Skip to comments.Proposition 200 and Mexico's War on Arizona
Posted on 02/04/2005 8:52:37 PM PST by CHARLITE
click here to read article
If the Mexican government pursues this and Bush is seen to be "neutral", this could cost him heavily in the Southwest.
Heh, gonna sue Arizona in US courts?
Hey Arizona: Insist on a Jury trial.
"If the Mexican government pursues this and Bush is seen to be "neutral", this could cost him heavily in the Southwest."
Dude: he's a lame duck! We must be working from a different
definition of "cost".....
Bush won, get over it.
Cost him what, exactly? A third term?
"this could cost him heavily in the Southwest."
Georgie's workin' on his legacy...unfortunately he'll be remembered by the Mexico government and populace as the gringo that opened the borders.
Did you join FR just before the election simply to bash Bush?
Bush doesn't care what it "costs" him. He can't run again.
"president bush should be ashamed representing illegal foreign criminals, and not standing up for rights, privileges, and needs of his fellow american citizens."
Remember, too, that it was his daddy who jammed NAFTA onto the fast-track in the waning daze of his presidency.....with the allegation that it would go far toward reducing illegal alien traffic across our border. What crap THAT turned out to be.
"Immigration inspectors ignored Mexicans coming into the southwestern United States during the 1900s and 1910s to work in railroad construction, mining, and agriculture.
"The Immigration Bureau did not seriously consider Mexican immigration within its purview, but rather as something that was "regulated by labor market demands in [the southwestern] border states."
" The Bureau also described the Southwest as the "natural habitat" of Mexicans, acknowledging, albeit strangely, Mexicans' claims of belonging in an area that had once been part of Mexico.
"The Immigration Act of 1917 doubled the head tax and imposed a literacy test, erecting the first barriers to entry. But unlawful entry was limited, as the Labor Department exempted Mexicans from the requirements during the war.
" It was not until 1919 that Mexicans entering the United States were required to apply for admission at lawfully designated ports of entry.35
How many divisions does he command?
Who cares what happened almost 100 years ago. It's time you opened your eyes and joined law abiding people in the 21st century.
How many can he transport in two low-riders?
LOL. Not enough I would suspect.
actually, you should read what I wrote again, and think about it before you go calling me stupid.
When contemplating the great global food chain, always remember:
The open borders opportunist equates to a Hostess Twinkie.
rad = read (I've been typing too long today)
LOL. Your "logic" deceives you. Here is the fact which supports what I wrote......not what you THINK I wrote.
"President Bush signed the NAFTA agreement on December 17, 1992 at a meeting of the Organization of American States. The accord was signed prior to the expiration of the President's negotiating authority, forcing Congress to either change its procedures or to consider NAFTA under fast track rules--which limits the amount of debate and requires lawmakers to vote up-or-down on the measure without amendments."
no apology is necessary.....your red face is sufficient.
(suppressed snickering in the background)
I don't think that Bush & Co. really realize the outrage at what is taking place on the border. But they will. Oh yes indeedy, they will.
uh... I think the real threat and the topic of this article has to do with AZ being sued in an international court of jurisdiction.
"I don't think that Bush & Co. really realize the outrage at what is taking place on the border."
Bush was a two-term Texas Govenor...and Texas resident. He knows damned well what's happening on the border. His nose is Fox brown.
Every state should do what Arizona is doing!
Perhaps it is time for a Real Third Party -- an AMERICAN PARTY! BORDERS, LANGUAGE and COUNTRY.
If borders are so important as in Iraq than Borders are even more important for the USA.
Why is Bush ignoring the War Mexico is performing on the USA?
The first duty of the president is to Defend the USA -- that means BORDERS!!!!
"And if NAFTA was such a bad idea, why didn't Former President Clinton veto it?"
Simple. He is also a trilateralist with no respect for American sovereignty.
"And if NAFTA was such a bad idea, why didn't Former President Clinton veto it?"
If you think NAFTA was or is a wonderful thing I suggest you read this:
International courts have no jurisdiction in the US;
U.S. and the World Court
In 1946, the U.S. accepted an optional clause in the Court's statute -- that gave the Court compulsory jurisdiction over cases regarding interpretation of treaties, any question of international law and any breach of international obligations. In 1984, Sandinista-ruled Nicaragua filed a suit against the U.S for its support of the Contra rebels. In response, the Reagan administration promptly withdrew U.S. recognition of the World Court's compulsory jurisdiction.
If Bush didn't kow-tow to Vicente Fox and the corrupt Mexican oligarchs, you would turn against him so fast. You aren't pro-Bush, you are pro-Mexican government --- that's become extremely clear. The SW belongs to that government huh?
LOL I love those eyes!
Here's a hint --- the Mexican oligarchs hold some strange kind of power over our government. Remember last week how Tony Garza attempted to stand up a little and warn Americans of the dangers of the borders? Well they have him backing down fast --- now explaining that the borders are really safe --- and not only that --- his little mistake is going to cost the American taxpayers some more millions:
$5 million to help fight Mexico crime
Victor Calzada / El Paso Times
U.S. Ambassador to Mexico Tony Garza Jr., left, Undersecretary for North America of Mexico's Foreign Ministry Geronimo Gutierrez, center, and Chihuahua Gov. Joe Reyes Baeza were among the dignitaries at the 10th Border Liaison Mechanism plenary session Thursday at the Chamizal National Memorial Theater in El Paso.
" I was just pointing out your fallacy in blaming Former President Bush for NAFTA!"
I suggest you read the posted article I mentioned in an earlier post. IT WAS GHW BUSH THAT PUSHED NAFTA. Had Clinton vetoed NAFTA congress would have overridden his veto.
Try living with them. That's Sauza. His litter-mate Ornito is attmepting to become the biggest, meanest Siamese who ever lived. I have the scars to prove it. I have a 67 pound pit bull and a 107 pound sheperd whose favorite pursuits are keeping Ornito's plans for world domination in check.
Tony Garza Jr has his marching orders from Bush. That's the reason he backed down.
It should disturb us that the former Bush and Carlos Salinas de Gortari ---- the drug-king-pin Mexican president were who rammed this NAFTA bill through. They knew all along it would destroy the majority of Mexicans --- and bankrupt the farmers of Mexico. There has to be some kind of big pay-off --- or extortion going on.
Many Americans don't know what the Salinas de Gortari family is about --- Raul and Carlos killed a servant girl --- of course the investigation "proved" it was just an accident, Raul is in prison still for killing their brother-in-law, Enrique just was found in a posh Mexican neighborhood suffocated with a plastic bag over his head. Why would the Bushes even associate with such types?
True --- he couldn't just grab millions of American tax dollars on his own. And the girlfriend isn't about to let go of her billions to fight crime in Mexico.
Clinton, Bush, and the CIA, perhaps?
Doesn't the president have fast track authority on trade?
Thursday, 1 August, 2002, 21:23 GMT 22:23 UK
The US Senate has voted to grant President George W Bush full trade negotiating powers.
The result was seen as a long-awaited victory for the White House, which has been seeking such powers for the President since he was elected in November 2000.
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.