Nov 17 2006
The Bush Conservatives
It seems I and many other conservatives need to just step back and re-assess the political landscape. As I mentioned in the post below on immigration, I do not see the Republican Party offering a very palatable form of conservatism any more. So let me describe what I think is an attractive conservative vision. It begins with supporting and respecting our President and all his accomplishments. And since I and many others still have unflinching support and admiration for the man, I decided to steal some from the commenters here and dub this conservative view “Bush Conservatives”.
Bush Conservatives not only believe in Reagan’s 11th commandment to not speak ill of fellow conservatives – we live it. From the Gang of 14, to Harriet Miers, to Dubai Ports World and to the immigration issue – there has been a brand of Republican which eschewed the 11th commandment. So let the Republicans be defined by that group – Bush Conservatives will be defined by their antithesis. Bush conservatives are not afraid of the word ‘compromise’. They despise the word ‘failure’. If there is a good idea, we do not care what party gets credit – we care that the good ideas get enacted. It is not Party uber America anymore.
Bush Conservatives, like Bush himself, are for lower taxes and focused government (someplace between liberals and libertarians is the proper role of government). They are not for destroying the public education system, they are for making it work. And they understand private school access is one option. They understand that a prescription drug benefit for Medicare/Medicaid will reduce overall costs and provide a respectable end of life for our seniors who came before us. Yes, it costs a lot to care for our elderly. But it doesn’t represent big government. It represents a big heart. I am not for throwing money away. The prescription drug benefit was a nice optimizing solution to a broken system. It was consumer driven (which is why the liberals should not be allowed to go in and insert bureacratic price controls) and it will save money that was being wasted in emergency room treatments for normal problems.
Bush Conservatives respect the immigrant worker in the sense we understand people need to make a life (not just a living). We do not want the broken current system to stay hostage to the “Fence Only” crowd. The illegal immigrant worker will pay a penalty in back taxes and lost time towards citizenship. That level of penalty is sufficient for the crime of missing paperwork. We respect those who are trying to do nothing more than raise a family. The Republicans can now have the mantle of harshness towards otherwise good people. They can focus on their vision of the few bad apples representing the entire immigrant population. They can ignore the more realistic, broader images that include aliens fighting for our country – the other immigrant worker. The only people who get my support will embrace Bush’s comprehensive vision of workers who are registered, background checked, working in the open economy, and who must avoid criminal activities if they stay here. They will not become citizens immediately, and in fact will not be able to apply any time here as illegal aliens towards citizenship. They will become our neighbors working by our side, raising their children with ours. And like the good neighbors we are, we will reach out and help them assimiliate to our society. The Reps can be the party of rounding up aliens for deportation. They are apparently clinging to that image with a death grip anyway.
Bush Conservatives do not see failure in Iraq, they see the long hard, generational fight we were warned was coming. Bush conservatives will not ally with liberals to find an exit and let the terrorists follow our troops home. Bush Conservatives do not blame Bush for Al Qaeda’s tenacity. We salute Bush for his tenacity.
Bush conservatives see success in the Gang of 14, who paved the way for some of the largest shifts to the federal bench in a generation. And we would welcome a repeat of the Gang of 14 in the upcoming senate to quelsh the partisan bickering between Reps and Dems. Go for it Gang – with my blessing. If they can keep the results going like they did in the last Congress, true conservatism will be able to flow into our court systems – as opposed to imposing Republican versions of the Liberal activism in the courts now.
Bush Conservatives are not necessarily Republicans – though obviously they are welcomed. Bush Conservatism is the broad-tent conservative movement that can include a McCain, DeWine, Snowe, etc. The only litmus test for Bush Conservatives is there is no litmus tests. There are no ‘real’ conservatives or ‘pure’ conservatives. Republicans can have their purity tests. Bush Conservatives will strive for enhancing the conservative vision and making progress towards those ends.
So how can Republicans (or Democrats) attract Bush Conservatives? Show respect to the President. Don’t blame Bush for your problems or mistakes. Allow processes to unfold without vitriol and panic. Admit the errors made on Miers (she should have been heard, then rejected), Dubai Ports World (not all Muslim Arabs are our enemies, especially ones willing to fund our outer defenses), and immigration (support the guest worker program for all the immigrants now here in this country). Failure to admit the mistakes means failure to correct the mistakes. These minimum changes could woo the Bush Conservatives back into the Republican tent – but there as to be unmistakable shift on these matters. No sliding around these examples of what we do not want to see more of. In many of these cases Dems and Reps both have some atoning to do.
Stop blaming the Gang of 14 and support the results they gave us on all those new judges and justices we are blessed to have. Look positively on efforts that are bi-partisan and are rolling back liberalism’s last vestiges: the liberal courts.
Don’t surrender on Iraq. Don’t pull a Kerry. We went into Iraq and made commitments. Honor those commitments and strive for nothing short of success. We do not follow people who go back on their word. Reps and Dems can tolerate that – Bush Conservatives never will.
Be positive, show respect, and use decorum. And this is not a Chinese menu. We are not looking for ideaological purity. But we are looking for a common vision, a common goal, something we can work together towards. We can debate the details of how to achieve these, but there is no doubt we need to do these things.
Here is the alternative: Reps and Dems can be against fixing immigration. Reps and Dems can be for bashing Bush. Reps and Dems can run from Iraq even though they supported the effort going in. The parties can continue to go their partisan ways. If they do, then I hope a moderate new party can arise from the ashes these scorched earth partisan efforts have been producing. We are at war, and these partisan are fighting us, not our enemies. America’s patience with these two squabbling camps will run out.
Addendum: I forgot one important subject – Embryonic Stem Cell Research (ESCR). Bush opposes the killing of human beings, as do Bush Conservatives. This is why Bush Conservatives are not soft on life issues. Arlen Specter would not be a Bush Conservative. ESCR is snake oil compared to the Adult Stem Cell Research (ASCR) results which keep poring in. Even one of Michael J Fox’s top scientists who studies the full range of stem cell options has leaned towards faster, better cures coming from ASCR than ESCR. Bush is very pro-life. From his Stem Cell stance to parental notification to partial birth abortion, he has successfully moved the country towards the pro life side in a massive way. That is why Reps who bash Bush are just not being true to conservatism, they are only being true to their pet issues at the expense of conservatism. How many ways did Reps hurt the conservative cause? They stayted home. They turned on Bush when they did not get one thing their way. They never refused to acknowledge all Bush did, only what Bush did not do for them, they refused compromise, they refused progress, they refused to participate, they refused to be civil. Now all Bush did accompolish is at risk while the losers keep blaming him because they turned on him. The Reps have a lot to learn. Too much, in my opinion, to be ready for 2008.
Addendum II: I must also point out why Bush bashing without any thought is really, really bad. I am now of the opinion that the Democrat wave was much, much higher than what we ended up with. There could have easily been more House seats lost and one more Senate seat gone. I can easily see Bush’s last minute push taking some of the force out of the political tsunami that hit, along with Kerry’s last minute gaffe. We did see a turn to the reps in the last weekend’s polls. If I am right, and people were returning to Bush in some small way, the Bush bashing/blame we see now is really destructive. It is pushing those who DID turn back to the reps off and making them doubt, if not regret, there last minute change of heart to the right. Reps will react like this, without thinking. Bush Conservatives are much less volatile.
Addendum III: I would like to also add zero tolerance for pork barrel spending and ear-marks. The runaway spending was not pushed by Bush, it was done by Congress. They demanded a price to support Bush’s goals and inflated the budget with useless bridges, etc. There was no way Bush would have vetoed SLIMMED DOWN budgets. That one is all at the feet of the Reps in Congress. Ed Morrissey does this subject great justice today.
Addendum IV: Reader Luker noted these fine additions to the list:
– habeas corpus reserved to US citizens and not granted to the foreigners, especially the terrorists and the GITMO detainees.
– Balance between civil liberties and security of our own country and its assets, namely the preservation of the NSA foreign terrorist surveillance program.
– Tax reform, especially the abolishment of the death tax.
– Social Security reform.
Note that the last two REQUIRE compromise so we can attract democrat support. The first two will be salvaged by folks like Lieberman (and hopefully Harman) putting national security above partisanship. We will now be indebted any democrat who helps save these items.
For Enforcement can’t keep from dissembling. For Strata’s crowd that means lying. Rumsfeld’s quote went on to cite 6 months. Cheney placed (in quotation marks) a period of “weeks not months,” for the
war’s duration. You have a very cheap view of American life, FE.
Thank God, 69% of the people still, do not.
The British Empire was lost during Churchill’s war.
And here is a damning cut-and-paste for Wolfowitz, as requested
by For Enforcement, who plays fast and loose with quotes and with the lives of American youth.
March 27, 2003
Wolfowitz again tells Congress that oil should pay for Iraq’s reconstruction. “The oil revenues of that country could bring between $50 and $100 billion over the course of the next two or three years. Now, there are a lot of claims on that money, but… We are dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction and relatively soon.”
hehe….You are a funny guy AJ…my British friends would be tremendously amused by your inability to understand irony. For you to accuse others of violating the 11th commandment means one of two things. One that you have absolutely no idea what that Amendment says. Or that you do have some idea but you think that no one remembers all the name calling and attacks you have launched against those you do not agree with.
Btw I was a Reagan Republican long ago…Bush is no Reagan. What you want is total obidience to the leader…if anyone is uber anything it is you and your readers who cannot take dissent without attacking the person delivering the questions regarding policy.
My beef with Bush is in the middle of a two front war he is giving money to No Child Left Behind, Prescription Drug Benefit and signing the McCain Feingold mess. Instead of throwing our money away on programs that look like a Democrat devised him he should have been raising Military Spending to at least the levels it stood during Clintons Reign in Office. We are now at 3.7% of GDP. During most of Clintons terms we stood above 4.0 and even higher. Clinton didn’t even have a war to blame it on.
Finally you are not Bush Conservatives you are Rockefeller Republicans…look up how successful they were.
Reagan conservatives kicked ass.
AJ,
You have invented the right term for my kind of conservative: Bush Conservative. And, as with “Reagan Democrats,” we should fuse with like minded Democrats and Libertarians.
But, I think a 3rd party is a loser. I believe it’s better to shape the Rep Party after our vision. And the expression, “Bush Conservative” describes our vision..
Retire05,,
Yeah ya did imply that I supported amnesty in your comments to my original comment but now you want to play it coy and throw in that “only†qualifier. My reading comprehension is just fine. I’ve read your comments and understand you’re position on the Guest Worker Program in its original form, so I’m not surprised you would support a Temporary Worker Program as it was proposed by Kyl/Cornyn. My point was that the Reps in the House would not even entertain a compromise and many, many of the fence-only/fence-first proponents would not even allow it to be discussed. And every time it was brought up it was painted as amnesty. The compromise of adding a Temp Worker Program to the immigration bill would not have cost us anything on the border security issue and could have saved the Hispanic vote.
I know that those of you who pushed the fence initiative have been turning over every leaf to find justification for not accepting responsibility for losing the Congress for the rest of us. The fact of the matter is that Bush brought Hispanics into the Republican Party, we could have ridden his coattails in this election if the House Republicans had not made us look like a bunch of racists. The other fact of the matter is that the Hispanic population is the fastest growing ethnicity in the US especially in Texas. Encouraging them to align themselves with the Democrats is a stupid mistake. We had the opportunity to turn the tide in that voter block and you’re bunch screwed the pooch!
And I’m not singing the praises of Mel Martinez. But the fact that Bush has tapped him for the shared position in the RNC is indicative that they too realize the Hispanic vote was detrimental to the election.
PierreLegrand, I’m not addressing this only to you, but to several others. I guess I don’t see the need to start trying to classify everyone. Seems like everyone is doing it, Bush Conservative, Bush Moderates, Bush Liberals, Rockefeller whatevers, Reagan Democrats.
It all depends on your perspective. It seems there are few Reagan Repubs any more, same as Rockefeller Repubs.
I’m not sure why everyone suddenly seems they have to make someone look ‘extreme’ to try to get their point across. Third parties only serve to get someone else elected. Perot running in 92 and96 definitely got Clinton elected.
Reasonableness: Look a fairly reasonable immigrant law was passed during Reagan’s term. No part of it was ever enforced (except amnesty)
Odds are, no matter what immigrant bill is passed in the near future, no part of it will ever be enforced (except amnesty)
Look, I’m talking reality, not pie in the sky. Neither party wants anything meaningful passed, so nothing meaningful will be passed. We have a lot of citizens that sincerely want something done, but they are only asking for disappointment. It ain’t gonna happen.
What would I like to see, laws enforced. What am I going to see, nothing. The can will be kicked down the road.
We really need to give out attention to the WOT and hope we really can get some progress made there.
I am for enforcement of laws already existing.
LindaNTexas, And every time it was brought up it was painted as amnesty.
Wonder why it would have been labeled that way?
“For LNDANTEXAS, you seem to know little about the voting habits of the Tejanos of your own state or the fact that the amnesty pig will hurt them the worst of all our state’s society.”
Now, please, LNDANTEXAS, tell me how you managed to spin that so that you thought I said you supported amnesty since the above paragraph was the only one specifically directed at you?
And thanks for giving my one vote such power as to lose the election for “the rest of you”. Since I am not in control over how campaigns are run or the tactics used by the different candidates, you comment that I, and other like minded Republicans, lost the election is simply nuts (for lack of a better word). I am entitled to one vote, and have no control over how campaigns are run (except on a local level) for any Republican candidate. You just want to find someone to blame. Well blame the RNC as it was up to them to get out our message of conservatism and they failed. Blame the candidates for not running intelligent campaigns. Or blame yourself for not beating on enough doors, making enough phone calls and devoting you complete attention to making sure the people in your area understood what was at stake.
You also said that we had the opportunity to turn the tide in the [Hispanic] voting block. Well, if they had become Republicans, what tide would there be to be turned? Or is it that you made a Freudian slip and you really realize that when they voted for Bush they voted for the man, not the party? No one has to encourage Hispanics to align with the Democrats. They have been aligned with the Democrats historically. If you are trying to say that a 14% loss in Hispanic votes that were cast for Bush in the current local elections is symbolic of the loss for Republican candidates, I am going to split my sides laughing.
Mel Martinez is a bad choice on a number of points: his part in S.B. 2611, his low rating with the Border Patrol, his lack of experience and most importantly, he is a sitting Senator and we need a full time chairman for the RNC and a full time Senator for his district. We don’t need a part time anything. The stakes in ’08 are just too high.
Yes, I realize that Hispanics in Texas are the fastest growing segment. We are now a minority-majority state. But the segment of Hispanics that are growing in my beloved state are illegals. That is why it cost Texas over $5 billion last year in services for illegals and will be even higher this year. So while I am sure you have complained about your property taxes, remember why they have gone so high. Do you even know the percentage of illegals in your own school district?
Quit blaming those of us who believe in the rule of law for the lost elections. When voting, immigration was way down on the list of important things to voters this year. But then, there are those of you that have to blame someone.
Why do I get the feeling you probably live in Austin?
LindaNTexas, And every time it was brought up it was painted as amnesty.
Wonder why it would have been labeled that way?
For Enforcement, I have no earthly idea, other than it was arrogance. The rest of us were silenced by those who shouted the loudest who had been stirred into a frenzy from drinking too much of the Azlan del Norte kool-aid and pushed to hysteria by La Raza and the Minute Men.
“For LNDANTEXAS, you seem to know little about the voting habits of the Tejanos of your own state or the fact that the amnesty pig will hurt them the worst of all our state’s society.â€
Now, please, LNDANTEXAS, tell me how you managed to spin that so that you thought I said you supported amnesty since the above paragraph was the only one specifically directed at you?
Now Retire05, I think it’s pretty self evident that you assumed two things when you made that comment to me. 1) That I didn’t have any knowledge about the Hispanic voter, 2) I had no knowledge the impact of amnesty on them. You last assumption implies I support such a plan without understanding the consequences. In my original comment on this thread, I was talking about a Temporary Worker Program and specifically stated it was not an amnesty program. But you demonstrated the very example I was pointing to as to how the fence-only/fence-first proponents painted any discussion of a temporary worker program as amnesty.
And thanks for giving my one vote such power as to lose the election for “the rest of youâ€. Since I am not in control over how campaigns are run or the tactics used by the different candidates, you comment that I, and other like minded Republicans, lost the election is simply nuts (for lack of a better word).
I said: I know that those of you who pushed the fence initiative have been turning over every leaf to find justification for not accepting responsibility for losing the Congress for the rest of us.
Those of you .. more than one.
You also said that we had the opportunity to turn the tide in the [Hispanic] voting block. Well, if they had become Republicans, what tide would there be to be turned? Or is it that you made a Freudian slip and you really realize that when they voted for Bush they voted for the man, not the party?
You yourself pointed out that in the ’04 election the Hispanic vote in the GOP had increased and as I said we had the opportunity to ride Bush’s coattails. My turn the tide was not a Freudian slip it was a reference we had not yet secured the majority of that voter block. This election could have done it and helped us in ’08 to keep Hillary out of the Whitehouse.
If you are trying to say that a 14% loss in Hispanic votes that were cast for Bush in the current local elections is symbolic of the loss for Republican candidates, I am going to split my sides laughing.
I suggest you have a good hardy laugh now because believe me beginning in January when the Dems take control of both houses there will be slim to none opportunities for laughing!
Mel Martinez is a bad choice on a number of points: his part in S.B. 2611, his low rating with the Border Patrol,
Get over it already. It’s clear the appointment is temporary and is intended to signal to the Hispanic voter that the RNC recognizes they were detrimental to the outcome of the election. Do you really think that the administration doesn’t understand they will need a full time RNC Chairman for ’08?
BTW, I don’t really care how the Border Patrol Association rates Martinez. Last time I check he was a Florida Senator and the borders of Florida were being protected by the US Coast Guard. Unless of course they are concerned that he’s too weak on keeping those crazy Georgians and Alabamians out of Florida.
Yes, I realize that Hispanics in Texas are the fastest growing segment. We are now a minority-majority state. But the segment of Hispanics that are growing in my beloved state are illegals.
Remind me again how the fence-first was intended to address that issue? Keep ‘em from going home? Oh, yeah, that’s right .. ICE is gonna round them all up and deport them before they have a chance to multiply.
Quit blaming those of us who believe in the rule of law for the lost elections. When voting, immigration was way down on the list of important things to voters this year. But then, there are those of you that have to blame someone.
There you go again, insinuating that I don’t believe in the rule of law. I said if a temporary worker program had been INCLUDED in the border security bill that DIDN’T include a pathway to citizenship we could have held the Hispanic vote. There were several contributing factors, but the one factor we didn’t have to loose was the Hispanic voter. There has been so much analysis of the individual races now, that there is no doubt the Hispanic vote was a deal breaker. Blame? No. Accountability? Yes. It should be a lesson learned but it doesn’t appear that it is being learned.
Why do I get the feeling you probably live in Austin?
You would be wrong about that but I get the feeling there’s an insult in there somewhere. 😉
LndaNTexas,
Reitre05 is a lost cause. He is the perfect example of why Reps lost Congress and whether he gets it or not is irrelevant. The Fence Only crowd is, thankfully, out of power. And all their insults and frustrations and rationalizations are simply their way of dealing with th e fact they do not have a seat at the table deciding where to take this country. The point they miss is the will remain in the political wilderness as long as the remain in denial. So what? They are only punishing themselves. Bush Conservatives have had it with the Anti-Bush Republicans and will never give them the support they require to win elections.
That is a cold hard fact of reality. They have no credibility. Just like Buchanan has no hope of ever winning the party nomination for President, the Fence Only crowd has no hope of ever rising to positions of influence – ever again. People forget that when they say “my way or the highway”, and we send them onto the highway, that is a one way road to nowhere. You just get their really, really fast.
Never again. They had their chance and they blew it. Think we want Dan Quayle back? Think Dems will nominate Kerry again? Think conservatives will ever entertain the Fence Only crowd again? I only asked Retire05 if he could support the Guest Worker program so he would, himself, determine whether he was going to be in the lost cause category. It is a simple test. If they will not adapt, they will not evolve.
AJ, lost cause? Why do you feel the need to insult me when I have not stooped to insulting you?
I have asked you question after question about the detriments of amnesty (and yes, that is what you are advocating) and you refuse to answer. Instead, I get more insults.
This, IMO, makes you less than honorable. But it does make you pigheaded. Your way or the highway mentality. You refuse to discuss the issues I have posed, you direct your response to me by addressing someone else’s post so that you can, once again, insult me.
Because I do not agree with Bush on immigration does not mean that I am anti-Bush. What it does mean is that I am an independent thinker who does not march lock step to any mantra.
I could stop posting here but you would count that as a coup and think that you have won the argument. You, by your silence on my questions, have won nothing, have not proven your argument for amnesty and have confirmed that you are not an independent thinker, just a dependent follower of those who disagree with the President on one issue.
Tell me, AJ, did your city ever managed to move out all those poor illegal migrants that were violating your city rental codes? Or did you just decide that having 20 people in a 2 bedroom apartment is none of your business?
One other thing, AJ, you asked me if I would support a guest worker program. Yes or no. I made it very clear that it was a gray question and deserved a grey answer. Yes, and no. But that was not good enough for you. You wanted a one word answer. I either supported a guest worker program for those all ready here illegally or I could not possible support the guest worker program.
Again, I SUPPORT A GUEST WORKER PROGRAM FOR THOSE WHO ENTER OUR NATION LEGALLY.
Now, where is all that compromise you are always spouting about? Or is it just more of the “my way or the highway” from you?
LNDANTEXAS, yes the Coast Guard patrols our waterway. Not just in Florida but in Texas, Mississippi, Louisiana, Georgia and ever other coastal state. But the Border Patrol does not just operate in the states that border Mexico. They also function in the above states as well as those that border Canada. And please, don’t show your ignorance by indicating that Alabamians are being kept out of Florida by Border Patrol. The BP does not patrol state lines.
No, Hispanics, on a local level, did not vote Republican in 04, only on a nation level. So you, once again, show you have no grasp of the Hispanic vote. Since there was no presidential election, we really did not lose what we never had in the first place. In 04, Hispanics, on a local level, voted Democrat, just as they have always traditionally done.
I am a fence first proponent. Stop the leak in the boat before you worry about how you are going to get to shore.
There are those of you who would like to blame the losses in the past election on immigration. That simply is not true. It was due to a number of things, one being that traditionally, the party in control loses seats during a mid term election. And the bottom line? We did not lose as badly as we could have.
Perhaps you and AJ would like to explain to me, using your theories, why Kyl won in Arizona? And why did all those inititives on the ballot stopping benefits to illegals win?
The reason I asked about Austin is because you sound like an Austin Republican. Not an insult. I don’t have to resort to insults. It was just an observation.
Retire05,
I made very clear your refusal to support the guest worker program landed you in the Fence Only crowd and now irrelevant. This issue is not debatle anymore. We don’t need any more help from the Fence Only crowd in losing ground and elections. Thanks – but no thanks.
BTW, it is not an insult to say your position will never get my support. Sorry, but that is just a statement of my position and how I see the Fence Only crowd. You folks need to deal with your new found irrelevancy. All or nothing on Guest Worker program? Nothing then.
AJ, please, tell me why you insist on saying that I am a “fence only” proponent when I have repeatedly told you that I am “fence first”. Is that if you admit that there are other aspects to immigration reform that you might feel you are losing ground?
I believe in a fence. Fences make good neighbors. They also allow control over who does and who does not enter your property.
Yes, I believe in a guest worker program. I think that we should allow those we need to enter legally and work on a permit for a certain length of time. Then they should return to their native country. If during the time they are guest workers, they want to apply for citizenship, with proper documentation and background checks, they should be allowed to do so.
Yes, I believe in immigration. Immigration should be for the purpose of benefit to the host nation, not to the immigrant.
No, I don’t think that illegals should go unpunished when they steal someone’s social security number, as they have mine. Along with my credit card number.
No, I don’t think illegals should be rewarded simply because they managed to stay in the U.S., without being deported, long enough to get amnesty.
If I decide to pitch a tent and live in your back yard, would you not have a problem with that?
So please, drop the “fence only” b/s. It is old. And see if you can find your way to answering some of my questions. I can only think that you know the answers are not what you “amnesty under any other name” proponents want to accept.
Retire,
Because you don’t back a guest worker program that assimilates all the folks here already. Your distinction is meaningless and the positions you espouse damage conservative causes at the expense of a few hardliners. 60-75% of the country are against your positions. You can include me in that majority.
AJ, thank you for your answer. And so much for your “compromise”. I understand now. I must agree to allow all those who have entered our nation illegally to remain here, give them a guest worker visa and accept that you think that is the will of the people. Funny, it seems the whole state of Arizona disagrees with you. You, AJ, are the hardliner. You prove that with your refusal to answer my questions or to debate the issue. Your way or the highway. I fully understand. And since I believe you are for stem cell research, I can then accept the fact that you believe in killing human embryos for research, as well. Because the argument is really black and white, isn’t it? You are either for stem cell research allowing the killing of embryos or you are against stem cell research and not the killing of embryos.
Arizona election results:
No bail for illegal immigrants: 78% for – 22% against
English as state language: 74.1 for – 25.9 against
Limited education services for illegal immigrants: 71.5% for – 28.5 against
John Kyl (an enforcement first proponent) won by 150,000 votes with three other candidates splitting the vote against Kyl.
Arizona is a heavily Republican state. But then, I guess you will not accept that many Republicans, who back our president on all other issues, do not agree with him on immigration. With your recent posts, it seems that this is just short of treason in your opinion.
You don’t want compromise, AJ. You want your way. You want your opinion imposed on those of us who pay the highest cost for illegal immigration. I understand. Not living in a border state (and don’t tell me how many illegals you have in your state, you can’t hold a candle to Texas, New Mexico and Arizona), I fully understand that illegal immigration is the problem relegated to the southwestern states and really has little impact on you. How many illegal children is in your kid’s school? 5%? 10%? But then, I am sure that when your school taxes triple to cover the cost of 50+% illegals in your schools, you will have no problem with that.
I do not agree with everything George Bush has done. That is the beauty of being an American, AJ. I don’t have to. I voted for Bush because I thought he would be fiscally responsible. He was not. But he was better than Gore. I campaigned hard for him again in 04. Not because of his fiscal responsibility but because I knew he understands the threat that Muslim radicals pose. I knew he would be tough on terrorism and would do everything he could to protect our nation from another attack.
Do you agree with everything your wife says? Or do you threaten to leave her if she doesn’t agree with you? That is what you want. Total agreement. No argument. No other side of the coin. No understanding how illegal immigration affects the rest of the nation beside you little corner of it.
You say you are not a Republican. Perhaps your Democratic ways are just too hard to throw off. I have no idea. But you are no conservative when it comes to illegal immigration and at least be truthful and admit that. Perhaps then we can move on to other issues that we do agree on. But blind allegiance to any president (or any politician for that matter) will not be one of them.
RetireO5,, what do you think of what they did in Hazelton, Pa. I think other cities are beginning to do the same thing. One in Tx, one in Ga. I think I’ve heard of some others. They did the story on 60 minutes tonight. Very interesting.
Strata says the Buchananan & “fence only” crowd has no chance of ever becoming pivotal in politics again. By this I suppose he means the “fence only” and “get tough on employers” symbiotic crowd too. But he might be surprised at the kind of parties that will develop with enough deterioration of the kind his milquetoast strata-gy will
facilitate. For instruction I reccommend obtaining a quick history of the BNP/ British National Party in England, which was once written out of polite UK politics.