Posted on 04/11/2006 11:12:36 AM PDT by philsfan24
Disagreements within the GOP won't kill them but the hateful spirit will.
I don't like Tancredo.
He IS an elected representative, and by will of his constituents will speak. Though he is NOT someone I'd have preferred on the front lines of this fight and, imo, done as much harm in building acrimony with the administration that may be a factor in their resistance on this issue, as well as good in keeping the issue forefront. My preferences do not matter. Fact is he IS a leader on this issue and it just needs to be accepted for what it is. It's wasted energy to try to deflate his status in this fight, energy I'd rather direct at the amnesty boosters in the Senate.
At same time I have and DO agree Sessions, Hayworth, and Kyl should be pushed forward as significant spokepersons. Kyl is a bit of a moderate on the issue, but he DOES favor border enforcement. Sessions represents the main of conservative thought. Hayworth is the conservative hardliner. Between the three their voices are not offputting and they represent the segments of the majority of this base in their degrees of opinions on this.
It is between those three and perhaps Nelson that a compromise should rise up.
Kennedy/McCain/Hagel/Specter/Martinez are simply pushing amnesty. A minority view in the extreme. No compromise should be allowed to arise from that corner, since there is room for no compromise among people that favor no border enforcement and blanket amnesty.
37% + 31% is 68%. Count me in the other 32%
The GOP is letting the country down on this one. The Dems actively court the votes of illegals who are on the welfare gravy train to a greater extent than the general public. The GOP, benignly neglects the issue for a variety of reasons. There's the cheap labor argument; there's Bush's well intentioned but feckless hispanophilia.
Even generally conservative publications like the Wall Street Journal and Forbes, sane on many issues, are out to lunch on this one. They focus on the problems skilled, educated guest workers experience with the immigration bureaucracy while paying minimal attention to the problems caused by the flood of un-vetted invaders coming in through the unprotected borders.
All you have to do is watch these demonstrations. They are a measure of how bad the problem is, not the will of the citizenry. They're working, and can't afford to demonstrate in those sorts of numbers.
I would vote for a real "seal the borders" candidate, but its hard to believe either party is capable of producing one. If we won't protect the borders, why have an immigration debate, or worry about security?
Let me guess...no evening news will lead with this poll story. Prove me wrong.
So 66%, two thirds of U.S. citizens don't trust federal government in general on immigration.
I guess even several liberals see the writing on the wall that illigal immigration will destroy the U.S. if it is not stop and those illigals here in the U.S. are not sent back to Mexico.
This is big, this is a top issue right now, and if the public thinks the answer to immigration lies with the GOP, we will win big in November. That's gonna leave a mark.
"How about... I don't trust either on this issue?"
In the '80's hip-hop vernacular, "Word!".
I always enjoy Rasmussen's polls more than the others. What is their methodology- is it reliable or just telling us what we want to hear?
Except for a few sheeple who can always be fooled, I would think the vast majority of Americans would trust neither party on immigration and be looking for other alternatives.
Maybe not Tom, but someone a little more appealing who has his same message, yes.
John Kyl has been excellent, too.
"Perhaps McCain, Hagel, Specter and Martinez ought to get onboard with Sessions, Hayworth etc.."
but they take the stance they do on immigration because they are radical ideologues.
McCain for example is a member of the immigration task force of the Migration Policy Institute. The task force is a group of the most prominent open borders idelogues in the world.
Now Specter and Martinez may very well have the position they do because they are simply confused.
But McCain and Hagel are open borders ideologues.
"Tancredo should be locked in a box. He is a lightning rod for every negative generalization made about Conservatives. He would kill the momentum towards Border Security. Senators Sessions and Kyl would help, and not hurt like Tancredo."
What exactly do you have against him? He makes the pro-borders case forcefully but respectfully.
Exactly what are these negative generalizations that people harbor toward conservatives, that Tancredo represents? The fact that he believes in principle and the rule of law rather than selling the American people to the highest bidder?
The latest Rasmussen Reports national opinion survey found that 37% of Americans now trust Republicans more than Democrats on the issue of immigration. Just 31% trust the Democrats more.
Ted Kennedys speech cheering on the illegals needs to be all over the TV.
we have to pressure the GOP to do the right thing on immigration.
Bushies hate Tancredo for having guts. Makes no sense. My vote is for Tancredo.
Yes, Buchanan may be right on the border, but he is wrong on everything else under the sun.
Do Republicans really feel they can buy the Mexican vote via amnesty? They are dreaming on this one. The Democrats have the Hispanic vote just like they have the black one. Disparaging their “white” base to bribe the ethnics is just plain dumb.
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.