article this morning in SF chronicle....both are delcaring the ag business a disaster because crops are rotting on the fields. seems the heat against illegals is reducing the workforce to pick produce. CA senators are claiming, if something isnt done CA loses its farms....oh really?...anyone really think all CA farms will shut down if we dont allow illegals into the country?.....more like, boxer & feinstein do not want to take the heat when the price of produce goes up as a result of submitting to illegals and the latino community.
i will gladly pay a lot more for produce and landscaping...and everything else, if it goes into the pockets of americans,,,not sent to mexico.
here's the message to you both-either start addressing the needs of americans, and not illegals,,,or you will be gone.
anyone disagree?
2006-09-30 12:51:29 · 5 answers · asked by bush-deathgrip 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
They both need to go, they both voted against making English our official language, and they both voted to make things easier for the illegals at every turn they voted against America and it's people. They care more for the illegals and what President Fox thinks than the American people and the people they represent. And all most all Dem's voted against the language bill, it didn't pass.
2006-09-30 13:02:01 · answer #1 · answered by hexa 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't like either of them. They're both nuts! I do have a problem with two assumptions you made, though.
One, not all illegals are Mexicans. There are plenty of other illegals who, I think, are even more dangerous because we are focusing all our time on illegal Mexicans. All illegals should not be allowed!
Second, not all Latinos support illegals. My husband is Puerto Rican, from the island, as is his parents and brothers. None of them supports illegal anything! It bothers me that Latino organizations are up in arms over the country being upset over the illegal situation. Most of the Latinos in those organizations were either born citizens or came here legally. All Latinos are not the same and illegality of any form should not be supported in anyway.
2006-09-30 12:57:51 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Can you explain why they both voted for the fence to be built?
Are you so sure you've got all your facts right? Are you sure you aren't tilting the real story to push your agenda.
Neither will be defeated anytime soon in an election. Both are very popular within the state of California. Although both are Democrats Feinstein tends to be very moderate and often votes for Republican sponsored bills. Boxer tends to be more liberal but because large sections of California are liberal she'll keep her job.
2006-09-30 13:19:13 · answer #3 · answered by Doc Watson 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You made my day.... Thank you.
But, No, they will be re-elected. What a shame.
California is now a bunch of commie pinko freaks.
In order to get re-elected, Arnie had to go along with the Democrat Creeps on some freaky things.
(I'm not saying that it was wrong. To stand up for Right and get defeated isn't good politics.)
Rush says that why Boxer is always mad is "because her thong is so tight, that it cuts way up inside her". (Probably WAY Up.)
2006-09-30 13:00:33 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
How about Siegfield and Roy??
2006-09-30 15:54:57 · answer #5 · answered by Bawney 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋