Thread: Activist Alert: Senator Jeff Sessions Needs Our Help

Thanks to Bostwitz, and everyone else helping out too...

I am so glad Senator Sessions is weighing in big time. It would be wonderful if we could alert the Florida voters about Juan Hernandez, the Mexican first Raza radical, being prominent in McCain's campaign in time for Tuesday. Any chance of phone bombing Florida? I am on top of asking all the campaigns about taking the Sessions survey. McCain must be stopped in Florida.
[/b]

So far...

Obama and Hillary they want me to volunteer and donate but don't have time to read my e-mail.

Huckabee sent me an "out of office reply". Hmmm, past behavior predicts future behavior. He's already checked out. So much like GW. Also, I was also asked to donate.

Dixie

E-mails sent, will call Monday morning. Thanks for posting contact info. Made it real simple.

Passed this info on to my contacts who have pledged to work on it thru Monday.

I've been sending emails and trying to follow up with calls. Hopefully I'll have better luck on the phone Monday.

My emails went out. I doubt we will get the answers we seek. Not because they do not want to answer, but because they are so busy. However, my real answer will be if the candidates answer Senator Sessions survey.
Wonder how many of them will espouse a strong stance, who previously were opposed to almost all illegal aliens obstacles?
My thought there relates to the caustic comment, "I'll build the G**D*** fence if that's what they want," that Senator McCain blessed us with.
I continue to be confused why the fence bothers them. Legal commerce & crossings take place at the port of entry gates. What is happening between those legal entry points that is so socially, economically, or otherwise important, that folks oppose the fence?
How can one say the fence will not work, when there is no fence in place along the entire border to accurately determine its effectiveness? And places where there is a fence, it has been over 90% effective.
Sorry, off topic. It just bugs me!!!

I agree there must be reasonable accommodation for those who depend on the Rio for their livings. I also think there are engineering ways to accomplish that that would probably satisfy the need. Would they be "perfect," of course not. But what in life is?
I agree we need significantly more eyes, ears, arms, legs, & most especially "large guns" along the border. The odds of that happening are even less than the fence. No one will make the commitment & when they do, they send the guys in unarmed.
I do not want to shoot anyone. MOD EDIT But the point is, if we have the presence at the borders, the illegal aliens, drug smugglers, human traffickers, criminals, & terrorists, will think twice before trying. In fact we stand a better chance of catching them & documenting them.
As for backing up our people...... there is no way anyone can call what has happened to Compean, Ramos, Hernandez, & a number of others, is anything other than criminal & a sin! When our court systems are more interested in winning a case by suppressing evidence & information jury would find enlightening prior to reaching their decision, then we need our court system revised. Holding back info on the guy who testified against (and perjured himself in the process) Ramos & Compean, was a dirty deed. Sutton was more interested in a victory, so he could attend Mexican & American consulate parties, drink cocktails & rub elbows nurturing his political future, than he was in actually seeing that justice was done. Suppressing relevant evidence is in itself a crime in my opinion.
It just seems to me there are inventive ways to make access to the Rio possible for those who have reason to do so. There also has to be a way to deal with environmental issues too. What we need are folks willing to discuss reasonable ways to make it work.
No fence along that porous border is hurting millions of Americans, far from that border. No fence is allowing our culture to be polluted with criminals & those who want only to take & not really give back.
Why not a watering canal built by the Army Corp?
If those herds were being rustled, you can bet there would be loud screams for action. So lets build a watering canal, inside the fence. Should those whose acreage is used for the fence still have to pay taxes on it, of course not.
It just seems there are reasonable ways to accomplish this and still secure the nation.
The San Diego fence has been documented at more than 90% effective. The Israeli fence is documented at being better than 90% effective. Give the nation 90% effective at that porous border & Americans would shut up.
The fence will not stop all, but, if it can reduce traffic by better than 80% to 90%, we've got a real winner!

i'll email my texas reps and suggest the canal and tax suggestions, but they're wanting to take more than just the land it'd take to build a fence. they want LOTS of land adjacent to it too. one old lady has sold all but 2 acres of her land. now they want to come in and take half of it. she lives there and doesn't want them to do it. she'll lose, but it's aggravating that something wasn't done before this became an issue. i think ron paul would be willing to put the troops there. he wants to bring the troops home, so what else is there for them to do? the media's treatment of paul is making getting the word out about him nearly impossible though. they mention that guiliani got x% of the vote, but they don't mention that paul has consistently come in above him and came in second in 2 primaries, nevada and louisiana. too many people aren't voting for him for fear of their vote not counting. that's a sure way to make sure he doesn't have a chance. too bad. he'd make a great president.

Hopefully, one of the questions Senator Sessions will ask is if Americans will support putting our troops along the border (s). That would at least let us all know how possible such an action is.
Why the government takes as much land as they do, is beyond my understanding. We all accept, to a point, the taking of land for public good. Now the deal where private enterprise ends up with land taken by the government is unacceptable to me; but for bridges, schools, etc., and so long as the plans are good ones that do not waste taken land, we can all live with it. We may not be happy, but to a degree we understand.
If the feds want hundreds of acres, it might be because of the way the property is situated toward the border itself? Not knowing the details, leaves me & others at a disadvantage. "I want NO ONE to lose their homestead, especially one of generations, to a greedy federal bureaucracy seeking land to then auction off later at a profit or worse at a bargain, to their buddies!" That ticks me no end!
Perhaps the feds plan a new, expanded crossing gate facility with expanded lanes to expedite transit, & the land is needed for the buildings & lanes? Surely they explained all of this at one point?!
Obviously, there are reasonable limits to cooperating & the feds must come to people with respect & treat them fairly. While we ask all Americans to sacrifice, we do NOT ask any America to get stuck just to make a fed bureaucrat happy about their authority. Have the environmental people demanded more land for something in the area?
Point is, I hope Senator Sessions is asking these kinds of questions, plus the typical questions. The whole issue requires careful thought, respect, consideration, and quality planning for the best & most effective setup.
Thanks bettybopper, Rubicon

bettybopper... a follow up to the last post. Representative Ron Paul, Republican candidate for president, gets no respect from the media or from the party. Neither want to treat him as a serious candidate or a candidate that can win the November elections.
Many see some of his positions as too radical. Others simply have already decided the constitution must "flex" to fit the agenda items "they" have decided should be changed to meet their positions.
I too fear for our constitution. I fear many will either eviscerate it totally (those would be Democrats, socialists {oops, sorry they are one in the same}, or rhino's pandering to what they call the moderates who are really Democrats in disguise), or they will so dilute it (read previous paren), that what we will end up with will not even come close to representing what our founders intended.
I cannot support the idea America isolate itself from the world. Economically, whether we like it or not, this nation needs to work with trading partners for our own good, let alone theirs.
Point is, Ron Paul has gotten little, gets no, and will probably get little respect from those who get the public excited about this or that! Perhaps we will all one day understand we must choose a president based on their abilities & detailed plans, not based on feel good emotions, color of skin, religion, sex, etc. Obama's feel good-ism really scares me. He has no concrete plans. Hillary's "the govt. will take care of you" plans are just as frightening.
Lets pray a Republican holds the White House so they can slow down a majority Democrat congress' plans to take away more of our freedoms!