Thread: We must find a way to make peace between two groups....

Originally Posted by SicNTiredInSoCal

Last POTUS election, I held on to voting for "principal" and voted for Chuck Baldwin. If I could have built a perfect constitutional candidate, it would have been him. Yeah, I knew he didn't stand a chance, but I also knew McStain didn't either. It was obvious Barakula would win.

This time it's different. People are PISSED off at Obama, I can't think of one person in my circle of friends and family that approve of anything he's done. Romney has a chance, and I feel WE have a better chance of him listening to us if we scream loud enough. Obama just does what ever he damn well feels like and I really resent that. I will hold my nose and vote for Romney.

Although I don't agree with his positions on immigration, I feel he can and will listen and he's got the experience of a business person to run this county like a business. The economy is a shambles and we need that experience right now.

Gay marriage, abortion, etc...they are all "wedge" issues and truthfully don't matter a tinkers dam to someone who is out of work and/or competing with illegals for scarce jobs!

Barakula. Lol. Had to explain to my friends what I was laughing at. Thanks. I think I'll use that one.

Anyways. Most of the people in my school would have turned their back on Obama had Ron Paul been given the chance to run against him. It is clear they are disappointed in his stance on drugs and the wars overseas which are costing us billions of tax dollars and blood. We on the other hand are tired of his entire presidency and so we have at least one thing in common.

But for the love of god, we cannot go from a socialist president to one that will run this country like a "business". He'll drive it into the ground all in the name of appeasing our foreign creditors in China and Saudi Arabia. We'd go from one extreme to the other and that is not what this country needs. And last time I checked, many businesses hire cheap illegal/legal labor all in the name of cutting costs because that's what running a business is all about. This ends up screwing the American worker. Wouldn't be hard to believe Romney has this in his head somewhere and hence his terrible position on illegal immigration.

Originally Posted by googler

Barakula. Lol. Had to explain to my friends what I was laughing at. Thanks. I think I'll use that one.

Anyways. Most of the people in my school would have turned their back on Obama had Ron Paul been given the chance to run against him. It is clear they are disappointed in his stance on drugs and the wars overseas which are costing us billions of tax dollars and blood. We on the other hand are tired of his entire presidency and so we have at least one thing in common.

But for the love of god, we cannot go from a socialist president to one that will run this country like a "business". He'll drive it into the ground all in the name of appeasing our foreign creditors in China and Saudi Arabia. We'd go from one extreme to the other and that is not what this country needs. And last time I checked, many businesses hire cheap illegal/legal labor all in the name of cutting costs because that's what running a business is all about. This ends up screwing the American worker. Wouldn't be hard to believe Romney has this in his head somewhere and hence his terrible position on illegal immigration.

Haven't you read anything I've posted to this thread? Where do you get off saying Romney is terrible on illegal immigration? He may not be everything your or I want him to be on the issue but he's far from terrible! I noticed you support gay marriage. Perhaps, deep down, that's why you find Romney so distasteful ...... could it be?

Originally Posted by MW

Haven't you read anything I've posted to this thread? Where do you get off saying Romney is terrible on illegal immigration? He may not be everything your or I want him to be on the issue but he's far from terrible! I noticed you support gay marriage. Perhaps, deep down, that's why you find Romney so distasteful ...... could it be?

I have, have you? He is terrible on illegal immigration because he cannot clearly state his stance on the Arizona law decision nor what he'd do about Obama's policy change to the American people. The fact that he is being vague on illegal aliens and the military is potentially traitorous. Perhaps he fears alienating the illegal alien bloc? Either he is a complete idiot or the people running his campaign are. At this point I can't tell. As others have stated, at least with Obama we know he stands on the wrong side, Romney looks to me like he considers illegal immigration a low priority. Perhaps it's understandable since he's never had to deal with it personally, so what does he care? If he wasn't running for office, he'd have ignored the fact that the landscaping company he contracted employed illegals. Those at the top don't care all the while we in the middle get screwed over.

Perhaps you noticed I support gay marriage because, I've said a couple times before, that is perhaps the one and only issue Obama and I can agree on (as much as I hate to say it), and even then he's clearly using the issue for political gain to energize his base. If he were to end the wars overseas that would another agreement, but sadly neither of these two persons are bright enough to understand our troops would be better used protecting our borders at home then another country's.

Originally Posted by googler

I have, have you? He is terrible on illegal immigration because he cannot clearly state his stance on the Arizona law decision nor what he'd do about Obama's policy change to the American people. The fact that he is being vague on illegal aliens and the military is potentially traitorous. Perhaps he fears alienating the illegal alien bloc? Either he is a complete idiot or the people running his campaign are. At this point I can't tell. As others have stated, at least with Obama we know he stands on the wrong side, Romney looks to me like he considers illegal immigration a low priority. Perhaps it's understandable since he's never had to deal with it personally, so what does he care? If he wasn't running for office, he'd have ignored the fact that the landscaping company he contracted employed illegals. Those at the top don't care all the while we in the middle get screwed over.

Perhaps you noticed I support gay marriage because, I've said a couple times before, that is perhaps the one and only issue Obama and I can agree on (as much as I hate to say it), and even then he's clearly using the issue for political gain to energize his base. If he were to end the wars overseas that would another agreement, but sadly neither of these two persons are bright enough to understand our troops would be better used protecting our borders at home then another country's.

In my over 50 years of life I've been around the block a time or two and consider myself fairly well seasoned where politics are concerned. How about you, have you been voting for over 36 years? If so, you should have some idea of how the game is played by now. While it's important to win over your main voting block, in this case Republican voters, it's also important to appeal to the Independent voters. With that said, a very important rule in politics is to avoid antagonizing your enemy as much as possible because it will only serve to force them to the polls against you. Every Obama voter that stays home on election day is a victory for Romney. Many former Obama voters, mostly Independents, have already had enough of Obama and will switch their vote this time around. As for hardcore liberal voters ........ well, there isn't much you can do with them except hope some of them have lost interest in Obama and decide to stay home on election day. Now there is some real money to be made on the black voting block this time around. I'm feeling that the newness, and Obama's failure to help their situation, will keep many of them home this year. Additionally, many in that voting block are very disturbed at Obama's support of gay marriage and that too will keep many of them home because they will not vote Republican (generalizing). Remember, the black voting block turned out overwhelmingly in favor of Obama last time around. This year I'm thinking that wont be the case (I'm hopeful many will stay home).


You don't antagonize a dog because he will bite you, nor do you reveal your hand in the middle of a game. I honestly don't think Romney's strategy is a bad one. I say keep the opposition guessing just long enough to get in the White House and than reveal your hand on immigration. All the signs of where Romney stands on the issue are there for anyone that cares to look. Remember, strategy is all about gaining a position of advantage over your adversary. If being vague on certain details helps to keep the enemy calm and docile ....... so be it. For some reason you seem to think his vagueness is an attempt at keeping something from us when in reality it is probably to keep his plans from the opposition ...... smart play.

Originally Posted by MW

In my over 50 years of life I've been around the block a time or two and consider myself fairly well seasoned where politics are concerned. How about you, have you been voting for over 36 years? If so, you should have some idea of how the game is played by now. While it's important to win over your main voting block, in this case Republican voters, it's also important to appeal to the Independent voters. With that said, a very important rule in politics is to avoid antagonizing your enemy as much as possible because it will only serve to force them to the polls against you. Every Obama voter that stays home on election day is a victory for Romney. Many former Obama voters, mostly Independents, have already had enough of Obama and will switch their vote this time around. As for hardcore liberal voters ........ well, there isn't much you can do with them except hope some of them have lost interest in Obama and decide to stay home on election day. Now there is some real money to be made on the black voting block this time around. I'm feeling that the newness, and Obama's failure to help their situation, will keep many of them home this year. Additionally, many in that voting block are very disturbed at Obama's support of gay marriage and that too will keep many of them home because they will not vote Republican (generalizing). Remember, the black voting block turned out overwhelmingly in favor of Obama last time around. This year I'm thinking that wont be the case (I'm hopeful many will stay home).


You don't antagonize a dog because he will bite you, nor do you reveal your hand in the middle of a game. I honestly don't think Romney's strategy is a bad one. I say keep the opposition guessing just long enough to get in the White House and than reveal your hand on immigration. All the signs of where Romney stands on the issue are there for anyone that cares to look. Remember, strategy is all about gaining a position of advantage over your adversary. If being vague on certain details helps to keep the enemy calm and docile ....... so be it. For some reason you seem to think his vagueness is an attempt at keeping something from us when in reality it is probably to keep his plans from the opposition ...... smart play.

Ah a smart play indeed. A smart play to disappoint those on our side that are tired of waiting for a candidate that will finally take a stand and put his/her foot down on illegal immigration. He rather concern himself with not pissing off a population that is not supposed to be in this country than those of us (the majority of the country I may add) that want illegal immigration addressed after decades of neglect? Really??? You're right, there are plenty of youtube videos of him supporting amnesty, so it's all our there for you to see. I'm only 24 years old and so I'm surprised that someone such as yourself who has lived far longer than me is still tolerating this crap. Jeez, wake up already man.


By the way, so where was this so called smart play when he opposed Obamacare? Did he not supposedly now antagonize the other side? Why can he take a stand on issues such as supporting Israel, opposing gay marriage, obamacare etc. but not illegal immigration? Why not remain vague on everything and say, "Elect me and find out where I stand on all the following issues! It'll be a surprise!". What's so special about illegal immigration over other issues that it warrants this marvelous strategy of vagueness?

Originally Posted by googler

Ah a smart play indeed. A smart play to disappoint those on our side that are tired of waiting for a candidate that will finally take a stand and put his/her foot down on illegal immigration. He rather concern himself with not pissing off a population that is not supposed to be in this country than those of us (the majority of the country I may add) that want illegal immigration addressed after decades of neglect? Really??? You're right, there are plenty of youtube videos of him supporting amnesty, so it's all our there for you to see. I'm only 24 years old and so I'm surprised that someone such as yourself who has lived far longer than me is still tolerating this crap. Jeez, wake up already man.


By the way, so where was this so called smart play when he opposed Obamacare? Did he not supposedly now antagonize the other side? Why can he take a stand on issues such as supporting Israel, opposing gay marriage, obamacare etc. but not illegal immigration? Why not remain vague on everything and say, "Elect me and find out where I stand on all the following issues! It'll be a surprise!". What's so special about illegal immigration over other issues that it warrants this marvelous strategy of vagueness?

I've tried my level best to give you a clue of what's going on but you refuse to listen. He has taken a stand on illegal immigration, you're just not paying attention because everything isn't as specific as you and some other would like. Well, I've already explained the possible reasoning behind that. He has said repeatedly that he does not support amnesty. Furthermore, his words and actions prove he doesn't support the Dream Act and driver's licenses for illegals. Oh, and he has also said he fully supports attrition through enforcement. For goodness sakes, he even said the Arizona law should be a model for the country. By the way, there aren't a number of youtube videos of him supporting illegal alien amnesty. Actually, he has said over and over again that he does not support amnesty.

Just for the record, any conservative voter knows it would be a kiss of death for a Republican running for President not to openly oppose gay marriage and Obamacare.

Originally Posted by MW

I've tried my level best to give you a clue of what's going on but you refuse to listen. He has taken a stand on illegal immigration, you're just not paying attention because everything isn't as specific as you and some other would like. Well, I've already explained the possible reasoning behind that. He has said repeatedly that he does not support amnesty. Furthermore, his words and actions prove he doesn't support the Dream Act and driver's licenses for illegals. Oh, and he has also said he fully supports attrition through enforcement. For goodness sakes, he even said the Arizona law should be a model for the country. By the way, there aren't a number of youtube videos of him supporting illegal alien amnesty. Actually, he has said over and over again that he does not support amnesty.

Just for the record, any conservative voter knows it would be a kiss of death for a Republican running for President not to openly oppose gay marriage and Obamacare.

Oh I'm listening, but you're trying hard to explain away his recent actions as some sort of "smart" strategy to not infuriate the other side. If there is a strategy, it is to remain vague on the issues so he can then pick whatever side he thinks will help him later on! Both Obama and Romney are similar in that regard. He'll say he's against outright amnesty, but then he'll also want to give concessions to the other side. There everyone is happy! Now vote for me. There's your so called "smart" strategy.


When he goes to speak to Americans one on one, funny how he simply states his supposed opposition to amnesty, but stops short of going into the "but" of his position. There's always some sort of catch to these fools' positions. When he did an interview with a newspaper, he stated, in a rather confusing way, his position. The reason so many people are unsure of where he stands on the issue is because of statements like these.


"I don't believe in rounding up 11 million people and forcing them at gunpoint from our country. With these 11 million people, let's have them registered, know who they are. Those who've been arrested or convicted of crimes shouldn't be here; those that are here paying taxes and not taking government benefits should begin a process towards application for citizenship, as they would from their home country. "


So those that haven't been convicted of crime are differentiated from those who have? What's the difference when we're speaking about people unlawfully here no matter what their behavior was during their stay in the country. And register them? For what? If you're going to seek a policy of getting them out of this country, why are you going to register them for? Fast forward to present day, and we get more generalities and confusing statements from him on Arizona's law decision by the SC and on Obama's policy change. It's clear he is doing this to leave wiggle room for himself, so that in the coming months he can announce, say, a pathway for children of illegals without being lambasted for flipping sides.


And Illegal immigration is as much a conservative issue as those other issues, yet Romney chooses to put it in the back seat. You can ask him now what he thinks of gay marriage or abortion and he'll give you a straight answer, but ask him about what to do with the children of illegals and he won't give you straight up honest answer. He's working the details out with his campaign how to best reward them all the while apparently saying he's against amnesty.

Originally Posted by MW

....

... I say keep the opposition guessing just long enough to get in the White House and than reveal your hand on immigration. All the signs of where Romney stands on the issue are there for anyone that cares to look. Remember, strategy is all about gaining a position of advantage over your adversary. If being vague on certain details helps to keep the enemy calm and docile ....... so be it. For some reason you seem to think his vagueness is an attempt at keeping something from us when in reality it is probably to keep his plans from the opposition ...... smart play.

The problem is that he is not very vague on the issue of illegal immigration. He has said he supports amnesty. We have videos posted here. Unless you can show evidence suggesting something like a contrary view, then we can assume he will support amnesty.

First off I want to say that I am against illegal immigration and have been fighting this battle hard for years. I have watched here in California as Liberal Democrats and Anchor Babies have taken over our State Government. We are outnumbered and no longer have any say whatsoever. I have watched as our state government has abandoned the pretense of representing all Californians. Now I am watching our Federal Government following in the sameway.

I have been watching everyone fighting over who to vote for. How hard is Romney on illegal immigration being vague on Amnesty, CIR, etc. I know in a perfect world we would have William running for President. Only then could we all agree, but unfortunetly we have Obama or Romney.

I have been giving a lot of thought as to how and when was California lost and how to save the rest of the country. I have given up on American's getting fed up and taking to the streets in protest. So what do we do? How do we stop it?

We are constantly on the offense. We want every politican as angry as we are, right there next to us ready to fight, and we will except nothing less. Our fighting amongst ourselves only hurts us and I question whether our all or nothing attitude will eventually bite us in the butt.

Here is my question to everyone. I agree with completely fighting against Amnesty or CIR, but are we going to be prepared with a plan B if Amnesty or CIR becomes inevitable? Are we just going to rely on our calls to Congress or are we going to be represented in the planning of say a CIR? We know LaRaza, the Hispanic Caucus and other open border groups are going to be right there with their input and demands, but what about us? How do we get to the table?

Originally Posted by pkskyali

The problem is that he is not very vague on the issue of illegal immigration. He has said he supports amnesty. We have videos posted here. Unless you can show evidence suggesting something like a contrary view, then we can assume he will support amnesty.

No, he has never said he supports amnesty. Have you seen this video: Romney in 2007 on Immigration and Amnesty - YouTube or this one: Romney clarifies immigration position - YouTube ? By saying illegals shouldn't be getting a special right or deal basically means they should go home and apply in the correct manner. Is this the contrary view you're seeking? Romney never said he endorsed any amnesty plan put forth by McCain or Bush.