Presidential Frontrunners Would Surrender America's Borders

Constitution Party ^ | 2/6/07 | Chuck Baldwin

[tfelice]

Looking at the potential presidential frontrunners for both the Democrat and Republican parties reveals that virtually everyone of them would surrender America’s borders. Not one of the presidential frontrunners from either party would protect our borders against illegal immigration. Just the opposite. They would continue George Bush’s policy of wide open borders, including his determination to grant amnesty to illegals. In other words, when it comes to protecting our borders, there is not a nickel’s worth of difference between the two major parties’ leading presidential contenders.

Democratic presidential frontrunners include John Edwards, Barak Obama, and Hillary Clinton. Republican frontrunners include John McCain, Mitt Romney, and Rudy Giuliani.

In fact, virtually every Democratic candidate, and even the vast majority of Republican candidates, would provide no relief to America’s border problems. And, yes, that includes Sam Brownback and Newt Gingrich. Notable exceptions include Duncan Hunter, Ron Paul, and Tom Tancredo, with Tancredo at the head of the class.

[stevie_d_64]

Actually this has been commented on the "Texas" board...

I'm actually leaning towards a "Cruz/Hayek" ticket in '08...

I could habla with that all day!!!

But then again I am the most hated person in Texas...

Rick Perry ain't got nothin' on me!!!

[wastedyears]

Vote Duncan Hunter

[tiger-one]

Then put Duncan Hunter in front!!!!

[Fierce Allegiance]

We need Hunter!

[MNJohnnie]

Let see, we can do SOMETHING about the border or we can mindless scream the 100%er dogmas of a party that cannot even get .0001 of the vote and has NEVER won any elections anywhere ever.

I suggest instead of spending all their time shooting their own in the back the Always Whining consider the fact that the Democrats are planning on taking away the $1.2 Billion for the Border Fence the Republicans gave you.

70% of something is WAY better then 100% of NOTHING. Quit being such fools or it WILL be President Hillary in 2008.

[OB1kNOb]

Duncan Hunter / Fred Thompson '08 !

[ghostrider]

Hmm! Now, that is an interesting thought.

[snowrip]

The border issue is the frontrunner for any thinking American.

Hunter looks like the best candidate. Maybe he could convince Schwartzkopf to run for VP.

[ghostrider]

Looking at the potential presidential frontrunners for both the Democrat and Republican parties reveals that virtually everyone of them would surrender America’s borders.

That is because both major parties get their big contributions from the same sources, and will do what they are told or get no more funding.

[ghostrider]

Let see, we can do SOMETHING about the border or we can mindless scream the 100%er dogmas of a party that cannot even get .0001 of the vote and has NEVER won any elections anywhere ever.

It is a good thing George Washington, did not think like this.

[tfelice]

Let see, we can do SOMETHING about the border or we can mindless scream the 100%er dogmas of a party that cannot even get .0001 of the vote and has NEVER won any elections anywhere ever.

Your facts are wrong. The CP candidate for state rep in Montana won in '06. Additionally, there are 12 CP members serving in local offices.

[ANGGAPO]

Hunter is the man.

[Russ]

Hunter might be the best candidate but he couldn't raise enough money to wage a presidential campaign if he had five years do to so. I don't care how many candidates have declared or are going to declare there are probably only two or three at the most in each party that has a chance of going all the way to their party's nomination.

[TomGuy]

Add to the list Hagel, Huckabee, Brownback.

The only ones expressly for border control are Tancredo and Hunter.

[chaos_5]

I second that notion, HUNTER 08!!

[TChris]

70% of something is WAY better then 100% of NOTHING. Quit being such fools or it WILL be President Hillary in 2008.

Well put!

[Reaganwuzthebest]

Republican frontrunners include John McCain, Mitt Romney, and Rudy Giuliani.

Why would anyone vote for Giuliani, he's just another Northeastern liberal living in his ivory tower. I've had a lifetime of these clowns and seen the destruction they've brought upon this country and continue to do so...

[Enosh]

Hunter does look good.

Source

• Rated 0% by NARAL, indicating a pro-life voting record. (Dec 2003)
• Rated 83% by the US COC, indicating a pro-business voting record. (Dec 2003)
• Rated 17% by the NEA, indicating anti-public education votes. (Dec 2003)
• Rated 100% by the Christian Coalition: a pro-family voting record. (Dec 2003)
• Rated A+ by the NRA, indicating a pro-gun rights voting record. (Dec 2003)
• Rated 11% by SANE, indicating a pro-military voting record. (Dec 2003)
• Rated 100% by FAIR, indicating a voting record restricting immigration. (Dec 2003)
• Rated 20% by the AFL-CIO, indicating an anti-union voting record. (Dec 2003)

[Carry_Okie]

70% of something is WAY better then 100% of NOTHING. Quit being such fools or it WILL be President Hillary in 2008.

The same BS frar mongering was told to us about Arnold. What we got was 20%, not 70%, with a destroyed Republican Party tossed in as a kicker. Arnold did more damage to California than his Democrat predecessor we recalled ever dreamed. He cut off all support to down ticket Republicans so that he could hawk more debt.

No. No gun grabbing Giuliani, no two-faced weasel Romney, and no borderline psychotic McCain.

No.

[william clark]

Well, just so your open-minded about it.

[Afronaut]

War on Terror with wide open borders?? What is that?

GO Hunter, Tancredo, Let 'em have it!

[mysterio]

Vote Ron Paul.

[william clark]

Make that "you're"

Damn, it's finally infecting me.

[TomGuy]

The Constitution Party has good conservative national policies, but their foreign policy is lacking and unrealistic, to say the least.

In 04, they were advocating isolationism.

Regrettably, that platform is unrealistic. The US is the sole superpower. The US has around 1/4 of the entire global economy. There is no way that the US can return to the isolationistic foreign policy platform the CP has advocated.

The CP needs to seriously revise the foreign policy platform and make it realistic. Then, they might attract more interest.

[Admittedly, I haven't reviewed their published foreign policy statements since 04, so they may have updated them.]

[babygene]

"Duncan Hunter / Fred Thompson '08"

I'll take that, but I think it should be Fred Thompson / Duncan Hunter...

[snowrip]

Then the question becomes this: Do we get off our asses and start the grassfire campaign to help elect the best man for America, or do we support a candidate who (at this stage of the game) looks slightly more palatable than a democrat challenger?

I say do what is right for America. Send money. Volunteer. Speak out. Change minds. Make time to do whatever you are good at, and keep doing it. Private American citizens raise BILLIONS annually for humanitarian causes. Last-minute action by those same American citizens changed selection for a supreme court justice, and caused the Congress to reject Bush's Shamnesty bill. The point is, we can get things done when we act on them.

I posted something earlier this morning, something for everyone who uses this site to think about: If America collapses, where will you go to be free?

What if the flood of illegals continues, Bush's shamnesty becomes law, and our economy collapses under the weight?

What if Hillary is elected, and impliments her plans for socialized medicine, higher taxes, and general "Communism Lite"?

There is only a certain number of burdens America can bear, only a certain number of messes we can clean up, and only a finite amount of resources we have to give. When that runs out, we are over. There are no other places to go.

If we all made a conscious decision to spend half the time we surf this site contacting our elected representatives instead, we could concievably begin to turn the tide against those who would destroy this country.

[tfelice]

The way I read it they are "isolationist" in the sense they don't think the US should be hopping around the globe getting ourselves involved in every little conflict that comes down the pike. Some would say in that sense the founders were isolationists.

See what you think: http://www.constitutionparty.com/party_platform.php#Foreign%20Policy

[subterfuge]

The fix is in people and it's pretty obvious.

We'll have either of 3 people as our next president and there is nothing anyone, including FReepers, can do about it.

Either McCain, Rudy or Hillary will be president and the borders will remain an imaginary line only used to persecute and harass American citizens.

Defeatist? Yes.

Cynical? Yes.

True? Unfortunately, yes.

[OB1kNOb]

"Duncan Hunter / Fred Thompson '08"

I'll take that, but I think it should be Fred Thompson / Duncan Hunter...

I'd be one happy conservative either way!

[ghostrider]

Me too!

[ghostrider]

Hunter might be the best candidate but he couldn't raise enough money to wage a presidential campaign if he had five years do to so. I don't care how many candidates have declared or are going to declare there are probably only two or three at the most in each party that has a chance of going all the way to their party's nomination.

Ah! You have illustrated a point that I have been saying for years. The American people, like the Soviets of old, can participate in elections and freely vote for any of the limited candidates funded by the global financial syndicates. These syndicates and their politicians have become the new royalty. Can you say Prince George I, Prince George II, Prince Jeb, Prince Slick Willy, Princess Hillary, Prince Teddy, Prince RFK & Prince JFK?

[stevie_d_64]

Fred Thompson??? The actor turned politician/Senator turned actor again???

Shirley you jest...

[Texas Federalist]

70% of something is WAY better then 100% of NOTHING. Quit being such fools or it WILL be President Hillary in 2008.

Reagan gave us 70% of what we wanted and he never lost our support. Your boys are giving 5% on a good day and -50% on a bad one.

[gubamyster]

ping

[Dante3]

I don't think Romney wants open borders - at least in one of his comments a while back he left the impression that he would support protecting our borders.

I am not a "one-issue" voter. However, surrendering our country is so extreme - an act smacking of treason - that I can never vote for anyone who favors open borders.

No country can survive if it fails to protect its borders and allow anyone to march in.

[Marine Inspector]

70% of something is WAY better then 100% of NOTHING.

Agreed! To bad, Giuliani, McCain and Bush are closer to the 100% of nothing side of the spectrum than they are to the 70% of something side.

[texastoo]

No. No gun grabbing Giuliani, no two-faced weasel Romney, and no borderline psychotic McCain.

ROTFLMAO! Excellent description of the RINOs.

[texastoo]

Howdy! Haven't seen you for a while.

[MNJohnnie]

Truth Hurts. No surprise the loudest screamers don't like contemplating the reality that they are actively working FOR Hillary Clinton's Election Campaign. Seems all the Whiners CAN do around here is shine. They never stand for anything, they merely bitch endlessly about everything.

[Marine Inspector]

Howdy!

I'm lurking more then posting. Too many idiots that thinks RINO's are better then Dems.

These bozo's would vote for Hilary if she put an (R) next to her name.

[texastoo]

These bozo's would vote for Hilary if she put an (R) next to her name.

I agree. LOL!

[babygene]

"Shirley you jest..."

No, I'm not Shirley, and I'm not jesting. It wouldn't be the first actor to become president. He's conservative, and he has name and face recognition (much more than Hunter).

He's also very likable and could get democratic, independent as well as republican votes.

[janetgreen]

Vote Duncan Hunter

BTTT

[Little Ray]

You mean the money for the fence that has NEVER been budgeted?

Frankly, I'm beginning to think it won't make much of difference who gets elected, whether its Queen Hillary! or Queen Rudy.

[stevie_d_64]

I know...I was just yanking your chain...;-)

I met Fred Thompson once years ago...And I was impressed with his overall presentation...Very Reagan-istic...

But I would think he's not looking to get back into the game again...Unfortunate for us, but well earned for him...He did his time, and its up to the rest of us to get it done now...

Its a nice thought though...

[Borax Queen]

Too many idiots that thinks RINO's are better then Dems.

These bozo's would vote for Hilary if she put an (R) next to her name.

Yes, they would. And I've seen them sabotage conservative after conservative candidate because the candidates wanted a sovereign America.

[taxed2death]

Your thinking got us here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1768750/posts?page=1

With 1/5th of the population of Mexico now residing in our country illegally, sucking the taxpayers dry.