Posted on 12/19/2007 12:09:02 PM PST by pissant
Back when Fred was a ‘sinator’ as you so cleverly put it, neither you, he, or anybody else was concerned with the border.
If you want to pretend that you were, show me sumpin’
It’s only in the last 4 or 5 years that we became conscious of the massive quality of the invasion and it’s cost to us.
Really? I don’t know much about Colorado politics. Are they not for immigration enforcement and small government? Is Tanc not PC enough for them?
Actually, there is only one candiate who was against Reagan on the 1986 shAmnesty deal that others were supporting....look it up.
“Remember the 1986 immigration amnesty? One of its beneficiaries was Mahmoud abu Halima, who went on to bomb the World Trade Center in 1993. His friend Mohammad Salameh wasn’t so fortunate. He applied for the ‘86 amnesty but was rejected. So he just stayed on in America, living illegally, and happily was still around to help Mahmoud and co-attack the Twin Towers. He’s the guy who rented the truck, which suggests he had enough ID to get past the rental agent at Ryder.” - Mark Steyn
hmmm
Those people commenting are idiots.
Colorado is a mixed bag, politically. We have a Democrat and a Republican senator, for example.
And we don't like blowhard self-promoters, of which Tom Tancredo is one. He is not electable on a statewide basis.
Then Reagan is NOT your hero any more?
I didn’t know Reagan was running for a 3rd term. We’re talking CURRENT candidates on this thread.
Those who are on the wrong side of the immigration issue would make the same mistake which has already been proven to be dangerous.
Funny you used Numbers USA. The seem to take a different view of Thompson now.
Roy Beck of Numbers USA on Fred’s immigration plan:
When Fred Thompson came out with a detailed immigration policy this fall, I knew it was very good but was too busy leading the fight against amnesties in the Senate to give thorough attention.
Reading Thompson’s full proposed immigration policy this afternoon, I am blown away by its depth, its breadth and at how it would so fundamentally change Americans’ future for the better.
It’s true that Numbers USA has been critical of Thompson in the past (mostly over LEGAL immigration issues, as they want a reduction in immigration overall), however Mr. Beck went further in his analysis:
As a Senator from Tennessee in the 1990s, Thompson had a mixed record on immigration. I’ve studied that record and believe it reflects the problem that we saw even in some of this year’s Senate heroes who also were mediocre in the 1990s — most of them just weren’t paying much attention to this issue in the 1990s (just like a lot of you have only become active on this during the last couple of years).
NumbersUSA always gives ample credit to politicians who turn from bad or mediocre records and decide to become our champions. But less-than-stellar past records require us to look for signs of sincerity and assurance that they will follow through on their promises.
With Thompson, we will be watching closely for these signs. One strong point for him is that he finished his Senate career with an A-minus performance in 01/02 term after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. And since coming out with his official stance, he has not been equivocating when asked about immigration in media appearances or in strong immigration ads.
I know it is a stretch for you Raster, but could be you are a bit behind the old curve on this one. If the people you quote to make your point actually disagree with that said point, well, what is your point really...
sensible reply but wasted on the Raster. He would kick a dead horse until it was a pile of mush and still keep kicking.
Obviously, he does not care to listen to reason on this issue.
I suggest we both refrain from wasting any more time with him.
“Nobody’s advocating that these people all be rounded up. Nobody’s advocating that they even be arrested and incarcerated, although they’re in violation of the law”
I suppose you understood his “aspirations of citizenship” for illegals to mean something other than AMNESTY!? If you don't plan to "round them up" for deportation, you plan on allowing them to stay indefinately...which is AMNESTY:
Amnesty (from the Greek amnestia, oblivion) is an act of justice by which the supreme power in a state restores those who may have been guilty of any offence against it to the position of innocent persons. It includes more than pardon, inasmuch as it obliterates all legal remembrance of the offence. The word has the same root as amnesia.
But it is too much fun...
The rest of us will be voting in 2008...
I’ll go with the Numbers US guy in this one, it’s a different time...
I recall when I started posting in the late 1990s about illegal aliens, I used to get nasty responses.
Sad to see Tancredo drop out. He was my first choice. We need more like him.
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.