1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

[blog-o-sphere] Conservatives debate Bush impeachment over immigration.

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by No Worries, May 15, 2006.

  1. No Worries

    No Worries Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 1999
    Messages:
    30,153
    Likes Received:
    17,091
    Conservatives debate Bush impeachment over immigration
    According to Article II, Section 4, of the United States Constitution:

    The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

    I believe George Bush’s failure to enforce immigration law and stop the foreign invasion, which he has the power and authority to do, warrants impeachment. Because of Bush, illegal invaders are emboldened, demanding that which they have no legal right to obtain.

    While the invasion has caused incalculable physical and economic harm to legal citizens, the president proposes to offer amnesty and allow the harm to continue. To the detriment of those he swore to protect, Bush chooses instead to protect those he has no duty to protect. His actions are in violation of the Constitution.
     
  2. rimrocker

    rimrocker Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 1999
    Messages:
    22,317
    Likes Received:
    8,174
    This, of course, is absurd.

    But no more than Bush sending troops to the border. The border is not significantly different from what it was when he took office, so why now? (Oh yeah, he also cut the Border Patrol funds in the last budget.) This reeks of desperation and incompetence and is designed to make Bush look tough with some photo ops as a bonus.

    What the heck are we doing sending troops to the border when Iraq is such a mess?

    Anyone see a pattern here...


    • Screw up and politicize FEMA to the point that the Defense Department has to take over a civilian responsibility.

      Screw up and politicize the CIA to the point that the Defense Department now makes the major decisions on intelligence.

      Screw up and politicize the border issues so that the Defense Department has to get involved in a civilian responsibility.
     
  3. Saint Louis

    Saint Louis Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 1999
    Messages:
    4,260
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well honk my hooter, so even his own party is turning against him.
     
  4. mc mark

    mc mark Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 1999
    Messages:
    26,195
    Likes Received:
    468
    Bill Pitt has a great take on this whole affaire --

    Humpty-Dumpty Republicans

    By William Rivers Pitt

    I will cut back legal immigration to 250,000 a year and I will defend America's border, if necessary with American troops.

    -Pat Buchanan, 27 October 2000

    George W. Bush will be delivering a big speech tonight on immigration, and will specifically announce the deployment of National Guard troops along the southern border of the United States. The New York Times reported today on the motivation behind this speech, stating that, "White House officials said late last week that they believed the president's address on Monday would be welcomed by voters, who have told pollsters they would like to see tighter control of the borders."

    This, while true, is not the entirety of the story. The main reason for the delivery of this speech, and for the deployment of Guard troops to the Rio Grande, has to do with GOP inside baseball and the looming midterm elections. The powerful Republican coalition between movement conservatives and business conservatives has shown significant signs of fraying lately, and the issue of immigration is at the heart of the matter.

    Before the immigration debate blew up, the GOP coalition was one big (mostly) happy family. The business conservatives - the ones with the money - happily deployed the movement conservatives - the ones with the causes - as their "useful idiots" on the ground. So long as the GOP remained stalwartly against Roe v. Wade, and so long as Bush continued to mouth platitudes about Jesus, the movement conservatives would keep voting Republican, and the business conservatives would get the tax cuts and deregulation they live for. It was a match literally made in heaven, if you believe what you read on GOP direct-mail flyers.

    Underneath the seamless facade, however, was the fault line of immigration. No other subject is as divisive, or as potentially destructive to the GOP coalition, as this. In 1992, Pat Buchanan forced George H. W. Bush to run a far more conservative campaign for president by hammering on the immigration issue, which ultimately contributed to Bush's defeat at the hands of Clinton. In 1996, Buchanan was at it again, beating Dole in New Hampshire and forcing him to spend far more than he could afford. Again, the immigration issue was central to Buchanan's message.

    The divide here is straightforward: The movement conservatives want massive border security, want to deport every illegal immigrant in the country and want to make citizenship harder to obtain. The business conservatives, on the other hand, enjoy having a massive pool of illegal laborers to tap because they can pay those laborers slave wages, avoid having to offer them insurance and thus pad their profits.

    This divide was ripped wide open when two competing bills appeared in Congress recently. The House bill, a truly draconian piece of work offered by Rep. Sensenbrenner, pandered to the movement conservatives. The Senate bill, which allowed for citizenship for illegal immigrants after a long series of hurdles, was more suitable to the business conservatives. The two bills were incompatible from the start and the entire debate collapsed into a blaze of acrimony.

    George W. Bush, as leader of the Republican party, was the inheritor of this mess. Though he owes his political success to the work of the movement conservatives, Bush's heart lies with the businessmen. He voiced support for the Senate immigration bill, and then watched as his favorability numbers among the GOP grassroots dropped like a ruptured duck. A recent New York Times/CBS poll placed his approval rating on the immigration issue at 26%, and for the first time, Republicans appear to be abandoning him.

    It was, strictly speaking, a terrible time for this kind of division to erupt within the GOP ranks. Iraq is a mess, Goss has quit the CIA under terribly suspicious circumstances, the #3 man at CIA just had his house searched, the scandal surrounding Duke Cunningham has reached into the heart of the House Intelligence, Appropriations and Armed Services Committees, Rep. Jerry Lewis of California is the newest name on the list of those being looked at, the Abramoff scandal continues to walk and talk, Karl Rove has reportedly been indicted by Patrick Fitzgerald in the Plame investigation, and it seems that the NSA has been harvesting millions upon millions of telephone calls from Americans to Americans, despite strident denials by Bush administration officials that anything of the sort has been going on.

    And the midterm elections are coming. And a Harris interactive poll has Bush's overall approval rating at 29%. And the approval ratings for this Republican congress make that 29% look tall and mighty by comparison.

    There isn't much Mr. Bush can do about this long laundry list of scandals and catastrophes during his speech tonight; it is all going to have to unspool itself in due course. He can, however, try to pull together the separating spheres of his coalition. By announcing a significant military presence along the southern border, Bush is seeking to mollify the movement conservatives, without whom any attempt at national electoral victory would be a comprehensive waste of time.

    He will also, in all likelihood, voice support for the Senate version of the immigration bill, thus mollifying the business conservatives who write all the checks during campaign time. Somewhere in there, or afterwards, he and his spinners will have to explain how deploying National Guard forces, which are already massively overtaxed because of Iraq, won't weaken our military even further. There will also be the matter of how he plans to pay for this operation, given the ocean of red ink currently flowing through Washington.

    It will be, in the end, one heck of a straddle, and the stakes are tremendously high. If Bush is unable to bring the Republican coalition back together again in time for the midterms, a lot of conservative voters will stay home on election day. The Democrats could conceivably pick up enough seats to regain the majority, and if that happens, the subpoenas will start flying out of Conyers's office faster than one can say, "What did the president know and when did he know it?"

    Reading tea leaves is a dangerous hobby, and nobody knows for sure how all of this is going to shake out. But the malevolently divisive spirit of Pat Buchanan still stalks the highways and back roads of New Hampshire, and the immigration issue he used to snap the campaigns of two consecutive Republican presidential candidates remains as dangerous now as it was in 1992. Can Bush's speech tonight stuff this genie back into the bottle? Watch and see.

    http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/051506Y.shtml
     
  5. rimrocker

    rimrocker Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 1999
    Messages:
    22,317
    Likes Received:
    8,174
    This will be Bush's first address on a domestic issue. That's "first" as in "ever."

    Edit: First ever from the WH. He did talk about stem cells from Crawford.
     
  6. RocketMan Tex

    RocketMan Tex Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 1999
    Messages:
    18,452
    Likes Received:
    116
    Republicans don't need abortion. They eat their young. :D
     
  7. Nolen

    Nolen Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 1999
    Messages:
    2,718
    Likes Received:
    1,261
    Holy cow, tell me you're kidding. :eek:
     
  8. No Worries

    No Worries Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 1999
    Messages:
    30,153
    Likes Received:
    17,091
    Conservative Christians Criticize Republicans
    By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK
    Published: May 15, 2006

    WASHINGTON, May 13 — Some of President Bush's most influential conservative Christian allies are becoming openly critical of the White House and Republicans in Congress, warning that they will withhold their support in the midterm elections unless Congress does more to oppose same-sex marriage, obscenity and abortion.

    "There is a growing feeling among conservatives that the only way to cure the problem is for Republicans to lose the Congressional elections this fall," said Richard Viguerie, a conservative direct-mail pioneer.


    Mr. Viguerie also cited dissatisfaction with government spending, the war in Iraq and the immigration-policy debate, which Mr. Bush is scheduled to address in a televised speech on Monday night.

    "I can't tell you how much anger there is at the Republican leadership," Mr. Viguerie said. "I have never seen anything like it."

    In the last several weeks, Dr. James C. Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family and one of the most influential Christian conservatives, has publicly accused Republican leaders of betraying the social conservatives who helped elect them in 2004. He has also warned in private meetings with about a dozen of the top Republicans in Washington that he may turn critic this fall unless the party delivers on conservative goals.

    And at a meeting in Northern Virginia this weekend of the Council for National Policy, an alliance of the most prominent Christian conservatives, several participants said sentiment toward the White House and Republicans in Congress had deteriorated sharply since the 2004 elections.

    When the group met in the summer of 2004, it resembled a pep rally for Mr. Bush and his allies on Capitol Hill, and one session focused on how to use state initiatives seeking to ban same-sex marriage to help turn out the vote. This year, some participants are complaining that as soon as Mr. Bush was re-elected he stopped expressing his support for a constitutional amendment banning such unions.

    Christian conservative leaders have often threatened in the months before an election to withhold their support for Republicans in an effort to press for their legislative goals. In the 1990's, Dr. Dobson in particular became known for his jeremiads against the Republican party, most notably in the months before the 1998 midterm elections.

    But the complaints this year are especially significant because they underscore how the broad decline in public approval for Mr. Bush and Congressional Republicans is beginning to cut into their core supporters. The threatened defections come just two years after many Christian conservatives — most notably Dr. Dobson — abandoned much of their previous reservations and poured energy into electing Republicans in 2004.

    Dr. Dobson gave his first presidential endorsement to Mr. Bush and held get-out-the-vote rallies that attracted thousands of admirers in states with pivotal Senate races while Focus on the Family and many of its allies helped register voters in conservative churches.

    Republican officials, who were granted anonymity to speak publicly because of the sensitivity of the situation, acknowledged the difficult political climate but said they planned to rally conservatives by underscoring the contrast with Democrats and emphasizing the recent confirmations of two conservatives to the Supreme Court.

    Midterm Congressional elections tend to be won by whichever side can motivate more true believers to vote. Dr. Dobson and other conservatives are renewing their complaints about the Republicans at a time when several recent polls have shown sharp declines in approval among Republicans and conservatives. And compared with other constituencies, evangelical Protestants have historically been suspicious of the worldly business of politics and thus more prone to stay home unless they feel clear moral issues are at stake.

    "When a president is in a reasonably strong position, these kind of leaders don't have a lot of leverage," said Charlie Cook, a nonpartisan political analyst. "But when the president is weak, they tend to have a lot of leverage."

    Dr. Dobson, whose daily radio broadcast has millions of listeners, has already signaled his willingness to criticize Republican leaders. In a recent interview with Fox News on the eve of a visit to the White House, he accused Republicans of "just ignoring those that put them in office."

    Dr. Dobson cited the House's actions on two measures that passed over the objections of social conservatives: a hate-crime bill that extended protections to gay people, and increased support for embryonic stem cell research.

    "There's just very, very little to show for what has happened," Dr. Dobson said, "and I think there's going to be some trouble down the road if they don't get on the ball."


    According to people who were at the meetings or were briefed on them, Dr. Dobson has made the same point more politely in a series of private conversations over the last two weeks in meetings with several top Republicans, including Karl Rove, the president's top political adviser; Senator Bill Frist of Tennessee, the Republican leader; Representative J. Dennis Hastert of Illinois, the House speaker; and Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, the majority leader.

    "People are getting concerned that they have not seen some of these issues move forward that were central to the 2004 election," said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, who attended the meetings.

    Richard D. Land, a top official of the Southern Baptist Convention who has been one of Mr. Bush's most loyal allies, said in an interview last week that many conservatives were upset that Mr. Bush had not talked more about a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage.

    "A lot of people are disappointed that he hasn't put as much effort into the marriage amendment as he did for the prescription drug benefit or Social Security reform," Dr. Land said.


    Republicans say they are taking steps to revive their support among Christian conservatives. On Thursday night, Mr. Rove made the case for the party at a private meeting of the Council for National Policy, participants said.

    In addition to reminding conservatives of the confirmations of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. to the Supreme Court, party strategists say the White House and Senate Republicans are escalating their fights against the Democrats over conservative nominees to lower federal courts, and the Senate is set to revive the same-sex marriage debate next month with a vote on the proposed amendment.

    But it is unclear how much Congressional Republicans will be able to do for social conservatives before the next election.

    No one expects the same-sex marriage amendment to pass this year. Republican leaders have not scheduled votes on a measure to outlaw transporting minors across state lines for abortions, and the proposal faces long odds in the Senate. A measure to increase obscenity fines for broadcasters is opposed by media industry trade groups, pitting Christian conservatives against the business wing of the party, and Congressional leaders have not committed to bring it to a vote.

    Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform and another frequent participant in the Council for National Policy, argued that Christian conservatives were hurting their own cause.

    "If the Republicans do poorly in 2006," Mr. Norquist said, "the establishment will explain that it was because Bush was too conservative, specifically on social and cultural issues."

    Dr. Dobson declined to comment. His spokesman, Paul Hetrick, said that Dr. Dobson was "on a fact-finding trip to see where Republicans are regarding the issues that concern values voters most, especially the Marriage Protection Act," and that it was too soon to tell the results.
     
  9. RocketMan Tex

    RocketMan Tex Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 1999
    Messages:
    18,452
    Likes Received:
    116
    Hell, I ignore stupid people every day....at work and on this BBS! :D
     
  10. JuanValdez

    JuanValdez Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 1999
    Messages:
    34,154
    Likes Received:
    13,568
    Which treason, bribery, high crime or misdemeanor would he have committed? (rhetorically.)
     
  11. No Worries

    No Worries Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 1999
    Messages:
    30,153
    Likes Received:
    17,091
    CBS News : Bush Is Now A Lame Duck
    CBS' Meyer: Forget November, Forget '08; President Is Done

    WASHINGTON, May 17, 2006

    The great impulse of the punditocracy right now is to look at President Bush's swelling problems with the public and his party in the context of the elections coming up in November and then in 2008. Big mistake.

    Short of another disaster on the scale of 9/11, George Bush no longer has the power, credibility or ability to effectively govern for the rest of his term in office. Contrary to what you hear on television, governing remains more important than campaigning. Government is more important than elections — to the extent the two can be differentiated anymore.

    Bush's realm of efficacy will be limited to areas where he can make unilateral decisions, mostly in war and foreign policy. The tax cuts that oozed through Congress last week may well be his last "significant" piece of domestic legislation; I put quotations around significant because they are, in fact temporary. The entire menu of Bush tax tinkering is set to expire in 2010 on someone else's watch, an apt metaphor for this administration.

    The Bush administration is now locked in a triple-hammer hold that would defeat Houdini.

    Public support for this president has evaporated to historic lows. Last week's CBS News/New York Times poll put Bush's approval rating at an embarrassing 31 percent. In this week's ABC News/Washington Post poll, voters trusted Democrats over Republicans to handle all 10 of the major issues the pollsters asked about. That's a new one. The new polling is consistent with a long, relentless erosion of public support.

    Faced with his unpopularity, the Republican Party, quite naturally, is fighting. Senate and House Republicans are in almost open warfare. The House is hawkish and loud on immigration policy, the Senate dovish and conciliatory. House Leader John Boehner called Leader Frist's call for a $100 gas rebate "insulting," a week after Speaker Hastert dissed General Hayden, the president's choice for the CIA. In February, the House shafted both the Senate and the House by killing the Dubai ports deal.

    On the more distant right flank, the party's Christian soldiers have stopped being such good soldiers. They are furious that Bush and the Republican Congress have delivered lip service but no action on issues like gay marriage, immigration, prayer in school, obscenity standards and abortion.

    "I can't tell you how much anger there is at the Republican leadership," Richard Viguerie, a veteran conservative consultant and activist told The New York Times. "I have never seen anything like it."

    An influential pocket of conservatives that doesn't have social issues at the front of its agenda is equally irritated and equally vocal. A fine example is Bruce Bartlett, a conservative economist long influential in the party, who has just written a book called "Impostor" that skewers this administration for its deficits and unwillingness to deal with the great looming crises in entitlement programs.

    The vaunted brilliance and corporate organization of Rove/Bush Inc. has been pretty much blown away in the second term. Rove is fighting off an indictment. From the Dubai deal to the Harriet Miers death march, the White House's political ear seems to be getting tinnier. Porter Goss' appointment to the CIA was a disaster not just politically but substantively. In his second term, the president has never reached outside his core circle for advisers, staff or ideas.

    Will all this lead to a Democratic field day in November? Who knows; and not to be flip, but who cares? Polls show Congress is held in low esteem similar to the president's. Democratic gains would simply lead to continued do-nothingism. And the ramifications for 2008, I believe, are nil. 2008 will be about two people, not the performance of congressional Democrats in 2007 and 2008.

    But what is apparent, is that George Bush has at his disposal none — none — of the tools presidents have used to turn bad situations around: public support, party support or skilled statecraft. He's a lame duck less than two years in to his second term. You are not being governed.


    Dick Meyer is the editorial director of CBSNews.com.
     

Share This Page

  • About ClutchFans

    Since 1996, ClutchFans has been loud and proud covering the Houston Rockets, helping set an industry standard for team fan sites. The forums have been a home for Houston sports fans as well as basketball fanatics around the globe.

  • Support ClutchFans!

    If you find that ClutchFans is a valuable resource for you, please consider becoming a Supporting Member. Supporting Members can upload photos and attachments directly to their posts, customize their user title and more. Gold Supporters see zero ads!


    Upgrade Now