Now you're trying to put words into my mouth. As I explained, all amnesties are bad because they encourage criminal behavior. What you're trying to do is to get me to agree that Reagan's amnesty of 500,000 lawbreakers is just as bad as Bush's attempts at so-called 'comprehensive immigration reform', which contained a lot more than just amnesty for 20+ million lawbreakers. But then you already knew that, didn't you?
Sorry, but I'm not going to engage in moral relativism. Each man's actions are distinct and separate from the other's and each stands or falls on it's own merits.
Meanwhile, you blithely ignore what Bush has done in addition to his amnesty. You acknowledge that these are 'all bad', but for whatever reason, you refuse to discuss the details.
I'm still waiting for you to explain, in your own words, why the Partnership for Prosperity, New Alliance Task Force and Social Security Totalization Agreement with Mexico are 'all bad'.
These are the things that Bush has done that have made the bad situation worse. Had he merely sat on his hands, as Clinton did, then I would agree that he shares blame with former presidents for continuing their failed policies. He didn't. Instead he instituted his own policies which have made this bad situation worse.
You are hopeless. You are arguing with me just to argue.
No, I'm arguing with you so that everyone can see that you're intentionally trying to muddy the waters by trying to get me and others to agree that Bush's actions are no worse than Reagan's.
The truth is that they're worse. Much worse.
Have a nice day.
Thanks.
LOL Hogwash. You are still just arguing with me for the sheer sake of arguing.