"Edited to add: Ron Paul did mention China briefly. He's consistent that way"
So is Rudi as far as being mayor of NY
Printable View
"Edited to add: Ron Paul did mention China briefly. He's consistent that way"
So is Rudi as far as being mayor of NY
Hi Rockfish. The voter fraud issue is a serious problem which can truly influence the Presidential Election and elections in general. I found a fascinating article when doing some illegal immigration information searching that explained that it was only so many thousands of votes that separated Candidate votes in the State Governor's race. This group had registered just shy of the thousands of votes needed to turn the election. They were registering immigrants through drivers licenses since the state gave drivers licenses to illegals and you can register to vote by mail.
Matthew 5:44
Continue to read and or post on Townhall at:
Mike Huckabee has some unfavorable comments in regards to illegal immigration. Add your own.
http://www.townhall.com/blog/default.as ... ebb33074d0
Matthew 5:44
McCain is probably basing this on the flawed NYT, LAT polls we saw this summer which list a bunch of supposedly tough conditions, e.g., learn English, pay fines etc. that have to be met first, then Americans will accept a pathway.Quote:
Originally Posted by tinybobidaho
But what these bogus polls don't do is offer the alternative of attrition through enforcement of laws, which win overwhelmingly against amnesty when asked in polls. Mark Krikorian from the CIS discussed thiss recently. His research director called one of the polling firms who didn't even know about the attrition method.
The polls and pols usually set up the false choice between mass amnesty & mass deportation.
I agree with some of your comments.Quote:
Originally Posted by Saki
Romney wasn't picking on Ron Paul-----his response would have been the same to any of them that said what Ron did. All he said was......."Ron you need to stop reading the Ahmendinijad playbook"-----which is true. He was saying that because Ron was talking about the BS report/video that Iran released today----trying to blame the US for what happened with the ships the other day. He was polite to him later in the debate---when he was answering something about illegals.
You are right about McCain........I caught part of the debate again----a part that I missed when it was on the first time. Did you see McCain's face when Ron Paul was talking??? Also, when they were getting ready to cut to a commercial.........I heard McCain say---in his usual snide manner......."We missed you the other night"-----talking about Paul not being in the debate the other night.
See my comment above.Quote:
Originally Posted by usanevada
It is hard to believe that those things are still around!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Dixie
It was brought up during the last debate!!Quote:
Originally Posted by MW
China could be a debate all on its own!!
(quote)
Thursday, January 10, 2008
Tonight's Debate
Posted by: Hugh Hewitt at 10:11 PM
UPDATE: John McCain with Sean Hannity immediately after the debate compounds his error on immigration by giving the impression that the only change needed in McCain-Kennedy is border-security first. Wow. He just doesn't get it.
Romney followed McCain and by contrast shined, and spent time talking about the Reagn example and inspiration and the Reagan-Bush legacy. Romney also got the opportunity to talk to Michigan voters. "I continue to feel that you cannot write off jobs," he replied to Sean's question about McCain's "straight-talk" about Michigan's economic woes, and spoke specifically to the auto industry's renewal in Michigan. Assuming that conservatives watching the debate stuck around for 20 minutes, Romney did himself a great deal of good in the after-game.
ORIGINAL POST
Fred had a great night, Mitt a good one and Rudy did fine as well.
Senator McCain struggled, especially on the question of what to do if recession arrives, when he channeled Herbert Hoover and spoke only about cutting spending. His talk of global warming was a bright red flag to conservatives, and his repeating of his "change" answer from Sunday night --that he helped change the policy in Iraq-- underscored the impression that he was running through some talking points he understands to be safe. "Not for profit, but for patriotism" was another example of a recycled rhetoric from Sunday. His answer on deferring to captains-at-sea was a strong point, but that was the only one. His halting and often rambling answers and occasional grimaces and winks just don't work on television, and his immigration answers just don't fly. He has had three sub-par debate performances in a row.
The huge loser tonight was Mike Huckabee, thanks largely to Fred and Chris Wallace who peeled the bark off of Huck's ideology. Huck bristled at Wallace at one point, and when pushed on why he raised taxes and spending, barked back, "I raised expectations." That might work with Democrats --though it probably doesn't in this day and age-- but it sure doesn't work with Republican voters. Huck's whining about the religion question was also off-putting coming from a candidate who has so often injected religion into this campaign.
Romney had less screen time tonight, but each time he answered he was poised and eloquent. The opening response on the economy, aimed specifically at Michigan voters was very strong, and his "Nope" answer to Wallace's question about whether the voters in New Hampshire might be saying that they do not want change in D.C. was perfect pitch, and his grasp of the foreign affairs questions impressive. The fact that the debate ended on immigration helped him as well as it again underscores that John McCain still doesn't grasp or won't admit that the McCain-Kennedy bill was the problem throughout 2005 and 2006, not the fact that "Americans need to restore their trust in the government." The specifics of the McCain bill is what soured the debate, and McCain's absolute refusal to concede this renders his conversion on border security completely suspect.
Mitt, Fred and Rudy have generally done well in these settings since they began at the Reagan Library last year, McCain wasn't a factor until recently and he has struggled to get through them, and while Huckabee used the early debates to charm folks, his performance has plummeted as focus on his record has increased. There's a huge message in the last three debates about the issue differences between the candidates on taxes and immigration, with Giuliani, Romney and Thompson on one side and Huckabee and McCain on the other side. And there's a message about who can win these contests in the fall, and it isn't Senator McCain or Governor Huckabee.
(quote)
http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/blog
Matthew 5:44
Here is why Mitt Romney keeps mentioning the one gold and two silver. Check out the primary vote totals at the top of page.
http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/blog
http://www.redstate.com/blogs/thunder/2 ... nomination
Race At A Glance
Total Primary Votes: Romney McCain Huckabee Giuliani Thompson
Iowa 29,494 15,559 40,841 4,097 15,904
New Hampshire 75,202 88,447 26,760 20,387 2,884
Total 104,696 104,006 67,601 24,484 18,788
Total Delegates: 30 10 21 1 6
Matthew 5:44
Great post. However, we always get it-----but for some reason, these voters are not getting it!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by GeorgiaPeach
I saw that the MSNBC count of delegates has Huckabee ahead at this time, but CNNs tally and page that Hewitt is basing the above on seems quite thorough.Quote:
Originally Posted by GeorgiaPeach
I am putting several articles here for us to learn more and to have some information for any comments that we may want to leave at any sites to oppose Mike Huckabee and to oppose John McCain.
(quote)
Key excerpts from the Santorum interview on McCain's immigration views:
HH: Senator, welcome back. I was just…did you serve alongside Senator McCain for 12 years or longer?
RS: 12 years.
HH: So you know him well.
RS: I do.
HH: When you hear the media talking about him, and of course, he got Iraq right, and we’re all grateful for that, but he wasn’t the only Republican to get it right. Do you believe he’s sincerely changed on the immigration bill to where he understands the message that was delivered last summer?
RS: No.
HH: Why not?
RS: Well, I mean, because John McCain was the leader on the other side of the aisle. John McCain was the guy who was working with Ted Kennedy to drive it down our throats, and lectured us repeatedly about how xenophobic we were, lectured us, us being the Republican conference, about how wrong we were on this, how we were on the wrong side of history, and that you know, this is important for his…because having come from Arizona, knowing the strength of the Hispanic community, that we were going to be seen as racists, and he wasn’t going be part of that, that he was not a racist, and that if we were for tougher borders, it was a racist thing. Look, John McCain looks at things through the eyes, on these kind of domestic policy issues, looks at it through the eyes of the New York Times editorial board, and accepts that predisposition that if you are not, if you stand for conservative principles, there’s some genetic defect.
Santorum on McCain's ideology generally:
HH: Why can’t John McCain win this election?
RS: Well, number one, John McCain will not get the base of the Republican Party. I mean, there was a reason John McCain collapsed last year, and it’s because he was the frontrunner, and everybody in the Republican Party got a chance to look at him. And when they looked at him, they wait well, wait a minute, he’s not with us on almost all of the core issues of…on the economic side, he was against the President’s tax cuts, he was bad on immigration. On the environment, he’s absolutely terrible. He buys into the complete left wing environmentalist movement in this country. He is for bigger government on a whole laundry list of issues. He was…I mean, on medical care, I mean, he was for re-importation of drugs. I mean, you can go on down the list. I mean, this is a guy who on a lot of the core economic issues, is not even close to being a moderate, in my opinion. And then on the issue of, on social conservative issues, you point to me one time John McCain every took the floor of the United States Senate to talk about a social conservative issue. It never happened. I mean, this is a guy who says he believes in these things, but I can tell you, inside the room, when we were in these meetings, there was nobody who fought harder not to have these votes before the United States Senate on some of the most important social conservative issues, whether it’s marriage or abortion or the like. He always fought against us to even bring them up, because he was uncomfortable voting for them. So I mean, this is just not a guy I think in the end that washes with the mainstream of the Republican Party.
(quote) clip
http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/blog
Matthew 5:44
Best Ron Paul clip of the night (perhaps any debate) In my opinion.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mffpkCH-PJw
To those who have always been republican, and perhaps are older and remember what republicans used to stand for - I think you will appreciate his response.
I still cant believe how honest and courageous Ron Paul is, whether you agree with him or not, he has balls, and he is making the republican party take a good hard look at themselves - something they need badly. Something our entire political system needs badly
OK, I watched it again. What Thompson actually said was "enforcement by attrition." Hey, he had the right idea. And for the record, he was the best on immigration tonight. He was the only one I believe who talked about employment verification. He said that our immigration policy should be "high walls, and long bridges." The moderator said that Romney said illegals should be looked at by a case by case basis (not sure if Romney actually said this). Thompson flattly rejected this idea. Paul brought it back to the economy again, saying that the tough economic times have made immigrants and especially illegals a source of anger -- he stopped short of the "scapegoat" comment this time. But, to his credit, he did say "the law is the law, and it needs to be enforced." Knucklehead made some stupid comment about how, "nobody should be looked at as illegal in this country, we should all be looked at as legal." :roll:
"The moderator said that Romney said illegals should be looked at by a case by case basis (not sure if Romney actually said this."Quote:
Originally Posted by BearFlagRepublic
Romney NO WAY said this..........It was Juan McAmnesty, when he was talking about the military man that was married to the illegal woman who was being deported!!!
You are right though-----the moderator referred to McCain as "governor", instead of "senator".
If you would have listened to RP, he said "if you read the paper it said} and he repeated what they said about the fabrication.Quote:
Originally Posted by rmsings
Ah, that explains it. When he said "governor," I assumed he meant Romney -- he incorrectly referenced McShame, good catch.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bren4824
I thought it was funny that Romney said that all of the candidates wanted the border enforced, except Paul, because he did not know his position. In all honesty, I can't blame Mitt. Paul has been really quiet about the issue, and somewhat ambiguous.
BearFlag, Ron paul hasn't been quiet on his views on illegal immigration. He has a tv ad running about it. It's available on YouTube.
I meant in the debates. Romney didn't know Paul's views, because he has not weighed in as much as the others in the debates.Quote:
Originally Posted by tinybobidaho
Romney said to Ron Paul-----"I am not being critical of you, I just have not read your positions regarding the issue----as I have the others".Quote:
Originally Posted by BearFlagRepublic
I am glad that Romney did that-----as it appeared that he felt bad that Juan McAmnesty and the moderators were continually attacking Ron Paul.
Bingo! The falling empire wants Hitlery and McPain is the weak Republican stoog to get it done.Quote:
Originally Posted by rmsings
I missed the debate. Thanks to everyone for the input & update.
In all honesty, my personal opinion is in agreement with those who say that the winners were in this order:
Thompson
Romney
Paul
I think the three stooges all lost last night. I'm not just saying that, I really think in the minds of "the people" that's the way it went. I've been reading around at other sites, and a lot of people are saying this too.
I wake up this morning I see that you are still at your hard headed ways!! :!: :lol: :lol: :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Bren4824
You mean we are all laughing with him!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by usanevada
Ron Paul had the BEST answer last night in illegal immigration. ENFORCE OUR LAWS. The laws are on the books just need to be enforced!! :wink: If we enforce these laws things WILL get back to normal. :!:Quote:
Originally Posted by BearFlagRepublic
Gawd, I'm glad I wasn't here for the 16 pages of THIS thread last night.
I noticed that while the 'focus group' said Paul was the big loser, the text poll had him as the big winner. When you realize that you can only vote once in the text poll, unless you have multiple cell phones to vote from, it's pretty clear that RP supporters are a much bigger group than what anyone gives them credit for.
And RP is RIGHT, it all comes back to economics, ALL of it... 8O :wink:
then he should win the nomination, but he won't. It only proves that his supporters are more fanatic at calling in at every poll and the others supporters only show up when it counts.Quote:
Originally Posted by PinestrawGuys
BearFlagRepublic wrote:
Not that it matters, but didn't he say high walls and wide gates?Quote:
He said that our immigration policy should be "high walls, and long bridges."
I was so proud of Ron Paul last night. What he said made so much sense and you could tell he was shutting them up. They all had grins on their faces especially McCain trying to convey that Paul is a nut case. All in all he shut them up.
In a discussion of Israel he made his point clear. If we are such good friends to Israel, then why are we selling arms to Arab's that want to see them wiped off the face of this earth.
I loved his stance on the war and he really had a great cheering section.
McCain and Guillani on the other hand are little clones of the Bush mentality and Huckabee is just a hick. I know that the American people are looking at it this way.
Thompson was great. This is just getting better and better.
We're fanatics, all right. Fanatical enough to become precinct captains, fanatical enough to canvass our precincts door-to-door, fanatical enough to ignore ignorant, denigrating comments from naysayers like yourself who are satisfied to let this country continue down the path of self-destruction.Quote:
Originally Posted by slyhunter
How ANY of you can think that ANOTHER CFR Globalist would be GOOD for this country is beyond comprehension, but I guess it proves that the dumbing down of America has been pretty damned successful... :roll:
I'm still waiting for all this support for Paul to translate into
viable votes
Name a state where he appears to have a win in the bag and I'll not
say another word until after the primary in that state
I can only educate the people in my own precinct, and the people on the internet that WANT to be educated. I frankly don't think Ron Paul will get the nomination, especially after the 'hit job' questions he got from Faux last night. The BS is going to get deeper and smellier as time goes by.
The real problem that this country faces is NOT illegal immigration, that's just a symptom of the REAL problem. Just like the 16th Amendment is a SYMPTOM, and the UN is a SYMPTOM, and the NAU is a SYMPTOM, and NAFTA, CAFTA, GATT, WTO, etc. are ALL SYMPTOMS!
The PROBLEM is the Council on Foreign Relations, and until we REJECT the PROBLEM, the SYMPTOMS will just keep multiplying.
Why is that so hard for you people to understand??? :roll:
I believe Romney owes Paul and apolgy.
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4115702&page=1
I know what his comment was in reference to; I just thought it was unbecoming of him, particularly since we're already aware of their differing perspectives on the Middle East. I don't know what purpose it served, and it bothered me that he would take a crack at someone who has neither directly challenged nor disrepected him. I believe Romney is a gracious and decent man, and I expect him to resist the cheap shot. That said, it didn't change my mind about supporting him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bren
His colleagues are right- except that McCain should be running for President of Mexico. Maybe he thinks he is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippy
I believe you're right, but you won't get any Romney supporters to understand it, in their minds the truth is whatever the MSM says it is, regardless of the evidence before their eyes. :roll:Quote:
Originally Posted by rmsings
If I'm not mistaken McClown made worse jabs at Paul, as did theQuote:
Originally Posted by PinestrawGuys
moderators
Where is the demand for their apologies ?
Also at one point in the debate when Romney was answer a statement
by Paul he stated that he had not seen Pauls stance on illegal immigration ,
Which was fair
I think several others treated Paul a whole lot worse than Romney did last night
I agree that Britt Hume was out of line the way he questioned Paul on what he was talking about. But IMO, Paul sometimes jumps all over the place and no one can follow what he is saying at times.Quote:
Originally Posted by LegalUSCitizen
THAT DOESN'T EXCUSE THE FACT THAT BRITT WAS RUDE!
Whenever McCain says this (which is often), I can't help but wonder- humane for who? The American people or the illegal aliens? There is nothing humane about Americans losing jobs, hospitals and ERs closing, once decent neighborhoods being turned into cesspools, our schools being trashed, our jails full of felons who are in the country illegally, citizens killed by drunk illegals and on and on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Saki
This is why I do think McCain believes he is running for President of Mexico. And thus far, no one has been able to convince him otherwise.