Timothy Crowley wrote:
> On Mar 5, 3:54 am, MURS radios <horsesh...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
> >>>Eat ****, JOSE!
>
> WOW! What logic. What reason! Did you right that yourself?
>
> hint: your desperation is showing. your anti-immigration lost the
> debate - we will move forward with comprehensive immigration and you
> no name freaks will continue to not have a seat at the table. All
> things considered, eat **** is probably your strong suit at this
> point.
There is not now, now has there ever been within recent memory, any
significant "anti immigrant" movement. There is a huge, and growing,
movement in opposition to ILLEGAL ALIENS. We understand the difference,
and
will not ever let you forget the difference between LEGAL Immigrants and
ILLEGAL ALIENS. The first are welcomed, the last are to be convinced to
leave us.
Despite the best efforts of the national-level Republicans to leave us
only
a notorious Amnesty promoter as a candidate, many Republicans are likely
to
vote for Hillary Clinton as "the lesser of all the evils". She's almost
certainly got _my_ vote.
However, we remember that the cir***stances which caused the greatest
useful
changes in US law and public policy were those which occurred with Bill
Clinton as President, when he was confronted with a massive new Republican
majority in both House and Senate. Simply summarized, both parties
realized
that there was no alternative to working together constructively if they
wanted to get anything done. Sadly, the Bush II Administration utterly
squandered the op****tunities of a massive-majority-Republican
Administration
and Congress by pursuing the goals exclusively of one party's ideology,
fomenting discord with the will of the People and polarizing the nation as
never before since the time of the First Civil War.
Astute political observers remember that the greatest progress for the
common good was seen when a semi-Conservative Democrat president was
confronted with a semi-Conservative Republican Congress. Such astute
political observers may in fact promote such a conflict in order to force
compromises. This is where we will get our "change".
Thus, we shall have to put the best possible Democrat in the White House,
and concentrate our efforts on populating the House and Senate with
elected
officials who are utterly opposed to the idea of Amnesty or Failure to
Prosecute Internal Enforcement, and whose outrage at the do-nothing years
of
Bush II is equal to our own, which is to say, "profound and implacable".
--
The immigration debate in this country is, in fact,
no longer a debate. It's a three-ring circus
with a very crowded clown car.
--Beth Slovic
|
