5 GOP candidates commit to Baltimore debate (No Fred, Rudy McRomney, but there are Hunter and Paul)

Baltimore Sun ^ | 09/22/2007 | David Nitkin

[Ultra Sonic 007]

Just five Republican candidates - half the invited field - will take part in Thursday's presidential debate in Baltimore, event organizers said yesterday.

The four leading contenders, Rudolph W. Giuliani, John McCain, Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson, have each said they will not participate in the forum focusing on issues facing minority voters. Their absence has drawn the ire of Tavis Smiley, the talk-show host who is moderating and organizing the debate at Morgan State University; he said the candidates are making a mistake in not reaching out to black voters.

A list of confirmed participants released yesterday also omits Rep. Tom Tancredo of Colorado, a staunch opponent of current immigration policy. Confirmed are Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, Alan L. Keyes of Maryland, Rep. Duncan Hunter of California and Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, organizers said.

Also yesterday, former Lt. Gov. Michael S. Steele, the chairman of GOPAC, a Republican political action committee, said in a statement that he was "hopeful" each missing candidate would "adjust his schedule" to participate.

[WalterSkinner]

note self: MOST Americans are not happy with open borders and illegal immigration

But a lot of job opportunities are being swallowed up which could be going to American minorities...

[George W. Bush]

Well, as much as I support the NRA and the second amendment, why is the NRA put into a different category than black or hispanic voters by Fred Thompson’s supporters?

Comparing this to the NRA which has a pretty large number of minority members and addresses the Second Amendment for all citizens isn't really that fair.

A better comparison would be to all the GOP candidates who swing through Florida and decide to flirt with the Cuban swing vote in GOP primaries.

So, "pandering" to Cubans is apparently a Good Thing. But "pandering" to blacks and other minorities is a Bad Thing.

[Kevmo]

Good place to bump the thread for Duncan Hunter. He is definitely not a panderer.

[RasterMaster]

His “pull out now” approach at work.....

Dems play into Al-Qaida hands ... (providing comfort to our nation’s enemies)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1900622/posts

[Calvinist_Dark_Lord]

i'm aware of all of those incidents. And about 250 more besides those.

As i stated in #78, you may want to look at what else was in those bills.

Incidentally, the word is Libertarian, and you still haven't provided any answer to the 'lies' that you have alleged Ron Paul told.

Libertarians don't believe in initial in the use of force except for defense of self, property, or loved ones.

Once Force has been used, all bets are off. That is why Libertarians tend to be Pro-second amendment, even at times in excess of the most 'conservative' opinions of the second amendment. i would not have any problems with citizens owning machine guns. In my profession, the proper tool for the proper job is a maxim that one lives by.

Incidentally, i am a card-carrying Libertarian.

[Calvinist_Dark_Lord]

Your link doesn't even mention Ron Paul.

Nice try at smear by association with the "General Betray-us" crowd, but you really have to try harder.

[RasterMaster]

“Once Force has been used, all bets are off.”

Yet Ron Paul slanders our troops and would cut them off at the knees before their work is completed. If that’s the LIEbertarian position, it’s no better than a LIEberal DUmocrats who slander our commanders.

[upsdriver]

“But a lot of job opportunities are being swallowed up which could be going to American minorities...”

Not to mention job losses with our poor trade deals with China,etc. Another issue on which Duncan Hunter leads the pack.

[Calvinist_Dark_Lord]

Yet Ron Paul slanders our troops

Document that.

and would cut them off at the knees before their work is completed.

Their work was done when they got Saddam. It may come as a shock to you, but you don't use the military for nation building. You use a military for nation breaking. Right or wrong, that mission is accomplished. Time to bring em home.

If that’s the LIEbertarian position, it’s no better than a LIEberal DUmocrats who slander our commanders.

i've just articulated the Libertarian position to you. That you choose to believe your own slander is not really my problem.

[counterpunch]

I’m sorry, but you don’t really understand the Constitution very well, do you?
It puts limits on what the government can and can’t do.
You are not protected from a murderer because of the Constitution, you are protected first and foremost by your own right to self defense, as enshrined by the 2nd amendment, which is your right to not have the government take your guns, and secondly by your state’s murder laws.

Whether or not there even is an “inalienable right to life” in the Constitution is moot, because it is not the government that is performing abortions, so the Constitution does not apply here. If Roe v. Wade was overturned, then at that point states could craft their own abortion laws, just as they have crafted their own murder laws.

Do you understand now?
Oh well, I tried anyways.

 

[counterpunch]

I’m sorry, but you don’t really understand the Constitution very well, do you?
It puts limits on what the government can and can’t do.
You are not protected from a murderer because of the Constitution, you are protected first and foremost by your own right to self defense, as enshrined by the 2nd amendment, which is your right to not have the government take your guns, and secondly by your state’s murder laws.

Whether or not there even is an “inalienable right to life” in the Constitution is moot, because it is not the government that is performing abortions, so the Constitution does not apply here. If Roe v. Wade was overturned, then at that point states could craft their own abortion laws, just as they have crafted their own murder laws.

Do you understand now?
Oh well, I tried anyways.

 

[Reagan Man]

Tavis Smiley is a racist liberal a-hole.

Nothing to be gained by attending this horse and pony show.

[ConservativeTerrapin]

You’re way off. First, the 2nd Amendment of our Constitution is supposed to be protected by the federal government (shall not be infringed...). Second, abortion in regards to its legalizing in the court case of Roe vs. Wade took away the powers of regulating abortion by the States to the federal government. Fred Thompson, as President, would give the powers of regulating abortion to the States, rather than having the federal government deciding everything in terms of regulation, etc.

[counterpunch]

>Yet Ron Paul slanders our troops
Document that.

Why should RasterMaster have to document it?
FReepers already know the answer.
How about a FReeper opinion poll, instead?

 

[Condor51]

Hunter will win this 'debate'
That being said, I'm holding a debate too. Its purpose is to

"Focus On Issues Faced by Blue Eyed, Blond, Irish-Germans Who Live In The Suburbs Because They Fled Big Cities Due To Democrat Machine Politics But Now the Democrats Are Attempting To Control The suburbs Too".

I expect all candidates to participate (except for Ron Paul, I can't get 'Kook Insurance').
Those who don't show are making a HUGH mistake in not reaching out to ...

Blue Eyed, Blond, Irish-Germans Who Live In The Suburbs Because They Fled Big Cities Due To Democrat Machine Politics But Now the Democrats Are Attempting To Control The Suburbs Too.

We vote dammit and I want to be pandered to. And I'm SERIES!

~~~ sarcasm and mocking of stoo-pid pandering to all 'minority groups', OFF~~~

[Iwo Jima]

I would not have agreed to put the military on the border before 9/11. In fact, it is only in the last couple of years that I have agreed with that.

If Duncan Hunter and others were ahead of the curve, well good for them. They had the "benefit" of seeing the Mexican invasion first hand, as I and others did not.

[Petronski]

...guilt-by-association anti-Paul spam thread.

Spin it however you want, but the word is out.

[Iwo Jima]

As a libertarian, I take great offense at being called a “LIEberaltarian.” It is juvenile, unpersuasive, and incorrect. It brands you as someone whose comments are not to be taken seriously.

[Iwo Jima]

How and when did Ron Paul slander our troops?

[fetal heart beats by 21st day]

The statement I responded to equated attendance at the Values Voters debate with other single-issue forums as pandering.

So, I ask, again, the second part of my question, especially in light of the evidence that some candidates are skipping certain forums, like the Values Voters debate, while attending others, supported by second amendment proponents, and in light of statements made by those candidates’ supporters here at FR:

What makes the 2nd amendment a federally protected right, but the UNALIENABLE RIGHT TO LIFE A federalist issue to be dealt with by the states?