Posted on 08/20/2005 10:52:05 PM PDT by joanie-f
looks like the problems the democrat party is experiencing with the crinton's lock could be the same we experience if the bush family does the same. jeb bush gets touted a lot around here for pres, "oh but he's the most conservative of all the bushs!" THAT AINT SAYIN MUCH!!!!
Paying attention to those last three words, I ordered some more Acurrate© No.5 smokeless double base. ; )
The only thing wrong with this approach is that I now believe that the 'Illegals' mess is intentional and short of insurrection, nothing will work. It is apparent that the greater 'Americas' economic block will expand to include the elimination of all borders. I leave it you to imagine the results.
It's not "too expensive," either, considering what illegal immigration is costing us now, and the toys our so-called "representatives" choose to spend our tax dollars on. "Enforce employer sanctions instead," some "border security advocates" assert. Fine, impose sanctions on scofflaw employers, just like we the people were promised 20 years ago in exchange for the amnesty back then. Only this time, make the sanctions not simply costly but ruinous. And use the sanctions collected---not for some "diversity" museum, or bilingual education, or health care measure---but for BUILDING THE WALL, from the Pacific Ocean, all the way to the Gulf of Mexico. End of story.
They only want to turn our country into the hell hole that they grew up in. Give them a break.
Amazing what a bunch of middle class folk can do that are all P.O.'d over taxes, gun grabbing, unresponsive government, etc. Maybe the people in Washington think times have changed so much that events such as those occurring in 1776 can never happen again. There's a lot of irony in that presumption, and there'll be even more irony when they find out that the "Spirit of '76" has never left the bosom of American patriots.
I disagree with the the notion that Americans should be employed to build the wall. We have a pool of cheap labor that can be employed at a cost of zero/dollar/hour to build the wall -- the illegals themselves. Each illegal should be rounded up to serve a three month stint on building the wall, and then dumped off in Mexicon on the OTHER side of the wall.
The only thing that comes to my mind is Globalism.. It serves a globalist agenda.. To wit; a massive influx of people that could care less about border boundary's(illegal aliens of all nationalities).. i.e. borders.. Would water down Americas bent for national sovereignty.. and demographically skew the populace toward a globalist agenda.. AND it is doing just that.. not a short term strategy especially after the illegals are made legal which WILL happen eventually..
Pretty smart really.. Treasonous but smart.. Is George Bush stupid.?. I say not.. I say hes a globalist.. as are most of his detractors.. Dubya is Not the Manchurian Candidate but the Mariachi Candidate.. Mexican illegals are most obvious but by means not the only illegal demographic.. some say 20 million Mexican(latin) illegals, I say more.. and with ZERO talk about other nationality's.. say CHINESE, Islamic, and African..
Something is up.. Globalist wise.. and zero talk about it is suspicious.. The eyes of "America" is on other things.. The easiest way to overthrow america is from within.. by demographics.. not by Socialist hanky panky.. THEN the "people" will VOTE IN the "overthrow'ers" THEMSELVES..
Looks like illegal immigration has its roots in America aborting "in mass" their next generation as "WE" have already done.. And we are IMPORTING the next generation.. to make up for the "ABORTION Holocaust".. Which seems to coming home to roost as massive illegal immigration.. NOT the only problem America has, but its a damn well BIG ONE... Abortion has its costs.. Who would have suspected it as raping the demographics of a sovereign america.?. By watering down the base of nationalistic citizens and replacing them with a globalist community.. I think Pat Buchanan of all people wrote a book on this subject.. kind of.. At least he attempted to highlight this problem.. Pat is not always right but a broken clock is CORRECT TWICE A DAY..
You have one of America's best minds.
And even better, you've got the heart to go with it.
BTTT, ping!
Ain't that the truth!
The Indians didn't have a legal system or property rights (territorial rights maybe) such as the Europeans brought with them, but an awful lot of them let us know we were not welcome with bows and arrows and then rifles and ammunition they traded or confiscated on raids.
We just came and took over the whole Northern and Southern Hempspheres. We had superior force and won. Nevertheless, we "invaded" the New World with shipload after shipload of unwelcome immigrants as far as most of the natives were concerned.
They did help Massachusetts Bay Colony settlers survive the first winter, but relations tended to go downhill shortly after that. Skirmishes led to the Pequot and subsequent wars and injustices against the Indians. Were they right in defending their territory?
We had the might, did that make it right?
Joanie, I second Eternal Vigilance's comment. You have one of America's best minds, and the heart to go with it.
What are you doing posting on a conservative forum? Your ideas belong on a forum hosted by moveon.org or People for the American Way. Somebody must have given you wrong directions. Walk to the nearest wall and turn left.
I give that one the "Oscar Wilde 'wish-I-had-said-that...' award."
"My entire purpose in creating this hypothetical example is to suggest simply that I believe there is a fundamental, nuts-and-bolts solution to the crisis represented by the exodus of illegals coming across our southern border. And I also believe that the financial cost of such a common sense solution would be nowhere near as prohibitive as the financial cost of continuing to support (and now actually cater to, at the cost of our own freedoms) non-citizens who have committed a crime simply by being here in the first place."
For those who've done nothing but demand a "solution, " I say HEAR HEAR! Please submit your post to various newspaper ed-ops and politicians if possible.
But then again, our major politicians appear to have an agenda that supercedes our national interests.
"Back in 1999, Claire Wolfe observed in her book, ‘ 101 Things To Do ‘Til The Revolution’:
‘America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards. '
" Considering the atrocities (both by neglect and by overt action) committed by our government in the six years since Claire penned that thought, I can’t help but wonder whether we have been pushed significantly closer to the revolution she envisioned in those last three words."
Many of us have been flabbergasted and shocked at what a GOP dominated gub'mint has NOT done to preserve American sovereignty, promote conservatism, and reverse and cripple the momentum of leftist policies implimented by Democrats since 1965.
America, 1773?
Let me put it this way: There're a few more boils that need to be removed ;-)
At which time THE question is (rubbing chin) -- when and what will be the "last straw"?
Can you make the distinction between "legal" and "illegal"? "Legal" and "moral"? If emigrants from the "Old World" were "authorized by the king" to leave, and there was no political or legal authority in the Americas which declared their immigration into the Americas prohibited, in what sense were those emigrants "illegal immigrants"?
The other part of your garbled point appears to be that it was "immoral" to "waltz in here and divide up the land as we pleased." Is that not what the Indians did? The remains known as "Kennewick Man" appear to have been Caucasian---perhaps inferring that the Indians had displaced earlier settlers. But whether they had displaced earlier settlers or not by their settlement, did the Indians have a superior right to land simply by settling it first?
The Indians didn't have a legal system or property rights (territorial rights maybe) such as the Europeans brought with them, but an awful lot of them let us know we were not welcome with bows and arrows and then rifles and ammunition they traded or confiscated on raids.
You talk of the Indians as if they were a monolithic group or duly constituted nation, notwithstanding the fact that as you acknowledge, they "didn't have a legal system or property rights." In fact, they were disparate and linguistically and culturally diverse tribes of hunter-gatherers and subsistence agriculturists that fought and massacred each other for centuries before the white man came. They didn't occupy the whole land and they certainly weren't making the use of it that European immigrants later did.
We just came and took over the whole Northern and Southern Hempspheres. We had superior force and won. Nevertheless, we "invaded" the New World with shipload after shipload of unwelcome immigrants as far as most of the natives were concerned.
I think you mean "North and South America," not "whole Northern and Southern Hemispheres."
They did help Massachusetts Bay Colony settlers survive the first winter, but relations tended to go downhill shortly after that. Skirmishes led to the Pequot and subsequent wars and injustices against the Indians. Were they right in defending their territory?
Two points. One, don't you think the settlement of North America by Europeans (and Asians and Africans), made the "New World" more "diverse," and isn't that a "good thing"? Two, if you posit that the Indians were right to defend their territory, would you deny that same right to the remote descendants of European (and African and Asian) settlers in North America?
We had the might, did that make it right?
Even if it wasn't "right," what does that have to do with enforcing current immigration laws? Does the fact that you think we "stole" the Western Hemisphere from the Indians make our residence here "illegal" and "immoral," and serve as an absolute impediment to enforcement of our laws and our borders? I think your proposition is too absurd to be entertained.
It was strictly a rhetorical question. What some Indians did to my ancestors would not fly at moveon.org. They would say they had it coming.
Thank you for pinging me, joanie-f. Great article! You and others like you are why I signed onto FR.
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.