Thread: Which candidate would be weakest in passing Amnesty?

Well, there's a good chance that I will probably just write in Duncan Hunter.

He was really my first choice, although I of course would have probably preferred Tom Tancredo as my first, first choice, but after he dropped out I was for Duncan Hunter.

Regarding McCain, I truly do not see HOW I could vote for him. Someone would have to convince me that it would really make a difference over the other two.

A neighbor in the grocery store today said that at the least it is important to think about who they would appoint to the Supreme Court, since the next president is going to have.....I think it is at least a couple to replace.

So, in the end I will HAVE to put aside my "feelings" and just do whatever I think will be in the best interest of the USA and for the futures of our kids.

I may be FORCED to make a decision that I do not want to make which would be to vote for McCain IF I am forced to look at the entire picture.

I am as sad and disgusted and angered as everyone else that of all people we have Mr. McCain in this picture. I do not have respect for this man because I saw how WILLING he was to just FLAT OUT NEGATE the will of the people.

I would never call ANY of these three "President". If ANY of them win, I will call them something "slang" when referring to them, whether it's McCLAME, Hellery or Obama.

NONE of them will EVER be referred to as "President" by me.

PhredE wrote:

One reason McCain being in the WH might actually be [ever-so-slightly] better is this: having a [likely] Dem majority in the House and probably the Senate makes the parties have to compromise and/or work with the WH to get a new law passed. If they are bickering between parties, they are less likely to compromise to get anything passed.

Excellent point, PhredE. Do we really want a Democrat President and a Democrat controlled U.S. Congress? The thought of such an occurrence sends me into a cold sweat.

Excellent point, PhredE. Do we really want a Democrat President and a Democrat controlled U.S. Congress? The thought of such an occurrence sends me into a cold sweat.

Yeah, one really big drawback of a Dem-Dem government would be court appointees. I have usually been "liberal" in my thinking on labor rights-type issues, but now am so fed up with affirmative action programs, minority contractors, hiring quotas, etc. The door has just been wide open for abuse in these areas; all they do is guarantee equality in mediocrity.
So a McCain Presidency would at least prevent the liberal judiciary JOKE.

But back to the House Republicans. They do seem to be standing firmest, among the US Congress, in their opposition to illegal immigration and the NAU agenda. I think they ought to lay down the Law to whoever is in the President's office that there will be no sellout of the American worker, no international freeloading of our Social Security system, and no flood of beggars arriving in this country.

We're going to have to look at each and every possible scenario and go over it with a fine tooth comb and discuss it from every angle and at least in the final analysis we will be able to see exactly what we're dealing with and what the effects will be according to the decisions we make.

I'm so grateful for everyone's knowledge and understanding about how our government works.

There is A LOT on the line for our country right now.

Maybe more so than ever. I think most people would agree on that.

Originally Posted by alexcastro

I think most everyone here believes that Barack Obama would be the worst of the three. But then again, I am soooo confused. I will not vote for any of these three anyway, so I can sleep at night knowing I did my best and voted my conscious.

Me too.

Sorry to go quite far from the OP, but I wanted to catch CaptainRon here on this thread in the current context...

Originally Posted by Captainron

Excellent point, PhredE. Do we really want a Democrat President and a Democrat controlled U.S. Congress? The thought of such an occurrence sends me into a cold sweat.

Yeah, one really big drawback of a Dem-Dem government would be court appointees. I have usually been "liberal" in my thinking on labor rights-type issues, but now am so fed up with affirmative action programs, minority contractors, hiring quotas, etc. The door has just been wide open for abuse in these areas; all they do is guarantee equality in mediocrity.
So a McCain Presidency would at least prevent the liberal judiciary JOKE.

CaptainRon - question for you:

Do you remember about 1 year or so ago, there were a few news stories being kicked around here locally (the City of Portland - aka 'The Great State of Portland') around 'disadvantaged small business contracting'. Specifically, these stories were mostly geared at women-owned small businesses that were getting (or not getting) City contracts?

Well, the part of this little debate or series of stories that stuck out to me was that the news channels that were covering this, would invariably do a {sob} interview with a woman that was telling the sob story about how hard it was to do business with the City, and how they are under-represented in getting city contracts, <blah, blah, blah>.

Then later on, from another (very different) news source, did I find that over 75% of all incorporated businesses in Portland are woman-owned!

So, they are conveniently overlooking the fact that they OVERREPRESENTED in terms of the business population locally, at the same time claiming 'discrimination' (eg. underrepresentation) in doing business with the City. Hip-shot conjecture: what if 50% of the contracts being let are for female-owned businesses and 50% are going to male-owned businesses? Is that discrimination???
What part of this doesn't pass the 'common sense' test???

I know firsthand how pathetic this "minority owned enterprise" syndrome is: A business owner merely has to find someone from an appropriate "disadvantaged" category to partner with him (as is usually the case) and take the titular designation of "owner." Happens all the time! The law is so absurb it should not even exist.

PhredE, I spend quite a lot of my time on another issue. Mass transit and transportation in Portland. I have been working with a group that would like to stop the expensive reconstruction of the I-5 bridge over the Columbia R.--and instead develop a new route from Clark Co. into close in NW Portland. We also are opposed to further light rail expansion. You may not know it but all the big Portland political liberals are behind a mass wave of federally backed programs that would end up spending 20-40 Billion over the next few decades-----and result in virtually no improvement to our transportation difficulties. With a compliant Democrat coalition bringing federal pork money into the State they think they are going to pull it off. But there actually is a lot of citizen opposition, now that people are seeing how ridiculous some of the programs are. To illustrate, if you think traffic on I-5 gets congested now, wait until they start reconstructing big swaths of that freeway---but taking it one section at a time over a few decades.

The rub is that big unions like SEIU and my own tend to support these projects. So therefore, we will have excessive federal spending, but our problems won't get solved, and the unions will pick up a lot of new members so they can strengthen their influence on the political process. So there you have the upward--or downward--spiral. As much as I have been disgusted with things that have happened coming from conservative political machines---I myself was the victim of a serious financial swindle---I am just as distressed by this new aggressive agenda which is colloquially referred to as the "Tax and Spend" program.

Back to the preferred contractor provisions. Liberals just don't seem to believe that Caucasians can be at a poor advantage. But we know differently---still we will get labeled as "racists" and "haters" if we try to protest. I have tried to break into contracting---but there are so many groups getting certain preferences I have been truly discouraged. Why we need "minority" status to begin with and the apparent ignorance of many people that it is riddled with loopholes begs explanation.