Posted on 10/27/2008 6:39:15 AM PDT by rabscuttle385
Edited on 10/27/2008 6:50:27 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin says she supports John McCain's position on immigration, including a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants.
She said she doesn't support "amnesty" because those here illegally should be shuttled to the back of the line for services.
LLS
*shrugs*
My vote will be found in the Reagan Conservative's pile.
My vote won't be found in the Socialist/Marxist pile, and it won't be found in the Socialist/Globalist pile.
As I said, the reality is what we are all voting *for*. To me, the votes that matter are the ones that stand *for* Conservatism.
Duty is ours, results are God's. -John Quincy Adams
I have never thought that way and don't agree now. Look through our history at all third party candidates and you will see that they usually help elect the party that they are most philosophically against. Thank you Nader voters for helping to defeat Algore and Kerry!
I'm sure you know him much better than I do, but McCain was my senator and I once supported and voted for him. As such, he pissed me off on a personal level. Certainly there are some things he won't back down on, such as the military, but he has shown a willingness to listen to voters.
I agree that he is not the ideal, but he's better than the alternative. Like it or not, we will get one or the other. I'm not telling you how to vote, just pointing out how the numbers game works. Vote your heart and conscience, just don't kid yourself about the consequences.
Pride goeth before a fall, but I'm sure you'll get a nice thank you letter from President Obama.
I don't know why- I am not voting for him... But if MccAin't gets in, and shoves his dearly held amnesty down our throats, and nullifies most of the Republican stronghold states, just remember, you voted *for* it.
The alternative is Keyes. As it is often said, Conservatives vote for Conservatives. MccAin't is not better than Keyes, not in any way, shape, or form. It is my duty to vote for the best man for the job. That is unquestionably Keyes, a Reagan stalwart.
Like it or not, we will get one or the other. I'm not telling you how to vote, just pointing out how the numbers game works.
Oddly enough, as a Conservative, numbers mean nothing. The candidate's character and record are weighed in a balance scale, weighted by Conservative principles.
In fact, I am quite opposed to your approach, finding such pragmatism to be the primary culprit behind our current dilemma.
Vote your heart and conscience, just don't kid yourself about the consequences.
Oh I most certainly will, as will my kind. And I would offer you the very same caution- For to me, the more pressing danger is not socialist Democrats; they have been with us for many years. It is the socialist Republicans, posing as conservatives, who will cause us to fall. Without any opposition, socialism's rise is assured.
The notion that only a Republican can win and that you must vote for the lesser of two evils is self-fulfilling, if acted upon by enough people.
roamer_1: In fact, I am quite opposed to your approach, finding such pragmatism to be the primary culprit behind our current dilemma.
Bingo.
GBA: Vote your heart and conscience, just don't kid yourself about the consequences.
Voting for the lesser of two evils only begets more evil.
. . . . .
The job of the President is to execute and to enforce the laws, and to carry out the duties of making war, as necessary, and as allowed by the Congress...not to decide "what is best" for the electorate.
The decision as to "what is best" was left to individuals by the Founders, as only you can know what's best for you.
Both McCain and Obama have indicated that their agenda is what they think is best for the electorate. And, in that respect, they both are wholly unsuitable candidates for the office.
Palin finally speaks on immigration, supports path to citizenship (Not Exactly, Read Full Interview)
There’s nothing wrong with a path to citizenship as long as we have the proper rules for taking the path. It all hangs on the rules. It’s ugly and heartless and politically stupid advocate “no path to citizenship”.
Heck, we could set the path up so one person per year could make it all the way through.
It’s like Obama’s health plan where everyone will have access to the same plan that blah blah blah have. Sounds good without knowing any details, huh?
The suitabilityy of the plan hangs on its benefits and its cost to the policyholder, and also the degree to which it is a redistribution mechanism from those who pay their way in our society to those that don’t.
Oh, absolutely! Given proper rules, I completely support the path to citizenship. Here's a start --
1) Begin your path to citizenship in a foreign country where you already have citizenship ...
For those already here illegally? The path doesn't start here. Go home. Start again.
You rarely get exactly what you want, especially in love and politics, but that doesn't mean you should should act so as to guarantee you get most of what you don't want. The last word is yours.
ping
In part, it is because of Reagan that I stand so vociferously against any sort of amnesty. Ronald Reagan gave his word, his solemn oath, looking me right in the eye, that the amnesty he passed would be the last one.
He was speaking as "the government" to the citizens, and he knew very well that what he was doing was an egregious affront to the law. It was a one time pass. I expect "the government" to stand upon Reagan's word.
They need to fix this, and fix it right. It is simple to do, with proven methods. there is no excuse. Send them home. They do not belong here. They are felons, fugitives from justice, and as such, it is amnesty enough just letting them leave without prosecution.
And that was 2m, by the way... this is 10x that many, at the least.
Neither do Bush or McCain. How you see it all depends on YOUR definition.
NO PATHS TO OR EARNED AMNESTY FOR ANY ILLEGAL ALIENS, PERIOD.
....”it seems there are some Freepers looking for any reason to dump McCain, and amnesty is one of them.”
I dumped McCain A LONG TIME AGO, because of AMNESTY, and worked my arse off to prevent passage of his stupid S2611.
The sovereignty and security of our country are STILL at stake. My vote goes to the CONSERVATIVE candidate willing to protect it.
...”Allowing Obama’s henchmen to paint the Republicans as jack booted thugs...”
Who needs Obama to do it? You just did.
ILLEGAL is ILLEGAL. Or do you fancy yourself above it all and having the ability to pick and choose.
There is a great many left in the middle. They can be swayed one way or the other. Handing the opposition the paintbrush is suicidal.
How do you avoid giving up your freedom to root out every illegal immigrant?
“Handing the opposition the paintbrush is suicidal.”
I’m a conservative. I don’t give a flying * about the MIDDLE. You start making decisions based on what the MIDDLE wants, like giving 35 plus million illegal aliens (and their families who follow them here) the right to vote, you’ll never have a chance to vote CONSERVATIVE again. THAT’s suicidal.
The only folks I’ve ever heard say anything about rooting out “every illegal alien” are those who are open to giving them some form of amnesty.
Rather than discuss the obvious solution, attrition through enforcement, they pit the uacceptable against the unacceptable and then tell us to pick. Just like they’re doing with this election.
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.