Posted on 02/19/2007 1:14:04 AM PST by Jim Robinson
Edited on 02/19/2007 2:20:11 AM PST by Jim Robinson. [history]
I was told earlier this evening that it's impossible for a conservative to win the general election against Hillary Clinton. That the socially liberal Rudy Giuliani is the ONLY Republican who can (a) beat Hillary and (b) win the war.
How many FReepers actually believe this hogwash? If we have no faith in our own conservative principles and values why do we call ourselves conservatives? How can we possibly hope to advance our conservative causes if we tuck tail and run when we should be fighting as if our very survival as a free people depends upon it. Because it does.
We cannot advance conservatism by running a social liberal for the office of chief executive. If you want proof, ask Arnie, the socially liberal Republican governor of California. No thanks. You can have him and the socialist horse he rode in on.
We cannot defend life, liberty or nation (see below discussion on securing borders) with a social liberal at the helm.
I'd like to build a winning conservative platform with a dozen or so hard hitting no nonsense points that we can all agree on that would help us focus on our best potential primary nominee and one that can defeat Hillary, et al, in the general.
Here's a starter list and it's open for discussion, cutting, consolidation, expansion and detailing:
Would a conservative platform focusing on victory in the war, national security, national defense, securing the borders, deporting illegal aliens, sound fiscal policy and defense of life, liberty, property and individual rights be a winner over Hillary's treasonous platform of surrender, weakness, open borders, socialist fiscal policies, "abortion rights," "gay rights," global warming, continued government abuses and subversion of our rights to freedom of religion, freedom of speech, right to keep and bear arms and private property rights?
Expanding on one issue, for example, I'm pushing for increased border security. I used to be in favor of some sort of temporary worker program, but not one that has a fast track to citizenship. I'm now coming around to the point of view held by the majority of Americans regardless of political party affiliation and that is we MUST secure the borders immediately. It's obvious that this war against Islamic fascism is going to grind on even after we put down the nasty business in Iraq. We must secure the borders against terrorist intrusion and infiltration. We must tightly control ALL immigration to the US.
It's also becoming more and more obvious that Americans are not happy with illegals taking jobs in an ever growing number of industries. They're no longer just doing field labor and or menial low paying tasks. They're creeping up the uskilled labor and union scale, only they're competing unfairly by accepting low wages and under the table payments.
We also need to seal the borders against drug smugglers, weapons smugglers, criminals, terrorists, etc. Catch them, try them and lock them up.
Americans are also tired of footing the bills for illegal alien health care, education, welfare, auto accidents, crime, disease, etc.
It's way past time to call a halt to this nonsense. I say we catch them at the borders and deport them. If we catch them again, place them in a work camp. If they want to work, fine, let them work in a work camp for their keep. Nothing more. And no illegal families or children or anchor babies. If it takes additional laws on the books, fine let's get it done. If it takes a constitutional amendment to stop the anchor babies, let's get the process started.
We should also catch and deport them when they show up at the DMV, voter registration or voting booth, unemployment line, bank, building permit office, welfare department, social security office, hospitals, free clinics, schools, jails, auto accident or traffic stops, etc. If they can't speak English and they don't have valid identification, then we need to hold them or call in the INS.
If we're going to secure the nation we must secure the borders, control immigration and stop pandering to the illegals or their enablers. Employers who willingly and knowingly hire illegals should be punished. If they pay their workers under the table and fail to withhold taxes or social security, they should be dealt with as felons.
So, we win the war, secure the nation, build our defenses, return to a sound fiscal policy, cut spending and taxes, and defend our rights.
How many states would go for this platform as opposed to Hillary's that is exactly opposite?
I think we'd even pull in California.
What say you?
I agree!
We had a popular Conservative as POTUSA.
Next was a one term moderate.
Next was a two term traitor, who some people think was conservative.
Next was a two term moderate that squeaked by because the democrats nominees were very bad.
Now some people want a far left winger as the Republican nominee that most real democrats can beat because they can run to the right of IT.
"What say you?"
Jim Robinson for President!!!
Seriously, thank you for a very reasoned and major-item list.
According to your recent poll only 14.1% of members support Rino Rudy.
Thank you for once again reminding FReepers that your site is intended to be conservative.
Anti-immigrant rhetoric is a loser.
EVERY candidate who ran on the issue got trounced.
Make anti-immigration a major part of your platform and you are doomed.
I am not saying avoid the issue and agree with your goals of strengthening the border, but I am telling you if you make it in ANY way a major focus you lose.
I'm with you, Jim. No compromise!
... oh and I forgot to say, you'll lose EVERY big state with many of the things on that platform. Without big states you lose.
Smaller govt is fine and so are lower taxes. Win the war is good. But all the anti-immigrant talk will sink you. It has already been proven. America is not quite mad enough to make anti-immigration a populist issue.
And conservatives alone CANNOT win an election.
Loved 1 through 12, sent this post to everybody on my address list. Keep up the good work Jim.
Regarding #10: Expand the economy using foreign labor? More NAFTA like treaties?
They're out in force, that's for sure.
If we have no faith in our own conservative principles and values why do we call ourselves conservatives?
A fair question that. Why don't you pose it to a few of Madame Gulianis supporters?
How many FReepers actually believe this hogwash?
Far too many. Some of them are becoming more than just a bit tiresome.
That the socially liberal Rudy Giuliani is the ONLY Republican who can (a) beat Hillary and (b) win the war.
Rudy isn't just 'socially liberal'. And he isn't the only one who can beat Hillary. She's essentially unelectable Jim. Nearly 40% of the people who were asked in a recent poll said they wouldn't vote for her under any circumstances.
We cannot advance conservatism by running a social liberal for the office of chief executive.
But but but Jim...he can win! And winning is the mostest importantest thing of all dontchaknow. Those silly principles thingies are like so last year.
I'd like to build a winning conservative platform with a dozen or so hard hitting no nonsense points that we can all agree on that would help us focus on our best potential primary nominee and one that can defeat Hillary, et al, in the general.
I like it but I think we can get it down to less than 10.
1.Win the war!
Nuff said here.
2.Secure the nation!
3.Secure the borders!
4.Stop the illegal aliens!
I think you can roll all this into "Secure The Borders".
5.Rebuild the military!
Yep.
6.Deal with growing threats! Iran, Syria, North Korea, China, (and an increasingly Muslim Russia and Europe?)!
Yep.
7.Cut government!
8.Cut spending!
9.Cut taxes!
Amen, Amen, Amen.
10.Allow the free economy to expand!
There's virtually no chance of any of these four if Rudy is elected. None. Zip. Zilch. Nada.
11.Return control of states issues to the states!
The 9th and 10th Amendments are dead, Jim. But it's nice to see that someone actually remembers to put flowers on their graves.
12.Defend life, liberty, property and individual rights!
How about 'support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic'. Maybe they could swear an oath or something when they take office.
L
rhet·o·ric –noun
1. (in writing or speech) the undue use of exaggeration or display; bombast.
Speaking of rhetoric: The phrase "anti-immigrant"--They are the ones illegally invading OUR country!
I say we catch them at the borders and deport them.
I say we do not allow them to cross the border in the first place!!!
P.S. DUNCAN HUNTER
The war will be our downfall....I don't think we can "Win" it....Islam and the Arabs can't or won't embrace what it takes to have a stable country.
Nice try, but how do you explain that NO candidate has won with the issue.
Bury your head in the sand all you want.
IT'S A LOSER.
Right Now, Duncan Hunter and possibly Newt seem to be our only options.
I've volunteered for Duncan's campaign ;-)
The people of California, one of the most liberal nations in the country, have passed laws to fight illegal immigration and pandering of same. Too bad the liberal courts overruled us. And in a very recent election, the Democrat ran on a pro illegal immigrant platform. The one good thing Arnie did was to oppose that, and he won in a landslide. Don't tell me it won't work. California will go for the platform I posted above. The people are fed up.
LOL. nations = states
I am not a republican, I am a conservative. I would vote for Zell Miller as a democrat before I'd vote for any of the current media appointed republican front runners.
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.