Monday, June 25, 2007

A question: if the fact that a majority of people are opposed to Bush's amnesty plan is cited as a reason for it to go down in flames, ought not the same happen to Bush's plans for Iraq, as he has just as little public support (if not less) for what he is doing there as there is for his amnesty plan for illegal immigrants?

Why should conservatives be willing to give Bush and his kool-aid drinkers a pass to ignore the public on one issue and not the other? If 'listening to the public' is so important for a President, then Bush ought to scrap both his Iraq mis-adventure and his let's-not-call-it-an amnesty plan.

On the other hand, if we want Presidents to do what they think is right, then Bush ought to be given room both to keep wasting American lives in Iraq as well as to grant 12 million illegals legal status and stick taxpayers with the multi-hundred billion dollar tab of supporting all of them.

For me, I want Bush to scrap both of his silly ideas... but not because the 'public' objects, but because they are silly ideas. See, I am opposed to silly ideas, whether the public or the President likes them or not... and I am not going to cite as a reason opposing a particular measure if I'm not willing to have that same reason thrown back at me on another issue.