Posted on 11/08/2007 6:15:33 AM PST by Liz
How happy is Clinton that Gov. Spitzer stirred up his licenses- for-illegals firestorm? Not very, we'd guess. She's been talking from both sides of her mouth on the issue since last week's debate - and her dissembling appears to be costing her. A Rasmussen poll showed that Clinton's support in NH (site of the debate) has dropped sharply........A recent Washington Times national poll showed 77% of Americans believe illegal aliens shouldn't be licensed.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Gov Spitzer and Clinton's support for licensing is proving to be the Democrats' moral equivalent of a date-rape drug.
I don’t get the “date-rape” connection.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
What’s laughable is how surprised the MSM is by that fact.
Hillary: License to Shill.............
The unique thing in this is that Spitzer forget to tell the NYS Legislatures and the timing of the next election. It would make one think he was ALREADY under “Hillary’s Orders.
Date-Rape Drug, I guess referring to the “license” as a way to get what you want from whom you want it..........
"No" is a vote against it.
Is that fair?
Absolutely! The fight to prevent illegals from obtaining driver's licensing is a fight to prevent them from also registering to vote. The 'Rats are desperate for more people with no education, no money, and an eagerness to take government handouts.
Anyone who thinks that the 'Rats motives for the "Dream Act", "pathway to citizenship", etc ISN'T about importing 10 to 20 million instant 'Rat votes is a DAMNED FOOL or a liar.
“I don’t get the “date-rape” connection.”
Maybe the Communist Chinese connection to Hillary? There is a new product from China being recalled called Aqua Dots...
http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=3835999
I will fearlessly take a shot at it.
The Democrats have a harmful agenda that they continually force upon the voters. The only way the Democrats can continue with their harmful agenda is to keep getting the votes. As time passes, votes are becoming harder to get. Thus, the Democrats need a mechanism to get the votes, and continue the harmful agenda. One way, will be to give drivers licenses to illegal aliens. Once they have drivers license, they have voting privileges. Give out about 20 million licenses to illegals, gain about 20 million votes. The Democrats can therefore control all Federal and State elections and unmercifully hammer home their programs, and the voters adversly affected are helpless to act anymore.
Something along those lines anyway.
Who said it?
1) "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."
A. Karl Marx
B. Adolph Hitler
C. Joseph Stalin
D. None of the above
2) "It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few...... And to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity."
A. Lenin
B. Mussolini
C. Idi Amin
D. None of the Above
3) "(We) ..can't just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people."
A. Nikita Khrushev
B. Josef Goebbels
C. Boris Yeltsin
D. None of the above
4) "We have to build a political consensus and that requires people to give up a little bit of their own ... in order to create this common ground."
A. Jane Fonda
B. Hugo Chavez
C. Kim Jong Il
D. None of the above
5) "I certainly think the free-market has failed."
A. Karl Marx
B Lenin
C. Molotov
D. None of the above
6) "I think it's time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in (the) entire economy that they are being watched."
A. Pinochet
B. Milosevic
C. Saddam Hussein
D. None of the above
Answers
(1) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/29/2004
(2) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 5/29/2007
(3) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007
(4) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007
(5) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007
(6) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 9/2/2005
Ms. Clinton is very good at telling you what she will do but tongue tied when asked to be precise on an issue. She is dishonest, unstable, and ambiguous. Now that her impeached, rapist husband is in the race for the White House with her, that is one more huge reason not to elect Ms. Clinton - No Third Term For The Clintons!!!!
Speaking of Rape... how’s her husband doing lately? Has HilLIARy had to threaten any of his victims lately? (Hi Juanita!)
oh and has she heard of this alleged rape by her husbamd yet? I know someone asked her yers ago and she had no clue.. has she found it important enough to look into it?
Orwellian forked-tongue BUMP!
Everyone has experienced or knows someone who has experienced the ER story, of the Criminal Alien getting preferential treatment (primarily to get the translator and the customer out of the ER to prevent the starting of a riot, to be fair. It was the Courts who mandated free medical care for and and all comers, no questions asked. Most of the hospitals hate it too, though there are plenty of administrators who love "cost shifting" to cover the ripping off of patients for other creative accounting, to be sure.)
This has been a growing toxic political issue growing to a climax for some time now. In North Carolina, a credible poll done a year ago indicated 85 percent of people who vote wanted nothing, "zero," nada done for illegarados. Similar numbers finally being reported nationwide show a significant part of the Left, 40 percent and below of the 45 percent who will vote for anyone other than Conservative Christians; the Left Turn Only folks want illegal aliens deported. Even before the debate debacle, Mrs. Clinton was toast. It is faith alone, of the True Believer kind, that fuels her campaign. Much of her Elitist De Luxe money will dry up when she not only loses in Iowa, but in New Hampshire and in South Carolina. She may well lose these races to three different opponents. Forget Edwards and Obama for a moment. Consider Joe Biden and Chris Dowd. Why do you suppose these seasoned liberal Senators, who can have lunch and joke with the President and then go out on the lawn and say everything short of pure hatred, are still in the race? Why are they in the race to begin with? Because they know George Bush will not be on the ballot next year and, whatever their real political differences, the President says what means and means what he says. Unlike Hillary, they are supreme pragmatic socialists of the Senate Collegium. These are heavy-weight Democrats who believe Hillary will not get the nomination. They've known and pragmatically denied publically the Clinton Stain since 1992. Their being in the race shows is prema facia evidence that the manufactured consensus of a Hillary "inevitability" is plain bull. Biden is an expert on Bull, as you all know, but unlike Hillary, he doesn't believe most of his own. Those of us on the Right have been up to speed on the Truth About the Clintons for many years. The pundits since 1995 and the Base since 1998. Still many Regulars on the Right have bought into the Inevitability trip and are clinging to this belief going into '08. She'll evaporate, unless this goes to their Convention, as it well might, after Super Tuesday. She will have been marginalized well before that, however, and without that illusion there just isn't much left about The Smartest Woman in the World we can talk about. I have not believed she would get the Democrat nomination since Biden and Dodd got in the race and since I saw that poll of North Carolinians. The vast bulk of all Americans are flatly immune from the shouting accusations of being racist on the issue of immigration. They want Legal Immigration, and at the very least, an Electronic Frontier to control the borders. This simply has to be true of both the self-identified Left, Right and a big chunk of self-righteous Moderates. It might be wise, if even as a thought experiment, that Hillary will not be coronated by the Democrats or the Media. The latter are mostly both insulted and sniffing blood in the water. Consider the possibility that Hillary will not be the problem, that Immigration will divide the Democrats into desperately looking for a Third Way middle on an issue that for most Americans no Third Way exists. Add a coming Cuban Missile Crisis with Iran, on George's watch or the next guy's watch. Consider Immigration as the wedge issue that divides the Left and unites the Right. Now who do you think will get the nomination of the Democrats under this scenario? Watch who breaks out on Immigration on the side the Media will tolerate, the brave... whoever... Edwards is desperate enough, admittedly. And he's determined to find that Third Way. But whoever it is, Republicans better get prepared to have this issue taken from them. Every campaign is re-evaluating their game of perception on this issue...right now. The D's will try to sell that Third Way, but, again, there simply is no Third Way according to the polls.
Regards
Duncan Hunter will be on the Glenn Beck Show tonight
Thanks Mojohemi!
It was the Courts who mandated free medical care for and and all comers, no questions asked. Most of the hospitals hate it too, though there are plenty of administrators who love "cost shifting" to cover the ripping off of patients for other creative accounting, to be sure.)
This has been a growing toxic political issue growing to a climax for some time now.
In North Carolina, a credible poll done a year ago indicated 85 percent of people who vote wanted nothing, "zero," nada done for illegarados.
Similar numbers finally being reported nationwide show a significant part of the Left, 40 percent and below of the 45 percent who will vote for anyone other than Conservative Christians; the Left Turn Only folks want illegal aliens deported.
Even before the debate debacle, Mrs. Clinton was toast. It is faith alone, of the True Believer kind, that fuels her campaign. Much of her Elitist De Luxe money will dry up when she not only loses in Iowa, but in New Hampshire and in South Carolina.
She may well lose these races to three different opponents. Forget Edwards and Obama for a moment.
Consider Joe Biden and Chris Dowd. Why do you suppose these seasoned liberal Senators, who can have lunch and joke with the President and then go out on the lawn and say everything short of pure hatred, are still in the race? Why are they in the race to begin with?
Because they know George Bush will not be on the ballot next year and, whatever their real political differences, the President says what means and means what he says.
Unlike Hillary, they are supreme pragmatic socialists of the Senate Collegium. These are heavy-weight Democrats who believe Hillary will not get the nomination. They've known and pragmatically denied publically the Clinton Stain since 1992. Their being in the race shows is prima facia evidence that the manufactured consensus of a Hillary "inevitability" is plain bull.
Biden is an expert on Bull, as you all know, but unlike Hillary, he doesn't believe most of his own.
Those of us on the Right have been up to speed on the Truth About the Clintons for many years. The pundits since 1995 and the Base since 1998.
Still many Regulars on the Right have bought into the Inevitability trip and are clinging to this belief going into '08. She'll evaporate, unless this goes to their Convention, as it well might, after Super Tuesday. She will have been marginalized well before that, however, and without that illusion there just isn't much left about The Smartest Woman in the World we can talk about.
I have not believed she would get the Democrat nomination since Biden and Dodd got in the race and since I saw that poll of North Carolinians.
The vast bulk of all Americans are flatly immune from the shouting accusations of being racist on the issue of immigration. They want Legal Immigration, and at the very least, an Electronic Frontier to control the borders. This simply has to be true of both the self-identified Left, Right and a big chunk of self-righteous Moderates.
It might be wise, if even as a thought experiment, that Hillary will not be coronated by the Democrats or the Media. The latter are mostly both insulted and sniffing blood in the water.
Consider the possibility that Hillary will not be the problem, that Immigration will divide the Democrats into desperately looking for a Third Way middle on an issue that for most Americans no Third Way exists. Add a coming Cuban Missile Crisis with Iran, on George's watch or the next guy's watch. Consider Immigration as the wedge issue that divides the Left and unites the Right.
Now who do you think will get the nomination of the Democrats under this scenario? Watch who breaks out on Immigration on the side the Media will tolerate, the brave... whoever... Edwards is desperate enough, admittedly. And he's determined to find that Third Way.
But whoever it is, Republicans better get prepared to have this issue taken from them. Every campaign is re-evaluating their game of perception on this issue...right now. The D's will try to sell that Third Way, but, again, there simply is no Third Way according to the polls.
The Dems are gonna sedate all us voters----slip GHB into our Oolong tea----then screw us all.
We will have no memory of it.
Eight of them were even registered to vote in American elections.
Under federal "motor voter" law, anyone receiving a driver's license automatically may register to vote.
Nothing but the "honesty" of illegal aliens prevents them from breaking one more law, and voting in American elections.
And Hillary Clinton thinks we should give driver's licenses to illegal aliens.
I wonder why?
QUISLING: a synonym for traitor, someone who collaborates with the invaders of his country.
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.