Posted on 02/21/2007 6:15:41 AM PST by Jim Robinson
Obviously, the biggest issue for the Democrats in 2008 will be the war. They're betting their entire stake on the hopes that America is fed up with the war dragging on so long, and they're convinced that their big wins in 2006 were due primarily to President Bush's determination to stay the course, versus their own antiwar stance. Hillary is furiously back pedaling trying to distance herself from her own pro war votes as her popularity erodes away and shifts to the up and coming antiwar superstar, Barack "Osama" Obama. And most of the lesser Democrat presidential wannabes are falling all over themselves trying to out coward the front runners. Whomever gets the Democrat nod will be running primarily on the "End the War Now, Bring the Troops Home" ticket.
And, naturally, the Republicans are going to run on the "Fight on to Victory and Secure the Nation" platform. All of the Republican front runners are convinced that they can win on this issue. But, they feel they must pickup some percentage of the Democrat vote and or of the liberal leaning swing vote. So, to varying degrees, the front runners are banking on certain liberal mainstay issues. They're saying they're okay with abortion rights, gay rights, gay unions, gays in the military, gun control, global warming, open borders, illegal alien rights, immigration reform (amnesty), big government entitlement programs or other liberal issues. They seem to be falling all over each other competing for their fair share of the mushy middle vote that may make their day.
So we have one side wrapping up the treasonous antiwar vote (probably around 40% of the total vote) while the other side clearly wraps up the patriotic peace through victory vote (another 40% of the vote). The Democrats will naturally pull in their liberal/socialist base (which is largely the antiwar vote) and the broken glass Republican base will be true to the GOP (their 40% of the vote), although the Christian Right and some of the normally true blue right wing conservatives are growing mighty tired of crawling on bloody stumps looking for scraps.
At any rate, what both sides seem to be ignoring in their fight for the mushy middle may be the 2nd most critical issue of all and an overlooked opportunity for the big win. And that is the fact that half or more of all Americans, regardless of party affiliation, are fed up with illegal aliens flooding into our country through our almost non existent border security. And this during time of war.
The borders must be secured. If the war goes on, an insecure border sets us up for terrorists smuggling in weapons that could kill tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands of Americans. Dirty bombs, chemical or biological weapons, etc.
Even if the Democrats are successful with shutting down our Iraq war efforts, the terrorists are not going to stop. In fact, they'll be emboldened. And freed from fighting over there, they're bound to bring their efforts here. They're going to continue hating us and wanting to wipe us off the face of the planet regardless of what the Democrats may do.
We must defend the nation. We must defend our national security. We must seal the borders now. And we must get control over who and what is coming into our country.
Also, Americans are tired of paying the costs of the growing flood of illegals. The costs are measured in terms of lost American jobs, costs of educating their children, health care costs, housing, welfare, gang violence, crime, costs of capturing, prosecuting and incarcerating illegal alien criminals, overcrowding crumbling cities and towns degrading into slums and barrios, failure of the illegals to assimilate or even to learn our language. Press one for English.
If I'm not mistaken, most if not all of the front runners of both parties are either soft on illegal immigration or are outright in favor of wide open borders and awarding constitutional "rights" to illegals if not immediate full citizenship. This is a national disgrace. And if not stopped will lead to an erosion of our national sovereignty and or to disastrous terrorist attacks of historic proportions. Again, our nation and our borders must be secured!
I sincerely doubt that any Democrat candidate is going to run on a platform of securing the borders and I don't recall any of our front running Republicans declaring that they will seal the borders either, so now what?
Are there any Republican candidates out there who will step forward and not only pledge to win the war, but also to place the nation on a secure war footing? Secure the nation? Seal and secure the borders?
I believe that a qualified Republican candidate with a solid conservative track record, including a record of fighting for full national security has a shot of overtaking the current weak (conservatively speaking) front runners and winning the Republican nod. I also believe this candidate will win over the cowardly antiwar, pro illegal immigration, liberal Democrat whether it be Hillary, Osama Obama or whomever.
By the way, why are we so eager to give up on our traditional American conservative values and principles? I don't know about you, but I'm not about to give up fighting for God, country, family, life, liberty and our traditional American heritage. Those who wish to merge with the liberals on these critical American issues are in for a rude awakening.
For those of you who do not understand what traditional American conservatism means, I'll lay out what it means to me. Others may think differently, and this won't be all inclusive, but here are some major points that are important to me:
Traditional American conservatives are not going to deny our God. Are not going to give up our guns (without using them first). We're not going to surrender to the abortionists or to the gay rights agenda. We're not going to cave to global warming pseudo science. We're not going to surrender our national sovereignty to terrorists, illegals, the United Nations or to Democrats! We're not going to surrender to tax and spend liberal Democrats or to tax and spend moderate country club Republicans.
We will not surrender to the progressives, socialists or moderates who wish to shove their big government socialist wealth transfer and or perverted social programs down our throats.
We're going to continue defending the nation, defending our national sovereignty, defending our national security, defending our borders, defending our families, defending our constitution, our liberty and our American way of life.
We stand for and defend the constitutionally separated and limited government as envisioned and set forth in the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution by the Founding Fathers.
We're going to defend our rights. Our rights to free speech, free religion, freedom of assembly, due process, private property, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are not negotiable.
We're going to fight against the activist court. We're going to fight for judges that interpret the constitution according to the straightforward words and definitions as used at the time of the writing and ratification of the document, ie, the original intent.
We are going to fight for stripping the government of its usurpations and expansions from the limited powers enumerated in the constitution.
We stand for and defend our traditional Judeo-Christian God centered American conservative society and family values system.
We believe we were all created equal by our Creator and are endowed with certain unalienable rights, including the rights to life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness, and we intend to defend same.
We believe it is the primary responsibility of the just government empowered by our consent to defend these rights. And that whenever government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.
I will vote for a conservative and Duncan Hunter fits that bill!
Well, put it this way. He wants the US to vanquish its enemies. His stand on the 2nd amendment is one of 3 main reasons he is unacceptable to me.
Yes. For your consideration, please see the link at post #14 and the list at post #181.
Would you be upset to be proven wrong in the coming months?
When you are interested in something you do it only when it is convenient.
When you are committed, you accept only results, not excuses.
Ken Blanchard
The front runners are missing a GREAT opportunity. And it's so obvious.
If a proven conservative with charisma who can beat Hillary enters the race, I will be first in line to support him/her.
OB1kNOb:
Care to elaborate on the "conservative rights or definitions" that Jim failed to mention? I'm curious as to what he forgot to list.
I didn't say JR failed to mention any rights. I implied that JR has issues with the definition of rights; so let me make it clearer. It is not possible to campaign on a demand for protection of our rights while at the same time throwing stones at gays and others who believe they should have equal rights as well.
Antoninus
You guys are proving my point more and more--scratch a liberal, find an anti-Christian bigot underneath.
Harrowup identified himself as a "Democrat". I for one am not in the habit of taking cues from people who have sold their souls to advance the socialist Culture of Death. You're not apt to get good advice from people who hate you.
"Brown people who need a job?" -- Just say it--Christian conservatives are "Racist, homophobic, misogynist bigots."
Come on. You know you want to.
Lump all the Culture of Life/Culture of Death issues together, and that's what you'll get. If you want to see the GOP dissolve, watch what happens if (God forbid!), Rudy gets the nomination. It will not be pretty. Which is why I'm urging pragmatic, well-intentioned Republicans and conservatives to abandon Team-Rudy now.
Given your bombast, you don't sound pragmatic, let alone well-intentioned. Flame someone else. I'm older, smarter and too good looking to take childish baiting from a Democrat candidate's best soundbites for reelection. We pay good money to people to say things like you do.
Jim Robinson
Huh? Where is a woman's right to kill her unborn child listed in the constitution? It's not there. It's a made up "right" forced on us by a liberal activist court. If you wish a constitutional right to kill children, you'd better start working on amending the constitution to allow it. Good luck with that.
A woman has a right to choose and while your opinion is valid, by insisting she does not have that right you are imposing your will over something that is none of your business.
Gays have the same rights as everyone else.
Then stop insisting candidates campaign against gay rights
Illegal aliens have the right not to be harmed before being deported. Period.
Building a wall isn't going to do that. Economic opportunity will.
And, finally, while I don't happen to trust former Mayor Juliannie, some of you might be wise to notice the pleas for reason from some folks like MadIvan and JimNoble who understand what it takes to be a Republican in a city like New York.
And, finally, finally, I have no dog in this race. I don't want Hillary Clinton in the White House and some of you guys are not helping with your rhetoric.
Duncan Hunter is that man
What people feel after they watch a video like the one you describe and what they feel a week, a month, or a year later may not be at all the same.
Also, you won't be able to get people to watch the video. We have students here at PSU who each year put up photos of unborn children and the impact of abortion. I'd say that a majority of students either don't look or become angry that anyone would dare post such images.
Then there are those who regardless of how badly they feel about abortion, simply won't deny others the "right" to have one, especially in cases of rape, incest, very early pregnancy, etc.
So, while I'm not saying your wrong, I'm suggesting that I'm not so confident in the power of these images. Let's say we ran them on TV every night in ads (assuming the networks would ever go along). Can't you imagine the angry backlash against the groups putting them on the air?
Re. your photo.
You may see it and I may see it, but apparently either not everyone does or else we are overlooking the ability of people to rationalize such moral issues away.
Sorry, pissant, he's not. While he's right on the issues, he hasn't the charisma or ability to defeat Hillary. In the coming months that is going to become increasing clear.
Bookmark.
No matter which traditional conservative American it is that gets the nod, they'd better start getting some real facetime real soon.
If they're unknowns now, a Rasmussen says they are, then they've got about 6 months to become household names.
Hold the phone. You're actually saying that somebody on the Republican side runs second to Hillary in charisma?
LOL
Yes, it will become increasingly clear. But just the opposite of your prediction. See you when the bandwagon comes by.
Yep, the naysayers will just eat a little crow this time.
I'd love it if I were wrong. : )
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.