Author Topic: The Republican Party Explained  (Read 3178 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Libertas

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 63641
  • Alea iacta est! Libertatem aut mori!
Re: The Republican Party Explained
« Reply #40 on: August 09, 2013, 02:41:56 PM »
"...has no positon on the issue..."

Pure unadulterated bullsh*t!

Don't know this clown, but he is obviously a gutless wretch.

No position!

 ::gaah::

Pull up a chair Trap, crack a cold Shiner, lite up a fine puro...and flip these clownboxers off! 

"Feed My Head" - Dio

Hiding in a corner
Waiting for the storm
Maybe they'll forget about me
Avoid connection
Still they say you always surrender

All the smiling faces
Promising the sun
Another way of breaking you down

All is lost
Hope is dead
Feed my mind
Fill my head

Hope is gone
The spell's been said
Fill my mind
Feed my head

Ah
Waiting for my number
To climb upon the cross
Maybe they'll forget about me
Must avoid detection
But they say you'll still go down

Safe in dreams
Away from where they are
Let me be nowhere
Just another star

Safe in night
The shadows cloak their eyes
Take me to nowhere
Where everybody flies
Oh!

All is lost
Hope is dead
Feed my mind
Fill my head

Hope is gone
The spell's been said
Fill my mind
Feed my head

All is lost
Hope is dead
Feed my mind
Fill my head

Hope is gone
The spell's been said
Fill my mind
Feed my head

All is lost
Hope is dead
Feed my mind
Fill my head

Hope is gone
The spell's been said
Fill my mind
Feed my head

All is lost
Hope is dead
Feed my mind
Fill my head
« Last Edit: August 09, 2013, 02:45:16 PM by Libertas »
We are now where The Founders were when they faced despotism.

Offline Glock32

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 8747
  • Get some!
Re: The Republican Party Explained
« Reply #41 on: August 09, 2013, 03:03:48 PM »
I sometimes still have trouble trying to figure out what their motives are. Unleashing the tidal wave of Mexican colonization means the Democrats will never again be challenged for supremacy at the federal level. So why would Republicans go along with their own undoing?

Is it so they can be seen as significant? As transformative? So they can be feted by the DC and media establishment for the remainder of their own political lives, and who cares about anything after that? Or are they really so stupid as to believe they will reap political rewards from the Shake & Bake overnight citizens? That the only real consequence of amnesty will be more Sanchez and less Smith in the phone books?
"The Fourth Estate is less honorable than the First Profession."

- Yours Truly

Offline LadyVirginia

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 5168
  • Mt. Vernon painting by Francis Jukes
Re: The Republican Party Explained
« Reply #42 on: August 09, 2013, 07:12:55 PM »
from Ed Meese 2006:
Quote
President Reagan set out to correct the loss of control at our borders. Border security and enforcement of immigration laws would be greatly strengthened—in particular, through sanctions against employers who hired illegal immigrants. If jobs were the attraction for illegal immigrants, then cutting off that option was crucial.

He also agreed with the legislation in adjusting the status of immigrants—even if they had entered illegally—who were law-abiding long-term residents, many of whom had children in the United States. Illegal immigrants who could establish that they had resided in America continuously for five years would be granted temporary resident status, which could be upgraded to permanent residency after 18 months and, after another five years, to citizenship. It wasn’t automatic. They had to pay application fees, learn to speak English, understand American civics, pass a medical exam and register for military selective service. Those with convictions for a felony or three misdemeanors were ineligible.

If this sounds familiar, it’s because these are pretty much the same provisions included in the Comprehensive Reform Act of 2006, which its supporters claim is not amnesty. In the end, slight differences in process do not change the overriding fact that the 1986 law and the recent Senate legislation both include an amnesty. The difference is that President Reagan called it for what it was.

Lesson of 1986

The lesson from the 1986 experience is that such an amnesty did not solve the problem. There was extensive document fraud, and the number of people applying for amnesty far exceeded projections. And there was a failure of political will to enforce new laws against employers. After a brief slowdown, illegal immigration returned to high levels and continued unabated, forming the nucleus of today’s large population of illegal aliens.

So here we are, 20 years later, having much the same debate and being offered much the same deal.

What would President Reagan do? For one thing, he would not repeat the mistakes of the past
link

Rubio in 2009:
Quote
But in 2009, Rubio wasn’t a fan of amnesty, criticizing the 1986 Simpson-Mazoli Act that President Ronald Reagan signed into law.

In an article in the Nov. 17, 2009 edition of The Palm Beach Post, George Bennett wrote about a Rubio appearance at a Martin County (Fla.) Republican Women, Federated meeting in Stuart, Fla. in which Rubio criticized Reagan’s 1986 effort.

“In 1986 Ronald Reagan granted amnesty to 3 million people,” Rubio said. “You know what happened, in addition to becoming 11 million a decade later? There were people trying to enter the country legally, who had done the paperwork, who were here legally, who were going through the process, who claimed, all of a sudden, ‘No, no, no, no, I’m illegal.’ Because it was easier to do the amnesty program than it was to do the legal process.”

Rubio told the group that amnesty would send the wrong message to those wanting to enter the United States.

“If you grant amnesty, the message that you’re sending is that if you come in this country and stay here long enough, we will let you stay,” he said. “And no one will ever come through the legal process if you do that.”

At the time, Rubio insisted that sealing the border was a prerequisite in dealing with the illegal immigrants in the country, a position he held during his 2010 bid for U.S. Senate, but has since evolved on.

 
“Only after you deal with illegal immigration in a serious way — seal the border and the visa problem — can you then create a legal immigration system that works. That still leaves you with 11 million people that are here illegally,” Rubio said.

“I think he did it for the right reasons, but I think it ended up working the wrong way,” he added, according to the Post report.
link

I remember Reagan's amnesty act.  Knew it was bad then and would make things worse.  I hate I was right.
"And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor."

Offline Libertas

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 63641
  • Alea iacta est! Libertatem aut mori!
Re: The Republican Party Explained
« Reply #43 on: August 10, 2013, 09:21:33 AM »
Yes, I remember it too, and the Dem's are a lot more devious and disingenuous now than they were then and they were very devious and disingenuous then...they knew then that the sanctuary movement and Latino community organizers would ensure more illegals would be brought in, that the pol's they supported and funded and sent to DC would ensure any immigration legislation had more loopholes and unenforceable provisions in it to render even the most stringent anti-illegal bill would be impotent and that the MFM would work to demonize any such attempts as racist, sexists, anti-family and unfair.

They always win on this issue, everybody else always lose.  I really don't care if it is their rank ignorance in believing they can peel off a few supporters from the influx or if they are openly progressive in their intent...the fact is the GOP is flat-out useless as an opposition party and in no way at all represents a conservative party interested in restoring Founding Principles.

It's been over for a while folks...this insanity is merely the final confirmation for those still foolishly clinging to hope.
We are now where The Founders were when they faced despotism.

Offline trapeze

  • Administrator
  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 6367
  • Hippies smell bad. Go away, hippie.
Re: The Republican Party Explained
« Reply #44 on: August 10, 2013, 10:44:21 AM »
Speaking of those who foolishly cling to hope, Ann Coulter says that any Republican who votes for amnesty should be voted out of office. Let's just say that I am totally unimpressed with Coulter's opinion on at least two levels. First, she has been the big time supporter of Christie who favors both DumbassCare and amnesty (not to mention gun control) so if she has suddenly got religion on these two issues her credibility is pretty thin. Second, she must still be under the impression that the Republican party can be salvaged. It can't. Sometimes you just have to face facts and walk away...cut your losses. This is one of those times. The party is dead and any attempts to revive and/or reanimate the corpse are a total waste of time and resources.

In a doomsday scenario, hippies will be among the first casualties. So not everything about doomsday will be bad.

Offline Glock32

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 8747
  • Get some!
Re: The Republican Party Explained
« Reply #45 on: August 10, 2013, 11:55:09 AM »
The big problem is, conservatives should have been more strident decades ago. A big middle finger to the Republican Party 40 years ago might have been early enough to allow the short term benefit to the Democrats come and go while there was still something salvageable left. Doing it now isn't so much punishing a hapless GOP, it's the painful resignation that the country is finally lost. And it is.

We might have been able to restore Founding principles, but for decades the nominal opposition party had nothing to say but variations of "come on now, this isn't the hill to die on, there's bigger fish to fry" ad nauseam. Even recently, we were told that about certain issues because the debt ceiling coming up in a few months time, that was the real battle. That is to say, that was the real battle for them to also immediately surrender on.

Bunch of decrepit old fossils, with their atomic white dentures, artificial tans. Scum. All of them. I want to hear their death rattle at the end of a rope, all of them.
"The Fourth Estate is less honorable than the First Profession."

- Yours Truly

Offline Libertas

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 63641
  • Alea iacta est! Libertatem aut mori!
Re: The Republican Party Explained
« Reply #46 on: August 11, 2013, 07:27:44 PM »
Yeah, that bus left the station decades ago Ann...this is the only one left to the GOP -  ::bus::
We are now where The Founders were when they faced despotism.