Posted on 06/21/2007 6:45:17 PM PDT by SJackson
You may be a Queen, but not England.
No that’s a FACT . . . I’ve done my research; have you done yours?
If you had checked you would have seen that I've been here longer than you have. And I have seen that baloney several times, do you think people are to dumb to remember what has been posted before. All I ask, was if you were being paid to post it over and over again, are if you just couldn't come up with something else as irrelevant.
And you're not a REAL conservative either.
If you’re not using Ronald Reagan as your conservative benchmark, who are you using? . . . [You really should learn your history: What happened to Ronald Reagan and the Republicans in 1986? and in 1987? . . . During this period, MANY so-called conservatives deserted Reagan as well; in fact, a few of these ‘conservatives’ are leading the attack on Bush today (e.g., Buckley and the NRO crowd) . . . If we lose the Presidency in 2008 it will be a NORMATIVE historical event . . . It will also have been enabled by ‘conservatives’ who didn’t know how good they had it until their stridency cost them everything! . . . How does President Bloomberg sound?!]
I agree - what a refreshing post.
Maybe that is the key to why the rush now. Possibly it is because the issue must be handled because of our safety. My belief is that they know AlQaeda is “seeding” America for some ungodly purpose. Maybe they realize that there is not a fence that will hold back starving people from a land willing to give jobs. So, the only answer is to partner with the democrats, sell them on pushing through a bill and taking what he can get.
We must know who is in the country and where they are.
We must get control of the onslaught.
We cannot uproot, divide families and transport them to a country dumping them with no home, no job, no money - so a workable solution has to be found.
He is an outgoing president and no president with political goals will ever touch the issue - it is too controversial.
He could not get social security reform, but the democrats do want an opportunity for votes so he can possibly get some part of immigration reform.
And a democrat controlled White House would provide a far worse version of immigration than hopefully he can get passed.
Something to think about.
Bush always has been WAY too easygoing with Democrats on the overwhelming majority of issues. His “compromises” allow them to turn his relatively few bad ideas into gargantuan terrible monstrosities and multi-trillion-dollar boondoggles that threaten to undermine the federal government generations hence. That said, I now think that Bush persistently pushes the present immigration monstrosity as part of a simple Rovian plot to curry favor with the Democrats, to deflect attention from his actions in other areas, and to sabotage the reelection prospects of Democratic Distinguished Members of Congress and by extension their Presidential campaigns.
Think about the Republican ads during the general election cycle, “Barack Hussein Obama voted against a fence to stop transnational gangsters from invading our country to murder our citizens...he even voted to give amnesty to illegal-alien sex predators who molested our children...and still worse he voted to give illegal-alien terrorists free rein to live in America indefinitely. Put an end to this madness...vote Republican.” How will these Senators defend their votes on the campaign trail? Better still, most viable Republicans—Giuliani, Romney, T. Thompson, Gilmore, and Huckabee—don’t have to defend such votes because they never served in Congress.
I useta woulda fist-fought anyone who said something bad about him, but since he could obviously care less about me and the rest of you now.... $%^& him.
What he said.
Are you able to present anything remotefully factual to back that up?
Remotely factual? How about directly from the horses mouth and actions? You may not consider it to be treasonous for a President of the United States to allow and even support legions of illegal aliens swarming over the American border and destroying our culture, our economic and physical security and possibly our status as an independent nation. By his actions and words he is deeply involved in an alien invasion of the USA with the likely objective of creating some form of union with the invaders.
REPETITION IS THE KEY TO RETENTION . . . [The FR haters certainly practice this montra.]
I admit I don't pay all that much attention to his political machinations, he's never been someone I've been interested in voting for.
But he strikes me as reasonably straightforward on most issues.
Wrong frequently, but straightforward.
Campaign finance, imo couldn't be more wrong, immigration the same. But he has his positions and he defends them. I can respect that. Vengeful, he strikes me as an egotistical *ss*hol*. Not a disqualifier for politicians.
I don't know, I think he might have had a better handle on Iraq, at least the logistics, and that has dominated the Bush Presidency.
Fair discloture, here in Illinois the primary was so late votes didn't matter, so to send a message I voted for a fellow I was very critical of in his Senate campaign, a guy names Trees, or Bees, I think it was Keyes, so what do I know.
They have been trying to get those amendments in but they are being defeated. Why? Because we taught the GOP a lesson last election and gave the congress to the democrats to make the GOP wake up and come running to us.
If the law is passed, possibly those amendments can be added later when we get the majority back. I’m a dreamer - I know.
Some needed to be reminded. Thanks for the post. I truly respect the man and believe he has tried to bring the Country together in spite of the MSM, far left organizations, and the RATS. He had a heavy burden to carry. No human is perfect. What bothers me more is all the Bush haters. Sick.
I agree, he would have wanted to, but I think he may have been at the mercy of this stupid P.C. world, as well. I’m all for giving war a chance and taking the gloves off. I surely wish we could have gone in and takin’ care of business, too!
“. . . Some here haver (sic) their heads so far up Dubya’s arse that they can’t see daylight.”
-
-
Your posts have been replete with name-calling and vitriolic/colorful ‘metaphors’ and yet you expect others to behave ‘politely’ toward you?!
This is just one more example of the absolute mindless hysteria on this topic.
It is embarrassing to see how totally unwrapped some people are becoming.
That's fascinating. I'd love to hear some details, which I promise to forward to my Senators, Dick Durban and Hussein Obama. They don't know me from Hillary, but impeachment, they'll be excited.
Can you provide some specificity.
Is GWB taking bribes from the aliens, or Aliens if they're otherworldly.
Swarming, are those the bees?
Union with the invaders, is he an ally of the Confederacy. He's spent some time in Texas.
Seriously, he's so wrong on immgration, but this he's a traitor stuff doesn't help in what is a serious issue.
That is your opinion, DrDeb...and not a fact. How do you think President Regan would have handled the immigration issue? President Bush is strong when it comes to the WOT. And when it comes to immigration, he is just another liberal shrew, it is a contradiction, IMO...I just don't get the way he thinks about this and never will... Makes me angry that I supported him with my heart and soul..
Please tell me why you think President Bush is more Conservative than President Regan. Thanks
Al Gore invented it after all.
Completely incorrect. My daughter handled that every day for an embassy in DC. She was the State Department liaison for the embassy as well as the chief protocol officer. It is a huge mess. I don't see how you could have the personal experience and professional expertise in that area that she has.
The author of the bill can call it fried chicken, but that doesn't make it so.
The REAL issue that needs dealing with pronto is the 12 million or more illegals already here. That's the most pressing issue today.
That's half of the really pressing issue. The other half is keeping illegals from pouring in. This bill won't deal with them beyond making them legal. Which is entirely wrong. And the notion that it will do anything to slow down the influx is a combination of lies and fantasy. Even if the bill had a genuine mechanism for securing the border (which it does not) this government would not enforce it.
The question which I have not seen answered is this. Why would the congress and the executive branch fund and enforce securing the border now, when they have not seen fit to do so for the last 21 years? What evidence is there that we can believe this will happen? Faith is for God, not for governments. The proof is in the actions. Which have been lies, some sly and some outright insulting to one's intelligence, and obfuscations.
Suppose you came home and found your wife in the sack with someone else, for the 20th time, and she said (as she had said the previous 19 times) that she would never do it again. Just take her back and she'd be faithful. Why do you suppose this time would be any different that the first 19?
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.