Impeach Bush for not protecting our borders!

Published on March 11, 2005 By COL Gene In Politics

Nightly, Lou Dobbs documents the failure of President Bush to fulfill his most basic responsibility which is to safeguard the United States. 3 ½ years after 9/11, President Bush claims we are short 10,000 border guards and thousands more INS agents to deal with the illegal aliens within our country. At the very same time he is acknowledging the lack of resources to enforce our immigration laws to protect this country, his new budget fails to ask for the money necessary to provide the needed agents. Of the 10,000 border agents President Bush indicates we need, he has requested funding for 210 in his next budget.

Congress indited Bill Clinton for lying under oath about having sex with Monica Lewinsky and ignores the fact that the President HAS NOT AND IS NOT enforcing the immigration laws of the United States. The proof of the president’s failure to safeguard our country are the 3 million illegal aliens that crossed our borders last year. The proof are the 14 million illegal aliens that exist within the interior of our country. Any one of those 14 million illegal aliens could have brought a nuclear weapon or other WMD into this country to kill Americans. Do we have to wait for a mushroom cloud over one of our cities befor the president provides the necessary resources to safeguard the borders of the United States?

It is time for action! Congress should bring a bill of impeachment against George W. Bush for failing to safeguard the United States by not enforcing our immigration laws and his failure to request the resources necessary to protect our borders. If we do not hold the president responsible to fulfill his most basic function, we are neglecting our responsibilities. We have the money for tax cuts to people making hundreds of thousands and millions of dollars each year but do not have the money to safeguard the lives of Americans.

Comments (Page 2)

COL Gene

on Mar 11, 2005

The problem is far greater now and 9/11 had not taken place when Clinton was in office. I too did not believe we would be attacked. However, now that we know different, why is the president , after 9/11, not protectiung our borders? There is no Homeland Security without border security and port security. That is all the responsibility of the President.

Rightwinger

on Mar 11, 2005

I too like the Rightwinger idea. You should send it to Bush. He is the Commander-in-Chief.

Wow...I'm honored.

I...don't think the Dems would let it happen, though, do you? Too much invested in the whole....foreign opinion thing. Wouldn't want them to think badly of us, now would we?

COL Gene

on Mar 11, 2005

I don't believe the president needs the support of congress to redeploy our military. You forget, I am a Moderate Republican.

As to your comment about the lack of military manpower, the problem began with Bush 41 when Dick Cheney prepared the blue print to draw down the military (Peace Dividend). Clinton continued and increased the reductions started by Bush 41. When Geoprge W. ran in 2000, he campaigned on the fact the Army was too small. He took office, increased the demands on the military and did nothing during his first term to solve the problem he identified in 2000! Sounds like our lack of military power falls on Bush 41, Clinton and Bush 43.

Rightwinger

on Mar 11, 2005

I agree with and see your point. Granted, I'm no one's expert on the budget, so my perceptions may be a little naieve, but perhaps there's "too many pigs for the tits"?
The military takes a huge chunk of the federal budget now, and rightly so. The "army we went to war with" was the one left over Clinton's 8 years of budget slashing and redistribution of funds. We have to redirect a lot of spending toward defense and intelligence, now, to improve our defense forces.
If that can be done, there's a lot to be said for the idea that, if we can keep the enemy over there, or stay ahead of them with improved intelligence, the urgent and pressing need for more border guards would be lessened.

bakerstreet

on Mar 11, 2005

"I wouldn't be throwing the "Biased, one-trick pony" title around if i were you Baker. From what i can tell (granted i haven't read all your articles, but quite a few of them)it Comes off as a tad hypocritical!

When was the last time YOU wrote anything anti-dubya? Hmmmmmmmmmmmm?"

I tend to agree with Bush, and in the areas I don't, I normally don't have any better ideas. Col. Gene doesn't need ideas, since just differing with Bush is the point.

Feel free to compare my blog with Col. Gene's in terms of diverse subject matter. It's blind optimism to see Col. Gene as anything but an anti-Bush bot.

"What would you like to do about the total lack of enforcement of our laws and protecting our border? "

Anything that could be done to really protect the border would be stonewalled by Democrats as being too costly or infringing on the rights of those who cross it legitimately. Feel free to look back at recent efforts to "secure" the border. ANything that endangers the lives of those ILLEGITIMATELY crossing the border is considered inhumane. Hell, there are people in D.C. that want us to put up water-stations for the people sneaking in...

"You won't think impeachment is wrong if a terrorist creates another 9/11 or worse and has come across our unprotected border."

I would? Odd, I have actually been to both borders, Col. Gene. It's insane to think that you could put up some sort of impenetrable wall between these two nations. Even if you could, you still have thousands of miles of coastline that drug smugglers penetrate daily.

If you think the border can be secured, give me a historical precedent of a nation that couldn't have been entered by a guy with a pack full of explosives. Given that the most isolationist nations in the world have people defecting to and from them all the time, I tend to think you can't.

You are plenty smart enough to know this. I don't laugh off your posts because I think you aren't intelligent, on the contrary. I see you post stuff that I KNOW you yourself could knock full of holes if you were asked to swap sides for the purpose of objective debate.

COL Gene

on Mar 11, 2005

With the use of technology and manpower a great deal to counter terrorists comming over the border especially if they are bringing things other then themselves into our country, is possible. Today we take pictures of the border but do not have the man power to act. You all ignore my point. Bush has identified the need for 10,000 more border personnel. Why is he not requesting the resources to fill the need he has identified?

Rightwinger

on Mar 11, 2005

Why is he not requesting the resources to fill the need he has identified?

Perhaps he will at some point in the not-too-ditant future....he did make the effort to pointit out, after all. It may be on the agenda. Who knows?

bakerstreet

on Mar 11, 2005

"Identified the need" isn't specific enough. Please cite the text of where he promised to have created 10,000 border personel positions by now.

We aren't ignoring your point, you just don't seem to have a solid one. You are either saying that he should be impeached because he lied, or because he should be doing something else to make the border less porous and is making a criminal decision not to.

You don't give us the claims he made in context, so we can't judge the "lie".

You don't propose anything that would have a reasonable expectation of clearing congress that would do anything about it, so you can't really show purposeful malpheasance. If the answer is so patently obvious, speak up and idea, THAT HAS CREDIBLE CHANCES OF PASSING CONGRESS.

You ignore the fact that you are calling for the impeachment of a President with no proof. If you want serious debate, make a serious case.

COL Gene

on Mar 11, 2005

Given his budget for 2006 it won't happen before 2007. I hope the terrorists will wait!

bakerstreet

on Mar 11, 2005

Given that we have like 9,850 border patrol on the southern border, and less than 1,000 on the northern, I find it difficult to believe that Bush promised to basically double the size of the border patrol instantly. If he did, it was an empty promise that he couldn't keep, since such budgetary matters are checked by Congressional approval.

I think if you are going to make a case for impeachment, it might help to know what he promised.

Eastern Diamondback

on Mar 11, 2005

Given his budget for 2006 it won't happen before 2007. I hope the terrorists will wait!

I agree with you, COL Gene, that Bush is irresponsible with his neglect of the Mexican border. Now since it seems to have arisen such passion within you, I urge you, in the meantime, to do your part:

The Minuteman Project
Civil Homeland Defense

Offer your services. I spent a couple days near the border in March 2001 with volunteers from Ranch Rescue. They'd especially appreciate people with military backgrounds.

COL Gene

on Mar 11, 2005

President Bush said he planned 10,000 guards at 2,000 per year just before the budget was released. He included money for 210. There have been members of congress and officials from the border patrol talk about the need especially on the Lou Dobbs Show>

bakerstreet

on Mar 11, 2005

What speech? Where was the speech given? What were his exact words? You are offering proof for an impeachment, aren't you? Lou Dobbs is hearsay. You can't enter evidence of what Lou Dobbs says Bush said.

Let's see the lie.

COL Gene

on Mar 11, 2005

BakerStreet

The Bush 10,000 guard source. Go to Google and search Border Guards

I found a story by Michael Hedges, Houston Chrinicle of Feb 9, 2005 that confirms the 10,000 guards and the fact Bush scrapped his own plan
There are other stories I am sure but that should io for now.
When ever you can not refute an issue you question the sorce. That is a trick Bush uses. Whan people offer facts that do not reflect well on him or his policies, he or his staff attacks the source to divert attention from the fact he has failed to do his job.

COL Gene

on Mar 11, 2005

Eastern Diamondback

I would most likely do just that if I lived anyware near the border.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!