Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Congratulations to John Campbell, New Congressman from California's 48th District
HughHewitt.com ^ | December 6, 2005 08:34 PM PST | Hugh Hewitt

Posted on 12/07/2005 7:56:36 AM PST by Checkers

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-110 next last
To: zbigreddogz

I wonder how many of the Gilchrist-ians are aware of Jim's Rollerball view of the world?


61 posted on 12/07/2005 1:27:43 PM PST by Checkers (Hasta La Vista, "Tookie!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

So, messing up on something as simple as "absentee ballots" made Gilchrist qualified for Congress how, exactly? If you lived in the 48th District, you could not have missed all the free airtime on wacko talk-radio and Gilchrist signs sprouting up everywhere - until this past weekend, he was leading in those areas by a long-shot - I think Hugh is correct that 10% is all you can count on for "sealing the borders."


62 posted on 12/07/2005 1:43:50 PM PST by clawrence3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: jmc813

I take it you have never listened to the John & Ken show then?


63 posted on 12/07/2005 1:45:13 PM PST by clawrence3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

Please don't count me among that 2/3 - I am (hopefully not in the minority) who knows sealing the border is crazy-talk.


64 posted on 12/07/2005 1:47:43 PM PST by clawrence3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: clawrence3
I think Hugh is correct that 10% is all you can count on for "sealing the borders."

Lots of us are old enough to remember a fairly tight border. The little green vans were always around in the border cities - like the one I'm from.

You knew who the illegals were - they were the Mexican looking folks who didn't drive 1 mph over the speed limit - because back then, the cops didn't hesitate to turn them over to the Border Patrol. In fact, the BP vans would meet them at the locality of the traffic stop. A lot of people got sent back with an outstanding traffic ticket - because the BP refused to let them stay around to answer it!

This all was well known to the people in Mexico. They didn't like it, but they knew that U.S. immigration enforcement was serious. So they didn't try - in other words, good enforcement was a deterrent.

It has only been since about 1975 that this equation changed, as organizations funded by the Ford Foundation at the behest of guys like Sargent Shriver (MALDEF is the best example) began to make traction in the leftist courts, and with propaganda campaigns designed to mislead and deceive people about the legal rights of the police to either enforce or aid in the enforcement of the immigration laws.

The result is plain to see in many American cities, but most visibly on the border, where people now live in fear, because the lawless own the border.

The answer is not surrender, as Hewitt claims. The answer is to enforce the laws for as long as it takes to make clear that enforcing them is what we will do.

65 posted on 12/07/2005 2:18:19 PM PST by Regulator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Regulator

And lots of us are 30-something who don't want to turn our back on American ideals like "Give me your poor your tired your huddled masses yearning to be free . . ."


66 posted on 12/07/2005 2:25:59 PM PST by clawrence3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Great Caesars Ghost

You must be kidding.


67 posted on 12/07/2005 2:29:45 PM PST by justshutupandtakeit (Public Enemy #1, the RATmedia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: mobyss

Your threat borders on insanity. And there will be no write-in vote which exceeds 1%. Most of those loons can't even spell Tancredo.


68 posted on 12/07/2005 2:32:22 PM PST by justshutupandtakeit (Public Enemy #1, the RATmedia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Checkers
I think Hugh's statements are kinda harsh, but that's his opinion, but I found one fallacy within it:

If that's the best this constituency could do in the best of circumstances, it isn't a "movement," it is rather a small, but important "constituency," but not an electorally decisive one.)

As close as the past 3 elections have been, going back to the 2000 Presidential elections, the 2002 mid-terms and the 2004 Presidential elections, NO constitutency or movement can be completely ignored anymore. Another thing, while Gilchrist is a one issue wonder, if he can expand his platform somewhat so he can escape that label, he might be onto something.
69 posted on 12/07/2005 2:33:23 PM PST by MikefromOhio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Regulator

"The answer is not surrender, as Hewitt claims."

You're just another liar.


70 posted on 12/07/2005 2:34:00 PM PST by Checkers (Hasta La Vista, "Tookie!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit

Borders on?


71 posted on 12/07/2005 2:35:21 PM PST by Checkers (Hasta La Vista, "Tookie!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: clawrence3
Give me your poor your tired your huddled masses yearning to be free . . .

No kidding! So you're a supporter of Emma Lazarus and her Socialist aspirations for the United States?

Maybe you're on the wrong website.

72 posted on 12/07/2005 2:36:48 PM PST by Regulator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

Comment #73 Removed by Moderator

To: Regulator

Even broken clocks like Socialists are right twice a day.


74 posted on 12/07/2005 2:38:30 PM PST by clawrence3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

Are you saying the candidates could mail out absentee ballots? Doesn't the voter have to request them?


75 posted on 12/07/2005 2:38:44 PM PST by justshutupandtakeit (Public Enemy #1, the RATmedia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

Comment #76 Removed by Moderator

To: justshutupandtakeit

Candidates do not directly mail out absentee ballots - what Campbell (and any smart front-runner) did was mail out applications for said absentee ballots - what these people called "lazy man" votes.


77 posted on 12/07/2005 2:41:29 PM PST by clawrence3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: clawrence3

Ok that makes sense. Was this Cox's old seat?


78 posted on 12/07/2005 2:43:58 PM PST by justshutupandtakeit (Public Enemy #1, the RATmedia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit

yes


79 posted on 12/07/2005 2:46:03 PM PST by Checkers (Hasta La Vista, "Tookie!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Checkers

Is Jim Gilchrist going to run in Randy "Duke" Cunningham's old district?


80 posted on 12/07/2005 2:47:47 PM PST by Checkers (Hasta La Vista, "Tookie!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-110 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson