Howard Dean made a speech last week in, of all places, Oakland California.
"In 2006 it's immigrants. That's what their strategy is on the Republican side: divide people, scapegoat them, set them aside, point the finger at them," Dean said. "Well, that may be good for the Republican Party, but it's bad for America, and we're not going to do that."
What the hell are you talking about Howard ? Democrats have built a new party and made careers out of scapegoating people, pointing fingers, and using some sort of minority for political purposes for decades. In fact, that's their whole basis for existence and grab at power. If it wasn't for the guise of protecting minorities, they'd have to rename themselves to "communist" party.
It's amazing how the Democrats have flip-flopped on this issue. Back in 2002, 2004, when Bush was throwing out the amnisty issue, dems were quick to condemn him and now they are quick to change sides when it's politically expedient.
Are they for amnisty for illegals to show solidarity with the protestrs ? Dick Gephardt planned for amnesty in 2002, or was he just pandering for the hispanic vote? Are they for earned legalization? Liberman, Kerry, and McCain clammored for earned legalization in 2004. Are they foran expanded green card program like bush proposed in the past?
Or is Dean just off his rocker not even realizing the President doesn't support the House illegal immigration bill to which he is so desperately trying to tie him ?
"In 2006 it's immigrants. That's what their strategy is on the Republican side: divide people, scapegoat them, set them aside, point the finger at them," Dean said. "Well, that may be good for the Republican Party, but it's bad for America, and we're not going to do that."
What the hell are you talking about Howard ? Democrats have built a new party and made careers out of scapegoating people, pointing fingers, and using some sort of minority for political purposes for decades. In fact, that's their whole basis for existence and grab at power. If it wasn't for the guise of protecting minorities, they'd have to rename themselves to "communist" party.
It's amazing how the Democrats have flip-flopped on this issue. Back in 2002, 2004, when Bush was throwing out the amnisty issue, dems were quick to condemn him and now they are quick to change sides when it's politically expedient.
Are they for amnisty for illegals to show solidarity with the protestrs ? Dick Gephardt planned for amnesty in 2002, or was he just pandering for the hispanic vote? Are they for earned legalization? Liberman, Kerry, and McCain clammored for earned legalization in 2004. Are they foran expanded green card program like bush proposed in the past?
Or is Dean just off his rocker not even realizing the President doesn't support the House illegal immigration bill to which he is so desperately trying to tie him ?
