Posted on 07/10/2007 9:06:01 AM PDT by Dick Bachert
If you want to blame me for a conservative GOP win, it's okay with me. LOL
When one picks out certain facts and omits others that don't support a thesis in order to 'prove' a thesis, it is cherry picking. It is not only not a clear representation of the facts, but it is outright dishonesty.
I believe Mr. Viguerie used kindly restraint in his well written article.
I believe Mr. Viguerie didn't use restraint in his badly written article.
The only thing to keep Duncan Hunter from winning would be hold-outs like yourself.
Yeah, President Keyes agrees with you.
BINGO. Just about any "R" looks conservative if you compare his/her record to Rudy's. It's like argueing that George Voinvich is a solid conservative icon in the U.S. Senate because his record is much better than Linc Chafee's.
LOL! You still have that knack for bringing people around to see things your way! Very effective! lol
Yes, I already "pointed these votes out" to you numerous times, but since you insist on seeing it AGAIN:
Fred’s Record -
Voted YES to kill voluntary pilot programs for workplace verification. (1996)
Voted YES on maintaining the chain migration system. (1996)
Voted YES on removed higher fines for businesses which hire ILLEGAL aliens (1996)
Vote YES grant amnesty to nearly one million ILLEGAL aliens from Nicaragua, along with their spouses and minor unmarried children. (1997)
Voted NO on including worker safeguards in H-1B bill (1998)
Voted YES for foreign worker bill with no anti-fraud provisions. (2000)
I think he was being facetious.
It is cherry picking when you report only the facts that support your position and ignore all the others.
Yes! Your entire post is excellent. Unfortunately too many of the posters on this forum are kamikaze type conservatives who would rather be "right" than effective in politics. If they can't find a true conservative who passes all 14 litmus tests, they pout and will waste their vote on a third party candidate or sit out the election allowing liberals to elect their candidate.
And there's still six months before primaries. Whee.
Yet D’Souza’s book on Regan was one of the best.
It means this: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved for the States respectively, or to the people
In other words, since the Constitution is silent on the fedgov's powers regarding abortion, it is a state issue.
Now it is not because I feel I am settling with FDT, on the contrary I have no real issue with him except for a few nits. But I fear those seeking purity are spinning in the wind.
Would I like some one up there who agrees with me all the time, yes, but that would only be me, and I ain’t got a chance.
Would I like a pure conservative, with few exceptions (like isolationism which seems to be a mildly popular “conservative” stance among some) sure, I’d welcome it.
But that guy would not make it in the general election. We play the hand we are dealt (the general American public) and we go with who can get us past them.
If we stay at home because the “real” conservative (whatever that means) is not there, then no conservative will be there and we will be out in the cold screaming at the wind.
Yes, he certainly can.
You have his “wrong” immigration votes listed. But can you tell us whether they were well-written and deserved to pass? How many of them were like this recent immigration bill—badly written and yielding a bad result? Context is important, you know, if you’re honest.
Great post!
At that BillyBoy, it was you who I responded to originally on these votes back on 06/29.
The worst site for spreading this false information is NumbersUSA, whose record has been discredited a long time ago because they try to confuse the line between legal and illegal immigration (for example, most of those are for LEGAL immigration issues) others, like S1664 (which is most of these) are procedural votes (things like move to and from committee) and not votes on the actual bill. At that, S1664 did not even get to the Senate to vote, it was killed in committee.
http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_keyvote_detail.php?cs_id=V907&can_id=53292
Another, S1156, Thompson didn't vote to grant amnesty, he voted to table the bill for a vote. I.E. Another procedural vote, not a vote on the actual bill. At that, Thompson's vote on the actual amendment, 1156 was Nay
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=105&session=1&vote=00265
This is just a small example of how records can be distorted and one should check more carefully before buying into something you read on the internet.
Clara, ping 337
Yeah, me too...
I got it, my fault...
He’s got a couple of stinker votes on guns as well.
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.