Just like you, President Bush gets one vote.
You will be responsible for the Democrats taking over power."
I haven't had my required dose of caffeine this morning, but let me try and understand the logic of the above:
When the electorate decides not to support a politician with their vote, because said politican not only fails to represent them in government, but actually acts against them , and aids/rewards illegal activity--it is the electorate's fault for deciding not to support said politician, rather than the actions of said politician.
Or, to use a recent example from Illinois: It wasn't George Ryan's (Republican) corruption that resulted in voters deciding not to support him (thus getting Rod Blago), but the fault of the voters recoiling at Ryan's corrupt activities ( Ryan was found guilty on all counts recently, BTW ).
Pardon me, but that reasoning is, IMHO, insane.
I work in Illinois, live in Wisconsin, so I actually know that Ryan was a slime. Criminals belong in prison.
Guess what? George Bush won't be on my ballot in November- but Jim Doyle will be. Jim Doyle makes Ryan look like a saint.
My election is not about amnesty. When you head to the polls in November, when you decide to vote for Blago or Topika, will your vote be about amnesty for illegal aliens?