Posted on 06/27/2006 11:37:28 AM PDT by Spiff
Please, take it to private e-mail.
Its not quite that simple. For instance many groups with many other names hire tons of political groups and consultants to come and bring their folks in during the last weeks of these races. It generally take after the election when looking at the reports to sort it all out. Furthermore there is political activity going on I expect by other groups that is right on the line. These groups because of their nature are not required to disclose.
I realize there is alot of grass root stuff going on. That why tonight is so important. If Jacob wins I view it as a setback . But If Cannon wins it cannot be denyed that this is a victory for Bush and those that reject the views of Fair, Numbers, CIS etc.
Well I've read the postings of others from that area who say differently. In any event it's not an excuse to promote another amnesty, the first one didn't work obviously and we should learn from our mistakes. Even Ed Meese is saying that today.
You write lyric for 2 Live Crew?
No, I live and vote in a RED state that helped drive a political dagger in AlGore's presidential ambitions. And did it happily.
Let me assure you people making that claim are trying to spin their way out of being out of step with Reagan on the immigration issue or are just in total denial. I lived here in the 80s and let me assure you enforcement was not much better than now. And further, the flood of illegals became a title wave after the 1986 amnesty. Those who claim despite the amnesty that there was greater enforcement are arguing against the historical reality that while the bill provided for greater enforcement, none was forthcoming in the subsequent implementation of the legislation.
Many of these same conservative opposing the Senate bill now are even saying "We were promised enforcement in '86 and weren't given any" as part of their rallying cry against current guest worker plans. They are being mightely inconsistent, and not just a bit dishonest, now flip flopping and saying there was in fact enforcement. It's not true and it's all to cover their rears on the Reagan front.
There is nothing big tent about "Mexiphobe." It's just ignorant. You're a phoney.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0606/26/sitroom.01.html
BLITZER: Welcome back.
In the Republican heartland, a key congressional battle may hinge on the immigration battle. President Bush sent Utah National Guard troops to the border with Mexico. Now a loyal Republican may be feeling the fallout.
Let's turn to our senior political correspondent, Candy Crowley.
You're just back from Utah.
CANDY CROWLEY, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Exactly.
Show me an incumbent candidate who is polling below 50 percent pitted against a challenger with money and laser focus on a hot issue, and I will show you a race worth watching. It's why we went to Utah to look at the Republican primary race for U.S. Congress.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CROWLEY (voice over): On any given summer Saturday, this is the kind of place you can find a parade. In political lingo, this is Utah 3, probably the most conservative, most Republican, most Mormon district in the country.
REP. CHRIS CANNON (R), UTAH: The primary on the 27th, I hope you guys get out and vote.
CROWLEY: Chris Cannon is a five-term congressman representing Utah 3. He is conservative, Republican, Mormon, and in trouble.
CANNON: I could lose. There are a bunch of people that are really afraid, and they are going to vote, and they'll vote against me.
JOHN JACOB (R), UTAH CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE: Wow.
CROWLEY: John Jacob is a conservative Republican Mormon with a lot of money and a whale of an issue.
JACOB: Well, I think Chris can help with that, because he became the president's point man on -- on illegal immigration.
CROWLEY: Both Republicans want better border security. They differ on what to do with undocumented workers already here. Jacob wants them forced out of the country. Cannon argues, it's impossible and bad for the U.S. economy.
CANNON: That disagreement is whether the Republican Party is going to be some kind of new xenophobic, anti-foreigner party, or whether they're going to be the party of a country that we're thrilled has grown.
JACOB: You need to know, Chris, that it's not anti-foreigners. We love legal immigrants. It's strictly the word illegal...
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
(CROSSTALK)
CROWLEY: As a kind of petri dish for the national debate, Utah 3 has seen an influx of outside money and one very pointed third-party ad.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, AD)
NARRATOR: Congressman Chris Cannon says he's tough on illegal immigration.
(LAUGHTER)
NARRATOR: He says he's never supported amnesty for illegal aliens.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CROWLEY: Cannon has brought in the big guns, via robo-call.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
BUSH: Hello. This is President George W. Bush. I'm asking you to vote for Chris Cannon on Tuesday, June 27.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
LAURA BUSH, FIRST LADY: We need Chris in Congress, so he can continue securing our borders.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
CROWLEY: The Cannon-Jacob smackdown comes as the House and Senate struggle over when or whether to meet to find a mutually acceptable immigration bill.
(on camera): And if your opponent wins this primary, what's the message?
CANNON: Well, then, I think we go into a conference, maybe. Maybe we don't even get to a conference on immigration. And people say, this is toxic.
CROWLEY (voice over): Utah 3 is being monitored as closely as a canary sent into a cave to detect poisonous gas.
(on camera): And what's the immigration message that your election would send to the Washington establishment?
JACOB: Secure our borders. Make it safe here in America.
CROWLEY (voice over): The vote and the message come tomorrow.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
CROWLEY: On the eve of the primary, a "Salt Lake Tribune" poll found a Cannon-Jacob dead heat among likely voters, and 91 percent of them saying immigration is a somewhat or very important issue. In turnout, the emotional advantage is Jacob's. Angry voters go to the polls. Cannon's job is to convince those who aren't so riled up to come out, too -- Wolf.
Do you want to tell him how to figure out where I live? Or at least, where I say I live (and why would I lie about that?). I mean, I just can't bring myself to tell him to just find my profile page. I understand how complicated it is to find out this kind of secret information...
You're nuts. As in, you're nuts for amnesty, rewards, benefits, privileges, and citizenship for illegal aliens. Isn't there a La Raza or MEChA forum that would be compatible with your point of view?
Yes, such as playing the race card as you did - just like Jesse Jackson likes to do when he wants to shut down valid criticism.
Get back to me when you absolutists
Absolutists? There you go again with your distortions.
learn the definition of the term "amnesty." You guys still don't seem to have it down.
We have the Webster's definition down just fine. We're just not buying your Clintonian re-parsing of such.
Lordy, Lordy, you are now quoting Wolf Blitzer, what's next. you quoting CNN comrade and Cher's best friend, lou dobbs.
What did you change your profile.
The Wall St. Journal, which is where that editorial of yours came from can spin Reagan all they want but he came around to the fact immigration needs to be strictly legal, period.
I haven't changed my profile at all for about 1 year and I changed my location 3 years ago. Long before you signed up.
Did you think up this term yourself, or are you just picking up the playbook of the pro-homosexual lobby?
Shut down debate by slapping a buzzword on your opponents that accuses them of mental aberration. It's a trademark of the hired hitman spinmeisters, like Carvile the Snakehead, but this time around you are employing the tactic to support an entirely different type of snakehead.
Don't like pointing out that fear is what drives you people?? I'm sorry I offended your delicate sensitivies. Now go back to obsessing about the gardner and the guy washing dishes at your favorite restaurant. And to be called a phony by extremist wackos like you is the highest of honors, trust me.
Great Post. Thanks for the transcripts. Looks live Cannon is calling half of the voters in his district racist.
That should do him a lot of good.
You mean like mis-use of the term "amnesty" or labelling of those of us who see the need for a controlled guest worker plan as being the "open borders crowd?" Give me a break with the "Our sides' crap doesn't stink" nonsense. As if you people haven't driven this debate with mindless labelling all along.
Whether you know it or not you're making the point for us. Illegal immigration increased after 1986 precisely because the amnesty failed. It makes no sense to do it again as Chris Cannon wants to. Even Ed Meese, Bill Bennett and others of that era are saying so, not until at least the borders are secured, then maybe they can talk about it.
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.