Posted on 11/12/2007 7:42:23 AM PST by pissant
I support only Hunter.
I was quiet because I am at work ace no fear of you however.
Why do so many people who flame Huckabee on immigration never say who they do support?
While Huckabee’s record on illegal immigration may not be perfect, IMHO it is as good or better than any of the other current GOP front-runners. A lot of people agree with this point of view about Huckabee. I will post some more evidence about this to you later.
If you don’t mind, may I ask each of you what candidate you do support? Or are you all afraid to say? immigration? illegal of issue the to regard with Huckabee’s than better record actual his is how be, may candidates your whoever And> If you support Hunter, no need to give any evidence. IMHO, Hunter has shown real leadership on this issue.
I heard Huckabee discuss immigration and other issues on the radio before it became clear that the RINO positions couldn’t be sold. I want no part of him. Yes, I’d vote for him over Hitlery, but I’d vote for Caligula’s horse before I’d vote for Hitlery. I might vote for Caligula’s horse over Huckabee, too.
IMHO, Hunter is great on illegal immigration. No question about that. As far as I know, I'm cool with all of Hunter's other positions too. But I'm worried about Giuliani, who I really think is the one to stop right now. Godspeed to Hunter, though.
From my standpoint I have no use for candidates that want to compete with the dems in trying to see who can give the most of taxpayer resources to illegals in trade for their potential votes when they are legal or get licenses that allow them to vote anyway.
I want no part of those candidates. If they are willing to break an important federal law where will it end how far are they willing to go in breaking other laws?.
I dont want to guess about that.
Actually I think Huckabee is being candid about his position. For example, see the interview excerpt below.
MARGARET WARNER: Where are you on immigration?
MIKE HUCKABEE: Well, I think the failure of the government has been they haven't sealed the border. It's harder for me to get on an airplane in my hometown of Little Rock, Arkansas, than it is for an illegal to cross the border. That's what makes Americans mad.
They're not mad at immigrants. They understand immigrants want to come here for the same reason their ancestors did. But here's where the failure is: You can't allow people to break the law and then have no consequence.
My reasons for supporting the idea that, if a student had been in our schools, had performed academically and behaved, and had done everything that we asked of one of the students in our school to qualify for a scholarship, then it's in our best interest to let the student apply for the scholarship because they would -- part of the provision was they'd have to apply for citizenship.
But here's the other part. You don't punish the child for the parents having broken the law. We don't do that. We don't say, "OK, your parents broke a law, so we're going to punish you for it." I just don't understand why anybody would think that that's a good thing to do.
MARGARET WARNER: That's not a popular position among a lot of Republicans.
MIKE HUCKABEE: No, it isn't. It's not very popular at all, and I took a lot of heat for it, and still do. I still get criticized.
But I'm a person who believes in strong border security. I don't believe in amnesty. But neither do I believe in, again, doing something that is ultimately harmful to a person who didn't break the law. You know, a kid who comes here who's 3 years old, I don't think he had a whole lot of choice about saying, "Hey, Dad, let's break the law. Let's cross the border." He didn't even know where he was going. So let's not punish him.
Source: Huckabee Gives His Take on Conservatism, Faith and Iraq
PBS Newshour | October 5, 2007 | Huckabee interview with Margaret Warner
You are creating a phony strawman. I support Fred Thompson, Duncan Hunter, and Tom Tancredo on this issue. I support Thompson overall, but I want our candidate to be strong on this issue. It is the main reason I don't want McCain, Giuliani, and Huckabee to be the nominee. It is too important an issue. Fred has the best written exposition of his position on this issue. It was written by Kris Kobach, a noted expert on the immigration issue.
While Huckabee’s record on illegal immigration may not be perfect, IMHO it is as good or better than any of the other current GOP front-runners. A lot of people agree with this point of view about Huckabee. I will post some more evidence about this to you later.
I am a member of a grassroots immigration group and help direct an immigration PAC. I am well-informed on this issue gained over years of experience. Huckabee is a pro-amnesty politician and we will not be endorsing him. We will do everything we can to ensure that he is not the nominee.
FYI: I watched Huckabee's performance at Morgan State and thought he was just a slick politician pandering to the audience. I was troubled by his support of DC having a voting representative in Congress. He was also quick to confirm and support black victimhood in contrast to Keyes and Hunter who would have none of it.
Both Pissant and Walterskinner are strong Duncan Hunter supporters so they are consistant in supporting a candidate who will oppose illegal immigration.
See excellent point by Janet Folger below:
Why I like Mike for GOP 'bus driver'
WorldNetDaily | 11/8/2007 | Janet Folger
The bus is leaving the station. Two of them, actually. Going to two very different places. ...
I read the Republican destination platform. We're on the right bus. We just need to quit throwing paper-wads at each other long enough to hire the driver who agrees to take us where we want to go. May I suggest a driver without a long record of traffic violations like driving the wrong way on one-way streets such as abortion, marriage and judicial appointments?...
By the way, if you're willing to compromise on life and marriage, go buy a ticket for the RINO safari bus, because you're a Republican in name only. Besides, if Giuliani or Romney were at the wheel, a whole lot of passengers would head for the emergency exit. And of those who remain, they're not likely to chip in for gas or help change a flat tire.
Who I support is in my tagline with every post. It’s certainly been no secret. Let me ask you why you support someone who is obviously NOT in support of stopping the invasion. Simpatico??
But isn't it true that not even Duncan Hunter is impressed by Thompson's record on illegal immigration? (please see below):
Road to Des Moines Conversions on Immigration
News Blaze | 10/26/2007
Rep. Hunter explained , “I can tell you that my proposals to significantly increase and strengthen deportations, penalties, interior and border enforcement, and to curtail the incentives for illegal aliens generally had few vocal allies in the US Senate… Mr. Thompson certainly was not among them."
I think that when you start digging, you find that Mitt is a smooth talking northerner, and Huck is a smooth talking southerner.
What they say means very little, what they promise the voters means nothing.
I have a lot of respect for Janet Folger and I have been willing to consider Huckabee due to her and Mike Farris’s endorsements. The problem is that she is focussed almost exclusively on the social issues. Huckabee is great on those issues but I am afraid that nominating him would cause the fiscal conservatives to walk just like nominating Giuliani would cause us social conservatives to walk. I am also beggining to lose confidence in Huckabee’s integrity since he seems to be trying to mislead us about his past position on immigration.
< Some of us have seen the effect of what unlimited illegal immigration can do to our homelands,complete destruction.It is devastating to say the least.
But the key thing here is either you obey current laws that are on the books or you try and smooth over them with mushy ideas like having the illegals pay a fine as if that makes it all right, It doesn't.They are still illegal.
Do you support Huckabee's position on the issue? Namely, this statement:
I don't want to have an amnesty program. You can't let people break a law and say 'hey we're going to look the other way, don't worry about it, we're going to let you in, no problem.' People have to make restitution, there's got to be a penalty paid for the crime committed. But it ought to fit the crime; you don't put somebody in jail for ten years because they came across the border to make a living.
You make them pay something, you make them go through a process, you may put them in the back of the line for the process, but you create a process that's realistic. You don't say the back of the line starts and for the next 12 years you're going to be filling out paperwork.What you do say is you're going to pay the fine, we're going to have a system that can be done in an orderly fashion, and you'll be able to be legal but we're not going to let you off scot free. That's important." March 27, 2007; RealClearPolitics.com
“This is a preposterous notion, a dangerous road, and completely inconsistent with the ideology of compassionate conservatism.”
Sorry, no compassion left. Compassion has been used and abused.
It comes down to rhetoric versus record. Every guy running has been veering right to win the nomination. But as history has shown time and time again, rhetoric to win a nomination does not a conservative make. Rather, look at what they did and said 2, 5, 15 years ago to get an idea how they would govern.
I support Hunter because he has been as conservative and consistent on all the issues, including illegal immigration, and he still says the illegals must leave. And he is the only one I trust to make that a reality, because he has been saying it and trying to make it reality since the 1980s.
But there is more. While Rudy, Huck, Fred, and Mitt talk a tough game regarding defeating the jihadis and increasing the size of our military, the guy with the most knowledge by far and the most consistent record, by far, and the most experienced by far regarding warfare, how to wage it, which systems to use, how big the military needs to be, what training is most important, etc etc, is Hunter.
But there is more. While the other guys give lip service to China’s malfeasance - only one guy has treated China like the evil communists that they are. Duncan Hunter, for the last 20 years.
But there is more. While Huckabee and McCain and Fred and Mitt all try to claim the mantle of a social conservative, Hunter has been far more so than any of them. He was proposing Amending the Constitution to end abortion while Huck was still in seminary, while Fred was trying to figure abortion out, while Mitt was adamantly pro-choice, and McCain was anguishing over how hard an issue it is. Hunter also has been trying to end abortion through his Right to Life Act, which he has either sponsored or cosponsored numerous times since the late 1980s.
Hunter put up the most spirited defense of anyone trying to kill Clinton’s ‘Don’t Ask Don’t Tell’ nonsense.
Hunter is an original cosponsor of Federal Marriage Amendment.
Hunter has proposed eliminating large swaths of the Federal leviathan, including the Dept of Education. He has proposed cutting back OSHA and the EPA by 50%. He has sponsored legislation to eliminate the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities. His proposals for eliminating welfare were far more strict than what the GOP eventually passed and Clinton signed. Hunter was THE man who went toe to toe with the RINOS and dems on the ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban. And Hunter’s a tax cutter with very few equals. He also never panders to anyone and does not have a politically correct bone in his body.
He is a patriot’s patriot.
He should be President
Sorry I missed the mention of Hunter in your tagline. My bad.
Hunter is definitely out in front on fighting illegal immigration. As you might guess, like a lot of people I'm not backing him because for whatever reason Hunter doesn't seem to be gaining much traction in the polls at the moment, unfortunately. But I do try to say good things about Hunter from time to time, for what its worth, which I'm sure isn't much.
As far as why one would support Huckabee, for me it would be mainly a process of elimination among the first tier candidates. Romney I think is a flip-flopper. Thompson doesn't seem to want to work very hard to convince anyone who is not already for him. Giuliani I was never that impressed with, has a lot of personal baggage, and is pro-choice. That leaves Huckabee.
IMHO, something that might help Hunter is if more Freepers would do what you and I are doing, i.e. picking a particular candidate and engaging in honest dialog about it. I think there are some people posting on these threads whose candidates have worse immigration records than Huckabee, but those posters don't have the guts to say who they are really for.
Godspeed to Hunter anyway.
Rodguy911, did you ever say who you are actually for?
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.