tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post114746506443481343..comments2008-07-16T15:30:59.431-07:00Victoria Taft, 5pm-8pm KPAM 860noreply@blogger.comBlogger47125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-1148512361329767702006-05-24T16:12:00.000-07:002006-05-24T16:12:00.000-07:002006-05-24T16:12:00.000-07:00

suomynona: I am not sure just what you mean by re-assigned. If you mean that border patrol personnel might be reassigned to purely military duty, and potentially sent to combat zones such as Iraq, that could be blocked.Yes, that's what I was referring to.Enlistment in the military creates a contract between the service person and the military. Employment by the border patrol creates no

Khaldunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05630208709233788206noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-1148454833980938012006-05-24T00:13:00.000-07:002006-05-24T00:13:00.000-07:002006-05-24T00:13:00.000-07:00

suomynona: I am not sure just what you mean by re-assigned. If you mean that border patrol personnel might be reassigned to purely military duty, and potentially sent to combat zones such as Iraq, that could be blocked. Enlistment in the military creates a contract between the service person and the military. Employment by the border patrol creates no relationship with the military, so that

westsidedavidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11799712270908208452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-1148372105112936212006-05-23T01:15:00.000-07:002006-05-23T01:15:00.000-07:002006-05-23T01:15:00.000-07:00

I wouldn't comment if I didn't care...I ponder, because I think you could fill the need for border guard without any draft, IF there was assurance that reassignment would not be in the cards.

Khaldunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05630208709233788206noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-1148363580884458112006-05-22T22:53:00.000-07:002006-05-22T22:53:00.000-07:002006-05-22T22:53:00.000-07:00

Backwards - what would keep drafted "border security" from being re-assigned during their service?Since we are only talking proposals and preferences, what says they would be reassigned to Military? Or, do you even care?

Lewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06422249750094117697noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-1148312823761770122006-05-22T08:47:00.000-07:002006-05-22T08:47:00.000-07:002006-05-22T08:47:00.000-07:00

Bassackwards, will you ever grow up?Now, go sleep it off like a good little liberal.Hmm, I expected a good rebuttal from you lew. Instead you are just avoiding some simple explanation for your statements.I guess we know, when you expect others to do one thing but not do the same yourself, that you are just not "lock-step."Now that I've got my "lowered self" reaction out of the way...what would

Khaldunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05630208709233788206noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-1148285482409954472006-05-22T01:11:00.000-07:002006-05-22T01:11:00.000-07:002006-05-22T01:11:00.000-07:00

David, you actually don't disagree with me at all. Although I haven't fully expressed my thoughts on drafting for the Border Patrol, I include at least Military style basic training and AIT for the Border Patrol. Personally, I don't oppose a Military Draft either. But I can imagine the outcry from the anti-war left if one ever was reinsituted.At least on this issue, we agree more than we disagree.

Lewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06422249750094117697noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-1148284798591291072006-05-22T00:59:00.000-07:002006-05-22T00:59:00.000-07:002006-05-22T00:59:00.000-07:00

lew:I disagree with you only in one regard. I think military training would be a prerequisite to border patrol work. Beyond this, two (or four) years of compulsory service would do many of today's young men wonders in terms of teaching them discipline, self-esteem, commitment, sense of purpose, espirt d' corps, and a host of other values that will serve both them and the nation very well. (

westsidedavidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11799712270908208452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-1148283598333367012006-05-22T00:39:00.000-07:002006-05-22T00:39:00.000-07:002006-05-22T00:39:00.000-07:00

Bassackwards, will you ever grow up? Now, go sleep it off like a good little liberal.

Lewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06422249750094117697noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-1148282116390211592006-05-22T00:15:00.000-07:002006-05-22T00:15:00.000-07:002006-05-22T00:15:00.000-07:00

Hey everyone, lew wants you to ignore that he is a hypocrite...so go ahead, please ignore that he is a hypocrite.Still "yawning" there lew?

Khaldunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05630208709233788206noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-1148280987327727732006-05-21T23:56:00.000-07:002006-05-21T23:56:00.000-07:002006-05-21T23:56:00.000-07:00

David, that's Politics for you. What you hear today and what people, of both parties, end up doing this November possibly will be two different things.Of course Democrat strategy will be to try to link any Republican to the immigration issue. But, don't be too surprised that it either fails or bites them in the butt. Personally, as I have said before, I wish both parties would get off of their

Lewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06422249750094117697noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-1148280632037034872006-05-21T23:50:00.000-07:002006-05-21T23:50:00.000-07:002006-05-21T23:50:00.000-07:00

Backwards -> Don't try to just sweep me under the table here lew...answer the question.*YAWN*

Lewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06422249750094117697noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-1148276872855771812006-05-21T22:47:00.000-07:002006-05-21T22:47:00.000-07:002006-05-21T22:47:00.000-07:00

lew:George Bush remains the most significant Republican office holder, and the leader of the nation. Yet over the past several days, I have heard many Republicans railing against his immigration proposals. More than one congressional Republican has vowed to never let a "guest worker" program get out of the congressional conference committee, and in Oregon, the Democrats are already gearing up

westsidedavidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11799712270908208452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-1148276021375761852006-05-21T22:33:00.000-07:002006-05-21T22:33:00.000-07:002006-05-21T22:33:00.000-07:00

So, everytime one of us "lefties" questions or makes claims to not support something this administration has done or decided to do, we are "treasonous."But when you do it, that makes you what? Not "lock-step?"Don't try to just sweep me under the table here lew...answer the question.

Khaldunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05630208709233788206noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-1148273679789406172006-05-21T21:54:00.000-07:002006-05-21T21:54:00.000-07:002006-05-21T21:54:00.000-07:00

Interpret any way you wish, Bakwards. You will anyways.

Lewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06422249750094117697noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-1148266138141568772006-05-21T19:48:00.000-07:002006-05-21T19:48:00.000-07:002006-05-21T19:48:00.000-07:00

"Because we aren't "lock-step" people who have to blindly follow and adhere to whatever officials would tell us."I see, so it's only "lefties" that you hold to this standard...?

Khaldunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05630208709233788206noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-1148254931566160252006-05-21T16:42:00.000-07:002006-05-21T16:42:00.000-07:002006-05-21T16:42:00.000-07:00

WSD - How can the rank and file of the Republican Party continue to support George Bush if this is his response to this hot button issue?Because we aren't "lock-step" people who have to blindly follow and adhere to whatever officials would tell us. Still, don't let disagreements with the administration fool you into thinking there is no longer any support. Bush cannot be reelected, no matter what

Lewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06422249750094117697noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-1148137853938886872006-05-20T08:10:00.000-07:002006-05-20T08:10:00.000-07:002006-05-20T08:10:00.000-07:00

Part of the posting that Victoria Taft started this thread with said that President Bush's speech was less about immigration than about the collapse of his support among his core supporters. I think there is considerable validity to that comment. Thursday evening on his cable television show, Larry King devoted a full hour to the topic, and I believe all of the guests that he had on had

westsidedavidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11799712270908208452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-1148102136098436372006-05-19T22:15:00.000-07:002006-05-19T22:15:00.000-07:002006-05-19T22:15:00.000-07:00

It seems everyone plays a fantastic Monday morning quarterback. Blame Clinton, blame Bush. How about we blame the folks that attacked us?That said, "reactions" seem to be what should be discussed. Clinton was in no position to react to 911 as commander in chief, so the criticisms must end there. No one can tell the future, not matter how good or bad the intelligence and the outcome based on

Khaldunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05630208709233788206noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-1148024106504558642006-05-19T00:35:00.000-07:002006-05-19T00:35:00.000-07:002006-05-19T00:35:00.000-07:00

David, the immigration problem transcends Bush, it is a dual party problem in that neither is or has addressed it seriously.Both parties have failed to secure our borders or propose any serious legislation to secure our borders.Democrat, Republican, none have made a move until recently to tackle this and so far, I am not overly impressed with the performance of either party.For example, look at

Lewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06422249750094117697noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-1148023221968129032006-05-19T00:20:00.000-07:002006-05-19T00:20:00.000-07:002006-05-19T00:20:00.000-07:00

Gentlemen, and Victoria:What Clinton did or did not do over a decade ago, and how much time Bush spends on vacation seem beside the point. For the past several years, the media have been pounding the drums on the immigration issue, but it is only now, when the matter has approached a crisis, that President Bush has seemed to pay any attention. And consider his response: he seems firmly aligned

westsidedavidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11799712270908208452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-1148015051150183432006-05-18T22:04:00.000-07:002006-05-18T22:04:00.000-07:002006-05-18T22:04:00.000-07:00

Moderate, spare me.Your hatred of Bush fogs your brain. You really expect anyone to think that simply because 9-11 happened 7 months into Bush's first term it is all his fault. Yet, who among you lefties condemns Clinton for the first WTC attack that happened shortly into his first term?Even the clairvoyant would have a hard time deciphering that 19 terrorists were going to hijack aircraft and

Lewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06422249750094117697noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-1148012887333119002006-05-18T21:28:00.000-07:002006-05-18T21:28:00.000-07:002006-05-18T21:28:00.000-07:00

Clinton's failures are not an excuse for Bush's failures. The attack occurred on his watch.Bush has spent 40% of his Presidency on vacation. He was vacationing when he was sent a document titled, "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S." on August 6, 2001. He relaxed at golf the next day and stayed on vacation for weeks. His 2001 summer vacation went from August 4 to August 31.

ModerateLewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07109139800196125033noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-1147975913826428882006-05-18T11:11:00.000-07:002006-05-18T11:11:00.000-07:002006-05-18T11:11:00.000-07:00

Moderatelew,Finding the perps for the first WTC does not excuse the Clinton administration's failure to respond to every attack in a forcefull manner.Bin Lauden declared war on America and American civilians during the Clinton years in office. Fighting terrorism can not be done using law enforcement, that is what contributed to 3000 deaths on 9/11 and was Clintons method of choice.It was

Kodiakhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17176489183754026207noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-1147973665018590752006-05-18T10:34:00.000-07:002006-05-18T10:34:00.000-07:002006-05-18T10:34:00.000-07:00

And he let the Iraqi chemical mixer go not once but three times where he also 'boogied' back to Baghdad. He supposedly was 'jailed' but has never been found and disappeared into the woodwork. Wow. They also indicted UBL (alleging connections with Iraq btw). They sure showed him, huh?America cannot secure its borders and maintain its national security in the courts. You can look THAT up.

Victoria Tafthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15566635810544426855noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-1147973278524094382006-05-18T10:27:00.000-07:002006-05-18T10:27:00.000-07:002006-05-18T10:27:00.000-07:00

Gee moderatelew what did Clinton do in response to the first WTC bombing in 1993? The perpretrators were arrested, tried, convicted and imprisoned. Look it up.

ModerateLewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07109139800196125033noreply@blogger.com