Thread: Voting choices??

It seems that MOST of the democrats vote in favor of amnesty--but AGAINST the Iraq war. MOST of the Republicans vote for the war and for the Mexican trucks. Some vote for amnesty as well. So here is my question: Do we have a list of Republicans or Democrats who are AGAINST AMNESTY, AGAINST THE MEXICANS TRUCKS HAVING ACCESS TO OUR ROADS, AND AGAINST THE WAR???

It seems that Ron Paul falls in this limited category; but are there any others who will be running for Congress in 2008? We really need to focus on the ones who can do us some good as well as point out those we need to get rid of.

For example, we might give all in the House and Senate (as well as presidential candidates) a kind of "rating."
1= against amnesty, the trucks, chain migration, auomatic citizenship for babies born to illegals, for the fence, for such things as social security match letters and punishing the illegal employers; against the war.
2=all of the above except that they support the war
3=some of the above
4=for amnesty etc., against the fence, against the war.

Or maybe each category could carry a number of points. I am thinking this kind of scorecard should be in a category by itself so we can stay updated. Most of what we share is great, but it's the kind of actions that are all over the country. Somehow, we need to pull all this together so that we can see ourselves as a kind of laser beam that focuses on what is most important--and what actions we can take to change the future at election time.

Tom Tancredo has an excellent record against illegal invasion and has credible view on the War in Iraq.
http://www.teamtancredo.org/tancredo_issues_index.asp

Iraq
America's noble sacrifice has purchased Iraqis a precious opportunity for democratic change; it is now up to them to ensure success. Setting the President's November benchmark for shifting control as an actual timetable for disengagement will let regional powers and Iraqi factions cooperate to forge a new balance of power.

Duncan Hunter has an excellent record against illegal invasion and has a respectable view on foreign policy. I do not think we are within our capabilities in Iraq with our borders wide open here!
http://www.gohunter08.com/inner.asp?z=4

Foreign Policy
20. Major foreign policy objectives and philosophy:
I believe in peace through strength. I believe in a policy that supports U.S. interests by spreading freedom within the limits of U.S. capability. I also believe in ending the one-way street on trade.
21. Advancement of human rights and religious freedom:
The greatest protection of human rights in this decade has been the overthrow of the Taliban in Afghanistan and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein in Iraq. Religious freedom is part and parcel of any free society the U.S. stands up.
22. The nation of Israel and the needed steps in the Middle East:
As House Armed Services Chairman, I recognize Israel as America’s most important ally in the Middle East region. As a result, I strongly support Israel’s right to exist and efforts to defend itself and I have consistently voted in favor of providing federal funding for Israel’s defense systems, including missile defense.
I also strongly support U.S. efforts to establish free societies in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Ron Paul has a credible view on the illegal invasion, maybe some issues over lapped others, and his view on the War in Iraq is all Patriotic.
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/

War and Foreign Policy
The war in Iraq was sold to us with false information. The area is more dangerous now than when we entered it. We destroyed a regime hated by our direct enemies, the jihadists, and created thousands of new recruits for them...

Ben Nelson has a credible record on the illegal invasion, like with Ron Paul some issues may overlap, and apparently does not have a campaign website.

Mitt Romney is difficult to assess on how he would resolve the illegal invasion problem although he does speak out against illegals. I could not find out anything about the War in Iraq at his website however he does discuss Jihadist. Michael Savage is trying to get Romney on his radio show and ask the questions we want to know...
http://www.mittromney.com/Issue-Watc...g_the_jihadist

Thanks for your helpful response. I could vote for any you have mentioned here, but I would still like to see alipac have a central place where we can post information about our senators and representatives in some form easy to grab on to. Maybe someone could come up with a chart that would have names listed in the order of those most of us would support (from most valued to least valued!). Then the issues could be listed across the top starting with immigration issues, NAFTA support issues, Iraq War issues. (I tried to insert a chart here, but it would not cooperate!!) This sort of chart could mark in red those running for office that we want most.

DJ,

Numbers USA has what they call an "Immigration report card" on all government officials. Check it out.

At least that'll take care of the immigration part of your quest.

Thanks, Realbsball. I'll look at it. I am also in Southern California, so you are feeling my pain, I'm sure!

DJ wrote:

Do we have a list of Republicans or Democrats who are AGAINST AMNESTY, AGAINST THE MEXICANS TRUCKS HAVING ACCESS TO OUR ROADS, AND AGAINST THE WAR???

It seems that Ron Paul falls in this limited category; but are there any others who will be running for Congress in 2008? We really need to focus on the ones who can do us some good as well as point out those we need to get rid of.

I know most on here won't agree with me, but I honestly believe, under the right circumstances, Ron Paul would support a limited amnesty. It's the gut feeling I've received from from reading his numerous interviews, statements, and voting record. It's also no secret that, unlike Hunter & Tancredo, he's less than adamant in his support of a border fence.

Hunter and Tancredo have come out and said they want ALL illegals to go home (attrition through enforcement) or be sent home (deported). Their voting record fully supports that position too.

While Paul may be a great candidate for conservatives and liberals against the war, I'm of the opinion he is not the best choice on the border security and illegal immigration issue. Sorry, but that's the way I see it.

curious as during the first debate he said flatly..

" I AM ABSOLUTELY OPPOSED TO AMNESTY. IF YOU SUBSIDIZE SOMETHING YOU GET MORE OF IT.." -- Ron Paul

That gut feeling is like Chertoff having his gut feeling about a terrorist attack.

Tancredo and Hunter will be out in a few months for lack of funds. That is just the way of it. I personally like Tancredo. I think him and hunter should stay in as long as possible so this illegal immigration issue comes to the for...

but they will drop.

You MUST Support RON PAUL... Plain and simple. His word is his bond. ANY OTHER CANDIDATE will see that border WIDE OPEN.

Ron Paul is your only choice for not only illegal immigration, but America's Sovereignty. Many people here consider Illegal immigration "seperate" from many other issues plaguing us.. many of them are wrapped together..

this war on terror, the NAU, open borders --- all connected. DR. RON PAUL has the cure for all of them, and they are the cure that will fix america. Plain and simple.

Originally Posted by MW

I know most on here won't agree with me, but I honestly believe, under the right circumstances, Ron Paul would support a limited amnesty.

Oh no MW, I would agree with that statement. If I am hearing Paul correctly, we just need to end welfare and other social services -- and we could have amnesty. Its his only stumbling block -- as with most libertarians. I don't think he wants to crack down on employers who have repeatedly violated the law. He said, "We need laborers, and I would support a generous worker program." That is, given we have a "truly free-market economy." That just doesn't cut it for me. If we end welfare, most of the invaders will stay.....Its not like because they lose the hand-outs they will be like, "Thats it, I'm going back to Mexico to make 1/10th the wage I make here." Paul sees it strictly as an economic issue. Their only problem is draining social services -- take that out, and he is fine with it. Think Bush's policy of "Matching willing employers with willing employees." The problem extends WELL beyond the draining of social services. The problem lies primarily with those who employ illegals, and that should be our primary focus. I don't hear him talking about that -- it would "inhibit the free-market." If Paul gets his way -- the invasion continues.

To the OP's question -- well, Paul does fit mostly with what you are asking for. He DID vot against the war. Against amnesty in its current form, and definitely against the Mexican trucks -- against NAFTA big time. Although Tancredo has a reasonable position on the war now. He doesn't want to stay there forever like Bush. And he is awesome on immigration, the trucks, NAFTA/free trade etc.

The only other guy who comes to mind that fits the OP's criteria is Byron Dorgan -- a DEMOCRAT Dorgan is against the war (like virtually all Dems, although I'm not sure about his original vote). He is against amnesty, and railed against the plan on the senate floor. He sponsored the bill to kill the funding for the Mexican truck program, recently wrote a book attacking outsourcing. He's a big-time FAIR trader. He's on Lou's show periodically, and is quoted in Lou's book..........Also, it might interest you to know that he chaired the committee investigating the Bush plan to fly the Bin Laden family out of the nation right after 9-11. Very comendable.

**Update on Dorgan. He actually voted for the war, and for additional funding. But says he favors a "change of strategy" -- he favors efforts for redeployment. I guess I assumed Dorgan was against the war simply because he's a Dem....Byron has to be one of the most interesting Democrats in our government.

Dorgan and Hunter seem to have a lot in common. Hunter sponsored the House amendment to end funding for the Mexican trucks. He's also a huge supporter of "fair trade" and we all know his stand on border security and illegal immigration. Furthermore, he has said repeatedly that he wants to bring our manufacturing jobs back home.

Besides the fact that Tancredo is not a war time military veteran, he and Hunter are almost lockstep on most issues - two peas in a pod.

Hunter is, and continues to be, my choice for President of the United States. Tancredo is my second choice.