I regret pinging you to it.
Posted on 07/10/2002 11:27:06 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
This is an unofficial quick and dirty presidential poll. Apparently, there is a good sized contingent on Free Republic that believes that President Bush is:
Please list the numbers that best match the reasons you don't like Bush (or state other reasons if not on the list) and state whether you believe that President Bush should be defeated even if it means installing a Democrat in the Whitehouse.
Conversely, if you believe President Bush should be re-elected, please state why.
Please state who you would like to see win the Presidency in 2004 and whether or not you believe he/she has a chance of winning.
Thanks,
Jim
Many times. Our office is in the basement, when I go upstairs to get lunch, I see hundreds of illegals all over the place. I can't stop them or even talk to them. INS policy, if they are not coming off an airplane from Mexico, then I can't arrest them.
Unfortunately, the INA and US code states that I can stop and arrest any illegal alien in the US at anytime or anyplace.
INS policy is set, so we only catch enough to make it look like were doing our jobs. Not to catch them all, which is what the Law says.
Who ultimately sets policy of the Government?
The President. The buck stops with him.
Bush has taken a rough hand and played it well. There was no precedent for 9/11, and he dealt well with it at nearly all levels during the first days of crisis.
He endured the Dems jabbering denial at having lost the White House and emerged relatively unscathed.
The current economic climate was not fostered by Bush, and although p/e ratios corrected to historical levels (pre 1980) will mean a market correction of unprecedented proportions, the situation was created under his predecessor's watch.
Nor can I view Bush as being responsible for accounting practices in private firms.
All in all, his administration has nothing near the opening scandal of the Clintons'--despite the media doing their best to find a hook.
These thoughts are not without caveat.
"Homeland Security" has a phraseology reminiscent of the bad old days of Soviet Communism, or in extremis, of National Socialism.
We teeter at the precipice of a slippery slope where many are willing to cast away what rights remain for the illusion of being secure. Will Bush and his minions have the character to resist the lure of such power consolidated? Time will tell.
I am gravely concerned by statements about global warming--as a professional geologist, I can not agree that anthropogenic global warming is even occuring, much less a threat to the world as we know it. Nor could the presence thereof, were it to exist, justify impoverishing a wealthy nation to permit poorer countries to generate far more pollution to achieve similar productive results. There are alreay signs of weakness on this front.
Am I concerned that the UN will gain more power? U bet. It (the UN) has become a Socialist mutual back patting association. But I cannot assume that our absence from the forum will make that any better.
I want our military serving our legitimate national interests, within Constitutional constraints, and properly equipped and trained to do so. It will take more than two terms to rectify the Clinton-era neglect. But deployment within our borders as a police force is questionable, suspending Habeas Corpus dangerous, especially in an ill defined war against a highly fluid enemy.
There is no Dem poised to take the field who would get a vote from me. Few Republicans. Keyes and I disagree on one vital issue, that of slavery reparations. I feel there is no fair way to conduct these, even if the slaves' descendents could be specifically identified. This cannot be done on a basis of race alone; not all blacks in the US are the descendants of slaves, some were owners, others' ancestors were not present to be involved. Not all whites owned slaves, some blacks did, numerous whites are unrelated to anyone present while slavery was permitted. Will the American Indians have to pay too? Forget it, get on with the program.
Keyes has vocally supported reparations in the past. I cannot.
Much remains to be seen, but before we worry about Dubya, let's regain control of the Congress and ditch a few more Clinton appointees who set policy in administrative rulings. There are numerous 'true believers' lurking in the ranks, Clinton holdovers who will take time to winnow out.
In the past 8 months, the Border Patrol has apprehended 636,471 illegal aliens crossing the border. The INS Inspectors have intercepted 447,881 inadmissible aliens at the US ports of entry. The INS Criminal Investigators have successfully completed 32,417 cases and the Deportation Officers have removed 81,762 aliens from the United States.
Your right, we don’t stop or question anyone.
My post in this thread, is directed at southwest border apprehensions by the BP.
I regret pinging you to it.
Please post the relevant "policy" excerpts. Thanks.
Uh, you forgot the factory jobs that they won't give Americans, airport security, and the virtual takeover of the Construction Industry. I might mention that its the Republicans that just love their cheap labor. Meanwhile, Americans about starve.
I've never advocated a wall, because I know it won't work.
Many things need to be done, including building Mexico's economy, which I've advocated before. One of the thing that needs to be done, is get the illegals out, fix the system and start over. By allowing the illegals to stay, you are advocating further illegal actions and disrespecting those who are waiting and following the law.
What part of illegal don't you understand?
In part, it's the very policy you appeared to advocate at #181... non-enforcement of our Immigration laws.
Yep it is a concern to many people, but not the overriding concern, even I am concerned about immigration, but the same old names have shown up who vociferiously bash the President over a difficult problem.
I just don't agree with Mexican bashing.
you precious source of amusement.
Likewise, I always wonder which kitty you will bring out for your replies, will it be cute kitty or angry kitty.
Then I am sure that you can post that policy for all of us to see. MI seems unable to.
Welfare, on a county and local level IS THE DEAL!!
If illegals are working and producing .... welcome to America!
It's the Democrat welfare whores, not the Mexicans. If I was paying for the health care, housing and schooling of illegal immigrants in MY COUNTY, MY SCHOOL DISTRICT, MY CITY ... I'd be so pissed and focused I'd ... whine incessentaly on Free Republic of course!
Then take a well deserved nap.
Really? I am sure that you have the documentation on that.
I'm not sure if you mean the Texas FReeper rank and file or the population in general. I would think it is a big issue with 98% of Texas FReepers. As for the rest of Texas? Well, the media doesn't help much. A lot of local TV tape was shot at our FReep at the LULAC convention and even with great video bites like the one below, not one second of it was aired.
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.