Posted on 09/20/2007 6:40:58 PM PDT by Petronski
Ya know, you probably will find it strange that there was a very successful conservative movement with lots of really important issues before anyone even noticed the border with Mexico. In 2004, we got 45% of the Hispanic vote and (given the overwhelmingly Democrat lean of the Puerto Rican vote on the mainland, a probable majority of the Mexican vote. Given the advancement of bordermania since then there is little likelihood of a repeat any time soon but go ahead and obsess any way. After all, it’s a free country. Maybe paleoPaulie will save the US from Karl Rove! Not likely. Gandalf the Grey has a better shot.
This is not Borking. Bork was innocent. PaleoPaulie is not.
I guess Scottie beamed up your balls.
His public contention is that the War on Terror is our fault. Consequently, we must retreat from the Middle East and the rest of the world.
For all his positives on illegal aliens, in foreign policy, he's 1930's isolationist -- a dangerous anachronism.
Hunter and Tancredo have essentially the same stance on illegal aliens as Paul -- and Romney seems sound as well. But none of them carry the bizarre foreign policy views as Paul.
Even though Paul is a long-time Texas Congressman, I sincerely doubt he could carry his own district in a Presidential race.
I read your statement above and only shook my head in amazement. You obviously haven't a clue what has been occuring for the past 20 years.
It seems you require a little history lesson here.
You mentioned 1994. But it seems you failed to notice or listen to the warnings from those in the southwest that a violent, lawless invasion was upon us, and spreading fast. Yes, before 1994.
In 1994 the southwest was being choked off by millions of illegal alien invaders. It was and still is the big issue.
Tell me, did you ever hear of CA. Proposition 187, circa 1994? Reading your statement above, it seems you haven't.
Some back ground on 187:
Generally, this initiative would have prohibited state and local government agencies from providing publicly funded education, health care, welfare benefits, or social services to illegal aliens. The measure would have also required state and local agencies to report suspected illegal immigrants to the INS and certain state officials.
The people of California spoke loud and clear, voting overwhelmingly for the proposition. However, state government officials, working in concert with the Federal government burned the ballots declared this proposition illegal, after it won big by the voters.
Ya know, you probably will find it strange that there was a very successful conservative movement with lots of really important issues before anyone even noticed the border with Mexico. In 2004, we got 45% of the Hispanic vote...
Ya know, it seems after reading your statement, you were willing to sacrifice our sovereignty, our border security, our national security, all for a few votes.
Either that, or you just had not idea what was happening in this country back in the early 1990s.
Now lets fast forward about 15 years...Well, the results should be quite clear to most everyone...Maybe even you.
Well, at least you don't claim that Dr. Paul contends 9-11 was our fault as some others do.
The WOT, incidentally, was the invention of the Bush White House. How can it be ascribed to anyone else?
Our having troops in more than half the nations of the world, according to Dr. Paul, invites more terrorist attacks. What a squirrelly notion that is, huh? Imagine, people whose only taste of American culture is by way of soldiers stationed in their hometown.
And, BTW, withdrawing our forces from Asia, Europe, Africa and South America has nothing to do with the WOT or 9-11. It's only common sense. The Cold War is over, and has been since 1990. We are the one remaining superpower, but that does not ipso facto make the United States automatically deputized as the world's policeman.
You might educate yourself on the distinction between isolationism as practiced by such luminaries as Patrick Buchanan (and to a certain extent, even Duncan Hunter) and non-interventionism,, which is a whole other kettle of fish. Dr. Paul is and always has been an advocate of a non-interventionist foreign policy, which puts him at odds with the current Republican leadership as well as those who call themselves neo-conservatives.
Hunter, Tancredo and Paul may share some common goals regarding immigration policy, but it is clear that Ron Paul does not make stopping the flow of illegal immigrants his number one priority in this presidential campaign. Nor does he believe that punishing employers is an appropriate answer to the federal government's misguided immigration policies.
Most important, Ron Paul is totally against the idea of a national ID card, whether it's tamper-proof or not. We don't need to invade Americans' privacy and ignore the Fourth Amendment to track everyone as Rudy Giuliani would like to do.
This is not Borking. Bork was innocent. PaleoPaulie is not.
Bork is not "innocent".
"-- Bork has denounced what he calls the "NRA view" of the Second Amendment, something he describes as the "belief that the constitution guarantees a right to Teflon-coated bullets."
Instead, he has argued that the Second Amendment merely guarantees a right to participate in a government militia. --"
One better, I never posted this post! Ha!
Wait a minute, um...
Like I said, I don’t see us getting any rational answers this way.
I guess you’re right. Let em Bork — what real difference does it make if the 2nd is just a protection for militias?
Insignificant collateral damage.
Thank you for admitting clarifying your view on this. That explains a lot.
H-O-R-S-E H-O-C-K-E-Y!
Damn, just damn.
I am still left speechless...
The Balkins are of no strategic consequence to the US.
Thanks for all your information regarding Ron Paul and the illegal alien immigration battle we have. I did not know that he makes no effort to stop the flow of illegals into the country, or to penalize the employers. As for the war, I wish it was over.
When you question these prospective presidential candidates, they all say what they know you want them to say. If they get elected, that all changes. What you want is all forgotten. How both parties ignore the wishes of the country, and keep on with their very liberal policies in giving the illegals all the benefits of citizenship is beyond me. How they can think that way makes me wonder about their brainpower. Are they just stupid, or are they all paid off.
Now, have YOU ever heard of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution? It distinguishes between the rights of citizens and the rights of those who are merely "persons" within the jurisdiction of the respective states. It REQUIRES that each state treat all persons within its jurisdiction as having EQUAL RIGHTS under the law. To translate for those in Rio Linda: if you want welfare state programs for your American citizen grandma, you are going to have to extend them to all "persons" within California's jurisdiction. In an amazing and unanticipated upset, a federal court in California proved capable of actually reading the constitution as Planned Barrenhood Wilson was unable to do and struck down his Prop 187.
Isn't the conservative position the one whereby the welfare state programs are abolished for everyone and not the one where categories of "persons" violative of the 14th Amendment are established to care for your granny but not the granny of Mexican non-citizens present here???
There has been an extended "conservative" temper tantrum now for more than a decade against "illegal" aliens (who are trying their best to replace50+ million murdered innocent babies in our economy and not replicating the views of the Junior league on social issues). Tell me about the successes in terms of policy and results and in terms of politics. That was short.
Conservatives are now being played for suckers on this issue and are all too eager to be played. The Demonrats get to reposition dangerously Republican-leaning Hispanics as being about as knee jerk Democrats in the future as blacks are percentagewise. That prevents the Hispanics from canceling out the Democrat stranglehold on blacks and gives them a second group perpetually upset at what, whether you like it or not, will be played as GOP "racism." I know, I know but your non-racism doesn't matter when you are perceived by the "victim" group as "racist."
OK, we lose the Hispanic vote which combined with the black vote makes up 25%. The Hispanics are a GROWING percentage of the electorate while the blacks are stable now at about 12%. We also lose some Catholic vote among people like some of my relatives who cherish the immigrant history of our families and really do not give a rat's patoot over whether immigrants come with the gummint's seal of approval. Most of my immigrant ancestors came here without such papers and so probably did most of yours.
We can make up for those losses, right??? We can attract feminazis and envirowhackos and gummint workers and antiwar antiAmerican losers and pacifists and abortion enthusiasts and entire lavender armies and people who favor legalizing sex orgies with space aliens. Remember with the unified opposition of blacks and Hispanics, we need 2/3 of the remaining votes to BREAK EVEN.
That is the future you are preparing. If you also support paleoPaulie (and IIRC you do have that shame on your record here), you also better teach your descendants to speak Arabic and to be able to quote (approvingly) every passage in the Koran with the heritage you are leaving them. Sharia "Law" would be a real shock to paleowindtunnels generally and to Libertoonians in particular.
No one, trust me, NO ONE is going to alter or repeal the 14th Amendment the Rosetta Stone and treasure chest of American liberalism.
My nearly forty year old college degree is magna cum laude in American History, thank you very much, topped by a doctorate in law. My are of NW Illinois has many Mexicans and they have proven to be good neighbors. You should get to know them. They want what your ancestors wanted.
Before you resort to "What part of 'illegal' don't I understand?", let's try: "What part of "unconstitutional don't YOU understand???"
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.