Replies

I am starting to wonder if FR and other conservative media is enabling conservatives and Republicans to undermine themselves as dissent appears to be not an option.

Sadly, I arrived at this conclusion some time ago. I am opposed to this immigration bill because I think while its "strict" provisions are unenforceable, the Z visa is just a joke and it really doesn't solve any problems. But I think it was partly brought on by those very conservatives who were unwilling to discuss it a year ago, when Bush first floated an immigration plan. The matter has got to be dealt with but politicians are unwilling to touch it because they know it's a live wire, so Bush should at least have gotten points for having the courage to bring it up.

But he didn't, because the self-designated "base" was unwilling to discuss or permit discussion of alternatives to the unrealistic, draconian things they were advocating. Their constant ridicule and obvious hatred of the President probably did have a lot to do with getting Dems elected and ultimately worsening the conservative position. And I think it is driving conservatives away, because any attempt at rational discussion is met with invective and rage.

“But I think it was partly brought on by those very conservatives who were unwilling to discuss it a year ago, when Bush first floated an immigration plan. The matter has got to be dealt with but politicians are unwilling to touch it because they know it’s a live wire, so Bush should at least have gotten points for having the courage to bring it up.”

Conservatives unwilling to discuss a year ago? A year ago the Senate debated and passed an immigration bill so I know not of which you speak. The bill was stopped by republicans in the House. It came very close to passage. Furthermore, even if conservatives were not willing to discuss a year ago, that is no reason to craft a very bad bill that would work to the detriment of Americans. I do not follow your logic at all, friend.

As to the immigration issue needing to be fixed: a good start would be enforcing current laws. If that were done, much of the problem would fix itself.

Thank you, livius. Well said!

But he didn't, because the self-designated "base" was unwilling to discuss or permit discussion of alternatives to the unrealistic, draconian things they were advocating. Their constant ridicule and obvious hatred of the President probably did have a lot to do with getting Dems elected and ultimately worsening the conservative position. And I think it is driving conservatives away, because any attempt at rational discussion is met with invective and rage.

What is this, a joke?

There haven't been any brutes here telling people, "Don't discuss the alternatives." There has been free and open discussion.

Sorry, but the boy you choose prefers not to be whipped.

But I think it was partly brought on by those very conservatives who were unwilling to discuss it a year ago, when Bush first floated an immigration plan. The matter has got to be dealt with but politicians are unwilling to touch it because they know it's a live wire, so Bush should at least have gotten points for having the courage to bring it up.

Whatttttt!@?!?!??

George Bush's first formal proposal was january 2004, not last year. Go to whitehouse .gov and look at the Immigration archive, it's there.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/01/20040107-3.html

He also made some less formal but equally repellent proposals in the months preceding 9/11/2001. In fact there was a debate raging here on FR the very morning of 9/11.

Bush should get zero points, because he has badly implemented and not enforced our existing immigration laws. New laws are not required, enforcement is. And George Bush hasn't yet tried that.