Thread: Clarification please

Bootsalinda, we are operating in overdrive right now and for good reason. But we always do our best to allow for differences of opinion.
The people work hard here, very hard, and the main thing we are concerned about is that we do not have to waste any valuable time on anyone who might be here to undermine our cause. We're at a critical point and we're charging full speed ahead. As you know, we need people calling, faxing for free at NumbersUSA and also having a chance to express what they are thinking, noticing what is going on and expressing their ideas. No harm is ever meant to anyone and at the same time we have a right to look out for the people who are here and working so hard as a team.

As for IrishAmerican, if your post was misconstrued of course, please accept our apology, and if you are here to help the senators understand how strongly we oppose this disasterous plan SOME of them have up their sleeves, due to their own selfish reasons, then please let us give you a hearty American "WELCOME" !!!

By the way everyone, one more time here's the NumbersUSA link to send free faxes and get the phone numbers.

http://www.numbersusa.com/hottopic/2454.html

My anger will not go away if the Senators and Congressman sell us out and make 50,000,000 Mexican's LEGAL immigrants.

And neither will ours my friend, I assure you. Btw, it is refreshing to see someone with a more realistic grasp of the numbers we are talking about. If we learned anything from the 1986 amnesty, it was that we should at least triple the estimates mouthed by our "esteemed" leaders. 1 million were estimated then....3.3 million applied.

One thing that was/is hard for me with internet posting is the fact no emotions show, no tone of the voice is evident, no facial expressions.

Sometimes, we don't know if a post is an insult, sarcasm, joke, or can be taken at face value.

First off, I have a love for Ireland and have Irish ancestors. While I have never been there, I am sure I am supposed to spend my last days in a 'wee thatched cottage' with a garden and a few sheep. My daughter & SIL recently spent their honeymoon there.

I, do, have a problem with hypenated Americans and people who put their country of origin ahead of American. So forgive me, if upfront, I was put on guard by that. I realize a lot of people do that - it is just one of those things that kinda gets to me.

Also from the post, it appeared you might be trying to solicit some form of negative reaction to legal immigration - which is not the policy of this board.

The post attempting to explain your position also sounds like you might be trying to get some very strong reactions.

Yes, we all are angry, but I don't think it would do us any good to let that anger get out of hand, especially on a public board like this. The other side would like nothing better than to find one or two comments they can spread all over the media and internet.

We are a little like Caesar's wife in this situation ----

Pat Buchanan?...as is sell-out Pat Buchanan?...okay now whenever somebody makes that statement it is up to them to back it up so here goes...this appeared in his magazine(The American Conservative) prior to the 2004 election

Notice where he says, "The Bush amnesty for illegal aliens has been rejected."

and:
The Constitution Party is the party closest to this magazine in philosophy and policy prescriptions, and while one must respect votes for Michael Peroutka by those who live in Red or Blue states, we cannot counsel such votes in battleground states.

If this isn't a SELL OUT of the issue to blindly procure votes for Bush then I would welcome to hear how you describe it.


2004 Presidential Endorsement of Bush
Coming Home
By Patrick J. Buchanan

In the fall of 2002, the editors of this magazine moved up its launch date to make the conservative case against invading Iraq. Such a war, we warned, on a country that did not attack us, did not threaten us, did not want war with us, and had no role in 9/11, would be “a tragedy and a disaster.” Invade and we inherit our own West Bank of 23 million Iraqis, unite Islam against us, and incite imams from Morocco to Malaysia to preach jihad against America. So we wrote, again and again.

In a 6,000-word article entitled “Whose War?” we warned President Bush that he was “being lured into a trap baited for him by neocons that could cost him his office and cause America to forfeit years of peace won for us by the sacrifices of two generations...”

Everything we predicted has come to pass. Iraq is the worst strategic blunder in our lifetime. And for it, George W. Bush, his War Cabinet, and the neoconservatives who plotted and planned this war for a decade bear full responsibility. Should Bush lose on Nov. 2, it will be because he heeded their siren song—that the world was pining for American Empire; that “Big Government Conservatism” is a political philosophy, not an opportunistic sellout of principle; that free-trade globalism is the path to prosperity, not the serial killer of U.S. manufacturing; that amnesty for illegal aliens is compassionate conservatism, not an abdication of constitutional duty.

Mr. Bush was led up the garden path. And the returns from his mid-life conversion to neoconservatism are now in:

• A guerrilla war in Iraq is dividing and bleeding America with no end in sight. It carries the potential for chaos, civil war, and the dissolution of that country.

• Balkanization of America and the looming bankruptcy of California as poverty and crime rates soar from an annual invasion of indigent illegals is forcing native-born Californians to flee the state for the first time since gold was found at Sutter’s Mill.

• A fiscal deficit of 4 percent of GDP and merchandise trade deficit of 6 percent of GDP have produced a falling dollar, the highest level of foreign indebtedness in U.S. history, and the loss of one of every six manufacturing jobs since Bush took office.

If Bush loses, his conversion to neoconservatism, the Arian heresy of the American Right, will have killed his presidency. Yet, in the contest between Bush and Kerry, I am compelled to endorse the president of the United States. Why? Because, while Bush and Kerry are both wrong on Iraq, Sharon, NAFTA, the WTO, open borders, affirmative action, amnesty, free trade, foreign aid, and Big Government, Bush is right on taxes, judges, sovereignty, and values. Kerry is right on nothing.

The only compelling argument for endorsing Kerry is to punish Bush for Iraq. But why should Kerry be rewarded? He voted to hand Bush a blank check for war. Though he calls Iraq a “colossal” error, “the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time,” he has said he would—even had he known Saddam had no role in 9/11 and no WMD—vote the same way today. This is the Richard Perle position.

Assuredly, a president who plunged us into an unnecessary and ruinous war must be held accountable. And if Bush loses, Iraq will have been his undoing. But a vote for Kerry is more than just a vote to punish Bush. It is a vote to punish America.

For Kerry is a man who came home from Vietnam to slime the soldiers, sailors, Marines, and POWs he left behind as war criminals who engaged in serial atrocities with the full knowledge of their superior officers. His conduct was as treasonous as that of Jane Fonda and disqualifies him from ever being commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces of the United States.

As senator, he voted to undermine the policy of Ronald Reagan that brought us victory in the Cold War. He has voted against almost every weapon in the U.S. arsenal. Though a Catholic who professes to believe life begins at conception, he backs abortion on demand. He has opposed the conservative judges Bush has named to the U.S. appellate courts. His plans for national health insurance and new spending would bankrupt America. He would raise taxes. He is a globalist and a multilateralist who would sign us on to the Kyoto Protocol and International Criminal Court. His stands on Iraq are about as coherent as a self-portrait by Jackson Pollock.

With Kerry as president, William Rehnquist could be succeeded as chief justice by Hillary Clinton. Every associate justice Kerry named would be cut from the same bolt of cloth as Warren, Brennan, Douglas, Blackmun, and Ginsburg. Should Kerry win, the courts will remain a battering ram of social revolution and the conservative drive in Congress to restrict the jurisdiction of all federal courts, including the Supreme Court, will die an early death.

I cannot endorse the candidate of Michael Moore, George Soros, and Barbra Streisand, nor endorse a course of action that would put this political windsurfer into the presidency, no matter how deep our disagreement with the fiscal, foreign, immigration, and trade policies of George W. Bush.

As Barry Goldwater said in 1960, in urging conservatives to set aside their grievances and unite behind the establishment party of Eisenhower, Rockefeller, and Lodge, the Republican Party is our home. It is our only hope. If an authentic conservatism rooted in the values of faith, family, community, and country is ever again to become the guiding light of national policy, it will have to come through a Republican administration.

The Democratic Party of Kerry, Edwards, Clinton & Clinton is a lost cause: secularist, socialist, and statist to the core. What of the third-party candidates? While Ralph Nader is a man of principle and political courage, he is of the populist Left. We are of the Right.

The Constitution Party is the party closest to this magazine in philosophy and policy prescriptions, and while one must respect votes for Michael Peroutka by those who live in Red or Blue states, we cannot counsel such votes in battleground states.

For this election has come down to Bush or Kerry, and on life, guns, judges, taxes, sovereignty, and defense, Bush is far better. Moreover, inside the Republican Party, a rebellion is stirring. Tom Tancredo is leading the battle for defense of our borders. While only a handful of Republicans stood with us against the war in Iraq, many now concede that we were right. As Franklin Foer writes in the New York Times, our America First foreign policy is now being given a second look by a conservative movement disillusioned with neoconservative warmongering and Wilsonian interventionism.

There is a rumbling of dissent inside the GOP to the free-trade fanaticism of the Wall Street Journal that is denuding the nation of manufacturing and alienating Reagan Democrats. The celebrants of outsourcing in the White House have gone into cloister. The Bush amnesty for illegal aliens has been rejected. Prodigal Republicans now understand that their cohabitation with Big Government has brought their country to the brink of ruin and bought them nothing. But if we wish to be involved in the struggle for the soul of the GOP—and we intend to be there—we cannot be AWOL from the battle where the fate of that party is decided.

There is another reason Bush must win. The liberal establishment that marched us into Vietnam evaded punishment for its loss of nerve and failure of will to win—by dumping LBJ, defecting to the children’s crusade to “give peace a chance,” then sabotaging Nixon every step of the way out of Vietnam until they broke his presidency in Watergate. Ensuring America’s defeat, they covered their tracks by denouncing their own war as “Nixon’s War.”

If Kerry wins, leading a party that detests this war, he will be forced to execute an early withdrawal. Should that bring about a debacle, neocons will indict Democrats for losing Iraq. The cakewalk crowd cannot be permitted to get out from under this disaster that easily. They steered Bush into this war and should be made to see it through to the end and to preside over the withdrawal or retreat. Only thus can they be held accountable. Only thus can this neo-Jacobin ideology be discredited in America’s eyes. It is essential for the country and our cause that it be repudiated by the Republican Party formally and finally. The neocons must clean up the mess they have made, themselves, in full public view.

There is a final reason I support George W. Bush. A presidential election is a Hatfield-McCoy thing, a tribal affair. No matter the quarrels inside the family, when the shooting starts, you come home to your own. When the Redcoats approached New Orleans to sunder the Union and Jackson was stacking cotton bales and calling for help from any quarter, the pirate Lafitte wrote to the governor of Louisiana to ask permission to fight alongside his old countrymen. “The Black Sheep wants to come home,” Lafitte pleaded.

It’s time to come home.


http://www.amconmag.com/2004/2004_11_08/cover.html

Originally Posted by IrishAmerican

I just run across this site last night. I was literally thrilled to see so many people who appeared to be anti illegals. I was ready to tell others who I know are tough anti illegals about this site. I read ER’s RAGE and COMPLETELY agreed. I am so mad about these illegals that at times I have trouble sleeping. They are truly an enemy within. I thought finally I had run across people who thought like I did. Then I read the comment from ALIPAC’s president slamming ER for his rage comments and I thought well maybe what I have come across is the politically correct (please don’t call me a racist) anti illegal site. Not the blood and guts Eisenhower “operation wet back” web site that I was hoping for. Eisenhower would not have put a skirt on had he been called a racist. Then I read the title that said this site supports Legal Immigration. Hence my question.

I don’t hate the majority of illegals who come here trying to get an opportunity for a better life but I do DESTEST/HATE the President, Senators, and Congressmen for the American traitors that they are. I DETEST/HATE them for not having the courage and love of this country to defend it.

I am almost as angry at the aphetic sissy white’s who are not screaming at these traitors for letting these illegals in. Our country is literally being destroyed in front of our eyes and they drink their beer beat their chest and watch football.

My anger will not go away if the Senators and Congressman sell us out and make 50,000,000 Mexican's LEGAL immigrants. I will still be against the 50,000,000 Mexican’s being here. Legal or not. Because they will destroy our culture. Their loyalty is to themselves as a race and a country not America or Americans. IMO only an idiot or a traitor thinks different.

I am not in the Sean Hannity’s / Rush L anti illegal sissy conservative campfire girl’s crowd. I am a disciple of Michael Savage, Joseph Farah, Ann Coulter, Michele Malkin and Pat Buchanan.

To the person's who thought they smelled a troll what do you smell now?

Just a recommendation: If you don't want to be misconstrued, it is probably better for you to simply state your position rather than asking leading questions with no context.

Taking your latest commentary into consideration, I think we can safely say that most of the people here are more or less on the same page as you are. No treasonous act of Congress will change these foreign invaders into good Americans. To the extent that they refuse to assimilate and threaten reconquista, they neither are nor will ever be our fellow citizens. The only acceptable solution is to run their sorry arses back across the border. Once that is done we can debate the merits of a temporary guest worker program, with the emphasis being on "temporary guest." Last time I checked, temporary guests don't get to vote in our elections and are expected to abide by the laws and rules set forth for them.

Originally Posted by IrishAmerican

I just run across this site last night. I was literally thrilled to see so many people who appeared to be anti illegals. I was ready to tell others who I know are tough anti illegals about this site. I read ER’s RAGE and COMPLETELY agreed. I am so mad about these illegals that at times I have trouble sleeping. They are truly an enemy within. I thought finally I had run across people who thought like I did. Then I read the comment from ALIPAC’s president slamming ER for his rage comments and I thought well maybe what I have come across is the politically correct (please don’t call me a racist) anti illegal site. Not the blood and guts Eisenhower “operation wet back” web site that I was hoping for. Eisenhower would not have put a skirt on had he been called a racist. Then I read the title that said this site supports Legal Immigration. Hence my question.

I don’t hate the majority of illegals who come here trying to get an opportunity for a better life but I do DESTEST/HATE the President, Senators, and Congressmen for the American traitors that they are. I DETEST/HATE them for not having the courage and love of this country to defend it.

I am almost as angry at the aphetic sissy white’s who are not screaming at these traitors for letting these illegals in. Our country is literally being destroyed in front of our eyes and they drink their beer beat their chest and watch football.

My anger will not go away if the Senators and Congressman sell us out and make 50,000,000 Mexican's LEGAL immigrants. I will still be against the 50,000,000 Mexican’s being here. Legal or not. Because they will destroy our culture. Their loyalty is to themselves as a race and a country not America or Americans. IMO only an idiot or a traitor thinks different.

I am not in the Sean Hannity’s / Rush L anti illegal sissy conservative campfire girl’s crowd. I am a disciple of Michael Savage, Joseph Farah, Ann Coulter, Michele Malkin and Pat Buchanan.

To the person's who thought they smelled a troll what do you smell now?

Just a few things:

First, have you read the ALIPAC Platform?
http://www.alipac.us/modules.php?name=C ... age&pid=14

Secondly, the issue here is about illegal immigration. Not Mexico.

Lastly, you should probably also read our rules:
http://www.alipac.us/ftopict-26071.html

If tomorrow the Senate and Congress voted to allow as many Mexicans who wanted to be here come as LEGAL immigrants would you shut this site down and be satisfied that our legislators have spoken?

Can the Senate and Congress promise that all illegal immigrants will be screened for infectious diseases and that they will pay the same price for services that we legal citizens pay without resorting to welfare?

BTW, a growing number of legal citizens of Ireland feel the same way about illegal immigration as we do and are upset about the growing number of Afghans, etc, that are flooding into their country.

And I'm sure that you realize that we are against illegal immigration regardless of race.

FYI: there's a very large block of ILLEGAL Irish aliens in NY.

JohnB2012

I have read your rules probably a little to fast but I am getting the idea that you think I missed one.

Which one is it?

VOATNOW1

"And I'm sure that you realize that we are against illegal immigration regardless of race."

Do you fear the illegal's from Ireland as much as from Mexico?

90% as much ?

1/8 of 1% as much?

Do they speak English?


Personally 99.99999999999999999 % of my fear of illegal's is those from latin America.

Right now we have around 22,000,000 from latin America and how many from Ireland? 422?

How many anchor babies are from Ireland?

How much TB has come from Ireland?

Having said all that I don't support illegals from anywhere but if we can't get rid of the 22 mil latin illegals I would feel better if we had 22 mil Ireland illegals to balance things out.