Posted on 11/22/2005 12:28:26 PM PST by Icelander
I'm seriously considering Tancredo's candidacy myself.
The man's a rock-solid conservative, and he's got guts.
"Why say that(we will have permanent open borders) when you know that won`t happen."
Here's why. In short, read NAFTA and CAFTA about the "free movement of peoples"
See this, originally posted by "the gillman" (hope I'm not crossing the wrong line by not asking you first gillman, but more folks need to see this):
Start with this summary by Phyllis Schlafly, staunch conservative and friend to Ronald Reagan.
http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2005/july05/05-07-13.html
...This CFR document, called "Building a North American Community," asserts that George W. Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin "committed their governments" to this goal when they met at Bush's ranch and at Waco, Texas on March 23, 2005. The three adopted the "Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America" and assigned "working groups" to fill in the details....
This was the meeting where Bush called the Minutemen "Vigilantes."
...the CFR document calls for "a permanent tribunal for North American dispute resolution." Get ready for decisions from non-American judges who make up their rules ad hoc and probably hate the United States anyway...
Bye bye Constitution.
... The CFR document demands that we implement "the Social Security Totalization Agreement negotiated between the United States and Mexico." That's code language for putting illegal aliens into the U.S. Social Security system, which is bound to bankrupt the system...
Bye bye your retirement.
...U.S. taxpayers are supposed to create a major fund to finance 60,000 Mexican students to study in U.S. colleges...
How generous of you to support the higher education of all those foreignors. Will you have enough left over for your own children?
... The CFR document calls for allowing Mexican trucks "unlimited access" to the United States, including the hauling of local loads between U.S. cities...
Look out for that big scary truck!
Talk about drug smuggling and terrorist heaven.
... To ensure that the U.S. government carries out this plan so that it is "achievable" within five years, the CFR calls for supervision by a North American Advisory Council of "eminent persons from outside government....
See? You don't get to vote at all. You just get to pay and surrender your rights at the door.
You can see the plan here.
http://www.cfr.org/publication.html?id=8102
Pay particular attention the portion on "Dissenting Views."
That's where some say they haven't sold us out enough, and the the others say they'll have trouble with, "racists, xenophobes and nationalists" who aparrently don't approve of being robbed to support the utopian dream of these traitors.
The talking points of the OBL's on this site come directly from there.
Here's Senator John Cornyn's bill to establish the first building block of this momentous betrayal.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:S.2941:
Highlights:
SEC. 3. PURPOSES.
The purposes of the Fund shall be--
(1) to promote economic and infrastructure integration among Canada, Mexico, and the United States;
(2) to promote education and economic development in Mexico; and
(3) to reduce the wealth gap between Mexico and Canada, and between Mexico and the United States.
Reduce the wealth gap.
Pure Marxism, from your republican administration.
More:
SEC. 4. PROJECTS FUNDED.
(a) IN GENERAL- The Fund shall make grants for projects to carry out the purposes described in section 3, including projects--
(1) to construct roads in Mexico to facilitate trade between Mexico and Canada, and Mexico and the United States;
(2) to develop and implement post-secondary education programs in Mexico;
(3) to install telecommunications technologies throughout Mexico; and
(4) to construct other infrastructure that will carry out such purposes.
(Part two, there's your children's college fund, going to Mexicans.)
More:
SEC. 5. CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE FUND.
(a) IN GENERAL- The terms of the agreement establishing the Fund shall, subject to the limitation in subsection (b), require the Governments of Canada, Mexico, and the United States to contribute to the Fund.
(Governments? They're talking about pillaging your paychecks!)
The terms of the agreement establishing the Fund shall require that the Fund operate for an initial period of 10 years.
By then, there will be nothing left of the Republic.
Bingo! Some of the most vocal opponents of illegal immigration are patriotic Americans of Hispanic heritage who took the time and trouble to come to this country legally. They deeply resent being identified with illegal aliens.
It's not impossible. According to this article, Tancredo has a lot of support in Iowa. If he can win the caucus there he's going to get more serious money to keep going. And if he can score a win in the New Hamshire primary, he's a much more serious candidate. Don't forget that California moves their primary up to March in the next election. There are many people here sick of the illegal thing. If he can win that one, he's already got a lot of delegates. It's going to be interesting.
"Don Quixote is alive and well...."
ain't it the truth.
The kid that cried wolf once too often, fits quite well.
It's like warning an employee over and over, and not seeing any improved results. Eventually, that employee gets fired.
One must fight for what they believe while at the same time be a realist. Vote for the person closest to your beliefs while still keeping in mind that they must ultimately be electable. Voting for candidate who reflects your views perfectably but doesn't have a chance in he!! of being elected is a wasted vote.
Reality: Most U.S. citizen Hispanics vote for liberal democrats. Gore won their vote. Kerry won their vote.
And Gore lost and Kerry lost.
And it will all happen in less than 20 years!
But at least I will be able to hold my head up knowing I didn't vote (again) for someone who won't enforce the existing laws on the books wrt Illegal Immigration.
sw
Sure, but it's still early on, and it's just the primaries. Reagan came out of nowhere to almost take down Ford in 76, despite the "realist" was for Ford.
Now I probably wouldn't vote 3rd party in the general election, but the threat being there helps prevent Republicans from becoming Democrats.
Right and wrong, and personal responsibility come to mind.
Like all of us, politicians need to be held accountable and take responsibility for their actions. They are not above responsibility.
Should voting for someone based on money, popularity and power be the deciding factor in giving someone a job? I don't think so. Unfortunately this seems to be the norm in todays America, and looking at the results, this is not good.
Where can I get some peseo's to send to the RNC? I think that's a great idea.
Reagan was always considered electable. He had just missed the nomination years earlier. I would never suggest voting for someone just because they're electable....just not voting for someone who obviously isn't.
Just find someone who is electable and the closest to your personel views and vote for him or her. A vote any other way is a vote for far worse.
When your party grows up give us a call.
When your's grows up to stand on principle give us a call.
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.