Resurrection: House Dems to bring back shamnesty?
Apparently, there is a new draft shamnesty bill in the works. Question: What will Johnny “I was for amnesty before I was against it, but I’m not really against it, because if it comes to my desk, I would sign it, but since it won’t come to my desk, well, just calm down, change the sbuject, and look at all my conservative endorsements!” Mac do? From Roll Call with a hat tip to Brian Faughnan:
House Democrats are crafting scaled-down immigration reform legislation despite the political minefields that surround the issue, with Hispanic Members seeking five-year visas for illegal immigrants who pay fines and pass criminal background checks.
Because we all know how effective the background check process has been…
More:
Baca said the prospects for a compromise package were discussed in high-level meetings that included Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel, and Rep. Zoe Lofgren, who chairs a key immigration subcommittee, Roll Call said.
The paper added: “It’s unclear if the behind-the-scenes discussions will actually result in a bill coming to the floor, but Democrats say drafts of legislation already have been written and are being vetted behind the scenes.”
Vigilance, fellow dyspeptics, vigilance.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- The Danger of McCain Illustrated « The McCain Mutiny
- A Field Guide To American Politics on Blog Talk Radio - February 11, 2008
- Shamnesty Alert? » Freedom Folks
- The Column » Blog Archive » McCain’s Anti-Obama Weapon
Since my Democrat Representative is up for reelection against Lou Barletta he has been sending his new anti illegal credentials in a letter almost weekly. I think I will give him a call this week and ask if the rumor is true and what does he plan to do about it. I think we know what Lou Barletta’s stand would be.
Time to go buy a new fax machine, again. Will these C**pweasels in congress never learn.
Getting my fingertips in shape. We will defeat these losers again.
Hope we can stop them again!
I knew this might happen. Log on to Numbers USA, folks and start sending the faxes they provide. We crushed these idiots before, we’ll do it again.
Any comment from Geraldo? How ’bout the Huckster? Waiting for a comment from Mcpain, but not expecting one.
He’ll be stuck at the airport and unable to vote…
As mind-numbingly ironic and paradoxical as this may be, this is the perfect reason why if McCain is the Republican nominee as seems all but certain, we must support and vote for him.
For the record once again I can’t stand the man. But this plan comes from the Democrats. And President Hillary or President Obama will be sure to sign it, and put judges in place ASAP to see to it that such action is “constitutional”.
McCain on the other hand is obviously mad for power. “Get in line”, “FU”,’Get used to the fact that I’m the nominee” are the words of a power-mad politician (not crazy, just crazy for power). Yet listen to how he humbles himself before the conservative base, like a little boy, almost pleading at times. You can almost hear his knees knocking.
The point is this: McCain knows he needs us for a second term and I think it’s clear for as much parsing as he does on the issue, he won’t risk enraging the base on the very issue they feel most strongly about. He’ll have to stay in line somewhat, however imperfectly.
Hillary or Obama on the other hand will sign such legislation outright, brag to their core base who believe the polar opposite of what we do, and beg for more from congress so they can do it again.
For those who feel that the lesser of two evils is still evil, try those comparatives on for size and see how you like ‘em.
No, it will take a strong stomach, but if McCain is the Republican nominee he absolutely, positively must be elected over Hillary or Obama. There is simply no patriotic choice. That last remark will enrage some who are so selfish that they cannot imagine doing something emotionally painful for the good of the country, but so what? We can’t live our lives around selfish, unpatriotic people. The rest of us have a country to save, and save it we must, because with the help of a willing media, the stakes really have gotten that high.
Funny, the timing. I received a few days ago an “immigration” flyer from Jason Altmire (Democrap- PA). These democraps are just thick headed.
I’ve already email Altmire the magnificent…
It’s like trying to kill roaches.
They just keep building their immunities.
Well, I guess, since the chicken dove Democrats are looking to pass on their efforts to surrender to terrorists until a new president is seated, they figure they have to have something to do to undermine the American people, huh? *sigh*
How is it that I’m not a patriot if I refuse to vote for that train wreck called McCain? Confused over here.
I don’t know the McCain will live through a first term. How old is he now?
And, honestly, I don’t think he will be too concerned about “enraging the base”, if he did get elected POTUS, even if he did want to run again. I suspect he would be banking on the incumbency angle in that scenario.
Call me a skeptic but I guess that is another of my character flaws coming through.
One question, then, if this is getting too complicated for you: How is putting Hillary or Obama into office better than putting McCain into office? (and please no “rush on meds” stuff about galvinizing the Republican party - the appointed judges alone, ruling as liberals for life is enough to smash that arguement)
Under the circumstances on this point I’m forced to agree with you.
Are you really confused or is that just convenient posturing? What is it about Hillary and Obama certain to appoint liberal the most judges and sign liberal legislation and McCain less so, possibly much less so, that you don’t understand? You’re intelligent enough to run your computer and express yourself through the internet on it. How is this so confusing?
This is great news! I just hope that it comes up before the Senate before the election. I can’t wait to see what McCain, Hillary and Obama’s positions are going to be.
The Democrats are dumber than I thought.
McCain crosses over to the Democrats that he’s on their side more than ours, Conservative Cat. I’d vote for Obama over McCain because with Obama, you know what you’re getting. McCain, he’s proven to need verification on his positions.
Talk about suicide…even when McShmanesty says he will sign a bill IF it came across his desk (but then says it won’t) and we see and predicted that immigration WILL be brought back…
some still believe that McSHamnesty will “listen” to them now, and will vote for him….
Wow. Unbelievable.
DITTO!!
Why are the Tuscan raiders (sand People) armed with shovels?
ON the issue, this is too caught up in money for them to throw all of them out. Most companies that higher the illegals give money to politition and don’t give a damn about any of us, just how much they can take. If they are legalizied then the cheap labor pool is gone, if you close the border they will demand workers visa’s or they up and leave american (companies) Actully and will humorus, I think this will stay dead locked for years.
1 It keeps us split so not one side gains an advantage to go full out with a bill pro or anit Ammnesty. And two It keeps an illegal cheap work force, while making it seem the goverment cares and is trying to help the American people.
Your right Mr. Conservative cat..
I am not a patriot…FOR MEXICO!!!
If it comes up for a vote and McCain abstains, the dems have ammo to use against him in an election.
If it comes up for a vote and McCain votes for it, he loses his conservative base.
If it comes up for a vote and McCain votes against it, more ammo for the dems to use in an election via his flip-flopping on a bill he initially sponsored.
It is a win-win for the dems no matter what.
Political Partying above and at the expense of We The People.
Politics as usual for the pols.
Some folks need to step away from RINO Kool-aid being dished out by the GOP.
Maverick candidate meet MAVERICK VOTER!! I just luv that
Are we doing Star Wars trivia now?
Mr. Cat looks to have taken a Dale Carnegie course…wonder how he did?
MrCC, I have to say it would be an incredible reach to figure anything as a positive for McCain when it comes to illegal immigration. Even in the fantasy scenerio you’ve given it really doesn’t make sense.
ROTFLMAO!!! The GOP needs to learn a thing or two about what happenes when they don’t listen to the base. I’m writing in Newt Gingrich myself.
Lets see , support a man who is depending and going after the liberal and rino vote. A man who sponsered the shamnesty bill in the first place. Put our trust that he will depend on the conservative vote for a second term in office when he ignores the conservative vote in seeking his first term in office. Sounds like “get in line” once again.
With the 1.4 billion dollar aid to Mexico for them to secure their southern boarder but leave ours WIDE OPEN. Gee what a hard decision to make.
Yes we all know what Obama and Biullery will do. The sell out of America as a soverign nation. The question is how will McCain sell us out.
Sure he talks tough on the military front overseas, but what about the front lines here at home.
We are being invaded on a daily basis. MS - 13 is creeping into our society like roaches and vermin they are. Identity theft is on the rise and , wow, an eye opener. It is illegal aliens useing these identities. What is McCain going to do about this. The drug war is spilling over into our country big time. We have clear violations of the Hildago Guadalupe treaty with the Mexican military crossing the boarder.
Gangs are planning and executing kidnappings as far north as Phoenix and Las Angeles. Car theft turns up the automobiles in Mexico being driven around. What about compensation for the victems of these crimes?
My taxes go up in order to keep open emergency rooms that I have to prove insurance to to use while ILLEGAS get free aid. (I HAVE A $27,000 BILL TO PROIVE THIS).
Facts are facts. Teenagers can not get summer jobs because unscrupulous employers use ILLEGALS to fill jobs instead of American youth.
Mexico is said to have a population of 108,700,891 (July 2007 est.) out of which how many are here in the States. Eleven to twenty million?
Mexico has a GDP (purchasing power parity): $1.353 trillion (2007 est.) Why do they need more money from us?
In 2005 they recieved from the United States economic aid - recipient: $189.4 million.
They had a national foriegn debt of external: $182 billion. We paid this off for them.
The list goes on and on and on. Yet we must fall in line. Suport Mexico and their CULTURE OF CORRUPTION.
ENOGH IS G.D. ENOUGH!!!!!!!!!
IT IS TIME TO SECURE THE FRICKEN BOARDER!
lol can’t help it. They don’t look like zombies (As URL source says) I swear its like a bunch of angry Sand People coming to a homested with shovels and hoes.
I mean if its aimed at the Illegals coming across from mexico someone should go down to a border deportation station and tell the guard “They’ll be back soon and in greater numbers”. Then head over to dc. “You’ll never find a more wretched hive of Scum and Villany.”
So, anyone interested in taking bets on on what Senator (Presidential Candidate) McCain will do if the bill hits the Senate floor?
Three options:
1. Vote in favor
2. Strategically “miss” the vote - like last week on the stimulus package
3. Vote no
My bet’s on #2.
Mr_Conservative_Cat,
I not sure why you feel the need to show such vitriol with me. I made an honest observation, nothing threatening or demeaning toward you or, even, your candidate.
Instead of jumping the gun and trying to bash someone you perceive as your opponent, you would be much better served keeping track of how I have commented over the course of this election.
While I hold little affection for McCain and, at least as of now, do not plan to vote on the top slot of the ballot, that could change. But, what I can guarantee you will not sway me to support him is your vile treatment of people you wrongly assume are attacking your man and you.
McCain is aged, is he not? Yes.
Has he had a history of rebelling against the Republican base? Yes.
Does an incumbent usually do well in re-election? Yes, if they don’t completely screw things up.
If you are really wanting to win friends and influence people, try being a little more civil. As of right now, your batting average isn’t too good it would seem.
Time to flood the house with e-mails, faxes, and e-mails again. At least they are being stupid enough to try this in an election year. Keep pushing this you lying crapweasels it will blow up in your face come November.
On February 11th, 2008 at 7:46 pm, John
I see. You’d absolutely, positively vote in a guy you are sure will fill the courts with wildy liberal judges appointed for life as opposed to the guy about whom such a thing you are less certain. I need clarification on this becuase it’s difficult for me to believe anyone who claims to be a conservative could think that way. Or more appropriately, not be thinking that way.
Did I get it right? Is that somehow, your actual position? And do you mean it?
You know Conservative Cat, I have a question for you. Why is it that McCain felt no problem attacking Romney but has vowed not to attack Hillary or Obama with negative ads?
Are you understanding why I’m confused now?
blockquote>CarpiJugulum said:
Gangs are planning and executing kidnappings as far north as Phoenix and Las Angeles.
Even a bit farther north, CJ:
Violent Hispanic gang spreading in Canada
Choose your corruption. I would assume McCain like Bush is on the pad of business and angling for the free flow of cheap labor into the U.S., which pretty much means the end of the United States as a sovereign nation and the start of the North American Union.
Hillary is simply after vote fraud–designer breeding of generations of Democrat voting jackpot babies. Ditto for Obama, with the addition of improving the power of minorities. So it’s Hillary over McCain for me.
The sovereignty of our nation is an overriding concern over all other issues. Even if McCain might be better on spending, Obama and Hillary are constrained by the national debt from spending anyway, not to mention borrow-and-spend Republicans have proven to be the big spenders in Washington.
On judges, they should be chosen for competence. I don’t want judges presiding over a complex patent case, for ex., to have to consult the Pope. Trying to force religious dogma on the country is un-American and contrary to freedom of religion as expressed in the First Amendment anyway.
Mr_Conservative_Cat said:
As mind-numbingly ironic and paradoxical as this may be, this is the perfect reason why if McCain is the Republican nominee as seems all but certain, we must support and vote for him.
Which fantasy? The one about Hillary or Obama filling the courts with far-left Ruth Bader-Ginsberg type judges who would ensure “shamnesty” for the rest of our lives, literally, as they would be appointed for life?
I agree: McCain stinks. Where we differ is that Hillary or Obama would be better in any way, shape or form.
That keeps it simple. And simple it should be, because with all do respect you aren’t demonstrating the political accumen to forecast complexity with authority. If you’re as good as that, quit your day job because there are candidates running all over the country who will gladly pay you six figures for your prognosticative skill.
Otherwise, don’t over-analyize over your head and try to influence others to do the same. This is serious business, and putting Hillary or Obama into the White House is less desireable than McCain, unless you in your ultra-analytic skill can conclusively explain otherwise.
Dimocraps say they do not support the war. Bull chips. They love war. This is a war and they will continue because they know they will win this war by atrition. One by one the Repubs will give in. The Repubs in DC do not care about their base (proven fact by now), all they care about is power. To give into the liberal base to get what they want is where the GOP is headed (and they can’t get there fast enough).
I think Bill Clinton probably summed that up for us fairly nicely when Michelle enlightened us on his comments in the CNN Political Ticker blog:
“She and John McCain are very close,” Clinton said. “They always laugh that if they wound up being the nominees of their party, it would be the most civilized election in American history, and they’re afraid they’d put the voters to sleep because they like and respect each other.”
You see you have me all wrong. I don’t trust McCain. It’s that simple. Being born and raised in Springfield, Illinois I can assure you that I Am a True Conservative. Heck, Sen. Dick Durbin (home is Springfield, Illinois) was once PRO LIFE so he could get elected in Sangamon County. He didn’t switch until he knew he’d be in the Senate for ever. If you called Dick Durbin and asked who he would rather have on the Republican side, there is no doubt he’d pick his good friend McCain. They both have the same view on GITMO!
I realize this is difficult to understand, but if the Dems get amnesty up for a vote this year, it’s far less to do with McCain than it is to do with the disgraceful Jorge Boosh.
Stop worrying about McC or Osama Obama or the Hildebeest.
This has to be stopped NOW. Today.
And, so you don’t forget, this is Jorge Boosh’s doing. He could squash it.
Stop trying to hang McCain over Bush’s biggest breach of faith with Americans.
John, I think you should answer my question first, since i asked it first.
Then I’ll answer yours. I promise.
This is never going to go away because it is the only strategy the two parties know to break the racial/ethnic impasse between them: Republicans will never get a significant percentage of liberal black votes (the vast majority or black) any more than democrats will ever get enough votes of conservative whites (a substantial minority in this country). While either party could offer these groups things the others cannot, they won’t. So to break the impasse and enable one party to become the dominant party forever, either has to win the bulk of the hispanic vote.
The democrats are masters of this sort of thing and all odds would be in their favor, except that blacks and hispanics are becoming increasingly hostile to each other. The riot initiative is soon going to move to hispanics and at that point the nation will be in grave peril. McCain, like Bush, is seen as the best hope for the Republican Party Establishment to garner a sufficient number of hispanic votes to offset the Democrats’ advantages everywhere else. That is why they are telling conservatives to shut up. More to the point, they will never, ever listen to them on immigration. It’s a fool’s dream, of course, and will have disastrous consequences, but that has never stopped either party before.
Recall Gingrich’s statement that the Republicans would stick with Affirmative Action because it would enable them to be the majority party for all time? It didn’t and it won’t but they no longer care about reason or their country and are incapable of thinking of anything other strategy even if they did. Everything in contemporary politics is now down to getting blocs of votes. We are no longer a Republic, barely a democracy, but are more of a “votocracy” than anything else.
Unless conservatives, and/or pro-sovereignty groups, are prepared to buck and bypass the party establishment with direct political action — including strikes, boycotts, and street demonstrations, and be prepared for the violent responses that will be given them, there is no way they can hope to win on this or any other issue of substance. Sorry to be the bearer of very bad tidings, but I think most people understand this even if they are loath to discuss it. The emerging America is sickening to contemplate, but that is the reality we face.
John,
We were posting at the same time but I’m still not sure of your answer, couched in trusting this and trusting that. Let’s reduce it doen to a yes or no, because you sound as if you don;t have a clear head on this subject so maybe we can get to the point this way:
You’d absolutely, positively vote in a guy you are sure will fill the courts with wildy liberal judges appointed for life as opposed to the guy about whom such a thing you are less certain?
Keep it simple: Yes or No?
Whoever thinks Hillary will play nice if she is up against McCain, is a fool.
tk421
“I’ve got a bad feeling about this.”
I’m not saying he’s good.I never did. I think he stinks. I known he plays dirty politics just like Hillary and Obama. But I wonder what it is exactly that you don’t understand about being patriotic and voting for the man who will do less damage - what’s best for the country when all we have are undesirable choices - rather than have a hissy fit and intentionally damage the country you assumedly claim to love by de facto voting in one of two who would reverse all conservative principles for sure? That’s my question to you. Can you answer it squarely and with obfuscation?
I’m reminded of a game of WHACK-A-MOLE!!!
GOOD. YES. RIGHT. This, ladies and gentlman, is clear thinking. We can take it one step further, though, we can frame our outrage on this that does still put McCain on the hot seat and as this does down - as it must, there can be no failure on that - then we can sqeeze McCain into clarifying a position he would rather not. If we’re stuck with this mess, let’s get to clearing it up, and try to turn a negative into an opportunity at the same time.
LOLOL!!! Yes! Every time you knock down one irrational “I’ll let Hillary and Obama ruin the country rather than vote for McCain” mole, another one pops up somewhere else! Hilarious. Very good!
Exactly. And instead of taking action and getting very vocal, many whine that they will stay home and martyr their vote to the most marxist candidate there is.
McCain sucks, but he is the least offensive at this point. If he gets in, the base can loudly hold his feet to the fire. You won’t be able to do that with the dems.
And by sitting it out, you are also going to hand over major majorities in both house with a resulting liberal marxist takeover of house, senate, judiciary, and president. Put that in your pipe and smoke it, whiners.
In all honesty I can’t figure out what the hell you’re talking about in context. Please clarify your point.
Yes! Thank God! I was getting tired of wacking those moles. Here, you take the hammer for awhile! My arm hurts!
Correct me if I’m wrong, memyselfandi, but you were referring to Shamnesty, right?
I think perhaps those who sounded the alarm have not read the bill as I just did, twice. I see no provisions for amnesty, fines, fees, or any verbiage saying illegals can pay and then remain in the U.S. That does not mean I am not leery; we’ve seen what Congress tried to do last year.
I will email my contact in my Congressman’s (a co-sponsor) office in a moment to inquire.
Trust but verify.
You know I got to say that Mr_Conservative_Cat seems to be a very ardent supporter of conservatism in as much as he’s willing to ignore the obvious and glaring flaws of McCain and shill for his election.
The problem is however that by nominating McCain the GOP has virtually insured a win by the opposition.
If you check your comment, MrCC, you’ll see you constructed a fantasy scenerio whereby McCain suddenly turns against legislation, the likes of which sound tamer than his own extremist Amnesty legislation that he pulled out all the stops for last year.
I believe people can tie up all sorts of odd items into such scenerios using 6-degree of seperation connectivity wishful thinking if they want.
In your comment you railed against “Rush on meds”, apparently you believe there’s no possible way that conservatives could make make a comeback.
Now, on the face of it, it would be correct to say that is a fantasy scenerio as much as is your own on McCain-Illegal immigration, (X will happen, they Y, then Z, etc.)
But what differentiates the two is that “the comeback” scenario has real life precedence. Your McCain-Illegal Immigration scenario runs counter to the reality.
In keeping with my overall point here of fantasy scenerios, I’d just point out that contructing them takes a bit more than just over-analyzing, MrCC.
I don’t think folks are idiots or sheep, they have their own minds and can figure out things. I have no illusion they need to be influenced by me or anyone. Or that they even expect others to make up their minds for them.
Yes, I was talking about Shamnesty!!!
Mr_C_C:
I’m not saying McCain’s feet shouldn’t be held to the fire on this, but that’s a sideshow to keep people busy while the current president and Congress slip one past us.
Does anyone honestly think Boosh isn’t behind the new “homeland security” no-background-check program?
Does anyone think he isn’t behind the $1.4 billion for his pals in Mexico?
Does anyone think Ramos and Compean weren’t shafted to make him (and his corrupt Mexican amigos) happy?
We still have 11 months to endure with Boosh at the helm.
He doesn’t “cross the aisle” as overtly as McCain does — Limbaugh points this out on an almost minute-by-minute basis as a reason to hang McCain out to dry — but who is in lockstep with Boosh on all this open-borders idiocy? The Dems.
Have to stop this NOW.
Is it just me or does it seem like we have seriously strayed from the topic of this thread on the Democrats in the House trying to resurrect amnesty to arguments about McCain and his ability to win enough votes to beat Clinton/Obama, the latter of which would be better bantered back and forth by us in another thread?
Sgt Tim, #55:
History shows that the truly evil provisions of bills like this one are slipped in at the last moment, so as not to be available to critics or wavering congress-members.
Can one expect any less from “Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel, and Rep. Zoe Lofgren?”
If these ultra-liberal nut-cases told me the sun rises in the East, I’d be in the market for a new compass. And I’d check my wallet to see how much they stole while we were discussing sunrises.
I still think that any vote on Amnesty right now would be a democrat party victory regardless of the current outcome. While I can see arguments for and against voting for a republican (since it is our only option?) I cannot be convinced that he will do what is best for this country or even that he will actively seek conservative judges (Which seems to be the primary concern here and one of the few remaining hopes for Conservatives)
His actions with McCain/Kennedy blatantly disregard the sovereignty of this nation. Hos actions with McCain/Feingold actively impede we the people in any effort to raise our voices. His actions with the thugs of 14 do not offer me much more in the way of hope.
So is a very dim and rapidly fading glimmer of hope better than none at all? As I said, I may ultimately be persuaded to vote for McCain but it will only be with the utmost desperation, grasping at that last glimmer of hope that remains.
I think that also speaks volumes about the condition of our once and proud nation. Sadly I also think it forces a long and hard look at the Declaration of Independence by those who have any hopes of salvaging what is left of the Confederacy of Independent but United States of America.
Maybe the time has come to get over the political partying and get back to Federalist basics?
Maybe?
Yup, Barry. On this I believe the focus is more, or should be, on stopping the Amnesty Zombie again. (The only really good linkage to McCain in that regard is how this can be beat back just as he was stopped.)
And, of course, it serves to remind us to keep in mind as Michelle sez, “vigilance”.
The legislation we need is the No Means No act.
After Americans shut down debate on an issue it actually becomes illegal to reintroduce contrary aspects of a “We the Peoples” ruling.
The furious citizenries absence in the halls of government is not our consent.
Please, re-read my comment (#55); I have never been on a turnip truck.
That email is sent, I have their direct number, and I will follow up. I say what I mean and do what I say.
Stay tuned.
BarryF,
No, I’m pretty suer that person meant wacking the “Boo-hoo-hoo, we can’t have perfection so we’ll vote to destroy the country and then you’ll be sorry, so there” MCCain haters/so vote for Hillary or Obama ideological extremist traitors to the US people.
On February 11th, 2008 at 9:03 pm, OldGuy53 said:
You know I got to say that
Cute, intellectually dishonest semantics, but I notice that no one who is offered this hypotheticasl question will answer it, so I guess asking it is a pretty good way to keep the “Vote de facto for Hillary or Obama US traitors” from spewing their irrational country-destroying rhetoric as far as they otherwise might. So I’ll ask you the same question, smart-ass, and we’ll keep it top a simple yes or no answer, okay, because this isn’t so complicated that a yes or no answer will not suffice:
If by the inaction of putting your “feelings” above the good of the nation (an illness some conservatives seem to have caught from liberals these days, it appears), you contribute your little share to the deaths of 80,000 of your innocent, hardworking fellow Americans, and breaking the hearts and destroying the lives of hundreds of thousands more as those killed will be grieved, will you still, knowing what you did, be able to look at yourself in the mirror and say “Yes, I was right and I’d do it again.”
Insane, intellectually dishonest hyperbole. I never said he would do an about face, I said, as others have too, you know, that we stand a better chance of holding back such legislation because he can loudly hold something over his head: the next election. Keep it straight and honest, wise-guy.
Now, last night I asked a question of you, the same one I just asked another poster above, and since you have the time to post these these long posts tonight, I think you can spare a moment to address the hypothetical question I asked last night. Rest assured, as Ombre Rose will attest, I’ll keep asking it. If you ignore it a few times I’ll assume I know what the answer is and broadcast your position everytime we mix it up so the other posters know where you stand. So be fair and honest. Answer this with a straight yes or no answer. No one needs spin and posture or pronouncements that such a question cannot be answered yes or no. Just yes or no:
If by the inaction of putting your “feelings” above the good of the nation (an illness some conservatives seem to have caught from liberals these days, it appears), you contribute your little share to the deaths of 80,000 of your innocent, hardworking fellow Americans, and breaking the hearts and destroying the lives of hundreds of thousands more as those killed will be grieved, will you still, knowing what you did, be able to look at yourself in the mirror and say “Yes, I was right and I’d do it again.”
Yes or No.
Maybe I missed it in the trail of comments, but have we considered that this is just a ploy by the Dems to force McCain’s hand, and that of Republican candidates? That they really don’t care if it passes or not?
If McCain denounces it to gain more support from conservatives, then Dems tell the Hispanic voters say he wasn’t sincere about their needs - even to the extent of a softer immigration bill. Ditto for the other Republican candidates.
If McCain and Republican candidates do support it, then the Dems label them as insincere flip-floppers who will do or say anything to win.
The Dems with the help of the MSM will continue be in charge of “positioning” of Republican candidates in the minds of the American voter right up to election day.
I haven’t expressed a “feeling” about it one way or the other.
Nor have I resorted to calling anyone names.
I’m just stating what I believe to be a fact, John McCain is a deeply flawed candidate for the GOP. There is nothing in his demeanor or actions over the last 4 years that will inspire or mobilize undecideds or independents.
That’s how I see it, a poster at my forum seems to think he has the undecideds and independents sown up, it’s just that he can’t convince enough conservatives.
Either way it’s a pragmatic and realistic look at the situation.
Spit on the screen at us all you want, it won’t change the fact that the odds are long he can’t get enough votes to beat Hillary/Obama.
Your question is steeped in histrionics and actually irrelevant as to McCain’s electability.
Get over to NumbersUSA and get a FAX off to your Senators and Rep. to support Heath Schuler’s enforcement-only bill.
NOW!
They also have a comparison chart with the Rep. House December, 2005, Sensenbrenner bill.
Mr_Conservative_Cat said:
MrCC, you argument just doesn’t make any sense, that’s why the fantasy scenerio fell apart.
For example:
You do notice we are already “holding it over his head”, correct? His response has been to go on record that he would sign his own extremist Amnesty monster.
Outside of your wishes there’s nothing that holds up the fantasy. To support the fantasy you also claimed:
But, in reality, he’s doing just that right now. However, if there’s been some change to which you may be privy McCain can certainly quite easily shown “he’s come to Jesus” in a very tangible concrete way in the Senate tomorrow.
Otherwise all you got are your emotions - or as you say “your feelings”. They might be strong but they just do not equal facts.
Be assured that I do not respond to bombastic fantasy scenerios, especially ones that rely on “Have you stopped beating your wife yet?” rants. I’ve already pointed out the absurdity of basing one’s positions and assumptions on fantasy here. The only thing more more absurd than such “questions” would be responding to them. You’re free to disagee.
But, you might want to brush up on logical fallacies (i.e. the “stopped-beating-wife?” variety interrogatory) and the problems of employing them:
Fallacy Files
You can get as angry as you want that folks might disagree with you, MrCC. But I don’t think it’s a wise response.
Yes, actually I mentioned that in the 22nd post and touched on it again (Attempting to get the topic back onto McShamnesty and away from personal attacks about a last-ditch candidate who may do as much harm as good) in post 62.
Either way, it is a win-win for the dims … ummmm … I mean dems.
Mr. Cat, YES! If it is McCain the repubs push I vote against him. To be fair, I’m sticking to my pro life stance. I am pro life. It’s just that I’m not a one issue guy. I’m gambling that a Justice does not retire in the 4 years of an Obama Presidency. Mr. Cat, I was at the 2006 RNCC Presidential Dinner and McCain was the speaker at lunch. We drilled him on the Illegal alien issue and he promised us he heard our wishes and would support us. Then he stabbed us in the back. It was a smack in the face. And for full disclosure, I’m biased as it cost my wife a great deal of time and money to become a citizen (money that she says was well worth it, but not when she could have only spent $3000 to get the same). McCain claims he knows so much about securing the border? Why didn’t he do it in his State? He claims he’ll enforce the border first? Isn’t he still a Senator? Can’t he do it now and why doesn’t he?
Why I would vote for I guy like Obama? He spent a great deal of time in Springfield and if it helps the town I love in anyway, I’m going to swallow the nasty and say, “ummmmm…..this really sucks, but it’s better than taking the other stuff that’s package as something it’s not.”
I’ve gone on record in other posts on this site that I’m writing in Newt Gingrich. Not to bore the other fine posters on this site, you can find my blogs on Newt.org. I post under my name and he can find my email there. I’m always open to have a fine debate like this.
“in_awe said:
Maybe I missed it in the trail of comments, but have we considered that this is just a ploy by the Dems to force McCain’s hand, and that of Republican candidates? That they really don’t care if it passes or not?”
Yeah, I caught that idea as it was floated. If that is the Dem intent, we probably actually owe them thanks if they can get him to come clean about it. We surely haven’t been able to!
Bringing up the Amnesty issue would be about the dumbest thing the Democrats could do. It will put all candidates on record just a few months before the elections. Really stupid for them, but great for real conservatives!
Yeah, I don’t see it as a minus for conservatives - unless they are of the “no borders” variety. Moreso since the great majority of Americans, across party lines, agree with the conservative take against illegal immigration.
While it may be a calculated risk for the dims I do not think it was (or is) actually a dumb move. Given the division that exists among the republicans, they can pander to their base. History has shown that they can say whatever they want in different states and the vast majority of people will believe them. Whether it is because the people are that gullible or simply want to believe these empty promises are real is the unknown factor. Look at the number of flip-flops that have already occurred in the election that have already been overlooked. This holds true on both sides of the fence and I would hazard a guess that this was a calculated risk that they can afford to take at this stage of the game.
Purple Peep,
I have to hand it to you, you can dance and spin as shamlessly as the best of them. Let’s try this again and try to keep it simple, eh?
Sorry, nice try, but no. Actually, scratch that - it isn’t a nice try, it’s a pathetic and obvious evasion. There is nothing bombastic or “fantasy” about the question - it is a reasonable hypothetical, which is not such a big word so you should learn to tell the difference.
Why is it a reasonable hypothetical, you’d rather I not ask generally? I’ll tell you anyway for the sake of the rest of the board since trying to get through to you personally is proving hopeless:
McCain, dislike him as we do (and make no mistake, I really do, and said so from the get-go) is tougher on the war on terror than Hillary or Obama. If you don;t believe that, then, well, tell it to Bilbo and Luke Skywalker and all your other fantasy favorites. Therefore, the chances are likely statistically greater that a terrorist attack would succeed under Hillary or Obama. That isn’t a loaded set-up. To compare it to the “have you stopped beating your wife yet” question is crazy beyond comprehension, but as we get into this, i think everyone gets a better idea on how your mind likely works, and I think that, too, is helpful to the overall discussion. The term “consider the source’ comes to mind.
The fact is apparent that you’re simply trying to evade a perfectly sensible albiet for you probably highly uncomfortable hypothetical - because in case you missed it, not only is it possible the terrorists will try such a thing, they have vowed accomplish it - and 9-11 was no lucky accident; it was a highly skillful plan, as dangerous as it can get because the perpetrators themselves are not just prepared to die in the act, but actually want to on religious grounds.
So I’ll try this again, since it isn’t a loaded question, but as explained, I hope clearly, a reasonable hypothetical:
If by the inaction of putting your “feelings” above the good of the nation (an illness some conservatives seem to have caught from liberals these days, it appears), you contribute your little share to the deaths of 80,000 of your innocent, hardworking fellow Americans at the hands of terrorists, and breaking the hearts and destroying the lives of hundreds of thousands more as those killed will be grieved, will you still, knowing what you did, be able to look at yourself in the mirror and say “Yes, I was right and I’d do it again.”
Yes or No.
Okay, you can’t answer the question honestly, either. So I’ll assume you just don’t care about the safety of your fellow citizens because ego and personal posturing is more important to you than making a practical albeit unpleasant decision. I’ll take that as a “yes”, that you would sacrifice them for the satisfaction of your own selfish feelings. Okay, good. Got it.
Next….
Congradulations, John! You are the only one to answer the question honestly and I respect you a great deal for that.
I can’t say i think much of you hypothetically sacrificing 80,000 American lives just to vote against McCain, nor how that stacks up to being “pro life” (to me being pro-life doesn’t just mean the unborn, though the helpless in the womb definately get a greater share of my personal sympathy as the ultimate underdogs in a cruel and murderous society), but you did it.
Unconscionable though your viewpoint is, in my opinion, you answered the question honestly.
Now we can take further steps to, perhaps, find out how you could reconcile your conscience, but we’ll leave that for another day. On a board with so many evasive posers, it’s refreshing as hell to hear a straight-up honest answer for a change.
You’re slipping even deeper into senseless bombastics, MrCC.
You really shouldn’t look to others to validate your own feelinsg and decisions, you should be secure enough to handle the fact that not everyone will share your them.
You seem obsessed with what’s called “playing to the board” with lines like:
It indicates a deep insecurity with one’s views if a person desperately tries to drag “everyone” into his personal issues. Most folks stand on their own, taking both the bouquets and the lumps.
But if what is emotionally driving you is how something plays to an audience, I’d suggest you scroll this thread and note the joking references to Dale Carnegie’s “How to Win Friends & Influence People”.
It would be sad if your frustation turned you into a parody of yourself.
You can threaten everyone who criticizes with threats to hijack every comment thread to rant endlessly about McCain and to reel out long, bombastic “did you stop beating your wife?” type demands, but I suspect the novelty will wear off soon. You’re consumed with what people think - you might consider that eyes might be already rolling.
Also you might keep in mind comment threads are not a personal playground for someone to throw temper tantrums.
You’ll find that folks here are not monotopical, have a wide variety of opinions and are good people. I’ve argued and agreed at one time or another with most of ‘em, including you. You agree or disagree, you move on. If a person can’t manage to do that they’ll likely become unhinged quite soon.
I oft-times note we are guests in our hostess’ home here. I believe it behooves us to act as such and not as kids on warpath who forgot their ritalin. I also think it’s wise to not make messes in every room just because we feel personally slighted. Even without that courtesy, it’s not a given the hostess will put up with rampaging children;
Michelle used to have comments before but it became problematic, so they were suspended. I can understand your zeal and maybe you feel you need to “prove yourself”. But I’d caution and suggest that you not invest so much of yourself in some words on a comment thread.
Conservative Cat. I think you and I have already agreed that we disagreed on this issue. I will make an exception to your last comment however since it is relevant and worth noting. Again, I understand the reasoning behind both sides of this discussion. A glimmer of hope is perhaps better than no hope at all. Still, in regards to sacrificing American lives in an attack, I think we need some qualifiers as well.
Given the proclivity of all of the politicians in question to express their overtly liberal and often socialist positions, there are a number of plausible scenarios that may come to pass regardless of who wins the election. With all of that aside for the moment … How likely are the terrorists to attack if they can gain more political ground through our courts and using our own system to defeat us much as they are doing in numerous other parts of the world.
I think they have learned very well how to manipulate the press and the weakness of our politician’s resolve. While what little bit of belief I do have in McCain stems from his seeming desire to allow the military to do its job, his statements about Gitmo give me great pause and reservation even there. I have somewhat equal hopes about his ability, willingness and desire to appoint judges who will rule based on American law and the Constitution rather than liberal judges who think we need international law and even perhaps worse in order to be capable of making a decision regarding the law of our land.
While I may perhaps be persuaded to vote for McCain in the end, it will still be nothing more certain than a roll of the dice in my opinion. His actions as some sort of ill-conceived and bastardized maverick make me worry even on the few points he does have something working in his favor. The company that he still keeps and his record with voting and asinine bills frightens me even more.
Still, I do not think this next war will be fought on the battlefields so much as in the courts and by other political means from within our very own system. My biggest concern about McCain is that it is a roll of the dice and nothing more. Oddly enough, that roll of the dice may ultimately be the best chance we have.
However, I do firmly believe that the next battle will be fought using our own system against us with people blinded by divide and conquer politics fighting amongst each other rather than paying attention to the real enemy as it creeps its way into our laws and our lives.
Government already controls smoking in private businesses and even homes. None of this would have been thought possible by our parents. Will our children come to expect this kind of government control? If we elect McCain and he does NOT discover some Conservative testicular fortitude, the price we pay will change all of our lives and history as we know it … much for the worse I am afraid.
Why should they physically attack us and unite us against them when all they have to do is ooze their way into our system just like they are doing now … albeit it at a more rapid pace? You are certainly correct about the importance of the judges given our “representative” government’s unwillingness or inability to represent We the People. I just wish I did not have so many doubts about the judges he may or may not appoint.
IMHO
(Sorry about another verbose posting)
PP,
I have news for you, PP, what I’m doing is debating you. You may not like the style and you seemingly definately don’t like the content, but like it or not that’s what’s going on here. Psychology is not your strong suit, and it’s showing here to an embarrassing degree. I’d suggest to stick to things to which you’re better suited.
Let’s stay on topic here, shall we, because I think this debate is important and yes, I think it influences people to read the debate. That isnt “playing the board’, that’s having an inclusive discussion. That and getting a greater education from others (so far you aren’t offering any)is what many of us do when we contribute to discussions of national importance.
So far John Answell was honest enough to answer the question that was originally put to you but you keep evading it, embarrisingly so at this point
You’ve posted so many words but failed to include one of two : Yes or No?
Wartip,
Sincerely great post. I agree with just about everything you have said. Indeed, I’m not sure why anyone would doubt it. Way back when I even took a half hour and a cue from one of Michelle’s topic titles and wrote a little knock off of Dr Suess in which the character says “I will not vote for John McCain! I will not vote for what’s his name!”. That, however, was at the start of the primaries. That’s all gone now, and I’ll tell you what else - I hope Huckabee gets a chance to take this thing to the convention, because if nothing else, Romney could ‘reactivate” his campaign and even if McCain won, such a close call would be a new experience for him in politics and it may give him more pause to consider the party base. He’s arrogant, but not essentially stupid.
the only places where we part company are
1. I feel the terrorists won’t be happy with wearing suits and taking this to the courts. Infiltrate? Yes. If they can. Liberal judges via Hillary or Obama would make that easier if possible. But as crafty as they are they aren’t particularly deep thinkers, which makes sense because deep thinkers usually have reservations about murdering people (not always but as a general rule). Bottom line: I think we all know an attack is not just possible, but very likely. They live and breathe daydreaming our destruction and those daydreams usually reveal themselves in methods we couldn’t guess - like holding three planes hostage with mere box cutters and using the power of the engines to destroy life on a massive scale considering the actual size of the operation.
2. You haven’t made up your mind about gambling on McCain and I have. That’s really all there is to it. I see the sparse list of options and say, “okay, I’ll do this.” And when I hear others taking opposing points of view on a discussion board, I’ll debate them, just as you do.
And that’s it. Otherwise I couldn’t agree with you more on what’s a very reasoned and well-written post, if you don’t mind me saying so.
Look how responsive the Democrats are to the handful of cases (Valley Park, Arizona contractors, etc) that were decided differently than the Hazleton case. Apparently they were happy about the Hazleton ruling.
Look for this change in their upcoming revision:
Alert Specter is scribbling again. http://pahomepage.com/content/fulltext/?cid=23674
Trying to convince us that its a federal problem.
This is because of the strict state and local laws that are being passed and upheld by the courts. Dems are worried that these laws are driving too many legals out of the country.
This is because of the strict state and local laws that are being passed and upheld by the courts. Dems are worried that these laws are driving too many legals out of the country now before federal action to grant amnesty is a done deal.
This Thread should be re-labeled as
“Mr._Conservative_Cat blogs on!
or
10 reasons to vote for that two-faced McCain”
Yes. This thread got seriously off topic last night from the Democrats trying to reintroduce shamnesty to debates/conversations that would be better off in another thread.
Okay guys one thing I don’t get,
When in gods green earth is the LAST TIME a canidate has been for everything you want? So far the only thing most of you have versus MacCain is OMG THE MEXCANS!
What about prolife, finishing the war, our military domincance? Will a hate for mexicans make you turn on all of that? For once THINK the other two are the reverse of you on ALL Issues. Gun control is a must for Obama and hillary, As is letting the illegals stay in one form or another. Pro Choice, anti military, anti finishing the war, even Obama wants to get rid of our stratigic edge.
NO canidate thats been in politics will give up power and then you all think by electing the little man in state you can change stuff. How did that work out of Segregation and anti civil rights? Row Versus Wade. WHen is the last damn time state has won out on Federal? And how will your votes matter when the mainly liberal states amount to more power than most conservitive states combined?
A canidtate that wants the good in this nation is no longer possable as Money runs things. And yet its like your all on an island thats sinking just staring off for a ship that may never come. I Just do not understand this. ITs as bad as the Liberals.
I’m not a McCain fan either. But being in the corner I’ve been backed into, I’ll support McCain for the sole reason, and the ONLY reason is he might just win the war. I know Obama nor Hillary will not - it’s defeat and retreat with them.
I was seriously considering going to the primary today and voting for Hillary because I think McCain has a better chance of beating her then he does Obama.
Go ahead and vote. No one will know who you are.
It’s refreshing after a complex day to sit down, log on and read several posts with plenty of common sense attached to them about why we need to suck it in and get on with the job. Thanks. I needed that.
Well as an aside Mr_Conservative_Cat, I’m not here to answer your questions, just comment.
I’ve made no statement as to whether I’ll vote for McCain or not, that is my own business.
I’m just pointing out the fact that IMO he has no chance to beat a democratic challenger.
It pains me to say so because I dislike democrats also.
He’s a poor choice and I have no confidence he can win.
Oldguy,
As a suggestion, try this exercise: force youself to answer the question. Seriously, it may help you to make up your mind.
Out of nowhere, I’m suddenly hearing this rationalization: “I won’t vote for McCain because he can’t win.” That’s fine in primaries. It’s nothing less than textbook self-defeatism in the general.
You just make this crap up as you go along?
You sound like a Ron Paul supporter, even now they’re running around the net creating all these fantasy scenarios on how Ron Paul will arise as the eventual nominee.
McCain can’t win, if we had any other candidate I might disagree, hell even Huckabee would have a better shot, but McCain is the kiss of death for a Republican in the White House.
Believe me or not but I’ve been alive since Eisenhower and have seen the writing on the wall.
McCain is a throw away candidate, like Bob Dole was.
Old Guy,
No, that was the third time in 24 hours I heard the “I’m not voting for him because he can’t win” routine.
Tell me specifically why. And none of that “if you can’t see it right off i won’t explain it bul*sh*t”. You want to have a conversation? Okay, good. Tell me why he can’t win.
Okay, what’s the handwriting? No long twisted obfuscation, just in a nutshell. Why?
Dole was absolutely. McCain is quite a different player. I dislike McCain tremendously, but he and dole are not the same guy. When Dole had the chance right after the Lewinski story broke, Dole had a chance to flay Clinton alive on stage before the entire world and walk away with the Presidency. Instead he chose to be a “gentleman” (translation: weak-kneed sucker). McCain by contrast is an antsy, prickly, egotistical power-tripper. can you imagine McCain not taking advantage of a ripe opportunity like that? No, he’d play it up and down. It’s unfortunate, but for all your years you don;t seem to have learned that politics are dirty, and sometimes you have to fight fire with fire.
I have huge problems with McCain, not the least of which is his zero lack of executive experience. But fighting hard and hitting below the belt, as is sometimes required, the lack of same was Dole’s biggest problem, I think McCain will not just do, but do with a determination which borders on zeal. Unlike Dole to some extent and Bush 1 to an even gretaer extent, McCain wants to win so bad he can’t stand it. And as much as we dislike the fact, the fact that the NY Times has endorsed McCain means he brings more independants and centerists to our side (I use “our side” loosely)
Now tell me, how is it that you think McCain not being able to win is a good motivation for staying home and ensuring that Hillary Clinton or obama do win? This is really the critical question.
First off not once have I stated that I’m staying home, I have no idea how you got that.
Your question needs to be aimed at the huge numbers who are disgusted with his nomination that will stay home.
But you can bet your bottom dollar that Obama’s supporters or Hillary’s are NOT going to stay home.
You’ve got it in your mind that your going to beat up anyone who disagrees with your fanatical insistence that everyone has to agree with you, but you see in a free society we are allowed to disagree.
I do wish we had a candidate that could win the election.
Truth is we don’t, and personally I couldn’t care if you accept it or not.
The proof will be in November….so rant on.
Oldguy,
Quickly as this is getting stale:
Must have been in context, and I don;t want to take the time to find out how. if you’re not staying home, good for you and my apologies. If you’re