Question:
NY TIMES Endorses U.S. Senate's Immigration Reform Plan?
Answer:
I hope it's not a kiss of death, because I'm for it too.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/07/opinion/07sun2.html
Robert Scheer on the farther left agrees, talking about, " with friends
like Robert Scheer...who needs enemies/the kiss-of-death."
Anyhow, I tend to rarely agree with the President, but he's being
Presidential, realistic & practical, despite losing his obviously very
much angered Bush-
base loyal followers in the immigration issue conundrum.
Scheer explains the reason for this unusal Bush perspective, and I
agree--he understands this issue unlike the others.
http://www.alternet.org/columnists/story/36379/
re: another NY TIMES edit-bore-all that you'll luv to deplore, diss &
despise, while me & an unusually insightful, responsible, nuanced &
thoughtful Pres generally agree
your favorite radio personalities should be required to put him/her
self in the actual dilemma of our chief Decider: helle vs lesser helle
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/21/opinion/21sun1.html?_r=1&hp&oref=sl...
Funny how they didn't mention enforcing the law at all here.
Maybe that's because they never spent the money on a fence, closed
circuit TV cameras and drones.
Maybe that's because Border Patrol is the lowest paid of all federal
law enforcement agents.
Maybe that's because Border Patrol is always eating at Arbys and not
out in the desert.
Maybe that's because Republicon businessmen want a lot of illegals so
they can force everyone to work unpaid overtime.
Maybe the politicans' monied interests don't WANT to enforce it.
Waste money? Yes!
Enforce the law?
No way!
Enforcement of the law ain't gonna happen until U. S. citizens pull out
the 9' loaded blacksnake whip, aka the First Amendment, and apply it to
politicians' backsides in such a way that the politicians understand
their interests are identical to VOTERS' interests.
But voters need to pop a few politicians on their fat behinds to get
any results. Standing out in the desert doesn't get results.
Otherwise the politicians will say:
"Can't figger out how to build a fence."
"That closed circuit TV guy ripped us off."
"Somehow our Predator crashed in Tubac."
"Manana."
I've lost track of the number of ways I can get traction with this
issue.
The question is "what do you want?"
If you want to help Mexicans -- hey, I'm a touchy feely liberaloon too
-- become prosperous then we need regime change in Mexico City.
Iraqi occupation is an a fortiori argument for annexing Mexico.
Mexicans, after all, don't blow themselves up.
Even more 200 years ago they copied the U. S. Constitution word for
word. This means their only problema is _interpreting_ the
constitution.
Well, last time I checked, we had 2000 "anglo" federal judges who seem
to know how to interpret the constitution for prosperity.
Just make Mexico part of the 9th Circuit.
