Skip to comments.The Transcript of the GOP's Univision Debate
Posted on 12/09/2007 8:37:28 PM PST by Ultra Sonic 007
click here to read article
He hasn't alienated me, because I understand what he's proposing. He's not looking to pander to conservatives or Christian voters by making nice noises about Constitutional Amendments that he, and those who ARE making those noises, know will never happen in our lifetimes, if ever. Instead of talking about the issue, he wants to actually DO something.
Accepting the fact that, up til now, the courts have allowed 'anchor babies' doesn't necessarily mean that he wants that practice to continue. It sounded to me like he was talking about the ones who are already here. I don't think it will take a Constitutional amendment to change the anchor baby practice. I believe it can be done by a vote of Congress. Of course that will be challenged, and it will likely go to the Supremes, but it would be a good way to open the practice up to debate, which hasn't happened yet.
He’s not looking to pander to conservatives or Christian voters by making nice noises about Constitutional Amendments that he, and those who ARE making those noises, know will never happen in our lifetimes, if ever.
***Hunter sees things the same way evangelical christians do, so he ain’t pandering, but when we see a Thompson supporter saying that it’s pandering for her own candidate to support a pro-life position, it shows he’s gone off into the weeds.
Instead of talking about the issue, he wants to actually DO something.
***I get the opposite impression. I get the impression that he wishes the issue would go away and he attempts to nuance his position to appear centrist.
Posted on 04/11/2007 11:11:59 PM PDT by FairOpinion
On Abortion: “Government should stay out of it... The ultimate decision must be made by the women... Government should treat its citizens as adults capable of making moral decisions on their own.” — Fred Thompson, July 1994
Thompson said he opposes making early-term abortions a crime, as some Republicans would like to do with a constitutional amendment. “But I don’t think you should bolt on one issue. I’m still not convinced platforms are a good idea. We know what we believe in and I don’t think we need to write it all down in a document,” Thompson said. (AP, 8/6/96)
Furthermore, I’m adding this from the American Spectator posted just a few days ago:
In the interview, Thompson was asked: “Some conservatives got flustered by your comments on abortion and Roe vs. Wade. Would you like to explain your position on abortion?”
Thompson answered: “Government should stay out of it. No public financing. The ultimate decision must be made by the woman. Government should treat its citizens as adults capable of making moral decisions on their own.”
Interesting tidbit from the poll on Univision’s website:
¿Tienes pensado votar por algún candidato del Partido Republicano en las elecciones del 2008?
Todavía no lo sé 4%
65% of the respondents say they are thinking about voting for a Republican in 2008.
I read a good part of the first transcript. I noticed he did not introduce Duncan Hunter. I scanned the second transcript and noticed the same thing. I wondered if there was some mistake and it was n’t added to the transcript. There are introductions for all candidates but Hunter. It could just be the typical marginalizations of Hunter, though. It was frustrating to scan it and see Giuliani, Romney, Huckabee, McCain, and to an extent, Thompson, getting the bulk of the questions and more time to speak. I commend Duncan Hunter for doing a great job with the questions asked to him and in the time alloted.
Thank you so very much for posting this!
Thanks for posting the transcript!
Hunter was very good. Impressive. Glad he went and glad he got his message out.
Lots of people who never heard of him could hear him without the MSM ignoring him. As it is, CNN and others just cut him out, but in outakes and photographs.
I am glad he could be there to communicate. I would hope it picks up some votes for him from new, legal American immigrants voting for the first time, who are DISGUSTED at all the illegal immigrants making demands but not doing it the legal way like they should have. Duncan did not compromise on this and I think he was respected as a result. He certainly did not get booed.
He engaged, was not scared, went straight into it, without altering his position.
I would like to see him start picking up Tancredo support, from those who might be wobbling between Tanc and him.
Thanks for posting this. I will re-read it tomorrow. I can’t imagine a bunch of democrats doing quite as well as the republicans. May it was worth going before this audience.
One thing I do know, is the Hispanic community that has fought long and hard to become legal citizens, do not want that right squandered by illegal immigration. Republicans have missed this point intirely in the past!
You are reading correctly, but both transcripts are wrong. I did watch the beginning of the debate on KMEX in Los Angeles. Hunter was introduced along with the others.
Yossarian’s transcript is much cleaner. Could you replace the original post with this one?
“Hunter was introduced along with the others.”
That’s good to hear.
“Isnt that a contradiction to his recent statements.”
Seems like most of Fred’s “new” plan for illegal immigration is a contradiction to his previous statements. IMO, Fred is still talking out of both sides of his mouth. Had he wanted to be clear about the 14th Amendment, he could have easily stated that it needed to be clarified to disallow giving anchor babies legal status. Instead, he chose to be vague. In other instances his “new” plan is a complete flip flop (employer penalties). And because he has stated that he only opposes blanket amnesty and that we must first determine who is here and give them aspirations of citizenship, I am wondering how this fits with his declaration of being anti-amnesty. Huckabee and Bush have also stated that they are anti-amnesty and illegals must go “to the end of the line”, but, at the same time would be willing to allow illegals to ‘touchback’ and return, not having to wait at the end of the line in their home country. This may be what Fred has in mind for (non-criminal?) illegal aliens. Even Romney’s answer was more specific than Freds. Bottom line, he’s keeping everyone guessing on exactly what he means. I just don’t trust him.
ugh! It is like a little Jimmy Carter. They want jobs and Minister Mike will give em jobs. People and markets make jobs not some populist politican!
MODERATOR: Governor Huckabee, how do you explain the decline of support to Republicans by Hispanics?
HUCKABEE: I think Hispanics want the same thing everybody wants.
They want jobs. They want education. They want to know that they’re going to be able to live with freedom. If the Republicans only got 30 percent of the vote, somehow we didn’t do a very good job of communicating that that’s what we would provide in terms of opportunity and fairness.
It says more about our party and our need to reach out thank it does about than it does about the Hispanic population of this country.
If we’re really serious about truly saying we want more than 30 percent of the vote, then as we look at issues like education we’ll understand that while the dropout rate from high school is 30 percent among all populations, it’s 50 percent among Hispanics.
HUCKABEE: We’ve got to change that by creating personalized education that focuses on perpetuating what’s good for students, not just making what’s good for the school.
There’s also issues and disparities between diabetes and other issues of health. So I think, if our policies reflect lifting people up, we’ll get the vote.
Wonder what Rudy and the Huckster look so tense about. LOL
Hunter and Lady Liberty.
Duncan Hunter for president!
Does anyone other than me see the irony in having a debate among presidential candidates on a network that caters to people who don’t speak english?
But he needs the help of the MSM and he's not going to get it.
That’s for darn sure.
The dude needs to learn some basic history.
That is what it looks like to me. Perhaps the person who did the transcript left out the introduction of Hunter, just don’t know. I also noticed that they mentioned the marital status of all the candidates and how many children and/or grandchildren they have, except for Thompson.
If they are American citizens and can vote, they should know English. Why should the candidates depend on translators to communicate their message? We need to make English the OFFICIAL language of this country or we will be Balkanized along cultural and linguistic lines. We see what has happened in Canada.
“We see what has happened in Canada.”
Off topic...but yeah...I see what has happened in Canada...they actually exploit their vast reserves of oil and gas while we ignore ours.
So if our government is incapable of making that process in that length of time, then we should do it in a way to outsource it. And here's why: When people come to this country, they shouldn't fear. They shouldn't live in hiding. They ought to have their heads up, because the one thing about being an American is, we believe every person ought to have his or her head up and proud, and nobody should have to be in hiding because they're illegal when our government ought to make it so that people can reasonably come here in a legal fashion."
Huckabee is using the old Pence touch back scam. He is pro-amnesty because he is "compassionate."
You are right, it is off topic.
UGH. Did Huckabee really just try to equate an American Express card with American citizenship?!
Huckabee views the illegal immigration issue as a paperwork processing issue. He is not against it, but rather, he thinks we ought to bring them in here faster and more efficiently.
Huckabee is a panderer extraordinaire.
Six questions, six answers.
I wonder what the ratio is for the other candidates. Or was this debate actually the most fair in terms of how many questions candidates were asked?
I caught it...immediately!!!
The Hucka-Nanny lives on!
Go Hunter '08
Perhaps it is more of an attempt to appear conservative. He is already a centrist.
The Centrist Coalition is a group of moderate Democrats and Republicans seeking common ground and compromise on issues. ... The Centrist Coalition helps to bridge the two parties...
The name of the Senate Centrist Coalition is "Third Way," subtitled, "A Senate-Focused Progressive Advocacy Group."
The group also exerted influence in helping to push for enactment of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform bill
Coalition Members (107th Congress) -- included FRED THOMPSON
From your link:
McCloskey saw him [Fred] as a Celebrity counter-force to the Religious Right/Pro-Lifers that could win the GOP Nomination.
Same argument we are hearing today.
PING to Duncan Hunter fans. Go vote here.....http://polls.newsmax.com/gop2008/?PROMO_CODE=3A77-1
Hunter: After that, 12 million more people came in. If we give an amnesty to this next batch of 12 million people, you will have a third wave of people coming in expecting to catch the third amnesty. You know, this lady behind me represents a lot of things. One is welcoming immigrants to America. The other is the rule of law. We have to establish the rule of law, and
people who are here illegally have to go home.
Where are all the folks that said they would vote for the first person that said this?
YOU ARE WRONG. THEY CAN SPEAK ENGLISH JUST FINE WHEN NEEDED. THEY HAVE NO INTENTION OF DOING SO. ASSIMILATION IS SURRENDER TO THEM, AND THEY HAVE NO INTENTION OF SURRENDERING.
I don't know where you live now or what exposure you have had to "hispanics". As a group, I have experienced their animosity over and over and over again: THEY TELL YOU IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS THAT SOMEDAY YOU WILL SPEAK SPANISH, AND THEY WILL NOT HAVE TO SPEAK THE HATED ANGLO LANGUAGE.
Ask almost anyone on this forum who lives in the Southwest. We've all been exposed.
No. You're wrong.
It is a matter of cultural and national conquest to them, and they take that seriously. Unlike you.
Suzi...I'm from the border. With Mexico. I didn't come by my opinions by accident. They come from exposure to these guys. ASK ANYONE FROM HERE.
I believe your estimate of 6% Hispanics is low
Believe me, Pew doesn't underreport.
Strutting, exaggerting, bragging, thumping your chest in comical self importance are all part of the Big Man Caudillo act. Inflating the numbers is not beyond them. But in a generation, they will be right - it's going to be 20%, largely due to negligence on the part of this President and his three predecessors.
how do you propose they're going to do that?
Simple. By walking in and staging abominations like Spanish Presidential debates, and demanding that the laws against them taking over be abandoned (like birthright citizenship for the children of illegal aliens), special privileges that reward their ethnicity and language (afrirmative action for the Conquistadors?), and forcing us to subsidize them.
Many have been here for years, but still converse better in their native tongues than in English
I know many Germans and French who live in Germany and France who speak perfect English having only learned it in school. I met a woman the other evening who married a citizen 10 years ago and moved here from Wurzburg who now speaks unaccented American English. She sounds like she's from Redondo Beach. When in American history was anything like this necessary? Were the 1920 election debates held in Italian?
You know and understand nothing of what is happening here. It is a full scale invasion and takeover mounted by a foreign government - mainly the government of Mexico. They saw the weakness of the Baby Boom generation, and decided to exploit it.
They appear to be fabulously successful. Largely because people like yourself give them ground.
LOVE that last pic!
thanks for the ping.
You’re welcome. (I hope the toothache is better!)
I say that politicians claiming to support the HLA are pandering because they can talk until they are blue in the face, but they won't get the Amendment passed, so they're not saving one single baby with all their talking. We've already seen that having both the White House and Congress in Republican hands didn't do anything to move that along. Why not look at other ways to solve the problem? What Fred has proposed is something that could be done within the next few years, as members of the Supreme court retire, or die, and need to be replaced. He has already said that he would appoint strict constructionists to the Court who do not believe that is in the Court's purview to legislate from the bench. This attitude would go beyond unlimited abortion to homosexual 'marriage' and other societal changes that liberals love to force on the populace through Court mandates, because they know that those things would likely never pass if the voters got the chance to weigh in on them.
If Roe v Wade is overturned, the major stumbling block to states in their efforts to severely restrict abortion will have been removed. This would result in thousands of babies being saved each year because women would no longer have that 'back up birth control', and would likely change their behavior because of it. It would also mean that every voter would have the chance to made a difference in his or her own state regarding abortion, and not feel like the issue is completely out of their hands. Yes, there will be some states that allow the practice, but even then, you will see that voters will be loathe to allow it for more than the hard cases like REPORTED rape or incest, or in the case of a direct threat to the LIFE of the mother.
“YOU ARE WRONG. THEY CAN SPEAK ENGLISH JUST FINE WHEN NEEDED. THEY HAVE NO INTENTION OF DOING SO. ASSIMILATION IS SURRENDER TO THEM, AND THEY HAVE NO INTENTION OF SURRENDERING.....It is a matter of cultural and national conquest to them, and they take that seriously”
You’ve summarized this well, Regulator. The ‘we are the world’ crowd simply won’t admit that all cultures are NOT the same. Even Calderone admits the difference.
Mexico president says culture of machismo still strong
Let me give you a history story about ‘assimiliaton’. Early in the 1800’s the Cherokee realized if they were to survive they had to ‘assimilate’ to the White power structure. They developed their own written language and in a matter of a few months virtually all of them learned to read and write it. At the same time they hired missionaries and teachers, sent their children to Dartmouth and where ever they could to learn and ‘assimilate’.
The point? If those ignorant ‘savages’ could do it 200 years ago with NO help from the government, I have no sympathy for the whiners of today.
Must be a perception thing. I don't see American voters falling over backwards to accommodate Mexico in any takeover bid. You seem to be fixated on Mexicans, and maybe your area of the country has a problem, but I don't see many illegal MEXICAN immigrants. The illegals in my area of the country are more likely from the former Soviet states, or Ireland.
Yes, Hispanic radicals made a lot of noise last year in their marches, and they got exactly NOWHERE because of it. These were the Reconquista people who I lump in the same category as the Black Power folks from the 1970's. They made a lot of noise, but their radicalism did them in. Black people made their way in society, and Spanish speaking immigrants will do the same thing, as they work their way up the economic ladder, no thanks to the blowhards in their midst.
And you can yell all you want, but not all Spanish speaking immigrants are unwilling to assimilate. Sure, they like the cultural trappings from their home country, so do the Italians and Irish who have big celebrations and parades and keep their cultures alive in their households. I'm not threatened by St. Patrick's Day parades or the Feast of San Gennaro, and Cinco de Mayo doesn't scare me either.
It would be nice if they became fully American and fluent in English. That was MY point, not what the national origin or ethnicity of a person is. We are increasingly becoming a bi-lingual nation, with parallel "cultures." I don't think that is good for America.