A winning conservative platform for 2008?

Opinion | Jim Robinson

[Jim Robinson]

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:

1. Win the war!
2. Secure the nation!
3. Secure the borders!
4. Stop the illegal aliens!
5. Rebuild the military!
6. Deal with growing threats! Iran, Syria, North Korea, China, (and an increasingly Muslim Russia and Europe?)!
7. Cut government!
8. Cut spending!
9. Cut taxes!
10. Allow the free economy to expand!
11. Return control of states issues to the states!
12. Defend life, liberty, property and individual rights!

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?

[Spiff]

Shut up Spiff. You represent the very worst of FR today. I haven’t opused and don’t intend to, and if that makes you unhappy, good.

No, YOU shut up! Like I said, you've been bitching and moaning for over a month about how your liberal buddies quit the site or got zapped. Maybe you should find a new topic that isn't so annoying and so disparaging of this website. If you don't like it, then leave. Either get with the program, get out of the way, or get lost.

[Dog Gone]

I don’t like obnoxious rudybots and I don’t like obnoxious socons, and I don’t think either should be welcome at this site.

I do think there is room for disagreement among conservatives of different flavors, especially if it’s done in a respectful manner. However, it’s painfully obvious that one side won and the other side lost and now is gone, so to say the socons are not on top is absurd.

It’s better to argue that this is how it should have been all along, and a painful experience was necessary to set things right.

[Dog Gone]

Either get with the program, get out of the way, or get lost.

You're such a voice of reason.

[Kevmo]

I do think there is room for disagreement among conservatives of different flavors,
***There you go again. This wasn’t a disagreement among conservatives, it was a disagreement between conservatives and liberals who wanted to claim the banner of conservatism.

especially if it’s done in a respectful manner.
***It does look like we agree on something. But who is the one with the lack of respect in a disagreement, the owner of the property or the guy trying to sell him Amway?

However, it’s painfully obvious that one side won and the other side lost and now is gone, so to say the socons are not on top is absurd.
***You’re slipping back into that drama queen thing again.

It’s better to argue that this is how it should have been all along, and a painful experience was necessary to set things right.
***Well, feel free to argue it then.

[free_life]

Stopping illegal immigrant is doable. I am waiting to hear a Conservative Presidential Candidate say he will bring real enforceable laws against those who hire illegal immigrants. It is about money/jobs. No jobs = little illegal immigrant.

The WOT needs to be re-sold the American voter. A plan to actually win in Iraq is needed and I am not one of those who think we are losing in Iraq. Quite to the contrary, now we just need to go the extra mile and use full force to rid the world of the rest of the terrorist ilk in Iraq.

As for candidates. Fred Thompson and Duncan Hunter are the only two I can see advancing Principled Conservatism and turning the tide of the left in the GOP.

[jmc813]

I haven’t opused and don’t intend to

I, for one, am glad to hear that. You're one of the good guys. If I may make a suggestion, perhaps one of you should pull the ol' "please don't post to me" card. I like both of you guys, and this line of conversation is only going too lead to flamewars. FR really doesn't need that at this point.

[Paperdoll]

WOW! Point by point your vital issue list sounds exactly like Rep. Duncan Hunter’s issue list. He has been fighting for these items for 26 years. No flip-flopping for Rep. Hunter. And, consistently Conservaative, he has clearly spoken to each of them, including his viable solutions.

[Hostage]

Add the following items:

FairTax
FairTax
FairTax
FairTax
FairTax
FairTax
FairTax
FairTax
FairTax
FairTax
FairTax
FairTax
..... however many times it takes to bring back the original method of funding government according to the original Constitution.

A related excerpt from the following link:

http://slimpickins.us/Default.aspx?tabid=93

“But certainly nobody will complain that a great and rich country like ours should give the insignificant sum of $20,000 to relieve its suffering women and children, particularly with a full and overflowing Treasury, and I am sure, if you had been there, you would have done just as I did.”

“It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of; it is the principle.

In the first place, the government ought to have in the Treasury no more than enough for its legitimate purposes.

But that has nothing to do with the question. The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be entrusted to man, particularly under our system of collecting revenue by a tariff, which reaches every man in the country, no matter how poor he may be, and the poorer he is the more he pays in proportion to his means.

What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much he pays to the government.

So you see, that while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he. If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20,000,000 as $20,000. If you have the right to give to one, you have the right to give to all; and, as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity, and to any amount you may think proper.

You will very easily perceive what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism, on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other.

No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity.

Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose.

If twice as many houses had been burned in this county as in Georgetown, neither you nor any other member of Congress would have thought of appropriating a dollar for our relief.

There are about two hundred and forty members of Congress. If they had shown their sympathy for the sufferers by contributing each one week’s pay, it would have made over $13,000.

There are plenty of wealthy men in and around Washington who could have given $20,000 without depriving themselves of even a luxury of life.

The Congressmen chose to keep their own money, which, if reports be true, some of them spend not very creditably; and the people about Washington, no doubt, applauded you for relieving them from the necessity of giving by giving what was not yours to give.

The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation, and a violation of the Constitution.

So you see, Colonel, you have violated the Constitution in what I consider a vital point.

It is a precedent fraught with danger to the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people.

I have no doubt you acted honestly, but that does not make it any better, except as far as you are personally concerned, and you see that I cannot vote for you.”

[BillyBoy]

>> Anti-immigrant rhetoric is a loser. EVERY candidate who ran on the issue got trounced. <<

Oh really? Reality would beg to differ. Last November, I worked on the campaign of a state Senator who ran a campaign around "anti (ILLEGAL) immigrat rhetoric", the Democrats threw everything they could at him and recruited the "perfect" candidate (female, minority, disabled, Iraq war vet) and he pulled through and is on Capitol Hill today. Here's a small sample of freshmen members of Congress who WON in 2006 while making "get tough on illegal aliens and secure the borders" a centerpiece of their campaign:

Senator Bob Corker (R-TN)

Congressman Brian Bilbray (R-CA)

Congressman Peter Roskam (R-IL)

Congressman Bill Sali (R-ID)

Congressman Vern Buchanan (R-FL)

Congressman Doug Lamborn (R-CO)

Congressman Heath Shuler (D-NC)

Congressman Tim Walberg (R-MI)

Mobile Vulgus, this FACT has been brought up on FR over and over again. Don't you open borders RINOs get tired of repeating the same LIES?

[EverOnward]

Here, here! Thank you for a thoughtful, reasoned approach that our “leaders” fail to comprehend.

[Buffalo Head]

"Anti-immigrant rhetoric is a loser. EVERY candidate who ran on the issue got trounced.

Same with anti-abortion.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Preach it brotha Jim! (stomps feet, claps hands)

[Boxsford]

You're a little late to the party with your smug little response about a person you know nothing about. What does FourtySeven stand for?-- five cards short of a full deck?

[VxH]

12 should be at the top of the list - it should be number 1.

It was the reason the nation declared Independence in the first place.

Return the U.S.A. to a position of leadership, make it a light shining on a hill that others seek to emulate - and the war will take care of itself.

Return government to its intended purpose - to preserve the rights and freedoms of the governed - and the pieces required to solve 2 through 11 will fall into place.

The nation is wandering lost in the desert. It needs to rediscover its roots, rekindle the flame and lead the world, not by force - but by example, towards Freedom.

There was a time when the U.S.A. stood for F R E E D O M! Remember?

[VxH]

If I was born south of the border, I would do everything in my power to get my family to the U.S.A.

Improve conditions in the South, and people will not want to move North.

Building a wall will only increase the number of folks will only multiply the number of those who are angry and isolated. It will increase the number of people that are receptive to being recruited by those who hate the U.S.A.

Starving angry people make for highly motivated revolutionaries.

Danny Ortega, Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez - they will gladly lead those who we force into angry isolation.

The U.S.A. is in a difficult position - Alienate and isolate, or embrace and make dependant.

We must rekindle the flame. We must take back the high moral ground.

If we lead the world to freedom the immigration problem will take care of itself.

[Prokopton]

Thank you, Ted Kennedy, for that beautiful, and thoroughly BS, speech.

[KingLiberty]

Nice work. I haven’t read all of the comments, but I’m getting that a discussion is occurring between the “send them back and stop any more from coming” and the “we can’t say that, it’s too radical of a thought to survive in this political climate” sides. I come down with you on the former. And I think American citizens would agree, just as long as an understandable strategy and a solid plan can be formulated to do it. How about a citizens commission to come up with such a plan? It could include people like Pat Buchanan, Duncan Hunter, Fred Thompson or his appointed representative (if he’d go for it, which I’d hope he would. This would tell me what I need to know about him, right now I’m just crossing my fingers and believing that he’s the real thing), and many other thoughtful citizens. This may make this point on your agenda popular, doable, and totally defenseable, within and outside of this forum.

[Iwo Jima]

Shut up Spiff.

You're the only one that I see trying to stifle dissent.

[aj7360]

As much as I like Fred... I don’t see ANY Republican having a snow ball’s chance given the situation in Iraq.

Just how can ANY Republican convince the American people that our party deserves another chance. We lot the House and Senate and we will next lose the White House.

And I think even if all the troops were pulled out before the election, we would still lose.

Sorry to be so negative... but that’s how I see it.