Posted on 10/21/2007 11:38:01 PM PDT by My Favorite Headache
Bravo to you!
| Huckabee |
||
| Posted by cradle of freedom On News/Activism 08/15/2007 7:54:10 PM CDT · 2 replies · 34+ views Arkansas News Bureau | June 30, 2005 | Wesley Brown Huckabee promotes 'open door' policy at LULAC convention Thursday, Jun 30, 2005 By Wesley Brown Arkansas News Bureau LITTLE ROCK - In a impassioned speech before hundreds of influential Hispanic civil rights leaders from across the nation, Gov. Mike Huckabee told a captive audience Wednesday that America is great because it has always opened it doors up to people seeking a better way of life. "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you," Huckabee said, citing the Golden Rule. "I have tried to govern that way and it stands to reason that I really do believe that... |
||
| Huckabee defends societal cost of illegal aliens (2004) |
||
| Posted by pissant On 10/19/2007 10:22:45 AM CDT Arkansas News Bureau ^ | July 7, 2004 | David Robinson LITTLE ROCK - Gov. Mike Huckabee on Tuesday defended illegal immigrants against a radio caller's criticism and sympathized with former convicts' inability to vote in Arkansas. Huckabee, in his monthly radio call-in show on the Arkansas Radio Network, also repeated his reasons for supporting a constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriages and for opposing an amendment that would allow lawmakers to stay in office longer. Chris from Cabot, who thanked Huckabee for speaking at his Fellowship Bible Church, asked the governor about the status of a proposed amendment to define marriage as between a man and a woman. More... |
||
He (like McCain, Graham, et al) is one of those recent converts to 'secure the border', since he sees that is a major election issue.
[Note that these recent 'secure the border' converts are not denouncing amnesty for illegals nor The Dream Act that is still floating around in the Senate. Why? Because supporting 'secure the border' sounds good without forcing them to state that they oppose open borders and amnesty for illegals. Their 'secure the border' is a ploy to help get them elected.]
Oh, yes, and it is totally framed to get a RINO in there.
Don’t forget-Roger Ailes is very tight with Hillary.
This is a Fifth Column effort and I, for one, refuse to participate in helping them elect a Manchurian candidate so he can fall on his sword for the globalist-annointed wraith.
Duncan Hunter is a veteran and former chairman of the Armed Services Committee.
He was overwhelmingly reelected 13 times in a very socially- politically challenging district.
The idea that some lying, cheating, baby-killing, perv-coddling mayor is a better executive, or that
a one-term lawyer-lobbyist-actor from a conservative state who promoted positions that were easy in his state,
or a former executive who has just recently changed his mind on critical issues of abortion and gay marriage are somehow superior to
Duncan hunter, a consistent, prolife, military veteran who has fought for border security, life, fair trade, and fair taxes,
just because shills like Sean Hannity say so is absurd.
In my mind Huckabee probably has more negatives (smoking ban and immigration), but I found myself liking him last night.
For the rest of the campaign season, the name Hillary should not ever be uttered by a Republican without the word “socialist”.
Hillary the socialist. Hillary, who is a socialist, Hillary, who will impose socialism. Etc.
It has a nice ring to it, and it is the truth.
KUDOS! You did a great job! I videotaped the whole thing. bttt
I don’t want Rudy to be our nominee, but calling him a liberal Democrat is silly.
He’s not even as liberal as our most current liberal republican. His ratings show that he’s a moderate republican, not something we like around here, but not a liberal democrat.
There is one thing I fear more than a “Rudy/Clinton” election, and that is a Clinton presidency. Oh, there’s one OTHER thing I fear: A “Rudy/Clinton” election where the conservatives all stay home but Rudy wins anyway.
Then you have a Rudy in the white house, bitter at how the conservative abandoned him, AND empowered by the knowledge that he doesn’t need to do ANYTHING conservative because we stayed home and he won.
Plus, because we were all demoralized and stayed home, a dozen good conservatives down-ticket lost close races, giving Rudy a much more moderate/liberal congress to work with.
Of course, that’s why I’m fighting against Rudy. I could even argue that a popular conservative candidate, even one that would LOSE the presidency, would be preferable to a Rudy that wins, if that conservative energized the base. The base would turn out in droves, and we’d win back house seats and elect conservatives.
But once the primary is done, if Rudy is our candidate, ACTIVISTS need to focus on energizing the conservative base even though we’d have a crappy presidential candidate, in order to support down-ticket conservatives. We won’t do that if all the conservatives are staying home.
And if the links with Fred as VP candidate? Which will give him a REAL shot in 2016. What will you do then?
Here is a question for you:
Tommorrow you pass a law that all abortion is illegal and anything else you want ...what will happen ?
Good idea! Just don't let the Ron Paul guy bogart the thing!
Tennessee is barely conservative these days.
Nashville is very very liberal. Memphis is lost until the New Madrid fault goes off again.
Nashville and Austin are political twins.
Duncan Hunter supporters can take care of him during the primaries. The MSM does not control the ballot box....even though they are trying....trying very hard. However, if Duncan doesn’t win the primary, please don’t stay at home when election day comes and let Hillary win:-)
His recent whimperings notwithstanding, it’s difficult for me to tell Mr. Giuliani apart, ideologically and policy-wise, from, say, Sen. Joseph Lieberman. Except on the war, Mr. Giuliani would fit reasonably comfortably in the mainstream of the Democrat party, and that mainstream is liberal.
“There is one thing I fear more than a ‘Rudy/Clinton’ election, and that is a Clinton presidency. Oh, there’s one OTHER thing I fear: A ‘Rudy/Clinton’ election where the conservatives all stay home but Rudy wins anyway.”
In my own view, any election where the two major party candidates are Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Giuliani is already lost to actual conservatives.
If Mr. Giuliani wins without conservative support, then it will show that conservatives are effectively marginalized, and can be ignored with impunity, as we are powerless to affect the outcome of the general election.
If Mr. Giuliani wins with conservative support, then it will show that conservatives are effectively marginalized, and can be ignored with impunity, as we can be taken for granted because we “have nowhere else to go.”
“But once the primary is done, if Rudy is our candidate, ACTIVISTS need to focus on energizing the conservative base even though we’d have a crappy presidential candidate, in order to support down-ticket conservatives. We won’t do that if all the conservatives are staying home.”
I have no intention of staying home. I’ll go out and vote for every office on the ballot. And with the exception of the presidency, it will be a straight-Republican ticket.
For the presidency, I’ll vote third party.
I won’t vote for a baby killer for president.
Just not gonna do it.
sitetest
I missed that, but see post #81. I sure hope we’re not funding something like that.
“Put Hillary Clinton against any Republican and you will see Republicans vote like you have never seen before, the alternative is too grave.”
Even for Rudy, who I thought won. Hope Jim Rob read that.
YO DA MAN
It’s not good enough for me to vote for him either, when I have others I trust much more.
But in the general election, I believe it’s better to vote for the guy who says he will do what I want, than the guy who says he will do what I don’t want.
In the first case, I have to trust him to do what he said, which of course he might not be trustworthy.
But in the second case, I have to trust him to NOT to what he said, and if I think he isn’t trustworthy, why am I voting for him?
If Rudy was SAYING he’d do what Hillary would do, I’d understand not voting for him just because he’s an “R”. I felt that way about Linc Chafee, and was glad to see him go.
But at the moment, on many issues Rudy is SAYING he’ll be mostly on “our side”. Hannity thinks that’s enough to SUPPORT him, and I certainly don’t, but in the general election, I can’t see giving Hillary half a vote over a man who SAYS he’ll do what I want him to do.
I hope I don’t have to make that choice.
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.