Hatch Wants Naturalized Citizens to Be Eligible for Presidency

C-SPAN "Washington Journal" | 08-19-03 | Theodore R.

[billbears]

No too late. Forgot to put Sly and Wes in cryogenics a few years back.

[tiamat]

Dude needs a new stash, man! ;-)

Tia

[VMI70]

"It makes him a Republican and a conservative."

Not saying you are one, but this is a standard response from party hacks. It is pure propaganda, the same as is issued from the DNC. The idea that Republicans equal conservatives is ludicrous on its' face.

I'll grant you that most Republicans are more conservative than most Democrats, but that's about the best face one can put on it.

You're right, this is supposed to be a conservative forum, but it has historically had its' share of those who mistakenly try to equate Republicans with Conservatives.

[King Prout]

indeed - smoking catnip just isn't doing it for him.

[BlazingArizona]

Hatch may make some dumb statemnents, but he votes right, not left.

Do you mean in being the prime mover behind the antitrust action against Microsoft, or in giving the RIAA everything it asks for?

[jammer]

Jeez, how absent-minded can I be. When I saw your post, I turned red with embarrassment. Thanks.

[JohnnyZ]

I'll grant you that most Republicans are more conservative than most Democrats, but that's about the best face one can put on it.

That would be "almost every single" rather than "most", at least on the national level.

The argument is pretty simple:

The Republican leadership policy positions (distinct from what's in the party platform, which is very conservative) are at least mostly conservative.

Orrin Hatch votes with the leadership, as a rule.

Therefore Hatch is at least mostly conservative.

(But can be a real idiot when he wants to be.)

[VMI70]

"The Republican leadership policy positions (distinct from what's in the party platform, which is very conservative) are at least mostly conservative."

Then why have a party platform (essentially a mission statement) at all? If the cndidates and office holders represent that they endorse it but then do not follow it, then they are deceiving the voters. I think the term to describe that is hypocrisy.

"The Republican leadership policy positions...are at least mostly conservative."

Again, only on a comparative basis.

"Orrin Hatch votes with the leadership, as a rule."

Again, then he is a robot, not a statesman. I don't mean to slam Hatch specifaically. He has plenty of company; a vast majority, IMHO. He just happens to be the subject of this thread.

We, you and I, just happen to disagree on the level of strength of conviction of the Republicans. Absent that strength, they cannot be defined as conservative. They can only be seen as less liberal.

[Paulus Invictus]

If you are so against Republicans and claim to be a conservative, who did you vote for last election? Pat? Nader? Gore?

[F.J. Mitchell]

If he keeps up this assinity, he's may soon earn and acquire the nick name "Booby Hatch"

[F.J. Mitchell]

Catnip? Isn't that stuff lethal when consumed by a mouse?

[VMI70]

"If you are so against Republicans and claim to be a conservative, who did you vote for last election? Pat? Nader? Gore?"

You are reading too much into my responses. My fundamental point is that one cannot equate Republicans with conservatives. In most cases one can on a comparative basis, but that does not say that Republicans are conservative.

I held my nose and voted for Bush, as he was the best choice. His actions involving MAJOR and unnecessary expenditures, e.g.: Kennedy Education bill, Aids aid to Africa, no oil drilling in FL, Hydrogen car, aid to Palis, and on and on, certainly cannot be considered conservative stances, now can they?

[Paulus Invictus]

No, those stances you mention by Bush were not conservative, but the tax refunds, his strong stance against terrorists and the war in Afganistan and Iraq trump those liberal causes and make them less of a problem for me. When he is re-elected (let's pray it happens), I will hope he takes a more conservative stance and reduces the size of gummint significantly. Is that a forlorn hope?

[VMI70]

"Is that a forlorn hope?"

Let me get out my tea leaves...

If he takes a more conservative stance, then it would seem to me that his actions during his first term were solely to get himself reelected--a typical Rovian trick, and Karl Rove is the ultimate political hack. He makes Klintoon look like a piker.

Secondly, despite protestations to the contrary, one of the easiest jobs in the world is being a war time president. Even Algore could do it. The problem I have, is that he did not need to support all the liberal causes. He had all the popularity he needed, with his competent handling of the terrorist/Afghanistan/Iraq circumstances, to say no to all that spending. I think he ok'd those, and other liberal big spending bills in order to have a safety net in case the terrorist problem was cured too soon.

Sorry to sound like I'm parroting Rush, but I saw it long before he did ;-}. It's not rocket science; it's poli sci 101.

[Ohioan]

Hatch is said to think it discriminatory that the Constitution limits the two highest offices to "natural born" citizens.

Hatch must really be losing it. Every rational choice that a free people make, is tantamount to discrimination--as is every individual choice. When one chooses rationally between alternatives, one is being discriminatory. That is not something bad. The alternative is to abandon critical judgment--the discriminatory faculty--and randomly choose between the alternatives, without rhyme or reason.

William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site

[Arthur McGowan]

Check out in RvW: "We feel..." is the absolute heart of the "Constitutional" "argumentation." They say that they FEEL that the right to privacy is grounded in the whatever amendment, or some other amendment.