Posted on 07/16/2010 5:35:36 PM PDT by onyx
Tonight, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) will debate his primary challengers, former Rep. J.D. Hayworth (R-AZ) and conservative "tea party" activist Jim Deakin in one of only two Republican primary debates.
During the one hour debate, Hayworth will likely concentrate on McCain's 28 years in Congress with a focus on his position on immigration. Deakin said he will compare and contrast his approach in representing constituents to the "other two entrenched politicians." A McCain campaign spokesman said that the Senator "looks forward to a spirited discussion on the issues facing Arizonans."
The LIVE debate will take place tonight at KTVK-TV in Phoenix, Arizona.
Very smarmy and dishonest on his part.
The guy is getting a thrill out of playing spoiler.
Native Arizonan's know the truth, but the newer voters to AZ might not.
I am planning to post the thread for tonight, unless someone else beats me to it...lol. Either way, I’ll be sure to ping you.
Man, if there was anything I could do other than campaign, donate and contribute to and for JD I would but there isn't. Remember we're dealing with overflow California poop-where-you-sleep liberals here. It's pretty tough to get around that kind of scum in big number when they vote as republicans. That's where mcnuts gets his support.
"Quislings – Response to Once-Ler (8-30-05)
To: Once-Ler; Spiff; Stellar Dendrite; calcowgirl; joanie-f; wardaddy; in the Arena; RetiredArmy; ...
1. “I really admire the formidable list of names you pinged.” Me too. Each of them have posting records demonstrating they are loyal American conservatives. Your posting record does not. Any ping list of yours would necessarily consist of just a very few names, there being so few quislings on FR.
”FR takes my money just fine...”
FR takes everybody’s money just fine. It’s still a conservative site for loyal American conservatives (unless you want to dispute the FR mission statement and JR’s supplement thereto). The Hispandering GOP Big Tent gaggle of RINOs, liberals and moderates are tolerated, that’s all.
”Actually Czar I bet we probably agree on much more than we disagree on.”
I doubt it, but maybe yes-maybe no; lets see how it shakes out.
”...but I support the NRA and I was happy to see the Republican Congress let the AWB sunset.”
I am an NRA Life Member. The Republican Congress knows what happens when you try to mess with our Second Amendment rights. The usual suspects wanted no part of a recorded vote extending that ban. Don’t give them too much credit. Not all of them are entitled to it–far from it. Agree.
”I think Roe/Wade is bad law, I want it overturned, and I think confirming conservative judges is the best way to end it. Do we disagree?”
It is not only bad law but, as we found out much later, it is fraudulent law. Agree.
”...and I think confirming conservative judges is the best way to end it. Do we disagree?” Agree.
”I believe America has a responsibility to destroy the fundamentalist islamic terrorist network that seeks to spread shari law.” Absolutely, including any part of that network, mosques and all, which may be operating in the United States. Agree
”I'm for tax cuts, pro military, pro law enforcement and for controlling our borders.”
Agree on the first three but your posting record even today continues to be a problem on “controlling borders”. Disagree on the fourth.
”I want people to go through legal channels to get to the USA. I agree with many of the things your side says about illegal immigration. It needs to be stopped. It is a danger to our security. Terrorists may be slipping in, and not being spotted because a family of 7 is caught instead.”
Agree.
”I am against a fortified wall around the land of the free and the home of the brave.”
Yes, as you suspected this indeed is where the wheels come off. If that’s what it takes to once and for all stop the illegal alien lawbreakers, I’m all for one big honkin’ wall and the sooner the better. Disagree, big time.
”I have compassion for an illegal who snuck across, got a job and supported his family until the INS found him and ripped apart the family.”
I have no compassion for illegal aliens. None. They are lawbreakers and should be deported instantly when located. They represent a threat to those values I consider most important: sovereignty, borders, culture, customs, traditions and language. The federal government has a lot to answer for, starting with the 20 million lawbreakers now here. And I wouldn’t worry too much about the INS (ICE) finding your illegals–as they have amply demonstrated, they can’t find their own ass with both hands. Disagree.
”It is estimated that 20 million illegals live in the US now and still there is a huge demand for more workers. With legal and illegal immigration the CIA world fact book estimates our population grew by less than 1% last year. Unemployment is down to 5%. Illegals want jobs, and the businesses want workers. Some people wait years to get in legally. Most unskilled workers who apply are denied.”
That huge demand for more workers is in reality a huge demand for the cheapest labor possible. I’ll forego commenting on your source, but a 1% population growth and a 5% unemployment rate does not justify letting more lawbreakers into our country. Illegals who want jobs can make application for entering the country on temporary guest worker status, with which I have no problem so long as such a reformed program makes such stays of specific reasonable duration with all participants documented, fingerprinted and tracked while here, and further provided the anchor baby outrage is brought to a halt. Unless that is done, no guestworker program. Some people may very well wait years to get in legally–so what? And we don’t want unskilled anybodies–they should be denied any status other than as a temporary worker under a drastically reformed guestworker program with a "real teeth" oversight program to go with it. Disagree.
”I support Dubya's guest worker program to eliminate the job vacuum our shrinking native population is causing. With this one step I believe we could eliminate over 50% of the illegal flow across our borders. Perhaps much more.”
I do not support the Bush proposal because it is essentially an amnesty dressed up as a guest worker program. It features a slap on the wrist fine for being in this country illegally. Your justification for buying off on this disgrace is the old “aborting babies/need more workers” smokescreen. A guest worker program which merely passes a magic wand over 20 million illegal aliens and pronounces them all “guest workers” is nothing this country is going to accept. Ever. You do not eliminate “illegality” by pronouncing everyone “legal”. Anyone dumb enough to draft legislation doing exactly what Bush wants to do has a bill that is DOA in the House. I will only support a guest worker program when I am satisfied that all of the associated issues have been resolved; i.e., a halt to anchor babies; a deportation plan for the 20 million lawbreakers already here; a strong border protection plan, including whatever may be required in the way of armed guards and concrete fences. Disagree.
”I am not for indiscriminately letting any one across the border. I'm for allowing workers in, not criminals and terrorists and I expect checks and registration for all guest workers.”
Sounds reasonable, but the devil is always in the details, is it not? Until I am satisfied that all of the issues I have discussed above have been properly resolved, including an extensive and iron clad program for vetting all applicant guest workers, I am opposed. Agree provided all of my guest worker program concerns are satisfactorily resolved.
”I am all for increasing border security to capture terrorists, smugglers, and other criminals. I am less supportive of more border money so we can fail to stem the flow of illegals. I am doubtful there is a way to stop millions of starving illegal workers from figuring out how to work around our security, without killing many of them. I don't believe the American people would stand for massive casualties among illegals on the border.”
I am for anything that stops the illegal alien invasion. While I do not favor killing people, lethal force is certainly justified as a last resort to protect our sovereignty, borders, culture, customs, traditions and language. There’s those annoying loyal American conservative values again. As for whether the American people would stand for a lethal response, lets hope we don’t have to find out. Disagree.
”As a point of practicality, I favor letting some illegals stay as long as they have established a good work and criminal history, and perhaps family ties.”
You’re compassionate on the illegal alien issue–I’m not. No room for compromise here. Rule of law applies. If you came here illegally– get out. Go back and apply legally. Disagree.
”I am for protecting our sovereignty, and securing and protecting our borders. I am against laying land mines.”
The problem we have here, and have been discussing ad nauseum, is that what you are “for” comes up short when tough measures must be put in place because that is where you go all wobbly on us with “compassion”. I reserve my compassion for our citizens in the border states and elsewhere who have had to bear the brunt of the illegal alien invasion. Save your compassion for them. Disagree.
”I'm for preservation of American culture, customs, traditions and language. But American culture has changed with immigrantion before, even as the immigrants changed and adopted our culture. I see no reason to fear the mostly Catholic Hispanics. They love their families and wear pants.
No “buts” allowed when it comes to the preservation of American culture, customs, traditions and language. You’re either for it or agin’ it. Your words say you don’t really feel all that strongly about it. Loyal American conservatives do. Disagree
”Some claim Hispanics don't assimilate like previous immigrants. These people are ignorant of history.”
How does that old joke go? Don’t pee on my leg and try to tell me it’s raining? Something like that. Look I reside in SoCal, right next to Santa Ana. Don’t try to tell me the illegal aliens assimilate. They do not, regardless of what you believe history says. That was then--this is now. Disagree.
The children of illegals are being schooled in our schools. They are citizens adapting to our culture.”
Please explain just why in the hell American taxpayers should fund the education of anchor babies foisted on us by illegal alien parents. We should not be responsible for providing free education for the children of lawbreakers, even though people like you feel it is the “compassionate” thing to do. Schools around here have been flooded with them. School districts are going broke trying to deal with it. You’re smoking something that is probably illegal if you believe any of us are going to buy into this one. And I am not entirely convinced that the law requires us to do so. Disagree
”Could you pass me their names. I've been posting on FR for 6 years and I still haven't developed a ping list so I can call for help and brag about how popular I am. Of Course it's not just the ping list that makes you so popular. It's your forceful and witty charisma...the way you called me a quisling right at the start and even if I had disputed that name you got me again at the end of the post. Good job.”
I suppose I could pass you the three names, but I don’t think it’s really necessary to embarrass them any further, although, if they annoy me enough, I may suddenly decide to do so. But you should be able to figure it out. After all, there aren’t that many of you. Start with the biggest pain in the ass (you know who) and work on down. All three of them are right there.
I understand about your lack of a ping list--kind of embarrassing if it only has a few names. But you don’t need one to summon help--you’re quite a good debater, fully capable of developing arguments to support your position. However, feel free to call for help and brag about how popular you are without the ping list--I know you can do it.
You know, we played around with quite a number of terms to describe the pro-illegal alien “crowd” (if you can call 5 or 6 of you a crowd). Of all the descriptors reviewed, the one that seemed most correct was “quisling”. It was obviously the right choice because of the way it pisses off all of you.
”So I've answered you questions. Did you even want to try and refute any of my previous posts, or just call me a quisling and question my love for this country?”
No, you really haven’t answered my single question, which was: "You know what a loyal American conservative is, don't you? It is someone who believes strongly in defending American sovereignty, secure and protected borders, and the preservation of American culture, customs, traditions and language. These are the values of loyal American conservatives, the majority group at FR. Tell us Once-Ler, do you accept these values? Loyal American conservatives want to know."
Just as two of the other three attempted to do, you too could not bring yourself to voice a simple “yes”. Instead, you explain, add conditions, interject excuses, lecture us on the need for “compassion” and carry on at length about the phantom need for more labor. At bottom, you don't want to say “yes”, but rather want to appear to be saying “yes”, but no matter how we try to interpret what you say, it still comes up short because you can’t accept the hard decisions when it comes to those magic values I talked about. You’re either for aggressively defending American sovereignty, protecting and securing our borders, and the preservation of American culture, customs, traditions and language, or you’re not. According to your own words: yes, you believe in this provided I don’t have to use lethal force to do so; yes, I believe in that as long as I don’t have to build a wall.
You may consider yourself a loyal American conservative. I do not. Feel free to come back and apply again when you don’t have to hang so many “ifs, ands and buts” onto your answers. In the meantime, since you appear not to like the term “quisling” perhaps we can custom fit a term for you. We could drop the “loyal” word and add “Lite” – American Conservative Lite. How's that? By the way, I do not question your love for this country--just seems to me, based on your own words, it's kind of conditional (that "compassion" problem again). 260 posted on 08/30/2005 6:46:07 PM PDT by Czar (StillFedUptotheTeeth@Washington) [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]"
Anything else?
“I like conservatives. JD is not a conservative. He’s a big spending infomercial shill. “
Wow....THREE complete lies in one short sentence! Once-Ler, I think you’ve beaten McCain’s and your own record!
PING ME TOO PLEASE!
onyx, if you have a list please ping me also.
thanks Irish
You betcha! I’ll ping you regardless if somebody else posts a thread.
I’m looking to ready the thread for posting about an hour before the debate starts.
By every account I’ve read, JD won big time last night!!!
HE’LL COME OUT ROARING AGAIN TONIGHT and with such style and class!
GOD BLESS HIM!!!
OVER WHERE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Why??? If I lived in Arizona,,I would vote for the dog catcher before McAmnesty!
If he is anti illegal immigrant, I don't care if he's communist,, that would still be better than McAmnesty.!
I don’t think so. Not that I can find. I have the new thread ready to post, but it’s a little too early, ya think? Lwet me know. Looks like it’s all local PBS but it’s LIVE stream too.
That is correct. Deakins is there to help McPain even if he is too dim to realize that.
I'm sorry. I meant to say state. I am with you but I have to call them the way I see ‘em. If that offends you (not every one agreeing with you), I am sorry. I really want JD wins and he has my 100% support.
We're out of state for the summer and can't get the local PBS. Where can I find the LIVE stream???
OK then...I think a lot of us are really, really tired of the whole country messin' with AZ over 1070.
Nobody is perfect.
FUJM!!
I don't like McCain anymore than you do. My disdain for McCain will not prevent his re-election. It didn't prevent him from winning the GOP nomination in 2008. Despite barely concealed disgust from New Media conservatives like Rush, Coulter, and Free Republic, McCain took the nomination. I went into the primary season praying for "anybody but McCain." I held my nose and voted for McCain and I justified it because as awful as McCain is "at least he isn't Obama."
JD polled really well in AZ last year when he was "anybody but McCain." Now he has an infomercial and little else. If JD would do that infomercial, what other embarrassments lurk around the corner? Do you suppose the guy who forced CFR through the opposition of a GOP congress, forced Bush to sign it after vowing to VETO it, and pulled Palin out of his hat...do you suppose he shot his wad a month before early voting?
JD has a large hardcore following of people who hate McCain, but very few people watched him spend a whole bunch of our money, get tainted by the Abrahmoff scandal, lose in his little congressional district, and teach others how to scam the system, and then said "This is my guy." I'm reading Freepers write "At least he isn't McCain."
And it might be enough for you, and me, but I don't think it's enough for the RINO lovin voters of AZ, who re-elected McCain with 77% after he opposed taxcuts, coddled illegals, strong armed CFR into law, and collaborated with the rats.
JD shouldn't have to fight for the conservative vote. Conservatives hate McCain and JD has all the anti-McCain vote. He needs to attract some of the 77% that voted McCain in 2004. JD has no clue how to attract those voters.
Back in May, in response to Palin, the center for responsive politics put out a propaganda piece claiming McCain and Palin got $2.4 mill from BP employees and $36,000 from BP executives. An ad pointing this out and linking McCain with Obama's kickbacks from BP, placed between news coverage of oil belching from the ocean floor for 2 months...that would have been more effective at pealing away McCain's support. It would offend RINO envirmentalists and liberal Operation Chaos wanna-bes who can vote in AZ's open primary.
GO JD!!
Woe to America if that seat goes to Reid.
Go JD!! Retire the traitorous old warhorse!! Yeah and Benedict Arnold was a war hero too before HE turned traitor!!
God help us if McCain is returned to the senate!!
Rebellion is brewing!!
(It takes a lot of practice to remember that you’re on the opposite side of every issue you’ve championed for the past decade or more.)
How true! Haha.
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.