Posted on 12/03/2007 8:05:32 AM PST by shrinkermd
When not fielding questions from Democratic moles at last week's GOP Presidential debate, Anderson Cooper and CNN had a grand time portraying Republican voters as Bible-thumping, gun-wielding Confederacy hold-outs. On immigration, however, the candidates didn't need any media help as they continued their descent into self-parody...
Mitt Romney persisted in attacking Rudy Giuliani for turning New York into a "sanctuary city,"
Mr. Thompson promised to "punish employers" for failing to detect illegal alien workers who have already slipped by the feds. He also wants to "cut off federal funding" to cities that refuse to turn local cops into appendages of the Border Patrol -- as if those cops don't have far worse offenders to pursue.
Tom Tancredo, the nuisance candidate who blames every problem in America on the illegal immigrants who constitute roughly 5% of the U.S. labor force.
Mr. Romney has also sung a different tune on immigration, as on many subjects. In a 2005 interview with the Boston Globe, he spoke approvingly of proposals like Mr. McCain's to put undocumented workers on a path to citizenship...
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Also, remember JD Hayworth's defeat in Arizona in 2006.
Every once in a while I get a reminder of why I don’t read the Wall Street Butt-wipe.
A lot of noise was made of Hayworth and Allen but overall the “restrictionists” won big. In my district we replaced an open border RINO with an anti amnesty conservative who was backed by the Minuteman PAC.
The WSJ never gets tired of promoting their borderless, transnationalist, mega-corporate utopia.
Sounds like a bunch of elitists don’t want to lose their cheap gardeners, lawn mowers, nannies, maids and cooks. Wouldn’t want to have to pay good wages at their sweatshops, either. Who cares how that affects the lower classes?
In respect to Huckabee he now leads in Iowa and is challenging Giuliani. Seemingly, a different stance on immigration is not hurting either McCain or Huckabee.
The current crop of WSJ editors will soon meet their own Immigrant waterloo, when the Aussie takes control!
I was told on the following thread at #101 where you can follow the conversation backward that your last sentence pretty much hits the target. Even with conservatives posting on FR. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1933564/posts Guess they better pack their bags and get passports!/s
And the giveaways to illegals worked for Spitzer ?
The WSJ, just promoting dissention within the Republican ranks in this article. No biggie. There are a bunch of posers, but this article is propaganda.
Okay, just for Mr. Huckabee’s sake, let’s set the record straight: just because he’s a social gospel minister with a hemorhaging heart doesn’t mean I owe anyone else’s children the sweat off of my brow. I think the proper treatment for the children of illegal alien invaders is to compassionately wish them, “Adios, ninos y ninas.”
New tagline? hmmmm.
Just put land mines on the border.Add some gators or crocs in the Rio Grande. No I am not joking.
ping
Since specific referendums curbing illegal immigration won overwhelmingly in Arizona in the same election, one would be had pressed to attribute JD Hayworth's defeat to his immigration stance.
“Also, remember JD Hayworth’s defeat in Arizona in 2006.”
Heck, that was old flak Karl Rove pumped. That and the “latino vote.”
After the amnesty bill failed Rove admitted the losses in 2006 were from the top two polled issues, corruption and economy.
I'm about to give the entire GOP the old heave ho for being in lock step of this abomination that MUST BE STOPPED!
Please shoot me, and put me out of my misery, if I ever let a globalist NWO rag like the WSJ define conservatism for me.
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.