Thread: To people who got upset about Tancredo's endorsement

Originally Posted by SecureTheBorder

Originally Posted by PinestrawGuys

So where's those answers, hmmmmm?

Sorry I didn't respond sooner. Sometimes work gets in the way of surfing the internet.

Exactly how do you propose we deploy our military to protect ourselves?

I think Muhammad Ali said it best: "Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee". I agree with a lot of Buchanan's views regarding the military and foreign policy.

[quote:2s9p6o46]Are the 14 permanent bases in Iraq a part of your plan?

No. Since when did the 14 bases become "permanent"? Do you have any links to support your claim that those bases are "permanent"? The Iraqis don't want us to cut and run right now, but I highly doubt they'd want us to have 14 "permanent" bases in their country.

What do you propose to do about Iran?

Isolation. It didn't work with Iraq because Germany and France ignored the sanctions while their U.N. officials were taking oil for food bribes from Saddam. Nowadays, Merkel and Sarkozy are backing sanctions and telling their respective countries' corporations to quit doing business with Iran. Hopefully, isolation will help to foment the movement of young Iranians who are fed up with this islamic theocracy that has only existed for 29 years.

Are we sending in the Army there next?

After all of the flak we've taken for Iraq, I doubt we'll ever put boots on the ground in Iran unless they shoot first. We have them contained right now with troops in Afhanistan and Iraq; I don't think Ahmadenijad has the balls to do it.[/quote:2s9p6o46]

1. That's a little vague. Do you think we need to keep bases in 130 countries around the globe, or can at least SOME of our soldiers come home?

2. Here's the latest on our long-term presence in Iraq...
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/is ... /bases.htm

3. That's a lot saner than what I hear from MOST war supporters...

4. Your answer pre-supposes that we'll STAY in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Originally Posted by corhanem

If I have to throw support behind Romney, I think I'll throw up after casting my vote. I understand the position that we all need to join under a particular candidate, but I am not sure I can bring myself to compromise my own integrity and that of my country. Why can't we sponsor a write-in campaign for Dobbs??

I'll be throwng up right along side you. I could never vote for Romney. He was pro-amnesty to begin with, and I don't trust him on his new antil-amnesty stance. If he wins the presidency, he'll dupe us all.

If not Paul, then there's nobody to vote for.

Originally Posted by americangirl

Originally Posted by corhanem

If I have to throw support behind Romney, I think I'll throw up after casting my vote. I understand the position that we all need to join under a particular candidate, but I am not sure I can bring myself to compromise my own integrity and that of my country. Why can't we sponsor a write-in campaign for Dobbs??

I'll be throwng up right along side you. I could never vote for Romney. He was pro-amnesty to begin with, and I don't trust him on his new antil-amnesty stance. If he wins the presidency, he'll dupe us all.

If not Paul, then there's nobody to vote for.

You people keep saying he is pro amnesty

I have yet to see any proof he is pro amnesty

If he was , way did he go out of his way to enact anti illegal
positions in Mass?
I'm still trying to figure out your reasoning ?

Geeez

Just think about ,

Would Tancredo the hardest hardliner on illegal immigration
throw in with a pro amnesty candidate?
Why not Rudi or Huck ,

Come on people , your smarter than this

Just the fact that he's another CFR member is enough for me.

Clinton couldn't be any worse, IMO.

Originally Posted by BrightNail

Originally Posted by odiesback

Whom would you like Tancredo's support gone to?
Hillary??

This was a wise choice. Romney is the only
option that can carry Tancredo's message to the
finish line.

Not sure who you are - but you come here in the last week or two, with a Mitt Romeny sign for an avatar and trying to tell those here about Mitt on Illegal immigration.

who are you trying to kid?

MITT IS CFR. MITT IS A GLOBALIST. MITT WILL FLIPFLOP ON AMNESTY.

What is there to like about Mitt? The proof is in the pudding.

HE IS CFR --- that is ALL THERE IS TO KNOW.

***************

Tancredo could have endorsed, Ron Paul. That would have made a TON of sense. OR Hunter - even though Hunter isn't rising in the polls, it would have been a respectable decision - NOT PLAYING POLITICS.

So, you get on the phone and talk policy to a flip flopper politician.. who will say anything for a vote? hmm.

FORGET IT MITT. BAD BAD BAD CHOICE.

I agree with other sentiments, that MITT is better than Huckabee - so I concede to that.. but I do NOT say MITT is the only choice.

**************

You will eventually have to concede that Mitt is the only viable choice. I believe you have the WRONG CANDIDATE belonging to CFR, it's Fred Thompson who is a member, along with Cheney, Coliin Powell, George Soros, Conde Rice, Jimmy Carter.....etc.
United we conquer, divided we fall.
I like Ron Paul on immigration, but internationally he spells disaster. I resent his thinking we brought 911 on ourselves.

Maybe Romney will select Tancredo as his running mate? Doubtful. I saw Romney's stance on illegal immigration on his web site. Sounded good. Then I read the transcripts from his 12/16/07 interview with Tim Russert of Meet the Press That pretty much cancelled out everything written on his web site.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22273924/page/5/

He believes in a pathway to citizenship.

Originally Posted by SenorKylNoMas

Maybe Romney will select Tancredo as his running mate? Doubtful. I saw Romney's stance on illegal immigration on his web site. Sounded good. Then I read the transcripts from his 12/16/07 interview with Tim Russert of Meet the Press That pretty much cancelled out everything written on his web site.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22273924/page/5/

He believes in a pathway to citizenship.

If Tom thought that Romney supported any type of pathway to citizenship, he would have NEVER supported him!!

I agree Bren

I also have never seen proof that Romney is a member of the CFR?

I know he has a write on their site but I don't know if he is a member , if someone has the proof I'd like to see it

Originally Posted by Martha

Originally Posted by BrightNail

Originally Posted by odiesback

Whom would you like Tancredo's support gone to?
Hillary??

This was a wise choice. Romney is the only
option that can carry Tancredo's message to the
finish line.

Not sure who you are - but you come here in the last week or two, with a Mitt Romeny sign for an avatar and trying to tell those here about Mitt on Illegal immigration.

who are you trying to kid?

MITT IS CFR. MITT IS A GLOBALIST. MITT WILL FLIPFLOP ON AMNESTY.

What is there to like about Mitt? The proof is in the pudding.

HE IS CFR --- that is ALL THERE IS TO KNOW.

***************

Tancredo could have endorsed, Ron Paul. That would have made a TON of sense. OR Hunter - even though Hunter isn't rising in the polls, it would have been a respectable decision - NOT PLAYING POLITICS.

So, you get on the phone and talk policy to a flip flopper politician.. who will say anything for a vote? hmm.

FORGET IT MITT. BAD BAD BAD CHOICE.

I agree with other sentiments, that MITT is better than Huckabee - so I concede to that.. but I do NOT say MITT is the only choice.

**************

You will eventually have to concede that Mitt is the only viable choice. I believe you have the WRONG CANDIDATE belonging to CFR, it's Fred Thompson who is a member, along with Cheney, Coliin Powell, George Soros, Conde Rice, Jimmy Carter.....etc.
United we conquer, divided we fall.
I like Ron Paul on immigration, but internationally he spells disaster. I resent his thinking we brought 911 on ourselves.

Paul has never said the American people brought 911 on them selves, he has said our foreign policy was part of the reason they attacked us.