Posted on 08/21/2007 7:55:59 AM PDT by hardback
Inhofe throws support to Fred Thompson
M. Spencer Green/AP Former U.S. Sen. Fred Thompson gives a thumbs up to supporters riding the Sky Gllider at the Iowa State Fair on Friday, Aug. 17, in Des Moines, Iowa.
By STAFF REPORTS 8/21/2007 8:52 AM Last Modified: 8/21/2007 8:53 AM
U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe threw his political support to unannounced presidential candidate Fred Thompson today.
Speaking to the Broken Arrow Chamber of Commerce Tuesday morning, Inhofe said he expects the former actor and Tennessee senator to announce a bid for the presidency soon.
Inhofe said he will support Thompson, when he announces.
Thompson is the only Republican who has a chance to defeat Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., in the general election, Inhofe said.
But of course facts are not good if they dispel your “truth”
Then what is your candidate going to do to solve the problem that is so superior to anyone else? Most of them use the same words and phrases if they are interested in the issue.
I guess we could just “tell them to go home.” Effective /S
We’re very blessed here in Oklahoma to have Inhofe and Coburn as U.S. Senators. We desperately need more like them in Congress.
Almost all of the liberal Dimm’s in Congress are simply pawns of Satan and foolishly attempt to do his bidding in the earth. Only Christ can save them (Romans 10:9-10).
“Then what is your candidate going to do to solve the problem that is so superior to anyone else?”
I thought you said you researched the candidate’s positions on border security and illegal immigration?
“Most of them use the same words and phrases if they are interested in the issue.”
Not at all. I explained some of the important differences between Hunter and Thompson in #84. You replied that it was too much information. Not to be rude, but I’m not sure if you’re just not ‘getting it’, or feigning not to.
I don’t mean this to be unkind, just to try to figure out the differences.
I did check the websites and found remarkable similarity in words and phrases which I’ve quoted.
I’m, sure you understand what your candidate says but if you don’t understand what Fred said it won’t be possible to discuss. He said things like, secure the border, enforce the law, certainly NOT amnesty, illegals can’t go to the head of the line [which is a reason to oppose amnesty], stop the flow of illegals accross the border...
You’re ignoring some of what he said and centering on one quote in abscence of the rest. He does not advocate amnesty and strongly opposed the latest bill that was defeated [as recently as the Iowa State Fair.] I think a person has to take everything that someone says, in context, not just pick out one thing and ignore the rest.
I’m being honest, I don’t see the big differences in what the numerous candidates say. And I can’t see what you say in what Fred has said. And I’m not saying any of this to be rude to you or your candidate. When people get angry with one another it is more difficult to understand what is being said. I am trying on my part to be calm. Which I haven’t always been able to do.
I can see that border security is important to Hunter and he stays strongly on message but doesn’t dwell in details. I appreciate that about him. He is getting that message across certainly.
When one says build the fence and another says secure the border, it seems they are headed in the same direction. When they say enforce the law, and the fence is part of the law, it seems they are headed in the same direction.
Ron Paul is one exception to me, he says a lot of good things but what is he going to do? I don’t view him as trustworthy IMHO.
You and I are handling the things that Fred DID say very differently which I believe is really the big reason you and I have differences. BTW, I was going through videos of DH on immigration issues, and a reporter asked him what were the differences between DH and Fred. DH gave an answer, but it was NOT immigration or border security. Which is part of the reason I was asking questions about immigration.
That's because even then the Clinton INS was playing the "catch and release" game.
"Located" should be identical to "Deported". And it can be with minor effort. Jerks like you who say "it just can't be done" give me an acute rectal pain. IT CAN BE DONE.
However, let's play...
Ok, give me details...
Give me the numbers...
Not ideal world, but real world 2007 facts and figures, taking into account politics, policy and personnel. Take into account that hard core politically active conservatives make up a tiny percentage of the voting public...
Put down the "Deport them now!" sign and get me some real ideas and plausible scenarios to back them up.
You have missed the entire point. Sad really because this stubbornness gets our asses kicked every single time...
I left that off.
The numbers did not lie if you bothered to look at them.
If the best effort was at most 15% ACTUALLY arrested vs. located, what effect will doubling the staff have? Tripling?
It is still a Government entity also, so a "minor" increase in effort? Been to a Government office lately?
Because that was by no means "the best effort". The Clinton INS was playing the same "wink and nod" enforcement games that Bush is playing. If we can locate 1,700,000, we should be able to deport 1,000,000 of them with REAL enforcement (i.e. the kind the DEA and IRS uses). Doubling facilities and staff would get us to 2,000,000 per year.
It took us 20 years to get into this hole, I don't mind if it takes us 20 years to get out of it. But what I want is for our immigration laws to be ENFORCED. I want ALL our immigration laws to be enforced. We don't need any more laws, and we certainly don't need any type of amnesty.
I've come to agree with the folks currently labelled "extremists"---BUILD THE FENCE and ENFORCE THE LAWS.
Have you seen any statement anywhere (other than AuntB's post 6) that indicates Inhofe is a "Wes Clark fan"?
No, I have not looked, either. There is a reason I used “if”, instead of “since”.
Hi PKM. Haven’t heard from you in a while. Are you still in Inhofe’s camp? I know you have been one of his big supporters.
While I think you are being a tick optimistic, the variables in all this could play in favor of your scenario. The biggest road block right now is going to be public perception and the forces that shape it, which are forces we don’t have a lot of control over. Now, I will allow that the dynamics are changing because of the Internet and the failures in the press.
The reason I pressed this, and will continue to do so, to the point of playing devils advocate, was because the place we always get our asses kicked is in the court of public opinion. The libs get an hour, and we get a sound bite and that sound bite usually is chosen to be that which reflect on us the worst. “Deport them all” signs, while reflective of our desires, look harsh and almost racist on their own. At least that is how its played. We have to stop that game and play it against them. We need to sound more reasoned than they are at all times so the sound bite has to be longer and it appears reasonable.
I also think we need to be considering all possible angles because I think time will work against us. If things turn, we may end up not much better off. If I had to look at what I want, I want the criminal illegals gone now, then the loafers, and then the worker, because IF it gets shutdown, I want the worst gone first.
We have to play it smart and also sound reasonable, it will sell much better to the voters. The left knows oh too well that we on the right have inherited, whether we like it or not, the skinheads and other radicals, from the Dems over the past 40 years. That 1% kook group get played against us every time we talk about Affirmative action, immigrants or whatever. Then the press runs with it and we slink away because we look hateful and vindictive and bullheaded. We have to start to look like reasoned and thoughtful individuals, because we do have the better positions, but not the best bully pulpit to play off of. I want to win and break this stupid cycle of us then them again.
Inhofe’s one of the few Senators left I like.
Still, I’m not going to support someone on the endorsement of anyone. I’ve been soured by politicians in general.
At this point it is between Hunter and Thompson, and Hunter I know won’t win while I’m still hesitant about Thompson. I do consider this edorsement to be a strong checkmark in the plus column for Thompson.
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.