if, a nuclear weapon is detonated inside our own country.
When that happens, we will no longer be having debates about who has more culpability for Sept. 11 – Bush or his predecessor. Bush has had ample opportunity to address the mistakes of the past. Instead, he has repeated them. They say hindsight is 20-20. Not for Bush.
Even if the border issue and the tsunami of illegal immigration was not strictly speaking the No. 1 national security issue we face, enforcing the laws of the land would be the right thing to do – the only moral and right thing to do.
Americans are dealing with more joblessness, higher crime, skyrocketing taxes, a crippled medical system, overcrowded jails, an overburdened judicial and law enforcement system, costly and divisive language barriers and changing demographics that are permanently transforming the U.S. culture.
Why?
Bush claims it is because America needs cheap labor. That's what the law of supply and demand is all about. It's not his duty or responsibility to acquire workers for big corporations and other fat cats below what the market will support.
I don't even believe Bush is being honest when he makes this argument. I am convinced there are international agreements behind this. I am persuaded the systematic destruction of the American way of life through uncontrolled and illegal immigration is part of a master plan for merger and global consolidation – first with our neighbors in this hemisphere and later worldwide.
This secretive plot must end here and now.
America was founded on the principle of independence and sovereignty. The president is betraying our most sacred national heritage.
Bush is ignoring the will of the people and he is violating the law of the land.
It's time to turn up the heat.
As Buchanan suggested: Will even one courageous Republican member of Congress have the guts to sponsor a bill of impeachment?
We are letting people from terrorist states enter the U.S.
Do I need to explain why I'm on that note? I'm thinking that you should be able to understand this.
What is the basis for these personally abusive and race-baiting accusations of prejudice and bigotry? Every person who complains on this forum about the borders or illegal immigration is eventually falsely accused of bigotry, racism and prejudice. Why is the pro-illegal immigration side in this debate allowed to continually engage in such personal abuse? Why the obvious double standard?
thanks. I agree
But not in the President?
We can get what we need accomplished on this subject through them.
But not through the President?
Impeachment is completely unnecessary.
Then why is it in the Constitution?
What's more important: getting the job done or carrying out a political vandetta against the President?
January 2001 to date is 4 years 8 months in office. Every time I hear the "nearly six years in office", I stop reading. Farah joins the other whack-jobs.
Excellent point. Illegal immigration and the problems it causes have attained the status of a national emergency. GW is no more entitled to ignore it than he would have been entitled to ignore the terrorist attacks of 9/11/01. If he continues to disregard the growing anger of America's citizenry on the issue, he may not last in office till 2008.
Getting the President to get the job done as "Chief Executive," "get" it?
Slow down bub. Reread the guy's comments, and notice that he covers all sorts of topics other than the fact of illegal entry. I object to illegal entry, because it's, well, illegal, and anyone who would thumb his nose at our laws as his first step in the land, doesn't belong here. But that isn't this guy's problem; he objects to the fact that they're speaking Spanish and working for low wages. In other words, he's angry about all the wrong things, and his anger is far broader than the issue of secure borders.
Every person who complains on this forum about the borders or illegal immigration is eventually falsely accused of bigotry
I complain about the borders and illegal immigration. So far, nobody has accused me of bigotry, falsely or otherwise. So your claim appears to be incorrect.
Nonresponsive, so I'll ask again:
What's more important: getting the job done or carrying out a political vandetta against the President?
NOTHING I post is "assinine," understand?
What's the end result of him opposing illegal immigration and you opposing it, since you assert you do? Do you oppose it any more or do you get a medal because you oppose it for the right reasons? The law is the law, even if as you claim Jim wants it enforced so he won't have to speak Spanish in that dishwashing job he's always wanted (although he should be allowed to express his position himself without benefit of being put on your analyst couch)---it doesn't matter why people want it enforced.
I answered that question a half-dozen times already: the difference is that this guy also opposes legal immigration.
it doesn't matter why people want it enforced.
I matters quite a bit. If the motivation is racism, then enforcing immigration law isn't the only action one will take; one will also do rotten things to american citizens in the hated group. For example, this guy states that "his" job is being taken by illegals--but how does he know they're illegal? Has he seen their green cards? Did he see them sneak across the border? Maybe some are illegal--but are they all illegal? He seems to think they are. Why? Because his real objection is to job competition, not to illegal immigrants. He is opposed to anyone who takes a job for lower wages than he would like to receive.
I responded. Your question just "assumes a fact not in evidence," that I'm pursuing a political "vandetta" against the President. I'm "pursuing" the enforcement of laws Bush took an oath to uphold. If he ignores that oath, he should be impeached. If he wakes up and starts enforcing the law and defending the borders, I and millions of other American citizens (who only voted for the guy, that's all) would doubtless be placated.
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.