Skip to comments.Tancredo won't initiate Bush impeachment
Posted on 09/03/2005 4:08:28 PM PDT by Constitution Restoration Act
Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., dismissed the suggestion of prominent columnists to introduce a bill of impeachment against President Bush for lack of border enforcement, saying his immigration reform bill will do what is necessary to stem the flow of illegal aliens into the U.S.
This week, WND columnists Patrick Buchanan and Joseph Farah called for legislation to begin the impeachment process due to, as Buchanan wrote, Bush's "conscious refusal to uphold his oath and defend the states of the Union against 'invasion.'"
Wrote Farah: "President Bush has had nearly five years in office to honor his oath of office and enforce immigration laws in this country.
"He has not only failed, he has intentionally neglected this sworn duty, instead claiming he prefers to promote a vague immigration 'reform' plan that involved a 'guest worker' program that has served as an encouragement to the most massive influx of illegal immigration this country has ever seen. "
Despite Tancredo's consistent criticism of the president's record on border enforcement, he says a better solution is to pass legislation instituting more stringent regulations on employers of illegal aliens and thus reduce the demand for illegal workers.
"The best thing to do is to see what we can accomplish," Tancredo told WND in a telephone press conference. "There are great many factors playing on our side," stressing the pendulum is swinging toward those who seek definitive action to deal with the nation's porous borders.
Said the congressman: "Right now, I'm kind of hopeful. Things are moving our way, and I don't think anything like [an impeachment bill] is necessary to keep this momentum going."
Tancredo says if Congress passes stringent legislation, the pressure will be on the president to enforce it.
The Colorado lawmaker told reporters Republican leadership in the House has indicated an immigration bill will be considered this year. The question is what form it will take.
Long an outspoken leader on the issue of illegal immigration, Tancredo is offering his own bill, H.R. 3333, the REAL GUEST Act of 2005. Besides stepping up enforcement at the border, the congressman's bill includes a provision requiring employers to use a now-voluntary "insta-check" program to verify the legal status of potential employees. A bill by Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., also makes the program mandatory, but, unlike Tancredo's measure, only for those newly hired.
Besides Tancredo's legislation, there are two prominent reform bills in the Senate – Kyl's and the McCain/Kennedy bill – and Bush has indicated he will have a detailed plan ready for consideration at the end of this month. The president has focused on a guest-worker program that critics say amounts to amnesty for illegals.
"My bill is a comprehensive piece of legislation that takes into consideration the needs of labor by creating a guest-worker program," Tancredo explained, "but that program can only go into effect once certain requirements are met in terms of securing our border and reducing the number of people in the country who are here illegally."
Tancredo says the key to solving the problem is cracking down on employers who hire illegal aliens.
Explained Tancredo: "If we can stop the employment of people who are here illegally, a huge part of this problem goes away."
The congressman says his approach will remove concern about the high cost of rounding up and deporting those illegals currently in the U.S.
"You will find people by the millions, frankly, will return to their countries of origin," Tancredo said. "If they do not have a job and do not have access to social-service benefits, there really aren't any option."
Tancredo noted the issue of illegal immigration "is reaching critical mass in this country. Something will happen … to force this nation to come to grips with this problem."
Referring to Bush as having an "open borders" approach, Tancredo decried the fact that current immigration laws regarding employment are not being enforced by the executive branch.
"The laws are on the books," he said. "Is there anyone out there that believes there are no aliens in this country working illegally?"
He says the laws not being enforced should either be repealed, or the government should "actually enforce them."
Tancredo backing off presidential candidacy
Tancredo visits with sympathetic Muslims
Tancredo talk too offensive? Too bad, says congressman
CAIR to GOP: Repudiate Tancredo
Tancredo clarifies 'ultimate response'
Tancredo talking White House bid
White House covered up immigration study?
Employers shun service to weed out illegal hires
Tancredo asks for border official's head
Rep. Tancredo considers White House bid
The key concepts of transnational progressivism could be described as follows:
(1) The ascribed group over the individual citizen. The key political unit is not the individual citizen, who forms voluntary associations and works with fellow citizens regardless of race, sex, or national origin, but the ascriptive group (racial, ethnic, or gender) into which one is born. This emphasis on race, ethnicity, and gender leads to group consciousness and a deemphasis of the individual's capacity for choice and for transcendence of ascriptive categories, joining with others beyond the confines of social class, tribe, and gender to create a cohesive nation. Immigration & The American Future
(2) A dichotomy of groups: Oppressor vs. victim groups, with immigrant groups designated as victims. Influenced (however indirectly) by the Hegelian Marxist thinking associated with the Italian writer Antonio Gramsci (1891-1937) and the Central European theorists known as the Frankfurt School, global progressives posit that throughout human history there are essentially two types of groups: the oppressor and the oppressed, the privileged and the marginalized. In the United States, oppressor groups would variously include white males, heterosexuals, and Anglos, whereas victim groups would include blacks, gays, Latinos (including obviously many immigrants), and women. The Gramsci Factor by Chuck Morse - Sierra Times.com & Welcome to the Anti-Communitarian League homepage! & Why There is a Culture War- Policy Review, No. 104 & Gramsci: A Method to the Madness & Gramsci And The US Body Politic & Gramsci's Grand Plan & Frankfurt School & Rigoberta Menchú: Liar & Treason &
Multicultural ideologists have incorporated this essentially Hegelian Marxist "privileged vs. marginalized" dichotomy into their theoretical framework. As political philosopher James Ceaser puts it, multiculturalism is not "multi" or concerned with many groups, but "binary," concerned with two groups, the hegemon (bad) and "the Other" (good) or the oppressor and the oppressed. Thus, in global progressive ideology, "equity" and "social justice" mean strengthening the position of the victim groups and weakening the position of oppressors-hence preferences for certain groups are justified. Accordingly, equality under law is replaced by legal preferences for traditionally victimized groups. In 1999, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission extended antidiscrimination protection under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act to illegal immigrants. City Journal Winter 2004 | The Illegal-Alien Crime Wave by Heather ... & City Journal Summer 2004 | The Immigrant Gang Plague by Heather ... & Race and Revolution & Rewarding Lawlessness & Racism is Not the Problem: Why Martin Luther King Got It Half ... & Issues & Views: Increasing "Hate Crime" Punishment Violates ... & Harvard University Fellow Advocates "Abolishing the White Race" & Issues & Views: Using Racism as a Device
(3) Group proportionalism as the goal of "fairness." Transnational progressivism assumes that "victim" groups should be represented in all professions roughly proportionate to their percentage of the population or, at least, of the local work force. Thus, if women make up 52 percent and Latinos make up 10 percent of the population, then 52 percent of all corporate executives, physicians, and insurance salesmen should be women and 10 percent should be Latinos. If not, there is a problem of "underrepresentation" or imbalance that must be rectified by government and civil society. Thomas Sowell recently wrote-as he has for several decades-that many Western intellectuals perpetually promote some version of "cosmic justice" or form of equality of result.8 The "group proportionalism" paradigm is pervasive in Western society: even the U.S. Park Service is concerned because 85 percent of all visitors to the nation's parks are white, although whites make up only 74 percent of the population. Therefore, the Park Service announced in 1998 that it was working on this "problem."9 An FTAA Sneak Preview & FTAA: Forced To Accept Aliens & What is Sensitivity Training & Psychic Iron Cage
(4) The values of all dominant institutions to be changed to reflect the perspectives of the victim groups. Transnational progressives in the United States (and elsewhere) insist that it is not enough to have proportional representation of minorities (including immigrants, legal and illegal) at all levels in major institutions of society (corporations, places of worship, universities, armed forces) if these institutions continue to reflect a "white Anglo male culture and world view." Ethnic and linguistic minorities have different ways of viewing the world, they say, and these minorities' values and cultures must be respected and represented within these institutions. At a 1998 U.S. Department of Education conference promoting bilingual education, SUNY professor Joel Spring declared, "We must use multiculturalism and multilingualism to change the dominant culture of the United States." He noted, for example, that unlike Anglo culture, Latino culture is "warm" and would not promote harsh disciplinary measures in the schools.10 Multiculturalism and the Politics of Guilt: Toward a Secular ... & Multiculturalism and Marxism
(5) The Demographic Imperative. The demographic imperative tells us that major demographic changes are occurring in the United States as millions of new immigrants from non- Western cultures and their children enter American life in record numbers. At the same time, the global interdependence of the world's peoples and the transnational connections among them will increase. All of these changes render the traditional paradigm of American nationhood obsolete. That traditional paradigm based on individual rights, majority rule, national sovereignty, citizenship, and the assimilation of immigrants into an existing American civic culture is too narrow and must be changed into a system that promotes "diversity," defined, in the end, as group proportionalism. Western Civilization Against Itself & New Mexico Professor Advocates Secession for Southwest
(6) The redefinition of democracy and "democratic ideals." Since Fukayama's treatise, transnational progressives have been altering the definition of "democracy," from that of a system of majority rule among equal citizens to one of power sharing among ethnic groups composed of both citizens and non-citizens. For example, Mexican foreign minister Jorge Castañeda wrote in the Atlantic Monthly in July 1995 that it is "undemocratic" for California to exclude noncitizens, specifically illegal aliens, from voting. Former Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) general counsel Alexander Aleinikoff, declaring that "[we] live in a post-assimilationist age," asserted that majority preferences simply "reflect the norms and cultures of dominant groups" (as opposed to the norms and cultures of "feminists and people of color").11 James Banks, one of American education's leading textbook writers, noted in 1994 that "to create an authentic democratic Unum with moral authority and perceived legitimacy the pluribus (diverse peoples) must negotiate and share power."12 In effect, Banks said, existing American liberal democracy is not quite authentic; real democracy is yet to be created. It will come when the different "peoples" or groups that live within America "share power" as groups.
(7) Deconstruction of national narratives and national symbols. Transnational progressives have focused on traditional narratives and national symbols of Western democratic nation-states, questioning union and nationhood itself. In October 2000, the British governmentsponsored Commission on the Future of Multi-Ethnic Britain issued a report that denounced the concept of "Britishness" as having "systemic . . . racist connotations." The Commission, chaired by Labour life peer Lord Parekh, declared that instead of defining itself as a nation, the UK should be considered a "community of communities." One member of the Commission explained that the members found the concepts of "Britain" and "nation" troubling. The purpose of the Commission's report, according to the chairman Professor Parekh, was to "shape and restructure the consciousness of our citizens." The report declared that Britain should be formally "recognized as a multi-cultural society" whose history needed to be "revised, rethought, or jettisoned."13
The Claremont Institute: The Cost of Ignorance & Historical illiteracy abounds & National Constitution Center: New Survey Shows Wide Gap Between ... & Senate Panel Hears that Ignorance of U.S. History Poses Major Security Threat &Only half would vote for Constitution & Albert Burns -- Historical Illiteracy & Antonio Gramsci & the deliberate dumbing down of america & Frivolous Courses Pervasive at Top American Colleges & Terrorists Find Allies on Campus & Marine Shouted Down at UNLV & American Flag Banned on Campuses Across the Nation & ACTA: American Council of Trustees and Alumni & The Intellectual Origins Of America-Bashing by Lee Harris - Policy ... & FrontPage magazine.com :: Battling Bias in Academia by Joseph ... & Book Review: Why the Left Hates America & Who Will Defend American Values? & How Textbooks Distort American History
In the United States in the mid-1990s, the proposed "National History Standards," reflecting the marked influence of multiculturalism among historians in the nation's universities, recommended altering the traditional narrative of the United States. Instead of emphasizing the story of European settlers, American civilization would be redefined as a "convergence" of three civilizations-Amerindian, West African, and European-the bases of a hybrid American multiculture. Even though the National History Standards were ultimately rejected, this core multicultural concept that that United States is not primarily the creation of Western civilization, but the result of a "Great Convergence" of "three worlds" has become the dominant paradigm in American public schools. The Multicultural Theocracy: An Interview With Paul Gottfried &The Relentless Assault of 'Multiculturalism'
In Israel, adversary intellectuals have attacked the Zionist narrative. A "post-Zionist" intelligentsia has proposed that Israel consider itself multicultural and deconstruct its identity as a Jewish state. Tom Bethell has pointed out that in the mid-1990s the official appointed to revise Israel's history curriculum used media interviews to compare the Israeli armed forces to the SS and Orthodox Jewish youth to the Hitler Youth. A new code of ethics for the Israel Defense Forces eliminated all references to the "land of Israel," the "Jewish state," and the "Jewish people," and, instead, referred only to "democracy." Even Israeli foreign minister Simon Peres sounded the post-Zionist trumpet in his 1993 book, The New Middle East, where he wrote that "we do not need to reinforce sovereignty, but rather to strengthen the position of humankind." He called for an "ultranational identity," saying that "particularist nationalism is fading and the idea of a 'citizen of the world' is taking hold. . . . Our ultimate goal is the creation of a regional community of nations, with a common market and elected centralized bodies," a type of Middle Eastern EU.14
(8) Promotion of the concept of postnational citizenship. "Can advocates of postnational citizenship ultimately succeed in decoupling the concept of citizenship from the nation-state in prevailing political thought?" asks Rutgers Law Professor Linda Bosniak.15 An increasing number of international law professors throughout the West are arguing that citizenship should be denationalized. Invoking concepts such as inclusion, social justice, democratic engagement, and human rights, they argue for transnational citizenship, postnational citizenship, or sometimes global citizenship embedded in international human rights accords and "evolving" forms of transnational arrangements. These theorists insist that national citizenship should not be "privileged" at the expense of postnational, multiple, and pluralized forms of citizenship identities. For example, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, under the leadership of its president, Jessica Tuchman Mathews, has published a series of books in the past few years "challenging traditional understandings of belonging and membership" in nation-states and "rethinking the meaning of citizenship."16 Although couched in the ostensibly neutral language of social science, these essays from scholars from Germany, Britain, Canada, and France, as well as the United States, argue for new, transnational forms of citizenship as a normative good. "America's Border: Who Left the Door Open?"
(9) The idea of transnationalism as a major conceptual tool. The theory of transnationalism promises to be for the first decade of the twenty-first century what multiculturalism was for the last decade of the twentieth century. In a certain sense, transnationalism is the next stage of multicultural ideology-it is multiculturalism with a global face. Like multiculturalism, transnationalism is a concept that provides elites with both an empirical tool (a plausible analysis of what is) and an ideological framework (a vision of what should be). Transnational advocates argue that globalization requires some form of transnational "global governance" because they believe that the nation-state and the idea of national citizenship are ill suited to deal with the global problems of the future. Academic and public policy conferences today are filled with discussions of "transnational organizations," "transnational actors," "transnational migrants," "transnational jurisprudence," and "transnational citizenship," just as in the 1990s they were replete with references to multiculturalism in education, citizenship, literature, and law. Can Globalism Amend Our Constitution? -- Phyllis Schlafly Aug. 13 ... & Bipartisan Border Betrayal & The & Immigration Conspiracy & Socialist Scholars Call for Dismantling of US Constitution in NYC & Lawyer Indicted for Aiding Terrorists Becomes Stanford Law 'Mentor ...
Many of the same scholars who touted multiculturalism now herald the coming transnational age. Thus, at its August 1999 annual conference, "Transitions in World Societies," the same American Sociological Association (ASA) that promoted multiculturalism from the late 1980s to the mid-1990s featured transnationalism. Indeed, the ASA's then-president, Professor Alejandro Portes of Princeton University, argued that transnationalism is the wave of the future. He insisted that transnationalism, combined with large-scale immigration, would redefine the meaning of American citizenship. University of Chicago anthropologist Arjun Appadurai has suggested that the United States is in transition from being a "land of immigrants" to "one node in a postnational network of diasporas."17 City Journal Spring 2002 | Do We Want Mexifornia? by Victor Davis ... & Abolishing Our Borders
It is clear that arguments over globalization will dominate much of early twenty-first century public debate. The promotion of transnationalism as both an empirical and normative concept is an attempt to shape this crucial intellectual struggle over globalization. The adherents of transnationalism create a dichotomy. They imply that one is either in step with globalization, and thus with transnationalism and forward-looking thinking, or one is a backward antiglobalist.
Liberal democrats (who are internationalists and support free trade and market economics) must reply that this is a false dichotomy-that the critical argument is not between globalists and antiglobalists, but instead over the form Western global engagement should take in the coming decades: will it be transnationalist or internationalist?
I'm broadcast live in front of a pre-recorded studio audience.
I will need exactly 7 months to read all this.
Thanks to Katrina, for the next couple of years the immigration issue is going to fall completely off the radar.
And I'm greatful for that - we don't need the few leaders who get the seriousness of the border problems to be marginalized by trying to impeach President Bush during wartime.
The only possibe exception I can think of would be his diversion of Border Patrol agents to New Orleans. That might have to be investigated.
I was castigated by several FReeps on another thread when I made that same point.
I'm broadcast live in front of a pre-recorded studio audience.
Wow. You are quick.
I was thinking more along the lines of the Evlyn Woodhead Sped Redding course.
Anyone have the short version?
Well I'm too new for my opinion to count much but for the record, I agree with you.
As well it should. I mean, somebody's got to rebuild New Orleans. We already know who won't be helping. They''ll be...
I'd better include this: < /sarc >
Aside from all the inane drivel that follows it I must admit to agreement with Pat Buchanan. He, is one of the few who have the courage to state the obvious. W, at every turn has, by HIS INACTION, failed to fulfill his obligation as Commander-in-Chief and President to secure our borders. He has done as the Prodigal President Clinton, before him did, prostituted his obligation for the sake of 'whoring' for prospective future votes. All this plus having called the sincere Minutemen "vigilantes" when all they tried to do was their collective patriotic duty to alert this Nation. For one who has set himself up as the champion of what is right, and whom I've consistently supported, despite some serious misgivings on policy decisions, he should be ashamed of himself.
To those who would criticize this view I ask...If we suffer another major terrorist incident and it can be traced to an infiltration via our wide open northern/southern land borders...On whose head do we hang the responsibility?
If the 2006 elections were held today with gasoline over $3/gallon, nobody would give a rat's ass about either immigration or the war in Iraq; that's the good news.
The bad news is that the republicans would get blown out.
Good grief .. aren't they enough liberals to whine about Bush .. not the independents have to get in the act .. guess they weren't getting any media coverage .. but just say the words Bush and impeachment in the same sentence and vultures will come quickly!
"Aside from all the inane drivel that follows it I must admit to agreement with Pat Buchanan. He, is one of the few who have the courage to state the obvious. W, at every turn has, by HIS INACTION, failed to fulfill his obligation as Commander-in-Chief and President to secure our borders..."
And we know that every president before him did. /sarc
Get real. It is not the President's job to enforce laws which already exist.
To those who seldom go beyond the Headline or the first paragraph...this Headline is biased on its face...
The first question or conclusion one gets out of the headline is that Tancredo was 'Considering' introducing impeachment to congress, and has since changed his mind because of Katrina perhaps.
Once you get to the second paragraph the facts come out. It was Farrah and Buchanan who are hoisting the idea up the flag pole...
I hope for better from Farah's byte rag, but am not surprised at Pat; Buchanan is a bitter has been.
Consider if someone asked you to jump off the bridge?
Which is a more accurate and unbiased Headline: "Sam won't jump from the bridge"?...or "Sam scoffs at suggestion to jump from bridge"?
That's not entirely true. Let's tell the truth. Even though many FReepers hate Pat Buchanan, lets tell the truth about what Pat actually said about impeaching PresBush.
"Some courageous Republican, to get the attention of this White House, should drop into the hopper a bill of impeachment, charging Bush with a conscious refusal to uphold his oath and defend the states of the Union against "invasion." "
Pat suggested someone in the GOP majority, take this action to get the attention of the White House. It was political rhetoric and more of a wake up call to the President. However, while Pat's suggestion is pure political theater, on the specific issue of immigration reform, Buchanan is absolutely right. The President and the Congressional GOP have to properly address the serious problems associated with illegal aliens entering the US. These are critical issues that Bush and Republicans have ignored for 4-1/2 years.
But Tom Delay is signaling his support of this bill, so its got a shot to put alot of legislators on the hot seat.
That said, a few pro-illegals folks might see this bill as their ticket to getting a guest worker bill through afterwards.
Long ago Buchannan ceased to be a real conservtive and became an anit-semetic fascist of the sort that was common in France in the 1930's. One of the worst things about him is that he does not distinguish between legal and illegal immigration. A substantial amount of legal immigration has alwsys been and continues to be a huge benefit to this country; illegal immigration isn't.
Do you know what HR 3333 is? Do you know what Kyl/Connyers bill says?
I hate Buchanan but this was not a horrible idea. You need to realize that the majority of idiot Americans now believe that the Republican Party is pro-illegal and the Democrats are trying to protect them from the invasion. This happens because the media creates the perception for the idiot masses. The media can't ignore a call for impeachment and it would straighten things out on the issue.
It would have been horrible if Tancredo had called for impeachment though, he is the most worthy Presidential material I've seen in several years and that would have destroyed any possibility that he could run for President.
Is anybody aware that Tom DeLay has signed on to Tancredo's immigration plan. I saw a blurb about that on the internet, but it was quietly ignored.
Jopurnalists and Dem slime trying to get a Republican to do their dirty work for them. Tancredo would end his political career with such a stupid move.
Tancredo has attracted a powerful ally in House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R.-Tex.), who said last month that before Congress enacts any guest-worker program supported by Bush it must first strengthen enforcement.
Any amnesty program put into place before that point would reward past criminality and encourage it in the future, DeLay told the Fort Bend (Tex.) Republican Club on August 4. It can only become part of the debate once our borders are actually secure.
And, if we, God forbid, have another attack, and the perpetrators came through our southern or northern borders, and, they are here legally, like most on 9-11, then should Buchanan be arrested? You, like many libs, want retaliation for Clinton!
The Kyl/Cornyn bill doesn't go far enough. And the McCain/Kennedy bill is pure BS. I'll take the Tancredo REAL Guest Worker Act of 2005, that incorprorates his Four Point Immigration Reform plan form January of 2004.
I guarantee you the MSM won't touch this. Bookmark this post if you like.
So, after the war and the hurricane, you're all for it?
So what was it that Clinton did that was so important to prevent emigration? I can't remember anything that Clinton did except lie in court>
who would have thunk it??
Seriously, if Tancredo can get his bill through Congress, that is one thing.
Any stupid arse bill of impeachment would only damage the GOP going into a midterm election and would help further marginalize Tancredo more than he already is.
He isn't stupid.
Another Impeach Bush fool heard from.
Farah is insane and don't even get me started on Buchanan.
I am glad to see Tancredo isn't following their line. For Once.
Read the Constitution lately? "He shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed". Article II, Section 3. It's kinda the whole point behind calling him the executive branch.
"Well I'm too new for my opinion to count much but for the record, I agree with you."
Being new hasn't a thing to do with it.
You have an opinion like everyone else, and are entitled to voice it, just like everyone else. Regardless of how long you have been here :)
So you think that the President SHOULD stand idly by while we are invaded and in a time when he himself has professed so much concern for possible terrorists attacks.
Can you spell
E-X-E-C-U-T-I-V-E O-R-D-E-R ?
That would accomplish what is needed. Let the lefties then go to court and challenge his right to issue such an order (if they have the cahones to do so), but in the meantime he's taken a positive step. If he doesn't push for action then his own party in Congress isn't going to do sh_t. They've got their fingers in the wind to see which way he's blowin'.
Now, by his INACTION TO DO ANYTHING, he makes two demonRAT governors of southern border states ACTUALLY LOOK GOOD.
You're the one who needs to get real, unless you don't care about border security at all and are just along for the ride.
Add T. Tancredo's name to the list of sensible lawmakers.
That's all Pat is talking about.
Buchanan's been off the conservative-GOP reservation on several key issues for years now. On the issue of serious immigration reform, Pat's right on target.
Bush can handle FatTeddyK.
Alright, here's a test for that assumption: Let's see how many MSM news stories over the coming weeks give prominence to Buchanan's and Farah's suggestion. When the coverage fails to materialize, will you then be willing to publicly answer your own question?
Tancredo has been the lone voice in DC on the border issue for quite some time and it would seem that there are others who now are coming around to admitting that he's right. I do believe that he would rather work with the administration and fully realizes that it would be the wiser way to pursue his goals, unlike the extremist way that Pat would seem to want to go.
From what I've read and heard the Congressman say up to this point I'll be seriously considering him.
awwwww....did I hurt your feelings?
Seriously, Tancredo can get some serious support for his immigration bill if he continues down this road and ignores morons like Farah and Buchanan.
Also, getting kicked out of the White House for ANY reason doesn't really endear him to anyone. You have to work with the system to work the system.
What kind of self destructive fool would do what Nixon did as President to earn himself the impeachment, in the middle of a war?
Touche and congrats to you Reagan Man for coming up with what everybody has ignored. What Pat actually said. He disagrees with W on a lot and makes his case and I respect him for that. All he was doing here is exactly what my sentiments have been, so I can understand his position. He's tring to put pressure on W to act TO SHUT DOWN THE INVASION...PERIOD, no more and no less.
To those who disagree and say it's not his responsibility I continue to pose the question:
If we suffer another terrorist incident and their entry can be proven to have been via one of our porous land borders...On whose head do we THEN hang the responsibility?
The President is the leader of this Nation and should LEAD on this issue.