Wednesday, June 04, 2008
|
|
McCain's Blogger Call Gets Slightly Heated ...
|
|
Posted by:
Matt Lewis at
1:38 PM
|
I just finished up a conference call with Sen. John McCain, which became heated at times.
When Quin Hillyer of The Examiner noted the perception that some conservatives believe McCain has been disrespectful to them in the past, McCain responded by saying: "I fundamentally disagree with your premise."
Hillyer followed-up by quoting specific comments he says McCain made about those who oppose illegal immigration. According to Hillyer, McCain referenced "Jim Crow" in reference to guest worker's tax treatment, and referred to those who opposed McCain's stance on immigration as, "Nativists."
McCain vehemently denied ever making those statements.
A few questions later, I asked McCain about his un-paid Hispanic Outreach Director Juan Hernandez. I'll post the transcript in a bit, but he essentially said that he takes advice from a lot of people, but that it doesn't mean that he will follow it. He also added that if he sees evidence that Hernandez -- or any adviser -- has said things that are truly unacceptable, he would get rid of him.
... To be honest, I did not want to ask that question today. I would have preferred to have asked him about that weeks ago -- so that I could ask him a question about Obama, or McCain's great idea to host town hall meetings. However, McCain has limited the amount of access we have to him lately, and I felt I owed it to our audience to investigate this topic.
Update: This video seems to show McCain comparing guest-worker tax treatment to Jim Crow -- though he doesn't say the words, "Jim Crow."
Update: Jim Geraghty has more.
Update: Here is the transcript of our exchange:
MATT LEWIS: Recently there were 2 evangelical pastors who you've declined their endorsements and some conservatives were upset about this, others have wondered about Juan Hernandez who is a non-paid Hispanic Outreach Director who has also said controversial statements but has not been let go from your campaign. What do you have to say to conservatives who wonder why you've sort of rejected some conservatives that may have said something that is politically incorrect, but not Juan Hernandez?
SEN. McCAIN: Well, I think that on both occasions comments were made...and as I recall Pastor Hagey apologized for.. or said they were taken completely out of context. I thought it was the right thing to do, I thought it was the right decision to make. I know that it was a very tough decision because I have respect for both individuals but, we simply cannot have the, in my view, statements made that I could be associated with. So I said look, I do not seek their endorsement.... and that is how I feel about it.
MATT LEWIS: Can I ask you about Juan Hernandez, not so much about Townhall where I write, but a lot of conservative bloggers have a lot to say about him... You never know what is accurate, but from what I read he has some very controversial things to say...about Mexico first, about essentially having a completely open border....Are we getting misinformation? or What is the disconnect there? Why are you taking advice from someone if he has made these outlandish comments?
SEN. McCAIN: First of all, I take advice from many many people. I don't always agree with that advice. I'm not sure that if he has a view, that he and I are in disagreement about..which I'm sure he does... I know very few people in this country, or in this world, that I agree with everything on... There's a difference between disagreement, if we have disagreement, and things that American's just find not acceptable.....
MATT LEWIS: ...Couldn't you make that argument for Rev. Wright or....?
SEN. McCAIN: I would be glad to examine any statement from any supporter of mine...I don't even know if he is quote or what he has specifically...I'll be glad to look at it... I'll be glad to look at anything anybody has said that may be offensive or wrong. But I may have disagreements with an issue with lots of people...and if we have strong enough disagreements, I will ask them to withdraw their support. And that is what has guided me....and that is all I have to say about it.
|
|
|
He has mastered the language of a weasel. When confronted with an indisputable fact, deny, deny, deny. Then stop talking. |
|
|
A little overdue, but thanks anyway, better late than never. Now dig up Hernandez' "Mexico First" agenda and present it to them, let's see what they do. I won't be holding my breath. |
|
Matt,
I realize that the issue of illegal immigration is the number one issue for many people on the far right, but if they really care about the consequences of illegal immigration, it doesn't make sense for them to surrender the keys to the White House to a radical left winger such as Barack Obama.
With the cooperation of a Democratic Senate, Obama will successfully appoint activist judges to the federal judiciary who will likely make rulings which will adversely affect laws about immigration and related issues, such as "citizenship" itself, English only election ballots, labor practices requiring citizenship, et al.
And think of the type of person Obama would select for his Attorney General---the person in charge of prosecuting federal violations.
In other words, a President Obama would be ten times worse than a President McCain. |
|
Actual letter from an Iowa resident and sent to his senator)
Dear Senator Harkin,
As a native Iowan and excellent customer of the Internal Revenue Service, I am writing to ask for your assistance. I have contacted the Department of Homeland Security in an effort to determine the process for becoming an illegal alien and they referred me to you.
My primary reason for wishing to change my status from U.S. Citizen to illegal alien stems from the bill which was recently passed by the Senate and for which you voted.
If my understanding of this bill's provisions is accurate, as an illegal alien who has been in the United States for five years, all I need to do to become a citizen is to pay a $2,000 fine and income taxes for three of the last five years.
I know a good deal when I see one and I am anxious to get the process started before everyone figures it out.
Simply put, those of us who have been he re legally have had to pay taxes every year so I'm excited about the prospect of avoiding two years of taxes in return for paying a $2,000 fine. Is there any way that I can apply to be illegal retroactively? This would yield an excellent result for me and my family because we paid heavy taxes in 2004 and 2005.
|
|
Additionally, as an illegal alien I could begin using the local emergency room as my primary health care provider. Once I have stopped paying premiums for medical insurance, my accountant figures I could save almost $10,000 a year.
Another benefit in gaining illegal status would be that my daughter would receive preferential treatment relative to her law school applications, as well as 'in-state' tuition rates for many colleges throughout the United States for my son.
Lastly, I understand that illegal status would relieve me of the burden of renewing my driver's license and making those burdensome car insurance premiums. This is very important to me given that I still have college age children driving my car.
If you would provide me with an outline of the process to become illegal (retroactively if possible) and copies of the necessary forms, I would be most appreciative. Thank you for your assistance.
Your Loyal Constituent,
XXXXXXXXXX xxxxxxxxx
Burlington , IA
Get your Forms (NOW)!! Call your Internal Revenue Service 1-800-289-1040.
|
|
|
When more than 80% of Americans list stopping illegal immigration and amnesty as a top issue, it is not a far right obsession. Defending one's borders, and hence defending the value of citizenship, used to be a given, not something to be negotiated away. It used to be that ALL Americans agreed on this. It isn't that most of us changed, it is that our government has sold out and a few squishies who get their "warm and fuzzies" intravenously from the RNC have allowed themselves to be brainwashed. The McCain-Kennedy amnesty bill was negotiated between Kennedy, Juan Hernandez (La Raza), Lindsey (a woman's name) Graham and McCain. Congress voted for it blindly. It took Hugh to inform everyone who was in it and that was a major factor why it has failed to pass since. It is United Establishment Party lie that anyone who is not a one-world globalist is a "far, far right extremist". |
|
If you need help finding out about Juan Hernandez, check with Michelle Malkin. I'm just a working stiff with a full time job, or I'd do the research for you. You could start here:
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/04/10/juan-hernandez-alert/ |
|
|
Way to go, Matt. It is greatly appreciated by many of us who do not like, trust or support McCain that you, and Qin Hillyer asked some tough questions. Best wishes and please keep it up. |
|
Contrary to assertions by Joe, I do not want Obama to get elected.
However, if McCain keeps obfuscating about illegal aliens and amnesty, it will cost him the election. If he comes clean and gets on the side of the American citizen, he could win. If he keeps pandering to illegal aliens he will lose. |
|
You still don't get it. I'm waiting you out but so far, you still don't get it.
Sacry.
By the way, baby, that's a great letter to Sen. Harkin. Thanks for sharing it. |
|
|
as though our conservative concerns are going to be tossed aside once again. I was part of the telephoning last fall and will be again - I WILL BE HEARD! |
|
|
Ditto what Phil told you. We are not extreme. We hold with traditional values and the Constitution (original 'interpretation'- no penumbras). You are left of center or have moved left. Anyone painting people like Phil, VAPAT, myself et al as extreme or far far anything is a propagandist intent on sowing disinformation in order to advance an agenda that undermines the principles on which this country was founded. |
|
Pasadena Phil,
Friend, I am aware that the issue of illegal immigration is a concern for folks, far right, right, center, & left, and far left.
I didn't say that ONLY people on the far right believe that illegal immigration is a top issue.
Rather, what I said is that I understand that illegal immigration is the number one issue for many voters on the far right.
Illegal immigration is a top issue for me, but I recognize that the consequences of a President Obama would be much worse than the consequences of a President McCain.
Obama would successfully appoint radical activist judges to the federal judiciary and their rulings would likely dismantle laws about the sovereignty and value of citizenship, English only, hiring practices, et al.
That's why I'm surprised that folks such as yourself are willing to concede the keys to the White House to Obama and his radical friends.
An Obama Administration would be very scary on a smorgasboard of issues. |
|
It'd be great if Lewis had pointed out that Hernandez is a **former cabinet level official with the Mexican government who worked directly with Vicente Fox**, and he presumably swore an oath to that country. It's not just what he's said, it's the former job he used to do.
Next time, Lewis should just read this question:
nomoreblather.com/mccain-mexico-hernandez
|
|
In the many opportunities I have offered you to substantiate your claim that Obama would be "much worse" than McCain, you have not offered anything of substance other than your insistence on projecting your wishes onto the candidate of your choice. There is no evidence whatsover (and I don't consider opinions of partisan pundits and political operatives to be evidence) to support your conclusions. McCain is much more accomplished at the very things you fear from Obama who has too thin a resume to form firm opinions on. Conversely, Obama has won the support of 3 former Fed Chairmen including the best ever, Paul Volcker. He has also assembled an all-star economic team that may even be better than the Reagan and Clinton teams. No one of any substance trusts McCain because he is so unpredictable and erratic. He doesn't seem to be operating on any fixed set of principles, just like Bush '41 and he has inherited the same fears that cost that George Bush the 1992 election.
If you can stand back and discount what candidates say, the worst you can say about Obama has to do with what we don't know about him. But he has big support from serious places. The best anyone can say about McCain always involves assuming the absolute (and insane) worst about Obama because his record is indefensible for someone running as a Republican.
Electing Obama may very well be bad but there is no evidence to support that it would be better under McCain and if you care about the Republican Party, it would be better that he lose. |
|
Here is something to ponder. The GOP is the ONLY party that suffered a presidential defeat by coming in third. About 100 years ago Teddy Roosevelt challenged Howard Taft and beat him by coming in second. That could EASILY happen again this year. All that is needed is for Ron Paul to throw his support behind Bob Barr and have Ross Perot underscore the GOP problem by also endorsing Barr. Many people could transfer the 1992 sentiment to Barr with a Ross Perot making the case. You may be too young to remember but Perot was very, very persuasive and better yet, history has proven that he was right. Dynamite in this election.
McCain's only hope is to win by forfeit. If he loses in November, the GOP has bottomed out and can start rebuilding. If McCain wins, it could take 20 years. |
|
Pasadena Phil,
Sir, despite your claim to the contrary, I have been explicit in many various Townhall threads in my opposition to the radical policies of Barack Obama.
He is a radical left winger on everything from abortion, taxes, spending, judicial nominations, global warming, to foreign policy.
He wants to meet with Ahmadinejad, but he won't meet with General Petraeus or visit Iraq to SEE what's going on.
How can such a person be trusted to be an effective Commander-in-Chief ?
The man even kicked off his very first Illinois state senate campaign at the home of an unrepentant domestic terrorist by the name of Bill Ayres.
Bill Ayres has admitted he conspired to plant bombs in the women's restroom at the Pentagon.
It is simply because Barack Obama does NOT have much of a voting record to judge him on, that we must judge him by his speeches, by his sympathies, and by the nefarious company he keeps in order to predict what an Obama Administration would look like.
Barack Obama's speeches, sympathies, and nefarious friends may not scare you, but they sure do scare me.
He is a radical left winger.
John McCain may not be the "perfect" utopian Republican conservative, but he is light years preferable to Obama.
John McCain has a Congressional record of making hundreds of votes for conservative positions, including voting to confirm Rehnquist and Roberts as CJs, and Scalia, Thomas, and Alito as AJs.
John McCain is strong on national security and defeating global Islamic Jihad.
That is the number one issue for me.
Phil, you wrote this;
------------
"Electing Obama may very well be bad but there is no evidence to support that it would be better under McCain and if you care about the Republican Party, it would be better that he lose."
------------
Phil, my concern for the country is greater than my concern for the Republican Party.
McCain would be better for the country than Obama would be.
Therefore, I want McCain to defeat Obama.
|
|
Parse your last statement and isolate those statements that based on emotions and look at what is left. In 1980, many people bought into the charges that Reagan was a crazed war monger who wanted to go after poor people and drop nuclear bombs on everyone.
You don't win any points for expressing your "concern for the country". I don't?
There is no evidence to support the claim that McCain would be better than Obama. Neither is acceptable in my book. And whoever wins is not going to get a mandate anyway. That's how we solved the problem in 1992 and that is how we are going to do it this November. If you can't take the rough stuff, maybe you should just avoid politics.
Our elections are not exercises in russian roulette. In the absence of being able to clearly identify specific evidence that Obama is substantially different from McCain, you resort to the tired tactic of fear mongering. Trust me, we will be fine regardless of who wins. It certainly would be better if we actually had a good candidate to vote for but these two don't offer much choice. That is why I will vote for "none of the above". My vote isn't automatic, you have to earn it.
And try something else. I've been hearing these childishly silly RINO arguments for the past two years. It's old. |
|
|
OHM, you keep calling conservatives "far right". I told you "We have not moved". You and yours have gone left. Get it "right". |
|
What legislation has Barack or Clinton passed that is in direct contradiction to what the GOP (used to) stand for? What legislation has McCain passed or tried to pass that contradicts the GOP's and America's best interests?
So far, McCain has done more damage than the other two. Your argument does not stand. |
|
|
The only far righters are the wingnuts who blast any candidate that doesn't pass their own conservative purity test. Those people are the problem with the movement, and the Republican Party, and it's one of the reasons this party is shrinking away. Conservatives will vote for and support McCain because they believe in the fundamental principles of the conservative movement--one of the most important being keeping this country strong and safe. Wingnuts will not vote for McCain because he is not a "perfect" conservative, but in the process, they're violating the very principles of conservatism that they claim to uphold. This party and movement would be better off without them, in my book. |
|
You simply CANNOT have national security if you will not defend your own borders or enforce your own laws. Foreign nationals numbering in the thousands are entering our country at will daily. John McCain has done and will do NOTHING to stop it. Don't believe me? Ask Juan Hernandez! |
|
Cons are against amnesty. Cons are for profits. Cons don't believe every problem needs a govt' program to fix it - like healthcare and global warming. Cons believe in the first amendment. We have always believed in or been against the same basic things. You guys have moved Left, like I said. You're a Repub no doubt. I'm objecting to being called far right when I used to be called a normal American. You guys are the ones moving towards Eurabia, creeping a little at a time. So my point still stands. We have not moved.
As for the "perfect" argument, you've got to be kidding. I voted for Reagan, Bush, Dole, W, and W - none were perfect. But none stabbed their own in the back and none helped out the Dem/libs as much as McCain. Mac is no where near perfect. He's diametrically opposed to cons. He is actively campaigning against us so what are you thinking? |
|
Just want a President who will actually uphold the oath of office, enforce the laws, protect and defend the country. Apparently that's too much to ask.
Sad.
|
|
|
But we ARE looking for a conservative. Not only is McCain not perfect, he's not even remotely conservative. Just like Obama. If the definition of "far right" is right of McCain, that doesn't leave much room on the left. Might as well vote for that "imperfect conservative" Obama. Why don't you guys just stop trying to distort the meaning of words. Conservatives never shifted an inch. We are trending with the typical American who is growing more conservative. It is the establishment elites who have moved left. You guys probably believe the sun circles the earth too. |
|
for holding McScamnestys' feet to the fire!
I hope you'll keep on, and the next time you should face him down with the facts on Juan Hernandez,....which I'm sure he already knows, but he'll try to lie his way out of it by saying he knows nothing about Juans' past,.....which is a "crock"!
McCain is a damn liar, IMO! |
|
|
we need to bite the bullet and let McCain go down in flames. Voting for a moderate Democrat running on the Republican ticket does nothing to further the cause of the party of Ronald Reagen. On the bight side starting with the 2010 Congressional elections, after 2 years of Democratic rule, we can ride a wave of victory that will crush the opposition in the 2012 election. |
|
|
I think it is a bit naive of John McCain to expect the media to walk away from the general election especially this one. In addition, I have no beef with McCain but does he honestly think his OPPENENT is going to try to help him, because John McCain is NOT an effective communicator, like say Regan? I have to give Obama and Hillary credit for debating more times than I have ever heard of, and they didn't say who was allowed to view, or act like the American people actually buy into the fact that they are just two regular Joe's just a having a good debate about politic, um this debate is for the highest position in the land. I will say as someone who used to be more conservative, and being from California I am actually tired of hearing McCain just talk about Iraq. I want him to talk about Immagration, and I want him to rally the base regarding this issue. I want him to say "that fence is going UP NOW and that the Republican party is AGIANIST ILLEGAL IMMAGRATION no if ands or buts about it." I want him to say clearly "I am pro-life and will appoint those judges that will support LIFE." Sure people may hate Bush now, but at least we KNEW where he stood on the issues. The DEM base is fired up, don't believe the hype..they are ready to go. My church, won't even endorse McCain because of the way he threw Hagee under the bus. Is McCain...the real UNKNOWN? |
|
McCain has made no attempt to GET IT!! He thinks, as he said in the interview, and what he thinks is all that matters, reguardless the cost, ..ie Global Warming Tax!
McCain is currently a 1 issue Repubican candidate, the War. If McCain wants to place all his bets on pulling moderate Dem's and Ind's to make up for lost conservatives, he is making a HUGE mistake.
McCain NEEDS to give us conservatives something-Anything- to get excited about for him. To date he has not and I do not see him doing it.
He and his Team wrote off conservatives months ago and they EXPECT conservatives to come on board anyway.
I am not on board and I will not get on board the McCain -speak with forked tongue- Express, this from a Delagate to OUR Convention. |
|
|
|
He hires a Mexican national to give himself street cred with the illegals, then he claims he doesn't listen to any advice the guy gives him.
McCain and Obama are practically one and the same. Lying elitists and traitors. Obama sleeps with Muslim throatcutters, McCain with Mexican invaders. Obama might be marginally better because he would bring us closer to Civil War more quickly. We really need to get it over with. My aim isn't getting any better. McCain is an enabler of marxism. With a real marxist in the White House, things will coalesce a lot faster. |
|
|
HE DIDN'T GET THE MEMO THERE ARE OTHER ISSUES WE CARE ABOUT!!! WHICH I THINK HE COULD CARE LESS ABOUT, IN FACT I THINK HE IS WEAKER ON THESE ISSUES THAN BUSH! THINK ABOUT IT. HAVE YOU HEARD McCain say "I AM GOING TO CRACK DOWN ON ILLEGAL IMMAGRATION AND DEMAND ILLEAGALS GET TO THE BACK OF THE LINE, PAY FINES, CRACK DOWN ON THE CRIME THEY BRING TO THIS COUNTRY." EVEN BO DID THAT! I AM PISSED BECAUSE I LIVE IN CALIFORNIA, AND THE DRAIN ON OUR ECONOMY IS STAGGERING, BUT MCCAIN HAS SAID NOTHING. AT LEAST THE DEMS CAN SPELL OUT WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO DO, WITHOUT BRINGING UP THE OR TEARING THE OTHER PERSON, MCCAIN CAN'T EVEN TELL ME WITH PASSION OR CONVICTION! I AM STEAMING MAD. I HAVE SPOKEN TO MANY DIE HARD REPUBLICANS WHO BELIEVE DEEP DOWN THAT MCCAIN IS GOING TO BE WEAKER ON BORDER CONTROL THAN GWB!!! HAVE YOU HEARD HIM SAY "I ENSURE YOU THAT I WILL APPOINT JUDGES THAT WILL OVERTURN ROE V.WADE OR VALUE WHO THOSE WHO VALUE PRO-LIFE" BUSH WAS STRONG ON THIS AND IN 2004 HE WON! NOOOOOOOO INSTEAD HE SPEAKS IN FRONT OF SOME RETARDED GREEN SCREEN, AND TALKS ABOUT HE HAS A "DIFFERNT CHANGE" WELL WHOOPDY DOO. WHAT ABOUT JUST SAYING HOW YOU ARE A REAL CONSERVATIVE!!! I HAVEN'T HEARD THIS KIND OF PASSION COME FROM MCCAIN, AM I SUPPOSED TO ASSUME HE FEELS THIS WAY? IN 04 MY CHURCH EAGARLY ROOTED FOR BUSH, BUT NOT MCCAIN. WHY BECAUSE OF THE WAY HE THREW HAGEE UNDER THE BUS, AND ROD PARSELY. ...IS HE A CONSERVATIVE OR JUST A MAN THAT IS HAPPY ABOUT TAXES AND WAR? IF MCCAIN DOESN'T STOP BEATING A DEAD US OVER THE HEAD WITH THE WRIGHT ISSUE, AND JUST TALKING ABOUT THE WAR HE WILL LOOSE COME NOVEMBER. WE NEED MORE MOTIVATION! STOP EXPECTING ME TO JUST FALL IN LINE. I DID THAT IN 04 AND LOOK WHERE IT GOT ME! MCCAIN BETTER PROVE IT HE IS AT LEAST A REAL CONVERSATIVE. AT LEAST THE DEMS HAVE A REAL DEMOCRAT. |
|
During the immigration debates these past five years, McCain has repeatedly demonstrated an arrogance towards all U.S. Citizens over-and-over to the point that he must not ever be elected President. He will sell-out this country's sovereignty to foreign-interests as quickly as one can count 1-2-3. His speeches in the Senate are full of rhetoric aimed at attacking citizens, our way of life, and our nation's sovereignity.
I recall him challenging U.S. Citizens to go pick vegetables saying it is hard work that U.S. Citizens will not do. His arrogance and hatred for U.S. Citizens shined brightly in that speech. All that farmers needed to do, in that instance, is increase wages paid and U.S. Citizens will line-up and pitch-in and do the work. It is the executives of businesses that employ illegal immigrants who are seeking corporate welfare - and John McCain will be their with a corporate welfare plan that will cost taxpayers trillions of US Dollars each year.
Instead of standing behind U.S. Workers, McCain instead attack us. And every word he is saying now contradicts his principles he has stood behind as a Senator.
McCain will sell-out our jobs to illegal immigrants with U.S. Citizens gaining nothing in return.
As for Obama ... at least he wants to hold illegal immigrants and their home countries accountable. His staff has estimated $750-billion US-Dollars can be raised from Mexico alone; $750-billion over 3-years from a country with a gross domestic product of about $1-trillion (in a sit-down meeting that McCain and RNC crack jokes about in their spins). And Obama wants the company executives (not just CEO but all company executives) held accountable - financially and criminally.
I'd feel safer with Obama in the White House than McCain.
|
|
Pasadena Phil, you are convinced Barack Obama will be no worse than John McCain despite arguments such as Iraq, pro life issues, taxes, spending, judges, etc. If you completely distrust McCain (as you do) I guess that is why, but most of us see a difference between them on those issues.
|
|
|
Most people want to see illegal immigration stopped. Most people DO NOT want to send all illegals home. |
|
|
There is no arguing with a zealot. Pasadena Phil is closer to the Huff Post and Daily Kos on this than he cares to admit. |
|
Joe,
If these far right guys are "more conservative" than you and I (as they believe themselves to be), then by definition they ought to be MORE FEARFUL of an Obama Administration than you and I are.
Their arguments in defense of Obama are so Orwellian.
I never thought I'd hear a bunch of so-called "conservatives" asserting that weak kneed foreign policies, raising taxes, and nominating left wing activists to the federal judiciary is nothing to be afraid of.
They keep talking about how McCain is "bad for the party," but I care more about the country than I do the GOP.
McCain's policies will be better for the country than Obama's.
|
|
What most Americans fear is 14 more years of our federal government that is 99% non-responsive to its citizens - in a manner the citizens define, not RNC or DNC.
Take Katrina in 2005... each citizen should have been given $20,000 cash ... instead 25,000 Mexicans flooded our border to lay-claim to the $2,000 debit cards.
There have been about 1,000 children & teenagers (who are US Citizens) abducted along the MEXICO-US border since 1999 and taken to MEXICO to be abused; after Mexican law enforcement has refused to assist despite US law enforcement knowing the exact location of the child/teenager being known, our federal government then refuses to step-in. The RNC and George Bush & John McCain call MEXICO our friend. Sorry... I don't buy that line. And once again, our federal government is non-responsive to its citizens.
To fight illegal drugs, in December 2007 our federal government agreed to send Mexico $500-million with no accountability and no reasonable 90-day deadlines - a move fully supported by John McCain. Instead, the federal government handed Mexico $500-million. For $500-million, citizens expect the drug cartels shut-down & 5,000-cartel members/supporters brought forth (dead or alive). And once again, our federal government is non-responsive to its citizens.
There are many more examples of our federal government being non-responsive to its citizens. With John McCain, he will change nothing. With Obama, at least there is hope for change... |
|
I do not disagree with one thing you are saying. It is friggin nuts. I also absolutely agree with Virginia Patriot, illegal immigration is corosive and damaging to our republic. I am not open borders. I am for expanded legal immigration that focuses on skill sets and people willing to work hard and assimilate as Americans.
I know this much, John McCain is better at immigration than Barack Obama. And Pasadena Phil's latest crush, Bob Barr, does not even want to build a border fence:
BECK: Do you build the border fence?
BARR: No.
BECK: You got to explain that one. Why not?
BARR: First of all, I think it would be terribly costly. And whatever border fence you build, people are going to find a way to get around it, go under it, go over it, somehow.
I think it would look absolutely awful. And even though it`s a fence to keep people from coming in, as opposed to the Berlin wall, it gives the same impression. Not the impression I want to give the world about America.
Asked whether he'd "ship [illegal aliens] home or not", Barr said:
"When you find them, you ship them home, absolutely."
What Barr forgot to mention was that, based on what he's said earlier, that would only occur after having granted an amnesty, and he's only referring to those who came after the amnesty or those who didn't take part in the amnesty.
http://lonewacko.com/blog/archives/007625.html
BECK: I mean, what am I on "Curb Appeal" all of a sudden? It looks bad? All right, we'll put some flowers there.
http://americanpatrol.com/MISCNEWS/2006-UP/ELECTIONS/2008/B ARR-BOB/GlennBeck080514.htm |
|
You said "John McCain is better at immigration than Barack Obama." And if any American citizen believes it, they are fools to believe that false belief. Well, John McCain is not better at immigration than Barack Obama, from my view.
McCain has gone on-record as supporting NAFTA and North American Union - which opens our borders to Mexico with no accountability and gives large corporations their corporate welfare package at the cost of our nation’s sovereignty.
Obama opposes NAFTA and the North American Union and will work to strike them dead.
Regarding immigration specifically... I tend to focus on Mexico - a country that accounts for about 68% of the 12-to-20-million illegal immigrants in the USA and Mexico accounts for $24-billion each year in remittances that Mexican nationals send to their families in Mexico.
It is a fact that Mexico's government expects $50-billion a year from US taxpayers. John McCain calls their $50-billion expectation "resonable and fair and the USA gets nothing in return" and calls those of us who oppose such a policy "traitors and f??king citizens."
What is Obama's position? He wants to put together a "package" after consulting Mexico's leaders. The package, according to his campaign staff, "will not cost taxpayers a dime." And it will deal with illegal immigration, guest-workers, remittances, college tuition for illegal immigrants, accountability in fighting illegal drugs and with respect to illegal immigration, etc. Using his campaign staffers words, "Obama will stand firm that the package will not cost US taxpayers a dime." That is better than John McCain's approach to give the USA away...
Thus why I disagree with your statement that "John McCain is better at immigration than Barack Obama."
|
|
Even if Obama does not deliver on his staff's remark that the package "will not cost taxpayers a dime", at least that approach is better and more responsible than John McCain's $50-to-$75-billion annual give-away plan to Mexico with no accountability in return - and by accountability, I mean 90-day benchmarks.
I can see Obama's point about the border fence that you quoted... "whatever border fence you build, people are going to find a way to get around it, go under it, go over it, somehow" is on-target and accurate. People who do not respect US sovergeignty will try to find a way to get around a fence - either over, under, or around it. Canadians respect US sovereignty; Mexico does not. At one point, I suggested to politicians that we (the USA) turn remote areas along the US-Mexico border into nuclear waste dumps, creating an invisible fence and monitor it with unmanned drone aircraft. That was back 2000-2001-2002.
I may not agree with Obama's position on the fence but I sure as heck disagree with more about John McCain's give-away than I do with Barack Obama. And I belive 180-million Citizens will see the twisting of facts the RNC will pull as a desperate ploy to put fear in the minds of voters.
|
|
McCain is clearly arrogant & disrespectful towards not only US Citizens but towards our Constitution and the rights it guarantees.
The immigration debate brought his arrogance to the surface. His thumbing his nose at US Citizens and siding with immigration criminals is well documented.
His economic policies are weak. Our country is leaving 79-million US Citizens behind to embrace immigration. That is wrong. Dead wrong.
The Republican National Committee wants the North American Union to continue; John McCain supports the NAU - despite 78% of US Voters (including Obama) opposing the NAU.
I do not like Obama but I sure as heck will not ever vote for John McCain, even if it means voting for Obama. McCain is worse than Adolph Hitler. And I am not changing my views or position. I have come to equate a McCain victory in November to the death of the beloved United States of America. It is my position that only the un-patriotic citizens will vote for McCain in November.
But lets be crystal clear. McCain has repeatedly been disrespectful of US Citizens over and over. His economic advisor calls citizens who complain whiners and not worth listening to. Sounds alot like George Bush ... and the stupid Nazi-like Republican National Committee in Washington DC.
Posted in my opinion.
|
|
|
You will have more choices than R or D on your ballot. Please look into Bob Barr (Libertarian) and Chuck Baldwin (Constitution) at the very least, they will be on almost every state ballot. Others are running as well. |
|
|
|