Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Impeach Bush! (Joseph Farah On Upholding American Sovereignty Alert)
Worldnetdaily.com ^ | 08/31/05 | Joseph Farah

Posted on 08/30/2005 10:34:44 PM PDT by goldstategop

Pat Buchanan, former communications director to President Ronald Reagan, former presidential candidate and WND commentator, has come to the conclusion that a courageous Republican legislator should move a bill for impeachment of President Bush.

I reluctantly agree – and for the same reasons.

President Bush has had nearly six 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.

Some will tell me this can't be done and that it is irresponsible to propose it because Bush is a wartime president.

My response? It is precisely because this nation finds itself in a desperate war declared by a formidable foe determined to use our open borders to destroy this country that we must act now.

Some will remind me I endorsed Bush just two years ago for re-election.

My response? I made it very clear at the time that I was not really endorsing Bush, per se, but seeking the only practical way to defeat his reckless and irresponsible and treasonous opponent. There is no contradiction here. Kerry had to be defeated. Now Bush must go. America can do better.

I don't agree with many of Pat Buchanan's foreign policy ideas. But on the border, he is 100 percent right. Bush has been a disaster. No matter how successful we might be in our campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan, we can lose this war against jihadist Islam right here at home.

Our enemies have already used the open border to penetrate this country – and they will do so again.

When Bush placed the old Immigration and Naturalization Service under the new Department of Homeland Security, I actually believed he recognized how critical border security was to the defense of our homeland. I was fooled.

In the current issue of my premium, online, intelligence newsletter, G2 Bulletin, author Paul Williams recounts in extravagant detail how al-Qaida operatives have already used the open Mexican border not only to sneak operatives into the country but to smuggle in nuclear weapons with the help of the MS-13 (Mara Salvatrucha) street gang.

The fuse has been lit.

The war in Iraq, which I have supported, will mean little when, not if, a nuclear weapon is detonated inside our own country.

When that happens, we will no longer be having debates about who has more culpability for Sept. 11 – Bush or his predecessor. Bush has had ample opportunity to address the mistakes of the past. Instead, he has repeated them. They say hindsight is 20-20. Not for Bush.

Even if the border issue and the tsunami of illegal immigration was not strictly speaking the No. 1 national security issue we face, enforcing the laws of the land would be the right thing to do – the only moral and right thing to do.

Americans are dealing with more joblessness, higher crime, skyrocketing taxes, a crippled medical system, overcrowded jails, an overburdened judicial and law enforcement system, costly and divisive language barriers and changing demographics that are permanently transforming the U.S. culture.

Why?

Bush claims it is because America needs cheap labor. That's what the law of supply and demand is all about. It's not his duty or responsibility to acquire workers for big corporations and other fat cats below what the market will support.

I don't even believe Bush is being honest when he makes this argument. I am convinced there are international agreements behind this. I am persuaded the systematic destruction of the American way of life through uncontrolled and illegal immigration is part of a master plan for merger and global consolidation – first with our neighbors in this hemisphere and later worldwide.

This secretive plot must end here and now.

America was founded on the principle of independence and sovereignty. The president is betraying our most sacred national heritage.

Bush is ignoring the will of the people and he is violating the law of the land.

It's time to turn up the heat.

As Buchanan suggested: Will even one courageous Republican member of Congress have the guts to sponsor a bill of impeachment?


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: americansovereignty; asshole; barkingmoonbat; blindbushbots; buchanandroids; bushenenmyofrepublic; bushtreason; deportfarrahfirst; dramaqueens; farahhatesbush; farahisaloon; farahkoolaid; farahvotednader; farrahtheusefulidiot; illegalimmigration; impeachment; joepatshouldbehanged; josephfarah; lordhawhaw; moonbat; moron; motherfarrah; nationalsecurity; openborderslobby; presidentbush; putdownthecrackpipe; rightwingmoonbats; seditiousarticle; tokyofarrah; worldnetdaily; worldnutdaily
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 421-435 next last
To: goldstategop
Another think: Everybody seems to concentrate on our southern border while our northern neighbor Canada seems to be the real destination of militant muslims. We know this. And our northern border is much longer and desolate than our southern boundary.
And of course we have to figure out a workable way to check upon everything imported into our country.
101 posted on 08/31/2005 1:01:56 AM PDT by thegreatbeast (Quid lucrum istic mihi est?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rdb3
Calling for the impeachment of a wartime president. How is that not giving aid and comfort to our enemies?

Leaving our borders wide open in a time of war. How is THAT not giving aid and comfort to our enemies?

102 posted on 08/31/2005 1:16:06 AM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Hey, Cindy Sheehan, grow up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: de Buillion
Sorry, did not provide url . . .

Much thanks for the March 2005 article!

The good thing about discussion is we gather a lot more information than we started out with.

You are claiming that 534 additions in AZ are NEW HIRES?

I'm not claiming anything.  I quoted the article.  From whence came the 534 "new' border patrol agents?  I don't know.

And, yes, something else doesn't add up. I was incorrect- the congress authorized 2000 per year, Bush hired 210.

Maybe he hired more than 210 and maybe 534 went to Arizona.

An April 2005 Senate Committee on Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs press release;

Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Ranking Member Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., Thursday applauded Senate approval of additional funding for border security.

Lieberman co-sponsored an amendment to the Fiscal Year 2005 supplemental spending bill by Senator Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., to increase by $390 million what the federal government will spend on border security. The funding represents an advance payment on the increases in border agents and detention beds authorized for FY 2006 spending by the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004.

“Right now, we have a finger-in-the-dike approach to protecting our borders,” Lieberman said. “With just under 11,000 agents protecting 6,000 miles of border, thousands of people enter our country illegally every day. The new Border Patrol agents hired and trained because of this amendment will improve immigration enforcement and strengthen our hand in the war against terrorism.”

The Byrd amendment, which was approved by the Senate late Wednesday, would pay for 650 Border Patrol agents, 250 Immigrations and Customs Enforcement investigators, and 168 enforcement agents and detention officers.

An additional $10 million would be spent on unmanned aerial vehicles on the Southern border. And $66 million would pay for an additional 2,000 detention beds, allowing the government to house 20,500 aliens at any one time.

The Byrd amendment begins to fulfill border security requirements of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act, authored by Lieberman and HSGAC Chairman Susan Collins, R-Me., which authorized the hiring of an additional 2,000 border agents each year for five years, an additional 800 ICE investigators each year for five years, and the creation of 8,000 additional detention beds each year for five years.

 If 2000 were authorized for 2005, why didn't the Senate provide money for 2000?

103 posted on 08/31/2005 1:17:32 AM PDT by Racehorse (Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Leaving our borders wide open in a time of war. How is THAT not giving aid and comfort to our enemies?

Yeah. How is that not giving aid and comfort to our enemies? Someone please explain.

104 posted on 08/31/2005 1:26:52 AM PDT by XpandTheEkonomy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

I agree....George is coming in on the side of business and foresaking the American communities that made this country great...He's not doing us any favors at all!


105 posted on 08/31/2005 1:58:26 AM PDT by AngelesCrestHighway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

I agree....George is coming in on the side of business and foresaking the American communities that made this country great...He's not doing us any favors at all!


106 posted on 08/31/2005 1:59:00 AM PDT by AngelesCrestHighway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MJY1288
"And how many times did you call for Slick Willy's Impeachment when the same or even more were crossing the border?"

Silly goose; look up Operation Hold The Line and Operation Gatekeeper before bringing Clinton into this mess. The last President, liberal and slimy though he was, did far more to secure our borders than this President has even considered. That certainly speaks volumes to me...

"Go take a look at how much money has been spent on the border"

Liberal rule number 1: When you have a problem, spend lots of money to fix it.
Liberal rule number 2: If the problem hasn't been fixed, you're not spending enough money yet.

It's not about cash spent on the problem; it's about solutions developed and implemented. That means, quite frankly, an Israeli style wall from the Pacific to the Gulf patrolled by military personnel. Clinton got a couple sections of the wall built during his two terms. He never finished the wall, but he got it started. Those walls have worked fantastic in reducing illegal immigration in the targetted areas, which has forced illegals into the desert and mountain terrain. This President has done nothing more than make token gestures (small increases in the USBP) and issue confused remarks (amnesty first, then a 'once and for all' solution later). None of it has translated into clear and verifiable steps to control the massive and critically dangerous problem of insecure borders.
107 posted on 08/31/2005 2:05:25 AM PDT by NJ_gent (Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: mastergibs; Map Kernow

Both of you knock it off.


108 posted on 08/31/2005 2:13:21 AM PDT by Sidebar Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: fr_freak
"impeaching the one president who actually had the balls to defend the country."

Willfully disregarding perimeter security in time of war is not defending the country. I'll agree that this President has provided a strong defense of this nation when Osama bin Laden cannot easily stroll across our borders and into this country completely unchallenged with a nuclear bomb strapped to a donkey that's walking next to him. A group of children could enter this country undetected. What does that say about a large group of trained terrorists?

This is not a difficult concept. The Israelis get border security as necessary for defense against terrorism; why can't some people here understand it? Until our borders are secured, we have zero defense against terrorists, regardless of our actions abroad.
109 posted on 08/31/2005 2:19:45 AM PDT by NJ_gent (Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: DB
"If your goal is to stop terrorists from getting in, you will fail."

Urging those who are under attack to surrender is generally a job we reserve for the French. I do not believe they will be pleased with your stepping on their toes in this matter.
110 posted on 08/31/2005 2:23:07 AM PDT by NJ_gent (Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: NJ_gent

I'm not surrendering. Not even close.

I'm putting the resources where they will be most effective.

Big difference.


111 posted on 08/31/2005 2:27:57 AM PDT by DB (©)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: NJ_gent
Israel is a tiny country.

We are not.

WWII was fought without sealing our borders.

Did you call for Reagan to be impeached?
112 posted on 08/31/2005 2:30:26 AM PDT by DB (©)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: DB
"Israel is a tiny country. We are not."

Israel's GDP is tiny. Our's is not.

"WWII was fought without sealing our borders."

WWII was fought against recognized governments using recognizable militaries who did not have access to nuclear weapons. This war is being fought against unknown enemies using unrecognizable paramilitary units who do have access to nuclear weapons.

In other words, you're saying we should have fought WWII like we fought the War of 1812. Different war; different tactics.
113 posted on 08/31/2005 2:34:49 AM PDT by NJ_gent (Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: DB
"I'm putting the resources where they will be most effective."

Precisely what is a more important area to place resources than protecting the perimeter of the homeland? Right now, Osama bin Laden himself could fly to a country in Central or South America, make the trek through Mexico, and walk across our border onto United States soil undetected.

Anyone who doesn't see that as an absurd and unbelievably bad situation is completely nuts. It's going to take a nuclear weapon transported across the southern border and detonated in a major American city before some people wake up and realize how dangerous our open borders are to our national security.
114 posted on 08/31/2005 2:39:36 AM PDT by NJ_gent (Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: NJ_gent
Yes, I'm completely nuts. Thank you for your fine analysis...



Or Osama could come by sea anywhere along our thousands of miles of coastline, by container, walk across the Canadian border in one of million unpopulated locations... Yes Osama could do a lot of things...

Nevertheless, doubling the border guard would have little affect on any of the above. This is a big country with thousand and thousands of miles of border/sea crossings with millions of tons of trade passing over them daily. You will fail stopping Osama from crossing the border if that's what he really wants to do. Even after you spend billions trying to stop him from doing so. We are not talking about armies crossing the borders, were talking individuals.

The solution to our problems can't lie there because if they do, we will surely fail.

You want to spend resources on feel good solutions not based on effectiveness. Much like searching old ladies and children that board airplanes... It has the appearance of security... Where little really exists...
115 posted on 08/31/2005 2:54:58 AM PDT by DB (©)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Racehorse
Why wait on George to propose doing the right thing when Congress can do the right thing? Then, should Bush fail or refuse to be the executive, impeach him.

I believe that's been covered, hasn't it??? Congress voted to add 10,000 new Border Agents...Bush said NO...

116 posted on 08/31/2005 3:00:57 AM PDT by Iscool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

Comment #117 Removed by Moderator

To: goldstategop
Bush claims it is because America needs cheap labor. That's what the law of supply and demand is all about. It's not his duty or responsibility to acquire workers for big corporations and other fat cats below what the market will support.

Just as union extortion causes artificially high wages, Mexican illegals lead to artificially low wages for the citizen working man. If one builder uses Mexican labor, his competitor also needs to use the Mexican labor to compete. The citizen carpenter is then forced to work at the same wages as the Mexican. I know this by experience.

118 posted on 08/31/2005 4:14:01 AM PDT by Jim_Curtis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

Anybody who has the mental capacity to think this through, could see that its the democrats that hold the nation hostage by hysterical howls of racism any time any one tries to do anything.


119 posted on 08/31/2005 4:36:53 AM PDT by tkathy (Tyranny breeds terrorism. Freedom breeds peace.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

Introducing a bill of impeachment might be a succor to Dems and other terrorist supporters, but someone needs to impress upon Bush that he works for US and NOT for Vicente Fox. To allow the borders to be as porous as they are in wartime is not just ignorance, it's criminal stupidity.

Northeast Republican office holders are generally pretty oblivious to the attitudes and opinions of the rest of the US....and Bush is no different (don't give me this "He's from Texas" jive....look at his family background. He was highly influenced by his dad, and Bush 41 is the quintessential northeastern "old money" Republican. They are both good and essentially decent men, but also thick as a brick when it comes to grasping the needs and attitudes of the vast majority of the population). Bush's willful ignoring of the border, save for the occasional "shut folks up" sop, such as hiring a whole 200 rather than 2000 Border Patrol officers, is what is causing many of his former supporters to begin thinking impeachment.

I don't necessarily want to see him thrown out....I want to see him woken up and kicked in the ass to DO SOMETHING AND ASSERT AMERICAN SOVEREIGNTY AGAIN. Those representatives and senators who aid and abet illegal aliens should be thrown out of office and indicted as accessories to trafficking in illegal aliens, or treason, as the case may be. As long as the political class in this country can disregard our national sovereignty and disrespect our culture (bilingual everything, honoring Mexican holidays, etc.) with impunity, then WE HAVE NO COUNTRY!

We need to look beyond the Republicans.....they've proven to be no better than the Democrats on many issues, and worse on some. Maybe it's time conservatives said "Good bye" to the Republicans and "Hello" to a Conservative Party. This might be just the issue to do it on. That, or proceed with a Bill of Impeachment for Dereliction of Duty in Wartime.....either way, what has to be done to save our country will be painful.


120 posted on 08/31/2005 4:44:32 AM PDT by Bombardier ("Religion of Peace" my butt.....sell that snakeoil to someone who'll buy it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 421-435 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson