His biggest goal, Bush argued, is to reverse a trend toward “decline” by making room for talented guest workers and technology specialists alike.
The theme of the conference was “Why the Future Is Conservative.” Posing the questions to Bush was Rich Lowry, editor of National Review.
Lowry asked “what was wrong” with securing the border first, tightening workplace enforcement and fixing visa programs before moving on to “some form of amnesty” for illegal immigrants and a new skill-based system for legal entry.
“Hey, we’re getting there,” Bush replied, though he said he worries that the definition of secure borders may mean compromising individual liberty.
Jeb worries about the definition of secure borders may mean compromising individual liberty? WTF? That sounds like something Hillary would have barfed out of her mouth. What about the individual liberty of every US citizen that has been affected by these invaders? Ranchers have their lands trampled, live stock killed, families shot or killed by drug runners. Dwindling funds that are denied to US citizens but happily spent on the invaders?
F–k Jeb and the burro he rode in on.
Why is anyone still talking to him?!
Ignore that useless twit and maybe he’ll go away.
Jebster, you’re a loser. That’s why the main stream media is paying polling outfits to find you a winner. You’re not a winner. You’re a loser. Either run as a democrat or get the hell outta here.
My definition of a secure border would be a 500 yard wide minefield.
” As mud.”
–Albert Finney in “Miller’s Crossing”
“… compromising individual liberty.”
This is getting to be the catch phrase (soon to become a joke) that “for the children” was in the eighties.
He lost me right here:
“…he said he worries that the definition of secure borders may mean compromising individual liberty.”
That’s patent bullshit! And notice he didn’t elaborate.
No more Bushes. No more Clintons.
And what RightWinger said.