Posted on 05/17/2006 7:47:58 AM PDT by Pukin Dog
Edited on 05/17/2006 8:30:59 AM PDT by Lead Moderator. [history]
Let me throw this out here for the sake of comment.
1. Secure the border. I think we all agree on that.
2. Make the consequences of being a business with an illegal on your payroll not worth the risk (i.e. fines, penalties, loss of eligibility for government contracts, ect.)
Most are comming here illegally to work. Make it hard/risky for a business to hire them in the first place.
Is this part of your permanent record?
Like is the time I skipped recess in 6th grade still on there?
I'm always ready to come to your aid, love. (Yeah, like you need my help!)
No, I am saying border security first. That is far different from doing both for the reasons I stated.
A bill that allows up to 150 million immigrants isn't parsely.
Roberts and Alito: Still in the oven as far as I'm concerned. Time will tell, and I hope you are correct.
HEH!
You make the point I was trying to make well! Follow back on what I said if you should so choose. Oh yeah, and it was freeper COOP who doesn't think an open border could possibly let in al Quaeda.
We all know that it is time to drop a MOAB on Mexico City. That is the UltraFreepers answer to everything isn't it?
Ok. but since you were asking for evidence I felt compelled to ask for some too.
I agree with those two points. But I think you have to have border security in place first before any discussion of changes to domestic immigration regulation - Reagan's amnesty showed that.
Yeah, it sucks when Federal Judges over throw the will of the people. And those federal judges were all democrats. So what has California done in response? Voted for the Democrat Presidential candidate in every election since. You want more of the same? Keep voting for those Democrats. Meanwhile, in states like Texas, almost 20 years ago I had my truck stolen by a Mexican crime syndicate. Texans started voting to solve their problems. San Antonio used to be the car theft capital of the country. You know who gets that honor now? Modesto, California. Texans solved their problems. Californians just blame everyone else.
I cut my own lawn.
You know that if you followed Bush from the beginning that he campaigned of the very immigration platform he is defending right now.
And he's wrong.
If you have ever had a steak at a Ruth’s Chris restaurant, you know that sometimes they bring that wonderful steak to your table with a sprig of parsley on it. I hate parsley. Hate it. If I were to treat my steak the way some of us want to treat our President, I would have to throw out the steak, due to that nasty parsley that comes with it. I can deal with the parsley to get the steak, and that is what I am asking FReepers to do.
I've never had a steak at a Ruth's Chris restaurant; I'm not an elite.
>Why settle for Bush when we could haveWasn't the idea behind this thread to promote Conservative Republicans?
>total perfection with president Tancredo!
Tancredo? Conservative? You must be kidding. :)
100% "Best and Brightest" Rating from American Conservative Union (one of only 38 other Congressmen)
100% Rating from National Right to Life Committee
100% Rating from Conservative Index (Spring '05 - 75% lifetime, tied for second highest rating)
100% Rating from Concerned Women for America
100% Rating from Christian Coalition
100% Rating from Campaign for Working Families
100% Rating from FreedomWorks
98% Rating from National Tax Limitation Committee (average since 1999)
95% "Taxpayer Hero" Rating from Citizens Against Government Waste
95% Rating from Americans for Tax Reform
95% Rating from Christian Action Network
93% Rating from Eagle Forum (tied for second highest rating)
0% Rating from National Education Association
0% Rating from National Organization for Women
0% Rating from Brady Campaign
0% Rating from People for the American Way
0% Rating from Planned Parenthood
0% Rating from Pro-Choice America
RINOS vote and I am grateful they vote GOP.
"A complete lack of perspective."
A statement of objective political reality. Don't get angry at the meteorologist for telling you that there's a hurricane coming because you don't want to have to ride out a hurricane.
"Al Qaeda is licking it chops at the prospects of a Democrat controlled government, with it's reliance on platitudes and UN police actions."
When the Democrats win in November, which they will unless BorderBots are appeased, there will still be a Republican controlling the US government. Democrats in Congress will not be able to override his veto, and there will still be a Republican Secretary of Defense. If this were the 2008 election, it would be a different story. But it's not.
"They will wait patiently until a Democrat is at the helm, and they will launch the most devestating series of strikes the world has ever seen."
Perhaps, but there will still be a Republican at the helm in 2007. Regardless of who wins Congress, it will be by a close margin, and President Bush isn't going anywhere.
2008 is the moment that a Democrat could win the election, if the Republicans don't learn anything from the defeat of 2006. Republicans WILL learn something from the defeat of 2006. I would prefer that they learn it BEFORE the defeat, so that we don't have to HAVE the defeat, but if they won't learn it before November, they will certainly learn it then. Then there are two years to change course and ensure that a Democrat doesn't get back the helm of state.
"They can do this largely because their state sponsors will know that they will not be retailiated against with a Democrat in office."
Depends on who the Democrat is. Joe Lieberman would retaliate. But I am being argumentative. Among the likely field of electable Democrats, you're probably right.
"The War on Terror should be the overriding issue for patriots."
BorderBots would say that securing the Mexican Border is fundamental to the War on Terror, because that's where all the terrorists who are plotting their next attack in America even now are sneaking in. And they're right about that too.
I would say to you that since the War on Terror is so imperative, it is imperative not to lose Congress. Since it is imperative not to lose Congress, President Bush and the Senate Republicans have simply got to give in to the BorderBot demand of a physical fence on the border. It's the easiest thing to give them, to start doing, and to let them have a visible victory that's more than symbolic. An actual wall will stop the flow and give the Border Conservatives what they crave, long term.
Anyway, if we can't seem to budge on the fence now, we're going to be forced to give it next year by loss in November.
So why be stubborn about it now?
We're going to have to do it anyway, so let's give them their victory on the fence and then not have to worry about losing Congress and the War on Terror.
Wasn't personal, I just needed the bounty.
I like it.
;^)
FOTFLOL! I see you got "the memo."
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.