Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Bush noted the negative response to his remarks but said he sees no conflict between enforcing the law and "having some sensitivity to the immigrant experience."
^Another lie. He wasn't talking about the "immigrant experience". He was talking about the illegal alien experience. Legal immigrants are the ones having the "immigrant experience". Illegal aliens are law breakers who either sneaked across a border or overstayed a visa---they have no business being here.
-----------------------
Then there is this nonsense:
The 2012 GOP nominee, Mitt Romney, took a hard line and advocated "self-deportation" for those here illegally. He won just 27 percent of the Hispanic vote, the lowest portion for a Republican in 16 years.
"The worst thing that can happen to a political party is not for voters to decide they don't like you," said Alex Castellanos, a GOP consultant and former Romney adviser. "It's for voters to decide you don't like them, and that's where the Republican Party is right now."
^Hispanic-Americans tend to vote majority democrat. Even when Reagan got the 1986 amnesty passed, republicans still didn't get the majority of the Hispanic vote.
Besides, why would any political party pander to anyone, regardless of race, religion or ethnicity, who wants to reward law breakers?
-----------------------
Republicans need to learn that pandering to those who want to reward law breakers is NOT going to garner them any more votes. Instead, it will only anger their base and cause them to leave the party and go independent.
Sadly, at one time democrats could be counted on to look out for the poor, working and middle classes. They never would have tolerated illegal immigration because they knew how much it hurt their constituents. Plus, at one time, democrats cared about the environment and overpopulation. They used to be aware of the consequences of adding millions more people to our country. What happened to the democrats that they took a 180 degree turn when it came to these subjects?
Bush noted the negative response to his remarks but said he sees no conflict between enforcing the law and "having some sensitivity to the immigrant experience."
^Another lie. He wasn't talking about the "immigrant experience". He was talking about the illegal alien experience. Legal immigrants are the ones having the "immigrant experience". Illegal aliens are law breakers who either sneaked across a border or overstayed a visa---they have no business being here.
-----------------------
Then there is this nonsense:
The 2012 GOP nominee, Mitt Romney, took a hard line and advocated "self-deportation" for those here illegally. He won just 27 percent of the Hispanic vote, the lowest portion for a Republican in 16 years.
"The worst thing that can happen to a political party is not for voters to decide they don't like you," said Alex Castellanos, a GOP consultant and former Romney adviser. "It's for voters to decide you don't like them, and that's where the Republican Party is right now."
^Hispanic-Americans tend to vote majority democrat. Even when Reagan got the 1986 amnesty passed, republicans still didn't get the majority of the Hispanic vote.
Besides, why would any political party pander to anyone, regardless of race, religion or ethnicity, who wants to reward law breakers?
-----------------------
Republicans need to learn that pandering to those who want to reward law breakers is NOT going to garner them any more votes. Instead, it will only anger their base and cause them to leave the party and go independent.
Sadly, at one time democrats could be counted on to look out for the poor, working and middle classes. They never would have tolerated illegal immigration because they knew how much it hurt their constituents. Plus, at one time, democrats cared about the environment and overpopulation. They used to be aware of the consequences of adding millions more people to our country. What happened to the democrats that they took a 180 degree turn when it came to these subjects?
If the Dems wanted to throw a "Hail Mary"; they'd start going AGAINST amnesty for illegal aliens. THAT could hurt the Repubs real bad IMHO.
Mitt Romney took a hard stance on illegal immigration? How so, since he didn't advocate for illegals to be rounded up and deported as they should be. He wanted to remove the incentives for them to remain here so they would leave on their own. That's taking a hard stance? WTH? The lies just keep on coming.
Mitt Romney took a hard stance on illegal immigration? How so, since he didn't advocate for illegals to be rounded up and deported as they should be. He wanted to remove the incentives for them to remain here so they would leave on their own. That's taking a hard stance? WTH? The lies just keep on coming.
It's only a "hard stance" in the eyes of the invasion cheerleaders.
I know. Anything short of an amnesty is taking a hard stance according to them.
And racist, don't forget racist.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
