Wednesday, June 07, 2006

BUSH: It's NOT Amnesty, You Fucking Idiot Citizens!!

Bush is a liar. And he keeps telling lies and deceiving the American public. I've seen both of his news conferences as he makes his bullshit adventure at the border. Apparently Rove told him that saying "Mexicans are here doing the work AMERICANS WON'T DO" wasn't a good lie, it wasn't going over well. So now, he says "Mexicans are doing the work AMERICANS AREN'T DOING." Got that?

Besides insulting those real Republicans who don't want amnesty, he keeps insisting that "IT'S NOT AMNESTY." What a liar? Let's look at the definition for amnesty. Amnesty is defined as 'A general pardon granted by a government.' Now illegal aliens, per our law, are to be deported PERIOD. The Bush/Senate "Dissove America Now" Amnesty Bill grants a pardon for illegal aliens. They are not to be removed. All this other stuff about a fine ($2000) and having to apply with special privileges and rights for citizenship is all noise. This is AMNESTY and Bush can lie and lie and lie. You know you have a liberal in the White House when he lies and insults the American citizen's intelligience.

Again, Bush, announce you are a DemocRAT! Go ahead, you lying Democrat.

REMEMBER THESE ARE THE TRAITORS IN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY and are on the core republican party hit list to get rid of by voting out of office:

BUSH (We can't get rid of him until the next Presidential election.)

The 23 Senate Turncoats:

Bennett (R-UT)
Brownback (R-KS)
Chafee (R-RI)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Craig (R-ID) ..
DeWine (R-OH)
Domenici (R-NM)
Frist (R-TN)
Graham (R-SC)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Lugar (R-IN)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)¬
Murkowski (R-AK)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stevens (R-AK)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)

5 comments:

friendlysaviour said...

Where is GWB's supposed toughnes, where did it evaporate to in the last 2 or 3 years.
Has he been getting wet feet over Iraq, and now Iran?
Is he all talk-talk?
He sounds like he has caught the Tony Blairitis, ...the jaw moves up and down, but only nonsense comes out.

Cubed © said...

BLD,

I'm not kidding around when I say that Bush actually believes in the de facto dissolution of the borders between Canada, the US, and Mexico.

His refusal to secure our borders doesn't represent weakness; it is the penultimate step in his iron-willed desire to create a political-economic-military union of North America, modeled after the European Union. Once the various "regions" (the North American Union, the European Union, etc.) have been created, then the idea is to have all the "regions" become unified in a single world federation.

If you think of it from that point of view, Bush has been pretty darned "tough." He has been absolutely intransigent re: determining who the hell is crossing into our country, where the hell they are after they come in, knowing when the hell it is when they leave - or even if they ever leave - and all this is in the face of growing objections of the electorate (70% by some counts). He has tried everything, from keeping his ambitions a secret, to villifying citizens who oppose his dream.

This free-flow of people is one small part of the process whereby the "unification" is taking place; others include a massive highway and railway transportation system from Mexico to Canada, straight through the U.S. (that was the primary subject of conversation in the meeting between the three leaders in Cancun a few months ago), and plans for a "regional" currency called the "Amero."

If we knuckle under to Bush, our Constitution and everything it subsumes will be sacrificed on the altar of the most ambitious plan for collectivist rule that mankind has ever experienced, with all that THAT subsumes.

We have only one hope: The election for a new president will be in November '08, and Bush's timeline for the creation of a tri-national "region" of unification is 2010.

Go to the blackboard and write 100 times: "It's time for a Third Party."

Tancredo, anybody?

Always On Watch said...

John Warner of VA was once married to Elizabeth Taylor. I don't know why I'm passing on this factoid. Perhaps as a sign of his gullibility?

friendlysaviour said...

cubed,.. what you say is astounding.
Do they feel the power slipping away to the East, and this regionalisation is the the only way they can compete?
Is it just for the bucks, or do they have deeper motivation?
Is the increase in repressive surveilance the way they see is the only possibilty to control this flux of people?
And will the American people let the Constitution slip away without a fight?
So many questions!

Cubed © said...

bld said...

"Do they feel the power slipping away to the East, and this regionalisation is the the only way they can compete?"

From what I understand so far, this is not the case (although certainly Asia is an up and coming economic player); an "Asian bloc" is also part of the plan, as is an "African bloc" etc. As I understand it so far, there will be about ten such "blocs."

"Is it just for the bucks, or do they have deeper motivation?"

It appears there is a "deeper motivation," but it's nothing we haven't seen before.

We've seen the same kind of thinking, for example, among the people who established our government-run school systems. The motives have been basically the same from the German school system of the Reformation, right on up to the system we have today (the German one was the model for ours).

The idea has been that by teaching all children exactly the same thing, social stability would be achieved. The same idea prevailed among the Utopian Socialists, among the Soviets, in the Israeli kibbutzim, and in other collectivist societies, both large and small, that have been attempted throughout history and all around the world (oh - and don't forget the ummah, where unity is maintained by force and under the threat of severe pain).

The idea in every case is that if everyone thinks alike, then everyone will live in peace. The Soviets even thought that by creating a uniform socialist society that it would actually change our genes, producing a uniform socialist people. The geneticist they loved was called Lysenko, and he was the laughing stock of scientists all over the world. Even the Soviet scientists were embarrassed by this guy, and slowly but surely, his "hero status" faded.

The problem is, while we are equal in terms of our rights, and in terms of equal treatment under the law, we are all very different in terms of our talents, our ambitions, our interests, our energy levels, our temperaments, etc. There's NO WAY we can ever "think alike" or live without disagreements or a sense of competition.

We see competition and disagreements even between identical twins, among siblings, and on and on and on in ever larger groups. Molecular cell biologists and geneticists have even discerned that if you take a single cell from your own body, and watch the actions of your own genes (which occur in pairs, one gene on each chromosome of the pair), it is seen that corresponding genes on our chromosomes are competing with one another! Competition is part of our nature.

The thing that these One World maggots don't "get" is that their plan just ain't gonna work. Trying to impose a system like that on human beings is like trying to walk up the down escalator. It is not in our nature to live without competition, especially when a "competition-free" society is forced on us. They don't understand that competition, per se, is not evil, mean, or bad.

Our differences and competitiveness can be channeled into productive directions, from scientific discoveries and product development to athletics, art competitions and even gambling and auctions, but the idea that they can be eliminated is screwy, and very destructive to us.

I've begun to hear rumblings that the European Union is not doing quite as well as the One World crowd had hoped, and that there are fears that greater and greater controls over the population are being exerted in order to maintain the status quo.

This idea for a world-wide collective has been in the works for a long time, minimally since sometime before WWI; the thought has been, that if every country in the world is united under a single government, with a single economy, a single justice system, a single military force etc., there would be no more war.

That is pure nonsense, of course.

"Is the increase in repressive surveilance the way they see is the only possibilty to control this flux of people?

My personal belief is that the surveillance started because of perfectly reasonable concerns, crime, terrorism, etc. But I am sure that if any of us object to the forced imposition of a uniform One World format, that it could be used as a tool for "maintaining order" to "achieve the dream." That may be what we are beginning to see in the European Union.

And will the American people let the Constitution slip away without a fight?

That's my huge, massive, overriding fear. The Constitution itself has been corrupted, and via one Supreme Court decision after the other,the original intent of the Framers has been eroded.

Then there's the truly abhorrent business of the "dumbing down" of our kids in the school system.

Have you ever heard one of our radio/TV talk show hosts, Sean Hannity, do his famous "man in the street" interviews? They are young people, mostly college students, and picked at random for interviewing. More often than not, they can't name the Vice President, find Iraq on the map, locate major cities in the U.S., etc. It's the scariest damned thing I've ever heard.

So many questions!

Yeah...sigh.