- Joined
- Jul 23, 2009
- Messages
- 3,357
- Reaction score
- 986
- Location
- Alabama
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
If Bush said that, he was wrong. It is nothing to do with isolationism.
Ingraham: Last November President Bush remarked that the Tea Party is good for the country. But why did he attack a key priority for many Tea Partiers, namely, getting our borders under control and preventing mass amnesty for illegal immigrants?
Bush: What's interesting about our country, if you study history, is that there are some 'isms' that occasionally pop up -- pop up. One is isolationism and its evil twin protectionism and its evil triplet nativism. So if you study the '20s, for example, there was -- there was an American first policy that said who cares what happens in Europe?...And there was an immigration policy that I think during this period argued we had too many Jews and too many Italians; therefore we should have no immigrants. And my point is that we've been through this kind of period of isolationism, protectionism and Nativism. I'm a little concerned that we may be going through the same period."
Just to show that I'm not talking out of my ass.
George Bush says Tea Party suffers from "Nativism" | Crooks and Liars
and no, it's not isolationism.
Which do you favor....Americans by a 2-1 margin prefer border control over Amnesty
Voters Put Border Control Ahead of Amnesty by 2-1 Margin - Rasmussen Reports™
I want strict border control and nothing even remotely resembling amnesty for anyone, ever. You break our most basic laws, you don't deserve to be here, period.
Amnesty. Make getting a visa easier and easier to immigrate into the country and get them in the tax payer system...
Plus most immigrants have a "right of return".
No to amnesty. I was all for it in the '80's, when Reagan granted amnesty to 2 million aliens in the USA. The result was an immediate surge of illegal crossings at an unprecedented level. Now there are over 20 million+ here, and the economic cost is enormous, around 20 Billion annually in California alone.
My thing is this: Nearly every country on the planet has immigration laws and secures their borders. America has immigration laws. Why the hell aren't we enforcing them? (I know why, but if I go into that this will turn into a tl;dr borefest) Why is America considered the bad guy for trying to secure its borders, just like the rest of the world? Besides the fact that we do a piss-poor job of it, and the little matter that there are 8,000 freaking miles of border to secure.
Uh-uh, no more amnesty. I want the borders secured, illegals who are found deported and every business that employs illegals fined until the cost is 100 times greater than the exploitation of cheap labor would save. There's no excuse for employers not to know their employees immigration status. There's a free .gov website that any employer can access that will instantly detect false green card and social security numbers.
This is what I would call treason. You are aligning yourself with the interests of foreigners over those of the US and over the interests of America's net tax-paying class. You want to burden that class with an even greater number of people that they have to subsidize.
Having a redistribution debate which is focused only on the interests of American citizens is one type of debate but to purposely agitate to exacerbate that debate by aligning yourself with the interests of foreigners is really crossing the line.
Im betting you see it before the election...he needs the votes.Totally agree! BTW, you know I love Obama but if he does not win in this next election? He is gonna write and grant amnesty for anybody illegal here on his way out.. Watch and see.
This is what I would call treason. You are aligning yourself with the interests of foreigners over those of the US and over the interests of America's net tax-paying class.
Thats some seriously funny stuff right there! YES...indeed...THAT is why they are sneaking into the country...not for under the table jobs and to send moeny back to their families in mejico...but for the awesome SHOPPING we have here. :lamoDo you prefer Border Control or Amnesty for illegals
neither
border control should only be a mechanism for sorting out terrorists
otherwise, let in all comers
we want them to spend their money herethat helps the economy and partially offsets the balance of trade deficit
This is a false choice.Which do you favor....Americans by a 2-1 margin prefer border control over Amnesty
Voters Put Border Control Ahead of Amnesty by 2-1 Margin - Rasmussen Reports™
This is a false choice.
If we have a closed border, Mexicans will get here anyway and be 'stuck' here unable to return to Mexico. We should open the border and monitor who comes here.
Thats some seriously funny stuff right there! YES...indeed...THAT is why they are sneaking into the country...not for under the table jobs and to send moeny back to their families in mejico...but for the awesome SHOPPING we have here. :lamo
Come on Bubba...you are killing me here. Those wealthy foreigners...THEY are the ones sneaking into this country? :lamogo back and read the whole post, mack
but there are certainly wealthy foreigners who might want to live in the USA without needing to also work here
we should want them to come and spend their money
just not expect to earn a living or enjoy any government benefits
Inforce the laws on gthe books anf they will go back home and stop trying to turn America into the crap hole they left.
Anyone who wants to give them Ammesty is Anti-American in my book, and that includes Obama.
Which do you favor....Americans by a 2-1 margin prefer border control over Amnesty
Voters Put Border Control Ahead of Amnesty by 2-1 Margin - Rasmussen Reports™
Lets start with just enforcing spelling rules and go from there.
Well...then call me unAmerican...but I think it is pure stupidity to think you can create an environment rife FOR abuse, profit FROM said abuse, then be all shocked and amazed THAT it is abused. I also think there is no way you can round up 20-30 million illegals, that if you tried it you would face crippling costs (more so than now), and that if you managed to pull it off you would have full scale race riots and other legal problems. You have to be smarter than the problem to come up with a real solution.Inforce the laws on gthe books anf they will go back home and stop trying to turn America into the crap hole they left.
Anyone who wants to give them Ammesty is Anti-American in my book, and that includes Obama.
Well...then call me unAmerican...but I think it is pure stupidity to think you can create an environment rife FOR abuse, profit FROM said abuse, then be all shocked and amazed THAT it is abused. I also think there is no way you can round up 20-30 million illegals, that if you tried it you would face crippling costs (more so than now), and that if you managed to pull it off you would have full scale race riots and other legal problems. You have to be smarter than the problem to come up with a real solution.
Now...if we can find a way to ship 20-30 million of our deadbeats to the socialist utopia that is mejico...then we would REALLY be on to something.
I absolutely agree the laws need to be changed regarding the hiring of illegals. But what you are essentially saying is "your honor...we opened the gates, windows and doors, made a bed for them, offered them a seat at our table, asked them to mow our lawn, clean our house, and watch our children and paid them off the books (and a HELL of a lot less than minimum wage) and let them live with us for 30 years. We just dont think its right and they should have to go back home now."You do not need to do another operation Wetback or Mexican Repatriation. All you have to you do is enforce and enact various laws that make it hard has hell for illegals to live and make it hard as hell for someone to aid and house illegals. Oklahoma has done it, so has Arizona and other states are also in the process of doing the same thing.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?