Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

DRUDGE REPORT: Pat Buchanan to Endorse Bush Tomorrow
Drudge Report Radio | October 17, 2004 | Matt Drudge

Posted on 10/17/2004 7:15:03 PM PDT by West Coast Conservative

Matt Drudge said he heard from the "grapevine" that Pat Buchanan will endorse Bush tomorrow.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: antiwarright; buchanan; bush; drudge; endorsement; gwb2004; kerry; patbuchanan
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-98 next last

1 posted on 10/17/2004 7:15:03 PM PDT by West Coast Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
PAT BUCHANAN, KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT! OR, IF YOU HAVE TO ENDORSE SOMEONE, ENDORSE JOHN KERRY!!

2 posted on 10/17/2004 7:16:07 PM PDT by Recovering_Democrat (I'm so glad to no longer be associated with the Party of Dependence on Government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

The only people who wll care about this are the Buchananites. Pat's endorsement will mean a few more votes for Bush; but fewer than Nader will cost Kerry. Combined, it means maybe a 1 or two points spead for Bush in States where Nader is on the ballot.


3 posted on 10/17/2004 7:19:57 PM PDT by connectthedots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

note to Pat: put a sock in it.


4 posted on 10/17/2004 7:22:28 PM PDT by wingnutx (tanstaafl)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

Did Patty B consult our own 'Willie Green' before he made this endorsement?


5 posted on 10/17/2004 7:23:47 PM PDT by teletech (Friends don't let friends vote DemocRAT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

Hey guys, since Pat is endorsing the president you may now throw out your concerns over voter fraud!! This IS the october surprise.
Bush will carry 50 states because of Buchanan's endorsement!!!!!!!!












;)


6 posted on 10/17/2004 7:28:13 PM PDT by Stellar Dendrite (These Commies are ruining our country...........WAKE UP AMERICA BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

In a related story, Hell freezes over. Film at 11.


7 posted on 10/17/2004 7:28:28 PM PDT by NewJerseyJoe (Rat mantra: "Facts are meaningless! You can use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

It's sad to see such animosity toward a guy who stated in the early 1990s that if we didn't get our borders under control, we were going to be exposed to terrible acts of terrorism, negative pressures on the ability to elect conservatives and ever increasing balkinization of the nation as well as incredible negative impacts on education, healthcare, social services, local communities and multiple forms of national infrastructure.

Yep, boy was he sure wrong. NOT!

Duh!


8 posted on 10/17/2004 7:28:47 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (US socialist liberalism would be dead without the help of politicians who claim to be conservatives)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat
CORRECT - KEEP YOUR ENDORSEMENT TO YOURSELF PAT!!!!!
9 posted on 10/17/2004 7:46:30 PM PDT by ImpBill (America ... Where are you now?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

The animosity is not toward conservative policies. It isn't accurate to tie support of Pat to support of conservatism.

The main discontent with Pat surrounds his statements about Isreal, the Middle East, as well as personal views of his character.

There are times I enjoy listening to Pat. He's a bright man, articulate. His interviews during the swiftvet height were the sharpest on TV, imo. Then there are periods when I wish to have no association with him. That desire has never been because I reject conservative principles.


10 posted on 10/17/2004 7:51:11 PM PDT by Soul Seeker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: teletech

Did Patty B consult our own 'Willie Green' before he made this endorsement?



No it was ARATOR .......


11 posted on 10/17/2004 7:54:48 PM PDT by deport (Texas...... Early Voting in person Oct. 18 thru Oct 29..... vote early and take someone with you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

Well he does have a constituency, so I guess it is ok. Bush isn't compromising, he is. Despite hating the Likud Party, Sharon, neocons and free trade he is endorsing Bush because he knows Kerry is a mortal danger to the Republic.


12 posted on 10/17/2004 7:55:01 PM PDT by AmarilloMorning
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

He must have been paid-off by a bunch of Florida Demoncrats.


13 posted on 10/17/2004 7:58:12 PM PDT by SmithL (Vietnam-era Vet: Still fighting Hillary's half-vast left-wing conspiracy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: deport
No it was ARATOR .......

My apologies to Willie Green.

14 posted on 10/17/2004 7:58:29 PM PDT by teletech (Friends don't let friends vote DemocRAT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: deport
No it was ARATOR .......
Oh man ... that brings back not-so-pleasant memories!
15 posted on 10/17/2004 7:58:43 PM PDT by Quicksilver (Yeah, but does it pass the "global test"?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Quicksilver

RATOR was capable of stirring the pot real well. I think he's even given up on Pattie.....


16 posted on 10/17/2004 8:02:00 PM PDT by deport (Texas...... Early Voting in person Oct. 18 thru Oct 29..... vote early and take someone with you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat

LOL, I was thinking the same thing, on reading the headline.


17 posted on 10/17/2004 8:02:39 PM PDT by FreedomPoster (hoplophobia is a mental aberration rather than a mere attitude)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Soul Seeker

I think your comments are reasoned. In that context I'll respond that although I do think Pat's policies are misguided at times, I do not see him as I see democrats. They seek to take down our system by any means possible.

I don't think Pat wishes to do that. While I disagree stridently with his middle-east views, I do think he speaks reasoned logic on other issues.

It was never my intent to have his complete platform adopted. It would have been fine with me if nothing more than his demands that our nation's security be considered above political correctness and the citizens of a foreign nation, had been implemented.

I voted for him in 2000. As such I realized the congress would moderate his desires. Many of his advisors would have been republican.

For all his talk about avoiding incumberances in the middle-east, I don't see how he could have avoided military action there post 09/11.

Had our leaders implemented reasoned border control policies, we would have avoided 09/11. There was no excuse for what took place.

We still don't have adequate border control and all folks can think to say about Pat, is that he inconsequential.

Is homeland security inconsequential? Nope.

Thanks for the comments.


18 posted on 10/17/2004 8:02:57 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (US socialist liberalism would be dead without the help of politicians who claim to be conservatives)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

I believe the ironic response waould be "NO PAT NO!"


19 posted on 10/17/2004 8:05:29 PM PDT by glennherman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: glennherman

That's okay Glenn. Post 09/11, when our borders were ignored, I realized there would be folks who would dismiss any call to get them under control. Expecting those same folks to understand the value of Buchanan's message on that point, was out of the question.

Take care.


D1


20 posted on 10/17/2004 8:11:41 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (US socialist liberalism would be dead without the help of politicians who claim to be conservatives)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
"I voted for him in 2000. As such I realized the congress would moderate his desires. Many of his advisors would have been republican. "

I can't believe anyone actually thought on election day that Pat could win. He got less than 1/4th of one percent of the vote. Pat's supporters are delusional.

21 posted on 10/17/2004 8:18:22 PM PDT by bayourod (Old Media news is poll driven, not fact driven, not event driven, not newsworthy driven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

Coupled with Pat's 1992 speech, this should negate Bush's wooing of Jewish voters.


22 posted on 10/17/2004 8:19:34 PM PDT by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

This should be good for at least 40,000 more Florida votes! :)


23 posted on 10/17/2004 8:21:03 PM PDT by RabidBartender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
"It's sad to see such animosity toward a guy who stated in the early 1990s that if we didn't get our borders under control, we were going to be exposed to terrible acts of terrorism"

Not a single act of terrorism has resulted from "our borders not being under control".

Terrorists enter the U.S. using valid visas and other government issued documents. Why would they risk dying or being caught swimming the Rio Grande or walking for days across deserts and mountains when they can fly first class to any international airport in the country?

24 posted on 10/17/2004 8:24:21 PM PDT by bayourod (Old Media news is poll driven, not fact driven, not event driven, not newsworthy driven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Soul Seeker

Thank you! You "hit the naile on the head"! Couldn't have said it better myself.


25 posted on 10/17/2004 8:37:44 PM PDT by Winfield (sham)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: AmarilloMorning

He has as much as said that Kerry is an empty shirt politician.


26 posted on 10/17/2004 8:39:17 PM PDT by Finalapproach29er ({about the news media} "We'll tell you any sh** you want hear" : Howard Beale --> NETWORK)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Stochastic
Coupled with Pat's 1992 speech, this should negate Bush's wooing of Jewish voters.

The Buchanan Brigade speech would have been great to listen to at a private rally. At the convention it was an unmitigated disaster.

27 posted on 10/17/2004 8:42:47 PM PDT by Nov3 (They knifed babies, They raped girls, They forced children to drink their own urine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: bayourod
I voted for him in 2000. As such I realized the congress would moderate his desires. Many of his advisors would have been republican.   I can't believe anyone actually thought on election day that Pat could win. He got less than 1/4th of one percent of the vote. Pat's supporters are delusional.

We've had this conversation what, 25 perhaps 50 times by now.  That being the case, your response here not only doesn't apply, but reveals you to be either a disrupter or someone who is truth challenged.

I considered Buchanan to be an extreme long shot as much as a year before election day.  As much as six months before I was fairly sure his chances were zero.  Three months before I realized it was over.  So much for me thinking he would be elected on election day.  It was a principled stand that is more complex than I care to spend time on now.  I have done so a number of times before, and you know it, so why bother again.

It's sad to see such animosity toward a guy who stated in the early 1990s that if we didn't get our borders under control, we were going to be exposed to terrible acts of terrorism... Not a single act of terrorism has resulted from "our borders not being under control". Terrorists enter the U.S. using valid visas and other government issued documents. Why would they risk dying or being caught swimming the Rio Grande or walking for days across deserts and mountains when they can fly first class to any international airport in the country?

A number of the terrorists on 09/11 had expired entry visas.  The proper implementation of entry visas and the review thereof, is certainly a part of our border control.  As such, your comments don't merit further comment on that point, but I will say that granting entry visas for education, then allowing said individuals to practice takeoffs, but not landings, strikes me as something we should have been aware of.  Beyond that point, these were individuals from terrorist states, who arguably shouldn't have been admitted to our nation under ANY circumstances.

Our borders were not under control were they.  And yes it cost us dearly.


28 posted on 10/17/2004 8:43:07 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (US socialist liberalism would be dead without the help of politicians who claim to be conservatives)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Finalapproach29er

I suspect he still has resentments from the Nixon White House-- he knows Kerry isn't a patriot. He might believe that Bush has made mistakes-- we know he hates the Iraq War-- but he knows that Kerry will only make matters worse.


29 posted on 10/17/2004 8:43:51 PM PDT by AmarilloMorning
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Stellar Dendrite

I seriously doubt that he'll carry 50 states as a result. A brief endorsement of Bush (as opposed to an endorsement of himself for endorsing Bush) can't hurt.


30 posted on 10/17/2004 8:45:11 PM PDT by dr_who_2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: AmarilloMorning

Yep.


31 posted on 10/17/2004 8:52:22 PM PDT by Finalapproach29er ({about the news media} "We'll tell you any sh** you want hear" : Howard Beale --> NETWORK)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative


32 posted on 10/17/2004 8:58:52 PM PDT by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
If you believed that Buchanan had "zero" chance of winning why are you now trying to excuse your vote for him by saying that you voted for him because you thought he would appoint Republican advisers and Congress would moderate him?

If you thought when you voted for him that he would appoint Republican advisers then you obviously thought he could win

All the polls showed Buchanan with less than two percent of the vote, but Buchanan was saying that the pollsters didn't call his supporters. Buchanan actually had his weak minded supporters believing that there was a vast secret pitchfork army of voters who were going to pull off the biggest upset in history.

When are you going to wake up and realize that he's nothing but a con man preying on the fears and insecurities of the elderly, mentally disturbed and bigots.

33 posted on 10/17/2004 9:03:35 PM PDT by bayourod (Old Media news is poll driven, not fact driven, not event driven, not newsworthy driven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
"A number of the terrorists on 09/11 had expired entry visas. "

They weren't expired when they entered. They didn't enter because "our borders weren't under control".

Buchanan was playing on the fears and prejudices of people against Mexicans. Don't you remember his ads about the dangers of choking on meatballs because the 911 operater might be bilingual?

That's how superficial his message needs to be to convince his racists supporters. Now he's doing the same thing by trying to tie terrorism to Mexicans entering illegally when there is no connection.

34 posted on 10/17/2004 9:14:29 PM PDT by bayourod (Old Media news is poll driven, not fact driven, not event driven, not newsworthy driven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: bayourod
Not a single act of terrorism has resulted from "our borders not being under control".

Yet.

35 posted on 10/17/2004 9:53:32 PM PDT by judgeandjury
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: judgeandjury
Maybe that's because our borders are more under control than people realize.

The first rule in security is to keep the details of your security system secret.

We know that the border patrol on the Southern border has been immensely beefed up and modernized with high tech surveillance equipment.

What we don't know is how much human intelligence we've moved into Mexico or how much satellite monitoring of cell phones in Mexico or how much monitoring of entry points into Mexico.

Just because we aren't arresting all of the Mexican laborers crossing the border doesn't mean we haven't effectively prevented it from being a practical entry method for Arab terrorists.

36 posted on 10/17/2004 10:09:08 PM PDT by bayourod (Old Media news is poll driven, not fact driven, not event driven, not newsworthy driven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: bayourod

Want to read something REALLY funny?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1248324/posts?page=60#60


37 posted on 10/17/2004 10:10:39 PM PDT by Howlin (Bush has claimed two things which Democrats believe they own by right: the presidency & the future)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

Doesn't matter anyway. By 2014 there will be 45 million illegals in America, our elections will have long since been undermined with massive fraud and corruption.


38 posted on 10/17/2004 10:17:16 PM PDT by Joe Hadenuf (I failed anger management class, they decided to give me a passing grade anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: bayourod
If you believed that Buchanan had "zero" chance of winning why are you now trying to excuse your vote for him by saying that you voted for him because you thought he would appoint Republican advisers and Congress would moderate him?

Excuse my vote for him?  I voted for him and I'd do it all over again things being equal.  As for the comments about moderation, I didn't fear a down side with him based on that.  That doesn't mean that I thought he would be elected.  I didn't.

If you thought when you voted for him that he would appoint Republican advisers then you obviously thought he could win.

It may seem that way to you, but then you've never been one to take someone's word for something when you could guess wildly wrong instead.  Why stop that practice now.

All the polls showed Buchanan with less than two percent of the vote, but Buchanan was saying that the pollsters didn't call his supporters.

I'm sure you think Buchanan was the first candidate to continue to talk positively about their chances going into election day, even when they knew they couldn't win.

Buchanan actually had his weak minded supporters believing that there was a vast secret pitchfork army of voters who were going to pull off the biggest upset in history.

Well in this case it appears only one weak minded hater of Buchanan bought off on that.
When are you going to wake up and realize that he's nothing but a con man preying on the fears and insecurities of the elderly, mentally disturbed and bigots.

You're actually much closer to a bigot than any Buchanan supporter I've ever seen.  I guess you think that folks who support adherence to the laws of our nation to be preying on fears and insecurities.  Why is it that the term mentally disturbed quite often appears in your posts.  Do I detect a bit of projection going on here?


39 posted on 10/17/2004 10:17:29 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (US socialist liberalism would be dead without the help of politicians who claim to be conservatives)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat

exactly. someone put a layer of duct tape on pat. lol.

The only good i see it does is maybe it will bring a few thousand votes which may be needed. I know, thats the purpose of an endorsment.. but I dont want to see people driven away.

Sorta like kim jong ill endorsing sKerry - which he has. lol.


40 posted on 10/17/2004 10:19:00 PM PDT by BoBToMatoE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: bayourod
Buchanan was playing on the fears and prejudices of people against Mexicans.

Actually, it's primarily fears and prejudices against Mexican illegal alien lawbreakers. This would include drug smugglers, violent gangbangers, and every other category of criminal who is running from Mexican authorities, or who has decided that the U.S. is a more profitable place to ply their criminal trade.

That's how superficial his message needs to be to convince his racists supporters.

Groups like La Raza, LULAC, MALDEF, and MEChA have many millions of racist supporters, which is way more than an individual like Buchanan has.

41 posted on 10/17/2004 10:20:26 PM PDT by usadave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: dr_who_2

Haha, go back and read my post...it was a joke. That's why I put the ;) at the bottom.


42 posted on 10/17/2004 10:26:11 PM PDT by Stellar Dendrite (These Commies are ruining our country...........WAKE UP AMERICA BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: bayourod
Maybe that's because our borders are more under control than people realize.

The first rule in security is to keep the details of your security system secret.

We know that the border patrol on the Southern border has been immensely beefed up and modernized with high tech surveillance equipment.

What we don't know is how much human intelligence we've moved into Mexico or how much satellite monitoring of cell phones in Mexico or how much monitoring of entry points into Mexico.

Just because we aren't arresting all of the Mexican laborers crossing the border doesn't mean we haven't effectively prevented it from being a practical entry method for Arab terrorists.

You've brought up some valid points to consider. Hopefully, for all of our sakes, our southern border is more secure than it appears to be.

43 posted on 10/17/2004 10:31:18 PM PDT by judgeandjury
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: bayourod
"A number of the terrorists on 09/11 had expired entry visas. "

They weren't expired when they entered. They didn't enter because "our borders weren't under control".

The term 'keeping our borders under control' applies to all oversight of entries into the United States.  If people overstay their visas, the borders are not controled.  If people enter the nation from terrorist states, take down four airliners and destroy two of the tallest buildings in the nation, severely damage the center of our military operations in the United States, kill 3000 of our citizens, not to mention a number of police officer, firemen and military personel, then our borders are not under control.

The policies that govern entry into the United States are both flawed, and uninforced.  No the borders are not under control.  These terrorists who shouldn't have been here killed thousands of people.  Yes, our lax border control has cost us dearly on U.S. soil.  Is this getting too technical for you.

Buchanan was playing on the fears and prejudices of people against Mexicans. Don't you remember his ads about the dangers of choking on meatballs because the 911 operater might be bilingual?

The point of that add was that a person not able to speak english, might not be able to obtain emergency services in time, should they need them.  I don't see that as a put-down.  Frankly I see it as a safety issue which could place the illegal immigrant in grave danger.  Why would you deem that to be a negative.  Do you not care if someone dies because they didn't bother to learn the language?  Advocating english be spoken and understood in the United States, is a reasoned policy.  I can't imagine going to France and expecting their emergency operator to take care of me in english, or someone else in swahili, farsi or some other language.  It is the immigrant that should adapt, not the host nation.

That's how superficial his message needs to be to convince his racists supporters. Now he's doing the same thing by trying to tie terrorism to Mexicans entering illegally when there is no connection.

You've been throwing out the racist card on Buchanan's supporters for years.  If I were the owner of this forum I'd boot your ass off here for doing so.  Buchanan supporters advocate the immigration laws of our nation be enforced.  We advocate they be enforced with equal conviction on illegal entrants from any nation.  It just so happens that most illegal immigration occurs from Mexico.

If all bank robers were white, would it be racist to address that fact?  Of course not.

As you have demonstrated for years, this subject is way beyond your capacity.  Thanks for the comments anyway.


44 posted on 10/17/2004 10:35:27 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (US socialist liberalism would be dead without the help of politicians who claim to be conservatives)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
I have done so a number of times before, and you know it, so why bother again. You took the time to announce your Buchananite loyalties to all the readers. Why shouldn't bayourod explain to them why that was a bad call? Even though he responded to your post he is obviously talking to the readers. If he was talking to you he would have written "I can't believe YOU actually thought on election day that Pat could win. He got less than 1/4th of one percent of the vote. YOU'RE delusional."
45 posted on 10/17/2004 10:48:22 PM PDT by Once-Ler (Proud Republican. and Neo-Con Bushbot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: judgeandjury; bayourod
Maybe that's because our borders are more under control than people realize.

The first rule in security is to keep the details of your security system secret.

We know that the border patrol on the Southern border has been immensely beefed up and modernized with high tech surveillance equipment.

What we don't know is how much human intelligence we've moved into Mexico or how much satellite monitoring of cell phones in Mexico or how much monitoring of entry points into Mexico.

Just because we aren't arresting all of the Mexican laborers crossing the border doesn't mean we haven't effectively prevented it from being a practical entry method for Arab terrorists.

You've brought up some valid points to consider. Hopefully, for all of our sakes, our southern border is more secure than it appears to be.

First and foremost, from my vantage point, Bayourod is a disrupter on this topic.  His comments have no connection whatesoever to reality even in the slightest.  Over the last five years I have dealt with him, he has never address real issues with reasoned logic.

The first rule in security is to make sure the citizens of the United States are safe.  Secrecy is a distant second to that cardinal goal.

Second, beefing up and modernizing the border with high tech surveylance equipment doesn't amount to a hill of beans if it doesn't stop illegal entry into the United States of people wanted on felony warrants for murder, rape, pedophelia, robery, assault, burglery...  On top of that, it is well known on this forum that over 100 suspected terrorists were admitted into our nation several years ago, by accident.  In the last week it has been revealed that the government is afraid two Chechyan terrorist cells of roughly 29 people have entered the nation recently.  They still aren't sure, which should really speak for itself.  This despite those wonder new measures at the borders.  On top of this, Time magazine reports 3.5 million illegals now enter the nation each year, also in spite of the enhancements.

What we don't know....  yep, smoke screen.  Nothing may have been done.  Very little could have been done.

Well we know for sure arab terrorists have entered through the border with Mexico.  One such individual was arrested in Chicago after shopping his terrorist skills to several groups in the area.  By luck, one of them happened to be a law enforcement front.

No, Bayourod hasn't brought up valid points that anyone who's followed his topic for a decade or more wouldn't be capable of shooting down.  He just trolls the forum spewing so that the unsuspecting might be misled.


46 posted on 10/17/2004 10:50:58 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (US socialist liberalism would be dead without the help of politicians who claim to be conservatives)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Once-Ler

Thanks for the response. I don't have anything more to add. Take care.


47 posted on 10/17/2004 10:53:11 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (US socialist liberalism would be dead without the help of politicians who claim to be conservatives)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Joe Hadenuf

Due to births, that number may actually be surpassed.


48 posted on 10/17/2004 10:59:47 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (US socialist liberalism would be dead without the help of politicians who claim to be conservatives)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
" Frankly I see it as a safety issue which could place the illegal immigrant in grave danger. "Your humanitarian concern for illegal aliens is very touching, almost as touching as Kerry's explanation that he mentioned Cheney's daughter being gay to compliment Cheney.
49 posted on 10/17/2004 11:05:23 PM PDT by bayourod (Old Media news is poll driven, not fact driven, not event driven, not newsworthy driven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
That's actually a conservative figure. You're right. The illegals, once here, reproduce way faster than legal citizens, as you know. Can't imagine making 15k a year and having 6 kids. Of course, we are footing most of the bill for all that too, in more ways than most realize.

In ten short years, by 2014 we wont recognize America, 50 million will be speaking Spanish, and will live as they did in ol Mexico. With the help of our government, they will have turned our elections into a three ring circus, of fraud and corruption. Watch what happens this coming election, and you can imagine what it's going to be like by 2014.

50 posted on 10/17/2004 11:11:09 PM PDT by Joe Hadenuf (I failed anger management class, they decided to give me a passing grade anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-98 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson