So what would be the difference between Jeb Bush and Hillary - Part 1 - Granite Grok

So what would be the difference between Jeb Bush and Hillary – Part 1

Jeb Bush – part of the Bush Dynasty.  It certainly seems that the Establishment GOP is rolling out the carpet for him; here in NH, he’s about to be squired around the State on Friday by Congressman Frank Guinta and former and failed NH GOP Chair Fergus “The Fringe” Cullen.  The problem for me is, how is he going to be any different than a Hillary campaign.

Issue #1 – Illegal Immigration.  Jeb wants to reward them (and so does Hillary).  We just went THROUGH a Republican debacle in DC after they all campaigned against Obama’s illegal immigration Executive Order overreach – and what did we end up for a result (ignoring their words which turned out to be as hollow as a dead tree)?

In this clip (starting at 3:54), he’s for it:  Its not a felony, it’s an act of love, drivers licenses for illegals, in state tuition price for illegals, and a pathway to citizenship

So what’s the bottomline? “Heck, I don’t care if you broke the law to get here, have we got stuff I want to give you”!  And so, like Hillary, like Frank Guinta, like Kelly Ayotte, he shows the contempt for The Rule of Law – he’s put emotion first.  He wants us to ignore that it is a Principle and not to be steathily circumvented for “love” or political expediency.  We who oppose giving illegals these things are not xenophobic and nor are we racist.  We could care less where you come from or what color you are.  You broke the law, plain and simple.  Jeb Bush just told us he doesn’t care.

You broke the law.  Too much, we see too many people willing to put emotions and do-gooderness above The Rule of Law – and then excoriate the rest of us for KNOWING that without The Rule of Law, bad things will happen.  Problem is, we are seeing this Principle being ignored, especially in Obama’s Administration in all kinds of unconstitutional Executive Orders including Amnesty.  Here we see Jeb Bush basically agreeing with Obama on this point – it doesn’t matter.  Not my opinion, his words say this.

“I talk about, first and foremost, we need to enforce the borders. A great country needs to enforce the borders for national security purposes, for public health purposes and The Rule of Law.

Notice how he so EASILY passes off The Rule of Law as being the reason to reward lawbreakers even as tells us that we should ignore that same Rule of Law.!  Here we go again with the redefinition of our language simply for an ideological reason.

So in this, how is he different than Obama or Hillary?

(H/T: Liberty Unyielding)

>