Posted on 10/08/2007 9:05:50 AM PDT by Gopher Broke
Excellent issue for Fred to campaign on.
Stop Hillary's "shoe bundlers".
From the standpoint of immigration, Abraham is not a good choice,
So much for being an outsider . . .
Really? Who forced those words out of Allen's mouth?
Bob is a great VET (US Army) too.
FRED VETS, SIGN UP TODAY AT:
no one - except the “aid” that gave him the note that said “that’s guy’s name is Mr Macaca” — a word that George Allen had never heard or spoken before.
FWIW, Fred has been pretty heavy on states' rights recently. His reason for not supporting the federal constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman is that he thinks the proper place to settle it is at the state levels--with the exception that judicial tyranny on the federal level needs to be dealt with.
That has offended some right to lifers, but it also seems like a prudent approach to me. If you tried to amend the constitution--not an easy thing to do--every time the leftists decide to redefine the English language, in this case the word "marriage," you'd end up with hundreds of amendments in short order. The problem has to be tackled in other ways.
Last I heard, people running the campaign don’t formulate policy.
I can’t believe the people around here who think that shunning people with skills who can help you win is a good strategy. Just like refusing the support of moderates is a “good” strategy.
The federal gov't is going to be forced to recognize homosexual marriages unless a defense of marriage gets written into the federal constitution. There is no way around it. If each state can define marriage differently as Fred proposes in his federal amendment, then how do you give the federal gov't the authority to discriminate between them? You don't. He advocates a "both ways" approach and it is simply not possible.
The Federalist position taken by Thompson is pathetic and juvenile. A first year law student would be flunked out of constitutional law for that stance.
Marriage IS a federal issue. There is a solid unavoidable full faith and credit issue. The absurd thompson position does not give 50 seperate definitions of marriage, it gives 50 concurrent definitions that apply to ALL the states.
You also have an equal protection issue that does not even have to touch the issue of how a state defines marriage.
Thompson has opened himself wide for this collapse of his campaign.
He sould just could his blessings that the homsoexuals who pretend to be republicans are running pro-homo thankyou advertisements for romney.
We have Guiliani the pro-homosexual marriage candidate, the Romeny evolved position, and now the Thompson dunce cap position.
I wish George would go do something on his own for his OWN comeback!
“I was excited to consider him. But please don’t let me get in the way of your assumptions.”
Fredheads seem to do alot of assuming. As I posted on an earlier thread;
He(Fred) talks in vague generalities and then you get to construct your own dream candidate! Even to the point of believing he is actually a conservative!
You’re right. You can’t ditch family or friends just because you don’t see eye to eye. My aunt and uncle are Democrats and love Teddy Kennedy, but that doesn’t mean that I do.
“Even to the point of believing he is actually a conservative!”
Tis not a dream. Fred is a conservative. Consistently.
As opposed to a candidate who can’t even get double digits from his own home State?
California
Likely Republican Primary Voters Jan 2007 May 2007 Aug 2007
Brownback - 1% 1%
Gilmore - 1% ni
Giuliani 33% 27% 30%
Gingrich 19% 5% 7%
Hagel 5% 1% ni
Huckabee - 1% -
Hunter 1% 1% 2%
McCain 18% 24% 7%
Pataki - - ni
Paul ni - 2%
Romney 3% 11% 18%
Tancredo ni 1% 2%
F Thompson ni 12% 18%
T Thompson - 1% 1%
Undecided 22% 13% 12%
Altough I do see he’s SHOT up to 2%!
That's really it. I was busy making him into my dream candidate and then he started actually verbalizing his ideas and it brought me back to reality. I guess I was just feeling desperate because Rudy McRomney is unacceptable to me.
That was totally about the start of a new quarter and stuff. Everything has to start at the beginning of a new quarter. You probably just don’t understand the nuances involved in running an effective campaign.
The two debates after that were put on by religious nuts and minorities and there is time to pacify them later. You just chill, Fred dances to his own tune, he knows what’s up. We’re totally going to give it back to the states and stuff. We’re going to have to do some things differently, and if that means skipping a few debates until the coronation you need to just chillax. You’re not a celebrity and I bet you never even saw a pair of Gucci shoes in person. Who are you to judge?
Standby for poll quotes. Incoming.......incoming, this is not a drill.
Remember to never listen to a politician but watch his actions. This is another group of the inside establishment. Only Allen has some true conservatives credentials but he is dim bulb. Face it. We get The Hildabeast or some moderate.
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.