Posted on 03/17/2002 1:36:37 PM PST by Sabertooth
For the past 10 years, I voted Republican, rain or shine. I was a single-issue voter.
My only concern was that the candidate be a Republican.
Why?
Because I don't like what the Democrat Party has done to America.
This year, another issue arises that concerns me greatly… so much so, that I might not be voting Republican this November. I'll maintain my GOP registration, but my vote is suddenly in play, where it hadn't been for 10 years.
That issue is: Illegal Immigration, and Federal Amnesties for Illegals.
Some agree, and some don't… that's fine. In any event, I've been active and vehement on the Illegal threads, to the displeasure of not a few. I've been called a few names, and that's to be expected (goes with being a Republican, no?) Among them are "racist," "xenophobe," "libertarian," "Buchananite," "knee-jerk," etc… And…
"Single-issue voter."
As though that's somehow damning. I was a single-issue voter beore, but now it's just a different issue. What bothers some is that it's a different single issue than theirs. Further, I don't really understand those who use this term in the pejorative… Is there no issue, position, or policy on which the GOP could lose your vote? Is there no circumstance under which you would part ways?
Your right to vote is your currency in the Political Economy. If your support is never in doubt, what is the incentive of politicians to listen to you? Do you continue to patronize restaurants with good food and bad service? Or do you let your wallet do the talking?
If so, then why should politics be any different?
How do you feel when arrogant party functionaries mock you, asking "Do you want Hillary?" or "You gonna vote Democrat?" or some other such demagoguery? Are we nothing but pawns?
Or do moments arise when notice must be loudly given to our "leaders," who serve at our pleasure, that there will be an electoral price paid for failing to heed the will of the American People?
See post #67.
Section 245(i) is specifically about Illegals. The vote this week in the House, if passed by the Senate and signed by Bush, will allow 200,000 illegals to escape their rightful deportation with a $1,000 fine.
The Federal government is turning coyote.
On illegal immigration, that couldn't be truer.
I'd never vote third party or democrat, so the stupid party it is.
Sorry HLL, that just doesn't move me.
Hillary Rodham Clinton should thank George W. Bush for being so stubbornly and badly wrong on such a divisive issue for Republicans.
He was warned.
On illegal immigration, that couldn't be truer.
I'd never vote third party or democrat, so the stupid party it is.
How do you expect there to be a dime's worth of difference if your vote doesn't cost the GOP a second thought?
If your vote isn't in play, you're out of the game.
Bush keeps saying there is no amnesty. He repeated that again today for the 3 million illegals that Fox wants !AMNISTIA! for.
But, hey, keep shouting, I kinda like the shrillness.
You quoted Section 245, which isn't at issue.
Look again...
Section 245 of the Act allows an alien to apply for adjustment of status to that of a lawful permanent resident (LPR) while in the United States if certain conditions are met. The alien must have been inspected and admitted or paroled, be eligible for an immigrant visa and admissible for permanent residence, and, with some exceptions, have maintained lawful nonimmigrant status. The alien must also not have engaged in unauthorized employment. Section 245(i) of the Act allows an alien to apply to adjust status under section 245 notwithstanding the fact that he or she entered without inspection, overstayed, or worked without authorization.
LINK.Last week's 245(i) extension was specifically about illegals.
Letting Illegals stay = Amnesty for those Illegals.
Hitlary! won't be the candidate for the RATS in '04. Nevertheless, your position here is suicidal. It's absolutely suicidal (and unless I've missed something, what's the beef with G.W. over guns?).
I wouldn't advise that. In my mind, the ultimate goal of those of us on the Right should be to defeat the Left at all costs. Don't let them win, period! You know what will happen if they do, so why even think of doing anything that might help them?
Can you imagine the Supreme Court nominees that Gore or Hitlary! will put up for confirmation? Those are LIFETIME appointments that we'd have to live with no matter who sits in the Oval Office. THEN YOU'LL REALLY WORRY ABOUT THE SECOND AMENDMENT!
Again, that's suicidal political thinking.
I also am a single-issue voter.
Which ping lists would you like to be on?
I've got General, Middle East, Colonista, Archaeology, Science/Crevo, Baseball, and Poetry.
Thanks for the link. I read 245(i) a few days back and went brain-dead trying to comprehend the jargon. What I don't understand is why the above language would only apply to about 200,000 aliens, as opposed to the 3 million, whom Bush said would not be given amnesty because a majority of Americans are against it. Even Dick Armey stressed that this was mainly for aliens whose visas had expired.
The people who will qualify are required to have a sponser (which the border busters would not have), or have family here who will sponser them. Even then, it states that their status will be reviewed, without a guarantee of legal citizenship.
I really see this as a way of registering 200,000 aliens who would continue to live here under the radar if nothing is done. Maybe this is a first step in getting a grip on illegal immigration which is so out of control now -- aided and abetted by American employers hiring cheap labor they can pay under the table. I just don't see 245(i) as the potential catastrohpe that you believe it is.
So tell me, why is President Bush such a genius for ignoring the will of 70% of Americans to risk this horror?
Why are you convinced that as a voter, you are bargaining from a position of weakness?
And for every illegal who casts a vote for social bennies, that's one more conservative who's vote didn't count. Talk about being disenfranchised...
But be that as it may, eating our own will have ramifications that will lead to Civil War II. I know that the tree of liberty must sometimes be watered with the blood of patriots, but why go through the bloodshed if we don't have to? A RAT presidency means Supreme Court nominees who will legitimize gay marriages and strip us of the Second Amendment for sure. A Leftist president gives another avenue to Jesse and Sharpton, and reparations will become a reality, either by Congressional decree or Executive Order. Racial tensions will absolutely explode. And what scares me the most about this is that conservative blacks such as myself will be put in a deadly situation. We either oppose the race hustlers, where lefty American blacks will kill us as Uncle Toms, or, hostile American whites will look at our skin color and suspect that we approve of reparations, and then they may want to take our lives as well. You think I want to be put into such a position?
That's not hyperbole, but a real life scenario that will definitely play itself out.
Those alone make me say, "HELL NO! I refuse to let the Left win!"
Think about that. Think hard about it. Protest votes only make us cut off our noses to spite our faces. And that most definitely isn't worth it.
I don't know the particulars of how the 200,000 number was arrived at. I'm just taking the Administration's word at this point, because the actuall number is moot. Any Amnesty is wrong.
As to the three million, Bush made no such promise that I'm aware of.
However, he did make the Clintonian promise of "no blanket amnesty."
Any Amnesties totalling less than 13 million would make that statement true.
The people who will qualify are required to have a sponser (which the border busters would not have), or have family here who will sponser them. Even then, it states that their status will be reviewed, without a guarantee of legal citizenship.
None of that matters. No Amnesties.
I really see this as a way of registering 200,000 aliens who would continue to live here under the radar if nothing is done.
If they were really under the radar, how could we tell them from those not Amnestied?
I just don't see 245(i) as the potential catastrophe that you believe it is.
It's an mini-amnesty, and a first step to more. I supported the one in 1986, and I was a fool. We're in this mess now because of it.
Further, that Amnesty was a "one time only" promise to the American People. I want that promise kept.
Think about this:
Bush's Amnesties will only cut off his votes for God knows what reason.
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.