Skip to comments.
Lessons learned, and relearned, and relearned...
10/16/2007
| Jim Robinson
Posted on 10/15/2007 10:56:36 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140, 141-160, 161-180 ... 201-219 next last
To: Jim Robinson
141
posted on
10/16/2007 4:18:31 AM PDT
by
ejonesie22
(265 pound Lemming with attitude for Thompson!)
To: TChris; All
142
posted on
10/16/2007 4:23:34 AM PDT
by
ejonesie22
(265 pound Lemming with attitude for Thompson!)
To: Jim Robinson
And, whoever is elected, hold their feet to the fire throughout their term.
Otherwise, they will try to slip in a Dubai ports sell-out, or a Miers Supreme Court nominee, or amnesty for illegals, or amnesty for illegals - round 2, or amnesty for illegals - round 3, or international law keep foreign illegal death-row murderers from being executed in Texas, or give the UN authority over US shipping with the LOST treaty, etc.
For all of the wannabes running for 2008, scrutinize them, their past political records and their current pandering. If they were ‘for’ something a decade previous, are they really ‘against’ it now, or are they just pandering and placating? [GW fooled many people -— but he waited until his reelection in 2004 before he really stated pushing some of his agenda.]
A definition of insanity has been stated as: Voting for the same people and expecting a different result from them.
- If they have assaulted the First and/or the Second Amendment in the past,
- if they have advocated open borders and amnesty for illegals in the past,
- if they have supported and pushed the globalist open trade agenda in the past,
- if they have supported and advocated international law over US law,
- if they have supported UN superiority over US sovereign interests,
they will, in all probability, continue to support, advocate, and push for these in the future.
Whoever gets elected to the White House and to Congress, we have to be relentless in scrutinizing them and their positions on major issues.
143
posted on
10/16/2007 4:30:07 AM PDT
by
TomGuy
To: Darkwolf377
If 9/11 hadn't occurred, Bush would have been a one-termer.
And he was almost a one-timer anyway. Recall that he was behind Kerry in many polls. Then, the weekend before the election, OBL released a tape. That tape ended up hurting Kerry by reminding the voters of the WoT.
144
posted on
10/16/2007 4:47:58 AM PDT
by
TomGuy
To: Jim Robinson
"Republicans" who try to convince you to overlook a candidate's liberal positions on abortion, gay rights, free speech, free religion, gun control, property rights, federalism, judicial activism, illegal aliens, socialized healthcare, taxes, spending, national security, sovereignty etc, are doing you no favors. Never compromise on the principles and values you hold dear."
Thank you Jim. National Security and the Sovereignty of our Country ARE values I hold dear and in any, especially this critical election, I won't compromise. Part of my not being willing to compromise has been working to defeat (Comprehensive Immigration Reform's) amnesty, to see our border's effectively secured, to end birthright citizenship, and to do what I can to inform the uninformed of the CFR's North American Union agenda. Therefore, my support in the primary goes to the only candidate who has, for years, consistently walked the talk and refuses to 'deal' on these issues....Duncan Hunter.
"Any candidate who willingly compromises in any one area will compromise in any other area. Your freedom is at risk. Our Republic is at risk."
I believe that if Duncan Hunter had united support, he would be the only non-liberal/non-moderate conservative in the forefront, holding to the ideals spelled out in your post. I admit that it is disheartening that he is not getting the united support that would surely put him in the top tier. While his unwillingness to compromise, 'deal' away, or moderate his conservatism for the sake of the moderate vote, is seen by some as a negative, I also believe that in his doing so, he would have the better chance of any to defeat both Guiliani and Hillary and as POTUS, would bring to our country a return to true conservative leadership.
145
posted on
10/16/2007 4:48:26 AM PDT
by
Kimberly GG
(Support Duncan Hunter in YOUR State....http://duncanhunter.meetup.com/1/)
To: Jim Robinson
nice job Jim
saving this one
146
posted on
10/16/2007 4:50:48 AM PDT
by
sure_fine
(• " not one to over kill the thought process " •)
To: Jim Robinson
One to think about adding: Never support or elect anyone who believes that judges should act as unelected legislators, even if they would impose an agenda you would agree with.
147
posted on
10/16/2007 4:53:38 AM PDT
by
kevkrom
(The religion of global warming: "There is no goddess but Gaia and Al Gore is her profit.")
To: 2ndDivisionVet
I knew about Thompson while he was a lawyer during the Ray Blanton mess and he stood up for right against a corrupt Democratic machine...he has some bad contacts but then, who in politics doesn’t? I prefer Duncan Hunter but I’d take Thompson too...
To: Kimberly GG
I also believe that in his doing so, he would have the better chance of any to defeat both Guiliani and Hillary and as POTUS, would bring to our country a return to true conservative leadership.How can you even BEGIN TO IMAGINE that if by some miracle or accident Duncan Hunter were the Republican nominee that he would win a national election against Hillary Clinton?
This kind of reasoning makes me despair.
Al Gore, for heaven's sake, got half a million more votes that the extremely moderate Republican candidate in 2000. In 2004, a communist traitor got fifty-nine million votes.
Your guy can't break 5% of REPUBLICANS, anywhere.
And you want him to be slaughtered by Hillary Clinton?
What's wrong with you?
149
posted on
10/16/2007 5:00:55 AM PDT
by
Jim Noble
(Trails of troubles, roads of battle, paths of victory we shall walk.)
To: GinaLolaB
3) Never vote for a lawyer.
Sorry, but I know of many fine conservative lawyers who would make good Presidential fodder.
150
posted on
10/16/2007 5:33:59 AM PDT
by
Atlas Sneezed
("We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts; I support them, I won't chip away at them" -Mitt Romney)
To: DaveLoneRanger; Jim Robinson
Thanks JR for the moral support this gives us this morning.
I don’t regret voting for GWB but with each passing year, the needle’s eye of politics becomes narrower and more impassable to angels. Fewer good people stepping forward in an increasingly dirty business.
I share your concerns, Dave, and I’ll raise you three. In Florida, Fred Thompson said he didn’t remember the details and couldn’t pass judgment on the controversial case. To me this response is incredible and unacceptable; however, he’s got plenty of time to read up on it and make a comment about the state-sanctioned killing of an innocent disabled woman. Second, I’d like to hear FDT’s opinion of the Law of the Seas treaty. Third, his take on the North American Union and the so-called globalist agenda.
Fred Thompson has said that one needs principles and he has them. Well, I have heard them, now I’d like to know how he would apply them. Incidentally, his principles did not stop him from hatching CFR.
I’d like to vote for him, but I need more information.
151
posted on
10/16/2007 6:17:01 AM PDT
by
668 - Neighbor of the Beast
(You can endorse the murder of 50 million unborn babies; but don't say "macaca.")
To: Jim Robinson
So, support the right candidate in the primaries, but what do you do if the race comes down to Giuliani versus Hillary? Don’t you want to vote for Giuliani because he cares about national security and will pick better justices for the US Supreme Court than Hillary will? Not to decide is to decide, and not to vote for the better candidate is to give a vote to the worse one. As the expression goes, the great is the enemy of the good.
152
posted on
10/16/2007 6:20:04 AM PDT
by
Piranha
To: mkjessup
I have constantly repeated the fact, that Fred will disappoint even the most ardent supporter once they learn more about him, but no one believes me. Thank You!
To: Bull Market
Does Hunter even truly care about anything but China and pandering to manufacturing unions?
Why not ask the hundreds of thousands of our military men and women who have had no stronger advocate in the Congress than Duncan Hunter?
In the years preceding World War II, Winston Churchill tried to warn Britain and the West about the danger of Hitler and Nazi Germany.
Duncan Hunter is doing the same thing regarding the threat America and the West faces from Communist China, and that threat is every bit as serious as the Islamofascist jihad we're facing today.
154
posted on
10/16/2007 6:43:07 AM PDT
by
mkjessup
(Jan 20, 2009 - "We Don't Know. Where Rudy Went. Just Glad He's Not. The President. Burma Shave.")
To: Dudoight; Darkwolf377; Jim Robinson
I wish we had these clear-cut choices as you seem to think we have. I cant think of a single past Republican nominee who meets all the requirements you list.There is one man who has run on the Republican ticket who meets these criteria. I wonder what would have happened had everyone who truly believes in these ideals had backed, supported and touted the candidacy of Alan Keyes. I realize he has many "flaws," but none of them is philosophical. Sometimes, we can't see the forest for the trees.
155
posted on
10/16/2007 6:43:42 AM PDT
by
MSSC6644
(Defeat Satan. Pray the Rosary)
To: Coldwater Creek
I have constantly repeated the fact, that Fred will disappoint even the most ardent supporter once they learn more about him, but no one believes me. Thank You!
Fred Thompson will do for the Republican Party what Bob Dole did in '96.
If Hillary IS the nominee (which is far from a done deal), that means Fred will (like Dole) help elect a Clinton.
156
posted on
10/16/2007 6:49:06 AM PDT
by
mkjessup
(Jan 20, 2009 - "We Don't Know. Where Rudy Went. Just Glad He's Not. The President. Burma Shave.")
To: Jim Robinson
excellent post Commander!
To: TomGuy
Well said, TomGuy. Particularly
Whoever gets elected to the White House and to Congress, we have to be relentless in scrutinizing them and their positions on major issues.
Much as I'd like to get on board now, Fred Thompson is like a huge floating object, largely submerged from sight, and we are all scrambling to survive a shipwreck by clutching him. Without knowing how much he can carry or how far.
And then there's Hunter, a micro-island, grounded and not going anywhere, and neither will anyone who turns to him. It's a sad commentary on conservatism; we should have more choices, and fewer Rudy McRomneys.
And deep down, I think Romney's going to grab the nomination.
158
posted on
10/16/2007 6:56:34 AM PDT
by
668 - Neighbor of the Beast
(You can endorse the murder of 50 million unborn babies; but don't say "macaca.")
To: Jim Noble; Kimberly GG; All
Your guy can't break 5% of REPUBLICANS, anywhere. And you want him to be slaughtered by Hillary Clinton? What's wrong with you?
There's nothing wrong with Kimberly, she has conservative principles she isn't willing to compromise, and she hasn't run up the white flag of surrender (as you apparently have) when it comes to putting a true conservative back into the White House.
Duncan Hunter has the national security experience, understanding and grasp of the dangers facing America, he's been a powerful advocate for our military men and women for 26+ years, he's walked the walk (former Army Ranger, Vietnam Combat Veteran), and that's why he talks the talk.
Hiliarly Clinton wouldn't have a prayer trying to debate Duncan Hunter on national security and the War on Terror because she's an ignorant and pathetic Marxist who thinks she can ride her name to the White House and her national security experience is limited to photo ops, sound bites, and her efforts to undermine our military and the Commander In Chief.
If the Republicans wise up and nominate a REAL conservative like Duncan Hunter, that won't happen.
Try thinking positive and stop compromising with the RINO crowd, of which Fred Thompson is their latest hood ornament.
159
posted on
10/16/2007 7:00:51 AM PDT
by
mkjessup
(Jan 20, 2009 - "We Don't Know. Where Rudy Went. Just Glad He's Not. The President. Burma Shave.")
To: 668 - Neighbor of the Beast
I don’t share your pessimism regarding Duncan Hunter, but I gotta say, your FR handle made me LMAO! *Funny* :)
160
posted on
10/16/2007 7:02:49 AM PDT
by
mkjessup
(Jan 20, 2009 - "We Don't Know. Where Rudy Went. Just Glad He's Not. The President. Burma Shave.")
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140, 141-160, 161-180 ... 201-219 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson