Skip to comments.GILCHRIST HITS CAMPBELL'S "FLIP-FLOP" ON CALIFORNIA BORDER POLICE INITIATIVE
Posted on 12/04/2005 2:53:18 PM PST by EternalVigilance
Lake Forest, CA Minuteman Project founder and 48th Congressional District candidate Jim Gilchrist who this weekend garnered the endorsement of the National Border Patrol Council, the union that represents 10,000 front-line U.S. Border Patrol agents and employees today criticized opponent John Campbell for backsliding on his support of the California Border Police Initiative. Campbell in a recent media interview confirmed his discomfort and lack of commitment towards the Initiative he supposedly co-sponsors.
Campbell has sold out all of the people who have donated money and who have given their blood, sweat and tears to get this critical Initiative on the ballot, stated Gilchrist.
John Campbell should be ashamed of himself for reneging on his commitment to all those volunteers who have dedicated themselves to qualifying the California Border Police Initiative for the California ballot, Gilchrist said. Campbell, who has been pretending to be a co-sponsor of this initiative, pulled the rug out from under supporters when he announced, in a November 27 article in the Daily Pilot, that he hopes the border police force never has to be used.
Campbells statement has caused a backlash among activists in the fight to stop illegal immigration and promote border security, who view the Initiative as an essential and urgently needed tool for beefing up law enforcement in the state.
Every supporter of this initiative should ask the question, what have we been fighting so hard for? said Barbara Coe, spokeswoman for the California Coalition for Immigration Reform and a long-time Orange County leader against illegal immigration.
Gilchrist noted that those of us who are close to this issue have been aware for months that the California Border Police Initiative and Campbell for Congress campaign are managed by the same political consultant, Dave Gilliard, of the big-dog and very high-priced Sacramento consulting firm of Gilliard, Blanning and Wysocki. It has become increasingly obvious that Gilliard set Campbell up as co-sponsor of this initiative for the sole purpose of Johnny-come-lately candidate positioning.
Continued Gilchrist, Gilliard has intended all along merely to rehabilitate Campbell with voters who were justifiably upset with his sorry history of pro-illegal alien votes in the California State Legislature. Gilliard has attempted to cloak Campbell with an aura of credibility as tough on border security and illegal immigration that he has never deserved on the merits. And now, from John Campbells own recent statements, we learn that, indeed, the fool the voters Initiative will be set aside by Campbell after this special election for Congress is decided.
After his recent fundraising junket to Washington D.C., John Campbell has turned his back on the California Border Police Initiative and the hard work of its advocates. He is more clearly than ever revealed as a lackey to the Bush Administrations pro-amnesty, open borders agenda. The ambitious politician who is John Campbell has revealed his true colors again.
In the best tradition of John Kerry, Campbell now says that I supported implementing the border police force before I opposed implementing the border police force. In fact, John Campbell is a worthy successor to the John Kerry of the 2004 election, as flip-flop champion of 2005, claimed Gilchrist.
Now, added Gilchrist, the chickens are coming home to roost for flip-flopping Honest John Campbell. In the last few days, our headquarters has been deluged with new supporters and volunteers, many of whom tell us that that John Campbell has let them down. I want the voters of the 48th District, who are going to the polls this Tuesday, December 6, to know that my dedication to support and materially sustain the men and women on our first line of defense will never waver. I will never back off from my commitment to put a halt to the flood of illegal immigration and to secure our borders.
Only two days left til the election!!
I can only wish that I could vote in the 48th Congressional District. Gilchrist would have my vote in a heartbeat.
California conservatives in the district must vote for Jim Gilchrest. Not because he has any chance of winning, but because the Bush administration and Congress are not serious about border security and need to be sent a message.
I already voted. Campbell 52%, Gilchist 20%, Young 28%.
"These people are clearly members and rooted in our community. Theyre going to stay here every bit as much as you or I are going to stay here. -John Campbell, OC Register
Illegal immigrants should be given the same benefits as everyone else - John Campbell, OC Register, 3-11-00
In the Assembly, John Campbell voted to give in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens, AND he voted to allow Mexican-issued Matricula Consular cards to be used as identification in California!
** A Sample of Campbells Voting Record: (taken from http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/bilinfo.html)
AB 540 (Firebaugh) Provides in-state tuition fees for illegal immigrants.
Passed the Assembly 57-15, 9/14/01 - John Campbell: Aye
ACR 229 (Diaz) Allow illegal aliens to use the sham Matricula Consular (Mexican ID) as legal form of identification.
Passed the Assembly 71-7, 8/30/02 John Campbell: Aye
AB 60 (Cedillo) Would give illegal immigrants the right to have California drivers licenses.
Passed the Assembly 52-20, 9/14/01 John Campbell: Abstain
We'll see, won't we...
Yup. As I said, all along, it was the wrong CD to wage the anti illegal jihad. Maybe Gilchrist should move on the the Cunningham district, and try there. It would be more fertile ground for him, and he would have a better chance of installing a Dem. Just a thought.
Campbell favored consular ID cards too? Amazingly stupid.
Indeed, Mr. Campbell voted to allow illegal immigrants at state colleges and universities to pay in-state tuition, which he later said was a mistake. And he favored a resolution that would have allowed Mexicans to use their government ID cards for identification purposes in this country. He withdrew his support after the F.B.I. said it was a bad idea.
It's my district and Gilchrist gets my vote but Canpbell will win.
I'm glad you'll be voting for Gilchrist. I just hope you're wrong about Campbell winning. I've had it with these "vote for what I say, not what I do" RINOs.
Oh, come on. You know better than to invoke 'installing a Dem'.
Young has no chance of winning in the 48th, and you know it.
I'll give you credit for consistency in your theorizing about JG's motives, but it just doesn't hold any water.
In the primary, Gilchrist singlehandedly made the Dems the third party.
No reason to believe it is going to be any different on Tuesday.
Why isn't that democrat Steve Young the favorite in this district.
The district gave Kerry 41 percent. Bush got 59 percent.
If Gilchrist and Campbell were to split 59 percent of the vote Young would win. If they each get 30 percent that would leave Young with 40 percent.
The primary were misleading too because the dems didn't put any money into them and it occured during a jewish holiday which is part of young's base.
I am all for Gilchrest running I just wished he would run as a republican and try to win a primary. Because if he were truly to split the vote with Campbell that conservative district would have a socialist dem representing them.
This run off system sucks. I can't stand the same system they use in Louisiana. I remember last year tauzin and the romero got way over 50 percent during election day but the vote was split between the two gop candidates. Then when tauzin ran a few weeks later without the pres race at the top of the ticket he lost to a radical leftist in melancon who is Blanco's water boy.
Another of Campbell's out and out lies.
All you have to do is read what he was saying in the Register and on the floor of the Assembly during that time period, and it is clear that he knew EXACTLY what he is doing.
He has been just as disingenuous about his pro-life record since he decided to run for Congress, by the way.
Gilcrest is a one issue noisemaker. The Republican is a very conservative, good man, and he will make a good congressman.
The WORST thing that could happen is for enough people to vote for Gilcrest and throw the race to the D's. That's the real problem.
Your answer is in my post #13 to Torie.
You've got it all wrong.
Jim's issues run the gamut of the conservative agenda:
He's 100% prolife, for the FairTax, pro-gun, etc.
You're also wrong about Campbell. He's a squishy 'moderate' masquerading as a conservative. Congress needs more of his type like it needs more tax dollars to spend.
And, as I've pointed out previously, the Dem is not a factor in this race.
Not even close.
Those who claim he is a factor are just trying to scare the ignorant into the Republican column.
No idea why the headline freaked out...it wasn't that way when the thread posted.
Could you repair it for me, please?
Weird. Now it's back the way it should be.
I'm telling you conservatives are playing with fire by splitting the vote in this district.
This district isn't provo utah. It is conservative but not to the point where you can split the vote between two candidates.
People are giving Young no chance because of the primary results. Just remember that Paul Hackett in his primary got very few votes and nearly won the district. Dems didn't show up for the primary in ca-48 knowing that young was the only dem and figuring that campbell wouldn't get 50 percent.
Also remember Gilchrest ran much stronger in voting that day. He got 25 percent and campbell got 36 percent. That gap can narrow to where both get around 30 percent leaving Young the victor.
Rino Brewer's voters will all go to Young. She got 17 percent add that to Young's 9 percent throw in some dem money, dems showing up for the real election instead of the primary, and throw in the extra votes he will get because it wasn't a jewish holiday and he could win.
Young can easily get 40 percent. Gilchrest's ceiling is under 40 percent. Only way the socialist dem doesn't win is if Gilchrest stays around 20 percent and I don't see that happening since he got around 25 percent in on day voting during the primary.
Campbell is relying on heavy absentee turnout. The dems are going to show up for this election. They didn't show up for the primary but will show up for this one. Cunnigham doesn't help either.
This is a recipe for disaster the democrats of the 48th district could very well be thanking Jim Gilchrist for giving them Congressman Steve Socialist Young.
This doesn't make any sense you would think Bush would have won this district with 75 percent to be confident the vote split won't affect the vote. Bush got 58 percent in this district when the gop in california was much stronger. The gop ballot inititive and arnold's recent actions are pointing to Gilchrest giving the election to Steven Young.
Watch Gilchrest say after he hands the election to Young to say it was better than Campbell winning. Gilchrest supported Peter Camajo in the governor's election remember. I wouldn't be surprised if he likes Young for his proposal to raise taxes on the rich.
Putting aside immigration, just why do you describe Campbell as a RINO? Heck, he is considerably more conservative than I am. :)
Your open borders bias is showing through, man.
You're on just about every immigration thread spouting nonsense these days.
Gilchrist outpolled all three Dems put together in the primary, and will far outpoll Young on Tuesday, as will Campbell.
You're just scaremongering.
Sorry, but that club just isn't effective anymore anyhow.
Conservatives are fed up with phony politicians feeding them a line of BS.
BTW, learn to spell.
Jim Gilchrist was and remains a McClintock supporter.
Looks like Campbell used them when it was convenient. Now spits 'em out. Shameless politician.
Come on, that doesn't take that much! ;-)
Dig very deep into Campbell's record and quotes of the past and it isn't hard to figure out that he is not nearly as conservative as his current rhetoric would imply.
McClintock endorses Campbell. McClintock cares most about fiscal issues, and on that Campbell is more reliable than the Buchananite populist. That is why Gilchrist will not do well next Tuesday. The 48th is the paradigmatic unpopulist CD.
Do my a flavor, and find just one issue other than immigration, where Campbell is not totally hard right. Cheers.
I was there that day: They were collecting signatures in Ontario.
The volunteers were ALL Gilchrist's, and Campbell showed up only to take pictures.
To him, it was nothing but a photo-op.
He has made it quite clear publically that he will do nothing to bring that particular holocaust to an end.
Wasn't that long ago he was running away consistently from the conservative label.
What a dope.
I am against open borders.
I would just rather have campbell than young.
Gilchrest is too much of a loose cannon too. He is not anti illegal immigration like Mike Pence and strong on all the other issues.
Can some one explain to me why Gilchrist wants to raise taxes and he supported Peter Camajo.
If this race were between Tom Tancredo and Campbell I would vote for Tancredo. Tancredo isn't a tax raiser peter camajo supporter. I don't trust Gilchrest at all.
Buchanan doesn't support the FairTax, notwithstanding the fact that he once upon a time wrote a few articles about it.
Jim Gilchrist does.
Good luck figuring out where Campbell stands. He and his hacks won't tell.
But, if he should win, he should fit in well with the big spenders and tax tinkerers we have now...
What was he supposed to do? California will have legalized abortion until the supernova. As jwalsh07 observed, abortion is a sacrament in California. A majority of registered GOP voters in the 48th are pro abortion. Inconvenient fetuses are inimical to their lifestyle. In the interests of full disclosure, I voted for Campbell knowing that he was a nebbish. And so it goes. Bad options lead to bad choices.
You're a lying troll, who continues to spell the founder of the Minuteman Project's name wrong, even after it's repeatedly pointed out to you.
Does Gilchrist still oppose the repeal of the estate tax? Newport Beach voters want to know. He is of course a protectionist, that is why he is AIP.
Considering that border security covers quite a bit, including terrorism, Campbell's flip-flop is enough.
Politics can be a bummer. I had to write Lieberman a letter praising his work on the WOT the same guy I wrote to on almost a daily basis many years ago castigating him for his atrocious flip flop on abortion. What's a guy to do?
Well, enjoy your 'nebbish'.
Nothing will change until conservative voters make the important things nonnegotiable.
And nothing could be more important than the God-given, unalienable right to life.
After all, without life, liberty means nothing.
He supports the repeal of the estate tax, along with all other forms of income taxation.
Gilchrist no longer poses a threat to installing Young, the Dem. His campaign ran off the rails. He didn't spend money on absentee voters, and made some comments about globalism that put him rather into the kook category for the 48th district. He had a disasterous interview with Hugh Hewitt that was sprayed across the blogs.
Become a curdmudgeon. That is my ticket.
I guess he changed his mind then. He is on record saying the opposite, but that was before in took on the very well to do 48th district. Cunningham district is just down the road. There are fewer mega estates down there, and a lot more blue collar whites worried about job competition by hard working illegals.
John and Ken have been ripping Campbell a new one the last couple of days.
It seems that Johnny backed out of Monday's debate on their show with Jim. Made up all sorts of lame excuses.
They were pretty easy on him early on, but now they're comparing him with David Dreier.
Looks like they finally have his number! :-)
You might be surprised how the alarm at the illegal invasion runs across socio-economic lines.
But, you and I have had this conversation before.
We need to send Campbell, and the GOP leadership, a message. Vote Gilchrist, and get everyone you know to vote Gilchrist. Campbell's record is bad enough to warrant not only a message, but punishment. We won't lose this seat to the Rats, but even if we do, it's a price worth paying and would serve as a wake-up call to the "leadership" and other GOP candidates well in advance of the dangerous '06 elections.
Gilchrist is running as an American Independent only because he couldn't have won the GOP nomination. He is a Republican, and recognizes that the solution to this crisis will from from the GOP, if anywhere. He told me so,
and I trust him.
I'm sure you're right. The affluent don't have to live with this problem. It's also convenient for them in some ways. It's the regular folks who have to live with it.
I'm with the regular folks.
We shall see next Tuesday. I didn't predict that well the primary. Maybe I will blow it again! Keep hope alive.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.