Posted on 04/05/2014 5:08:15 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan
HOWIE CARR, HOST: Who are you for, for president right now, Ann?
ANN COULTER: Well, don't tell him but I'm planning on giving Mitt Romney a little more time to rest -- flying out, kidnapping him and depriving him of sleep, food and water until he agrees to run again.
CARR: You're kidding?
COULTER: No.
CARR: You really want him to run again?
COULTER: Yeah, I think he was a fantastic candidate. As I've told you before, he would have won by a larger landslide than Ronald Reagan did in 1980 without Teddy Kennedy's immigration bill. And it's basically impossible to beat an incumbent, but he is head and shoulders better than the other candidates we had. And I don't want to name them, but I mean you go through the list -- and for one thing, as you and I discussed, and this is the most important point, that all of your listeners have to tell all of their friends knock it off with the Congressmen or inspirational figures. It's got to be a Governor or a Senator, preferably a Governor. And, you know, there is a limited world -- a list of who those people are, and they all have problems. None of them are articulate and reasonable, and as good on immigration as Mitt Romney! CARR: What about Ted Cruz?
COULTER: Well, he's a lot worse on immigration.
CARR: Is he that bad? I didn't think he was that bad on immigration.
COULTER: Well, most Republicans are, that's why you need to call your Congressman. I'm not singling out Ted Cruz, he has the same position a lot of these idiots have. 'Oh yes, let them come here and we have a special permit, we just won't give them citizenship. But we want to increase ...
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
I have seen over the many years countless examples of journalistic malpractice and the biggest offender is the NY Times.
If you are serious and truly interested in getting to the bottom of this, you will copy that NY Times piece to Ted’s office by email or fax and accompany with your letter asking for an explanation. His office will respond to you and they will give their view of the NY Times slant. Then take the results and post them back here.
But I know the answer already because I am very familiar with the game back in DC. I know Ted tried to get the poison pill of amnesty out of the Gang of 8 bill and he tried several other amendments but they failed. When he saw he could do nothing more to stanch the damage the bill would cause, he turned to communicate directly with conservatives in the House and because of his leadership they wised up and shut the immigration effort down.
Ted is with us and by us I mean conservatives, real true conservatives. Conservatives are not anti-immigration, they are anti-democrat and anti-RINO who use immigration to fortify their incumbencies.
Ted is right that immigration reform is needed but not under the bunch of socialists and liars that control the Senate and White House. Timing is everything in a poker game regardless of what cards you hold. The time for immogration reform is later as in the time when real true conservatives control Congress. Ans this is exactly what Ted has said.
See Jane Long’s post #248 for more insight and truth.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3141102/posts?page=248#248
Very simple question. From the article that you are basing your comments about Cruz, can you copy and paste a DIRECT QUOTE from him that says the words THAT YOU ARE PUTTING IN QUOTES? The words YOU PUT IN QUOTES are the interpretation of the writer. They are not Ted Cruz’s words.
Here’s what you printed:
“Sen. Ted Cruz is dead set against any path to legalization for undocumented immigrants, unless it sends them on a detour back to their native countries, he told talk show host Sean Hannity in an interview on Monday.”
Here’s how it is written in the article:
Sen. Ted Cruz is dead set against any path to legalization for undocumented immigrants, unless it sends them on a detour back to their native countries, he told talk show host Sean Hannity in an interview on Monday.
Notice the difference? You put quotes as though Cruz said it but the FACT is that he did NOT say that. THOSE ARE THE WORDS OF THE WRITER AS HE INTERPRETED WHAT CRUZ SAID. DO YOU GET THAT????
From Jane’s comment:
“Keep in mind, if Sen. Cruz’s amendment had passed, the underlying work permit of the Gang Of Eight would have remained. The 11 to 12 million here living in the shadows would have been able to get a work permit, which the majority of Hispanics support over Amnesty.”
So that means that Cruz does favor LEGALIZATION of the aliens - and therefore turning this country into a Third World cesspool in a couple of generations, rather than trying to get them back home and keeping this country what it was.
Thanks for the clarification.
Whoa! That's a keeper!
That link is to a New York state injunction. Read it carefully. It in no way infers what you claim it does.
I see this as not necessarily because some states have a lot of illegals, that is true.
Unfortunately, from what I know, I believe Ted Cruz is trying to make the best out of a bad situation, illegals are here, sadly, we won’t do an operation wetback as happened under Ike but FDR and Truman too from what I know. So maybe Cruz looks at this and says, okay, let’s give them RESIDENCY... that’s residency, not citizenship. Seems a few others of the pols feel that way. It is a compromise, I’m not sure what to think of that.
It’s sort of the way people want a National Amendment defining Marriage as being between 1 man and 1 woman, I’d be for that but it’s like the horse has already left the stable, seems the best thing now we can hope for is that individual states can still control the matter and hoping the Fed. Govt. doesn’t force same-sex unions as law all over which would be atrocious.
Just my view, sorry for the long post.
I’m reading the posts but this is what I thought Cruz’s position was.
I use to have an article bookmarked, I thought though people don’t like it is what Cruz gave, I repeat, was RESIDENCY, thus NOT CITIZENSHIP. Whether that is acceptable or not...
House was going to vote down immigration no matter what with Representatives like Bachmann, Gohmert and others. Didn’t even Boehner give in to House pressure not to bring immigration up. The House has a strong conservative base, a Senator isn’t going to tell them what to do.
“I use to have an article bookmarked, I thought though people don’t like it is what Cruz gave, I repeat, was RESIDENCY, thus NOT CITIZENSHIP. Whether that is acceptable or not...”
The idea is ok...but it’s just too many people. The demographics of this country will change for the worse, much worse. A million or two, we can probably absorb, but this is 10 times that amount...and maybe a lot more, since we really don’t know how many there are.
“House was going to vote down immigration no matter what with Representatives like Bachmann, Gohmert and others...”
Unfortunately the Dems get to vote in the House too, and if they stay united, only 16 Republicans are needed to jump, and several already have jumped. I would agree that the vast majority of Republicans in the House will vote no, but they won’t be able to stop it if those 16 votes are rounded up.
The main question is what Boehner will do and that is very sad. If it’s an important issue, Boehner should check with the Republicans, and if he finds something like 80% saying no (which is the case here), then it should be GAME OVER for that bill...but no - yet more drama from the House, Cantor and other losers try DESPERATELY to “craft a compromise”.
On further thought, the Dems should have taken the offer from Cruz. It would have only slowed their efforts a bit to make this country Third World, and that could have been dealt with VERY EASILY through the judicial system - with the Courts ruling that legal residents here cannot be “Second Class Americans” (i.e., no voting rights), forever. And bamm!! Full up Amnesty and all that goes with it.
Now, hopefully this thing dies off and stays dead, until we start talking about self-deporting again.
Sen Cruz does NOT favor legalization. He supports work permits that do NOT allow citizenship or legalization. This system used to work pretty well, prior the 1965 Heller Act. Once that passed, chain migration started, and you all know the “rest of the story”.
Giving work permits to illegals is making them legal—or, “legalization”.
And such legalization would ultimately lead to citizenship.
And chain migration would multiply the number of new citizens by a multiple over the present illegals.
AC starts talking really outrageous crap when she has a book to sell. can’t take her seriously at all.
I think Ann Coulter is wrong here.
“Sen Cruz does NOT favor legalization. He supports work permits that do NOT allow citizenship or legalization.”
Maybe we disagree on terminology, but it sounds to me that the people that are here illegally get to be registered and into our system - sounds like legalization.
We really need them, and their families, to go home first, and then we bring people in in a controlled manner.
Agree.... She’s toast IMO ..... Stay Safe Basil !!
“The guy who lost to McCain who lost to zer0 in 2008 and then in 2012 lost (directly) to zer0. A man proven unable to fight when the going gets tough.
What could possibly go wrong?”
First, Zero is not on the ballot.
Second, Reagan lost to Ford who lost to Carter in 1976.
What could possibly go wrong ?
She sounds like she needs to get out, she sounds like she must not listen to Rush ever or the others.
That book she came out with I believe I heard about, “Godless” sounded pretty good. She must have been upset at the interview or something. Bad hair day.
I’ll see how this develops. Unfortunately most of my favorites have at one time or another said silly things.
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.