Posted on 06/16/2006 3:03:55 AM PDT by Dane
Stephen Stone, a Provo resident and president and editor of RenewAmerica.us....From this thread. I'm sorry, but a longshot candidate should not be hard to "pin down". An establishment candidate, sure -- play it safe -- but not a guy like Jacob.
"We've done research on John Jacob and it's kind of hard to pin him down. Chris Cannon has done some things that would be a red flag or troublesome to conservatives."
If you go to Jacobs' website, his positions are fuzzy and ill-defined. It resembles Kinky Friedman's, who is running for governor here in Texas.I should also note that Cannon has a near-perfect record from ACU and a near-perfect (almost 0%) from ADA. It would be a real shame if Jacob was worse than Cannon, particularly on illegal immigration.
Jacobs is hoping to slip in as the "un-Cannon." Cannon has a sterling record, and is being endorsed by the NRA.
--sinkspur
I know quite a few people on student visas. They can't do any work at all if it isn't approved (being a TA, etc.). They can't work at McDonald's. They can't clean toilets, they can't do anything. The money he claimed to give her was small potatoes and even if laws were enforced, since he isn't a genuine employer, not much -- if anything -- would happen to him. The couple would be deported, however.
"like you and other zealot tancredo supporters don't have farmers and house builders automatically convicted for the people they hire."
I can't with knowledge say that every farmer belongs in prison but I sure can as far as contractors go. Every last one of them that hires an illegal belongs in prison.
On the contrary, this story makes it appear that Jacob did something illegal. His explanations are not convincing. Most voters won't bother to get into the intracacies; they will assume that where there is smoke, there is fire.
This is Jacob's Busby moment.
Good Luck on getting an answer from Dane, I'm still waiting for many I've asked.
Guess he just put up this thread to continue his never-ending rant against Tancredo.....Unless I missed it Tom isn't even mentioned in the article, yet EVERY reply from Dane includes another rant against him.
IIRC correctly Dane is in CA, yet he remains obsessed with the fact that Tancredo is always re=elected in CO.
His time & effort could be much better used in getting some 'America First' pols elected in his home state.
I've been trying to get the dude's opinion on the Pence plan for weeks now to no avail.
Is it breaking the law if there is a legal loophole?
susie
Jacob will probably owe back social security and tax withholding for this couple. They were probably employees as a legal matter despite the dross, if they only worked for Jacob.
Don't hold you breath....(maybe we should mention Tancredo's name in all our questions....;o)...
My last inquiry was why Dane showed up again to support the illegals.
Even tho one of them freely admitted he was much better off (financially) working off the books.
When asked his thoughts on any guest worker program this illegal said;
"It doesn't interest me; I would prefer to live like I'm living," he says. "It's much better for me than being here legally, like a guest worker."
It's about Jacob's and tancredo's hypocrisy about using foreign born labor..
Ahhh, immoral but not illegal?
This man obviously broke the law and used a loophole to do it. He SHOULD be fined at the LEAST.
I believe that if it is a loophole, he did not break the law, so, legally what can be done to him?
susie
bill(oral sex is not sex) and hillary clinton, tom tancredo, and bay buchanan are applauding you for your above, IMO.
Because I can read and I understand what words mean? Good for them.
susie
Keep on posting brytlea, you make my point(the hypocrisy of the tancredo zealots) with each of your posts.
Loophole-- A technicality that allows a person or business to avoid the scope of a law without directly violating the law.
The poster I was responding to said:
This man obviously broke the law and used a loophole to do it. He SHOULD be fined at the LEAST.
I simply pointed out that if he used a loophole, he didn't break the law. For that observation, I got back:
Ahhh, immoral but not illegal?
Which prompted me to clarify:
I was not commenting on the morality of what he did. I was commenting on what you said:
This man obviously broke the law and used a loophole to do it. He SHOULD be fined at the LEAST.
I believe that if it is a loophole, he did not break the law, so, legally what can be done to him?
This in turn prompted you to suggest that I am somehow applauded by the likes of Bill Clinton et al. Now, I gotta think you mean that as some sort of a put down, since I've never seen you say anything nice to anyone except open border advocates. The other thing I might also discern is that you either cannot read well, or you like taking what people say and twisting into something it isn't, to make your point. Of course, if you really had a good point to make, it would stand on its merit and not require you to do what you do.
So, if you think I've commented anywhere in my posts on the rightness or wrongness of what the guy did, find it and post it. Otherwise, I think you owe me an apology. I won't be waiting for one, however, since I've also never seen you do that.
susie
You may have a future in being part of hillary's campaign, put your resume in, I think it will get a positive response.
Pointless to respond to you ever at all.
susie
No doubt, that will save you from doing your clinton/tancredo/buchanan like pretzel twisting, that twisting must be painful.
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.