Posted on 03/29/2002 5:48:42 AM PST by oursacredhonor
That's how we have to think about some of this stuff, IMHO. We have to be willing to score runs however we can, and not wait for the three-run homer.
Opposing Amnesty in any form is not "waiting for a three-run homer." It's an applause line every time with the majority of Americans.
What will it take to convince you? Will you insist that we lose elections over it?
And if we do, if we don't get "the results Pataki got," whose fault is that?
1. I mentioned the Sixth Circuit. Put the three nominees who have been waiting the longest in as recess appointments. Make it clear that this is to address the emergency there because the Senate is not acting on these nominations.
2. Retaking the Senate would be much harder if the Dems can run attack ads that tell Mr. and Mrs. Six-Pack that "Republicans support corporate crooks who buy influence." Don't you remember the Mediscare campaign? I didn't think people would buy it. I was wrong, and I won't risk a similar attack ad campaign.
3. No. But there was very adverse polticial terrain post-Enron.
4. You haven't seen the number of editorials in major newspapers, stuff from the broadcast media, or the way the Dems would run attack ads this fall.
5. This bill isn't effective until the day after the 2002 election. It won't affect this election. Also, if you would read Congressman Billybob's posts, this bill is dead legislation walking, anyhow.
6. It has only angered those who don't understand how to play the political game. And it probably saved him from losing far more votes due to an attack ad campaign.
7. Yes. But the victory will be more permanent than one that would come from a veto. And it costs less than refuting millions of dollars in attack ads. The terrain is more favorable in court, as well.
8. From what I've heard it will be Common Cause doing most of the defending. DOJ is taking a back seat on this, and might not do that good a job defending the thing.
What will it take to convince you? Will you insist that we lose elections over it?
And if we do, if we don't get "the results Pataki got," whose fault is that?
Yep and that so-called "applause" line is being said by pork barreler racist democrat. Daschle is in a box and a wedge is being created.
But you are a "one issue" voter and will never see the forest for the trees.
As far as the things I don't like about the party, I have more of a voice from within than from without.
Is that the only qualifications the Pubbies are looking for....an "electable candidate"? Pretty low standards to shoot for, don't you think?
That's why we got Bush....he was electable, but not exactly living up to his campaign rhetoric.
Hmmm....a politician who can't be trusted....what are the odds?
The GOP couldn't do a thing against Byrd when he said "n****r" on TV. You think they'll be able to do it on an issue that puts him on the side of most Americans?The wedge created so far is in the GOP. Whose fault is that?
But you are a "one issue" voter and will never see the forest for the trees.
You live in a desert of political acumen. You have neither forest nor trees.
The problem is that the government offices will always be there. Always. We cannot pretend they don't exist and we cannot destroy them.
The only thing that is possible is to devolve power from them and that cannot be done as long as those offices are held by those whose ideology demands the use of power. They will simply accrue more power to themselves.
------------------------------------
How true.
Democratic & Republican ideology demands everincreasing government power.
We must find a way to 'devolve' their hold on this power. - Think & vote for rational libertarian principes.
I must admit, it's a bit surprising to see a Constitutionalist described as a "kook".
As for illegal immigration, I refuse to debate lying sacks of Clinton, even if they claim to be conservative.
Actually he said "white n****r" on TV. But it is still out there. The wedge created so far is in the GOP. Whose fault is that?
From your world view. Feinstein and Daschle are in a box. Why the delay in the vote? First of all 245(i)is not an amnesty and second if they block it they look like the obstructionists to Hispanics.
This is creating a wedge for the demo's.
Well Bush was elected was he not? Besides, it always much easier too just cry about it and take your marbles and go home.
Ad hominems and refusal to debate.
I see.
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.