Glazed ham for main course
Bread and Butter Pudding
Posted on 12/09/2007 4:55:31 AM PST by Alas Babylon!
I LOVED that, too!
WALLACE: Let’s turn to immigration, because you put out a new immigration plan this week. You called for building...
HUCKABEE: Yes.
WALLACE: ... a border fence, for cracking down on employers, for telling illegals to go home.
But last year in an interview, you said something somewhat different. You said this, “I think that the rational approach is to find a way to give people a pathway to citizenship.”
Governor, in your new plan, the only path is to go home and to get on the back of the line, which, of course, would mean years of waiting. Why the change?
HUCKABEE: Well, I don’t think there’s an inconsistency. When I said a pathway, I didn’t say what the pathway was.
I now believe that the only thing the American people are going to accept — and, frankly, the only thing that really makes sense — is a pathway that sends people back to the starting point.
But this idea of the waiting years — no, I don’t agree with that. In fact, look, if we can get a credit card application done within hours, if we can get passports done within days, if we can transact business over the Internet any place in the world within seconds, do a background check instantaneously — it’s our government that has failed and is dysfunctional.
It shouldn’t take years to get a work permit to come here and pick lettuce. So part of the plan that I have is that we seal the borders. You don’t have amnesty and sanctuary cities. You do have a pathway that gets you back home.
But that pathway to get back here legally doesn’t take years. It would take days, maybe weeks, and then people could come back in the workforce.
Let me tell you why that’s important. Two reasons. Number one, the American people say, “Do something. Do it now. We don’t want to have this country ignoring the illegal problem.” I get it.
Secondly, I want people who are in this country to hold their heads up high. You know, right now there are a lot of people who really are here because they’re trying to feed their families. I don’t begrudge them that.
I say every day I thank God I’m in a country people are trying to break into, not break out of. But let’s give them a means by which they can get here through the door legally, and when they’re here they don’t have to hide, they don’t have to keep their heads down and hope nobody catches them, they have their heads held high.
Everyone living within the borders of the United States ought to do so with dignity and with a sense of pride, not a sense of fear.
"I now believe that the only thing the American people are going to accept — and, frankly, the only thing that really makes sense — is a pathway that sends people back to the starting point. But this idea of the waiting years — no, I don't agree with that...You do have a pathway that gets you back home.
But that pathway to get back here legally doesn't take years. It would take days, maybe weeks, and then people could come back in the workforce."
----------------------------------------------------------
If that isn't amnesty, what is?
Ok, the people who are supposedly answering these polls are the “ordinary people” and more then half of them, counting Democrats and Republicans together are supporting people who will either do nothing, or make the problem worse, in regards to the illegals.
What I cannot get my head around is how it is possible for people to claim they are all outraged about the Illegals yet go right along supporting the same sorts of people in politics who created this mess!
Interesting bit from McCain on Fox which I missed due to a phone call...
“Wallace brought up a spurious attack on McCain by Mitt Romney. Evidently, Romney is mailing fliers which claim that McCain wants to give Social Security to illegal immigrants, which Wallace pointed out was not true. McCain pointed out that Romney has been all over the map with his stated policy positions, and he’ll have to explain that to voters.”
From RedState: http://redstate.com/stories/elections/2008/the_sunday_morning_talk_shows_the_review
I personally watched McCain on the Senate floor explaining why it was unfair for the illegals not to get Social Security as part of their path to citizenship. All Romney needs is the video from C-Span.
Thanks, Rod. I am inawe of guys like Michael Yon. TOTAL awe.
Those are in the Comments section on John Podesta’s web site. Just click on the link and look at the comments below the article.
This sounds suspiciously just like the massively defeated "not-an-amnesty" argument so soundly defeated by a massive citizen groundswell just this year.
So long, Huckster. You're not going anywhere but back to Arkansas - just like John McLame is going back to Arizona and Rudi is going back to NY, and for the same reasons.
Once GOP Primary voters catch on to your little sleight-of-hand amnesty scam, it's adios, Hombre.
snugs, didn’t you see my post where I said Fred is sexy??
Believe me on this.
Go here to December 5, hour two. Listen to what Timmerman had to say about the three who wrote the NIE.
http://wor710.com/pages/48796.php
Glazed ham for main course
Bread and Butter Pudding
Your characterization of Kabar's position is incorrect. He does not "desire" to sit out the Presidential vote. He has simply analyzed the situation and quite logically and correctly made a personal decision to no longer enable a corrupt political establishment to triangulate his vote by limiting his options to false choices.
The struggle in which we are engaged to preserve our rights, our freedom and our nation's sovereignty is being waged on more levels than simply votes and elections. Equally, if not more important, is the battle of ideas and principles, e.g. citizens' rights, national sovereignty, sanctity of property and the rule of law. Elections are simply one means of fighting this battle; they are not the only means.
kabar has correctly reasoned it out that "winning" an election between candidates whose positions are relatively indistinguishable from each other and similarly hostile to the principles we claim we wish to defend is merely contributing to our inevitable demise.
Worse than that, however, if the candidates, our ostensible "choices" are practically indistinguishable except for "party affiliation", then the case for ideas, the public argument and debate for those fundamental principles we all claim to champion never gets made. As I said, we are lulled into thinking we have a choice, but it's a false choice, or more precisely, an irrelevant, inconsequential one. Such a scenario, which is exactly what we are facing, makes it entirely possible to win elections and still lose the war, and ultimately our nation.
In practical terms, e.g., if either Hillary or Rudy wins, we get an authoritarian statist as President. Neither of them has any real devotion or committment to the rights and freedom of the American people. The difference is, however, that because of the adversarial partisan structure of our government, a Guiliani Presidency will accelerate the loss of our freedoms even more quickly than will a Hillary administration. With President Hillary, constituent pressure and the exigencies of securing their re-election will impel Republicans lawmakers to at least make a show of opposition. Under a President Guiliani the Repubs would have the MSM sanction and cover of "bipartisanship" to join their Democrat colleagues in looting and dismembering the Republic.
It seems most people have succumbed to the cults of partisanship and personality in choosing our nation's leaders, while ignoring the inexorable erosion and abandonment of our first principles. Our only chance to turn this around lies in standing firm for those ideas and principles, to fight the battle of ideas regardless of what partisan pressures are brought to bear.
Losing an election might indeed be a disaster, but if the differences and principles embodied in the issues and contending factions are clearly articulated, then people will have the chance and hope of correctly interpreting and understanding the consequences of their choices. If those principles and differences are muddled and indistinguishable except for association with a letter of the alphabet, the people will have nothing tangible to grasp and evaluate, and will be unable to escape their cognitive trap.
It may not be enough - the hour is late. But refusal to make the effort guarantees defeat. It is sadly ironic that so many Freepers who clearly understand the necessity for us to fight the Long War against our external enemies cannot grasp that our domestic enemies are part of that same Long War.
kabar is correct. The current game is rigged, the voters are simply spectators, and the only ones who truly benefit are those who own the arena and pocket the gate receipts. If the American people fail to wake-up and drastically change the game next year it will probably be too late to turn it around.
Bump for later read.
Okay, I read that after I posted to you and realized what you meant. Those dems are as paranoid as we are!
I wrote, “It is tweedledum versus tweedledee as far as the immigration issue is concerned.” In other words, it doesn’t make a dime’s worth of difference in terms of amnesty. Once the illegals’ status is legalized, we are finished, whether we have liberal judges or not, liberal programs, etc.,or not just becomes a matter of rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
What are you het up about? We seemed to have missed something in the translation.
We can preach religious tolerance and every kind of tolerance known to man but you cannot expect it not to be a big part of the landscape. When people vote, they exercise the right to express whatever intolerance they have including intolerance to religions, sex, skin color, body type and political persuasion.
People are only human. If I read your comment, it is fine to not vote for a muslim because he is a muslim but that is as far as you take it in terms of religion.
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.