Posted on 06/30/2006 7:15:57 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
No National Guard on the CA border.
Truthmark bump!
I have always been a bit in awe of engineers. Especially those who mastered integral calculus. The formulas all looked the same to me in high school : )
I still have my slide rule from college. I take it out once in a while and wonder what in the heck I did with it.
Measure how thick to slice the cheese? : )
If this were a restaurant, I don't belive I'd be leaving a tip.
If the FBI's numbers are accurate, King should also apologize for misleading the public.
Not enough of them, apparently. If if one joins the guard, they will not be sent down to the border.
Conspiracy, huh? How much are you being paid by the NWO Bushbots to come onto these threads to create problems? You obviously only do it to try to interfere with legitimate discussion, since you never add anything substantive to the discussion. $10.00 per thread? Those NWO types have a lot of money, so I hope you are getting at least $100.00 per thread. If you are not, you should quit.
"Back it up with a quote, or STFU, freak."
How nice. How civil. As a Bush supporter, let's see, I'm an idiot, a freak, and a host of other things.
We're 12 hours past an arbitrary deadline and this is where we stand. Does anyone who shows even a modicum of restraint in this matter prove to be less than true blue Republican?
This issue has been neglected by administration after administration, and by Congress after Congress, and now that we're one day past a short term deadline, Bush is a lying good-for-nothing.
You all need to get a life. I am no less committed to securing our borders than most anyone else here. But I'm not so naive as to think it can be done in short order. This will take time to address, and a bit of civility would actually prove to be quite productive. If others are like me, they are not so much against your position as we are opposed to your methods and your temperament.
Oh, and why are you so folks so inclined to take what the Associated Press says verbatim when it feeds your anger, but not other times? The AP is not a credible source, on this or any other story.
I said that to Sinkschmuck, not to you.
Maybe you should follow the thread before passing judgment.
I'll weigh in one more time, and then will not engage further. So I give you the last word.
First, many of the invectives hurled here are directed at me, even if yours wasn't. Indeed, the thread opens with the statement that anyone who disagrees with the poster is an ... IDIOT. They are then peppered throughout the thread. But more to the point of your comment ...
When my 7-year old son watches basketball in the park directly across the street from our house, as he often does, he sees some truly remarkable players -- late teens and early twenties who come from all over the city where I live. He loves the game and learns a lot. Far too often, though, the games break down into disputes over one thing or another, and the profanities flow freely. I pass judgment on those players, and not only or even primarily because I don't want my child subjected to that sort of language. I figure that language is part of his education, as unfortunate as it may be. By behaving as they do, they hold up the game, they show extraordinary disrespect for their fellow players (and those waiting in the wings), and they demonstrate a contempt for the rules of the game. Moreover, and most important, they distract from and diminish the game itself, which is where the true learning comes. So, I do pass judgment on them even though none of their invectives are directed at my kid.
For these same reasons, I pass jugment on you. I see no difference whatsoever between this circumstance and those playground games across the street.
They're probably so friggin' big and smelly I'd have to pack a lunch and a gas mask.
Now, on to what I consider the substance of my views ...
Charles Krauthammer had a column a few weeks ago that I considered absolutely brilliant, and which I adopted as my own. He argued that the issues of securing the borders and offering amnesty are separable, and that the securing of the borders must come first, even before we have a real dialogue about amnesty. Not only do I think Krauthammer is right, but I think there is no real alternative to this approach. One way or another I think we will get there -- we can talk about amnesty if and only if the borders are truly secure.
I have opinions on amnesty, though within certain boundaries they are not set in stone. Whatever those may be -- and please, folks, don't assume that I favor amnesty just because I won't oppose it here -- I think this is how all of us here should view the issue. Because I don't think that our disagreements revolve around securing the borders. We all want that, as soon as possible and as securely as possible. There is much more to unite us than divide us.
I can get PAID to get under your very thin skin?
Where do I sign up?
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.