1

I don't know about you guys, but if Ace has enough loose cash lying around that he can send it to Chuck Schumer, I'm not going to rush to hit that PayPal link next time. The guy is plainly rolling in it!

preparing for banishment in 3..2..1..

2 Ace,
I share your rage, and would prefer a response that is more than symbolic.  But a donation to the DSC and Chuckie Schumer?!?  That's over the top.

How about doubling your normal donation to the NRA / ILA, enclosing the reciept and a note that states you will continue to support those persons or entities that actually fight for your conservative interests.  Beyond that encouraging and financially supporting primary challengers to senate seats held by amnesty supporters will send a clear message without contraverting your (our) conservative principles or damaging our agenda.

Schumer is the Devil..............but you  know that.

3 de-affiliating and registering as Independent...check

Donating to the Democratic Senate Committee...er, um, not there yet.

I am going to wait for the primaries to be over for that one. I am donating to the guy running against Hagel in the primary and anyone who runs against Lindsey Graham (who is a guy apparently).

After that, I am in for the Democrat option.

4 The only problem with that idea is that most of the Democrats voted for amnesty.

5 Sending money to democrats? In protest? There's an old saying...Fuck you in my ass!

6 Yeah, re-register, but giving money to the Dems seems foolish.

7 Continuing to say "We will only donate to and vote Republican" is sort of precisely what they're counting on, isn't it?

8 Better idea: Public protests at the Amnesty Senators' 4th of July appearances.

These guys go home to kiss babies and wave to crowds at holiday parades.  What better way to drive home our point than to have a crowd of several dozen, or even a hundred, protesters, chanting "Am-nes-ty" every time Sen. Bond pokes his snout out of his hole?  The press might even cover it if it's a Republican getting embarrassed everywhere he goes.

I'd be willing to travel some distance to take part in a protest like that.

9 I like Jack M's "vote for Tancredo" option.

10 Welcome. We've been waiting for you.

11 Its not that I think we should give money to the GOP, but man I dunno.

12 All this write-in and third-party stuff is just another way to elect Democrats anyway.  AND YOU CAN'T DO THAT UNTIL AN ACTUAL ELECTION.

Why not cut out the middleman and do the one tangible thing you can do NOW? 

13 Ace, you're not thinking about the big picture, with all do respect. You're asserting that 1. the $25 will have no impact, 2. that the Senators are going to care that you're registering as Independent.

$25 from you is not a big deal. That's correct. $25 from each of several million, or even hundred thousand, people is. Money the DSC can use to run against the Iraq War, against the war on terror in general. You'd be better of just withholding any further donations to the Republican party.

Your registering as unaffiliated or Independent just means that there's one less person these RINOs have to worry about in their party.

 They don't care that you're responsible for keeping them in office, and you're a member of their party. How much do you think they're going to care about what you have to say when you don't donate, and aren't a member of their party?

We'll end up with a permanent Democratic majority - over one issue. An important issue? Yes. But, we'll be screwed on all the other issues. Besides, withholding donations will hurt the anti-amnesty Senators, too.

14 I stopped voting years ago. It's like being a party to your own rape.

15

DU posters occasionally call for donations to reward the DNC with amounts to end in specific numbers of pennies to let the DNC know where the funds were generated and to act as some sort of lefty symbolism. 

 

Instead of donating to the DSCC out of spite, donate $0.86 to the RNC to remind them of the last amnesty and of the fact that they are about to get 86’d out of office by their base.  It sends a message to the GOP that everyone that is donating will not donate again (stick) and that should the GOP come to its senses, then they would have a nice donor list to solicit later (carrot). 

 

The GOP would need to know why they were getting a bunch of sub $1 donations and they would have to get a lot of them for this to have an impact.  As an added bonus, should amnesty come to be, we all know that the RNC will be calling/mailing for donations.  For the mere price of $0.86, we will all get to give the RNC a piece of our mind via the phone or tape that postage paid envelope to a cinder block. 

16 >>I stopped voting years ago. It's like being a party to your own rape.

I haven't gone that far. But belogning to a party that constantly kicks you in the nuts and then worse, defending them, is akin to being in an abusive relationship. Fark 'em, let 'em try and earn my vote at the very least instead of demanding it.

Aside from having my secret decoder ring taken away, I don't miss being in the party at all.

17 Posted by: ace at June 26, 2007 04:04 PM (1UCRY)

I've already dropped the R off of my voter affiliation, and I'm seriously considering voting for Tom Allen, Susan Collins' Democratic opponent next year.

First, though, I'm going to talk to some guys I know this weekend about finding someone to run against Collins in the primary.  I'm tight with some GOP folks up here, and we're all sick of the current representation.

18 Posted by: rw at June 26, 2007 04:06 PM (nlqdM)

There's an idea I could get used to.

19 They know how we feel, believe me, they know. They do not care, repeat- they do not care. No amount of symbolic whatever is gonna matter. Nothing short of a cataclysmic shift in the party will matter, and let's be real, that ain't gonna happen.

20 The unregistering is the best idea and option we have.

THe Dems support amnesty more than the Rs.

How does giving them money help US?

21 <blockquote>How about doubling your normal donation to the NRA / ILA, enclosing the reciept and a note that states you will continue to support those persons or entities that actually fight for your conservative interests.</blockquote>

The NRA/ILA does not fight for any ascertainable conservative interests that I'm aware of. Send the money to JFPO, SAF, or GOA; otherwise you may as well set it on fire. The NRA is fucking worthless.

22

Yeah, like Slublog said...Democrats are pro-amnesty too.  I just don't see how this helps anything.

Why not give money to primary challengers instead?  Or to me?  Hell, I could use it, and I support a border fence.  I'll send in the canceled checks with a nasty note to all the Republicans, if you like.

23 C'mon. Give the money to Tancredo. He rates about as conservative as there is on a whole host of issues, is the standard bearer of real anti-illegal immigration reform, and was told by the Bush administration not to grace the halls of the White House. That right there is called "hitting the trifecta." For all intents and purposes, Tancredo is an Independent. Considering the Democrat and Republican alternatives, I should think an Independent deserve some tangible support.

Give money to Tancredo... then send the receipt to the DSC or RNSC. Tea-bag optional.

24 And the sending in bullets thing in the other thread--that's just crazy, dangerous, and illegal.  Just talking about that crap marginalizes us even more.  Let's get serious here.

25

Given that the Democratic senators were even more in favor of this POS amnesty bill than the sellout Republicans, giving to the Dems will only make them think their corrupt, pro-enemy, pro-amnesty policies are gaining them support.

That said, there's no reason to donate to the GOP, though individual GOP Congressmen who voted against this shitty bill should still be supported- perhaps even moreso than before.  Those who voted for it?  No mercy.

A better option:  donate to a third party opposed to amnesty.  Or, symbolic though it may be, send your local pro-amnesty Senator a voided check made out to his campaign fund. 

Better yet- send a real check to an anti-amnesty Senator, with a photocopy sent to your pro-amnesty one- not only are you rewarding the anti-amnesty Senators, but demonstrating to your pro-amnesty one that your money is going elsewhere

26 Ace,

Fuck the DemoRats; they're the RINOs⁸ .  But I love your idea on changing affiliation and donating to competitors.  So donate to the Greens, or some other whackjob group.  Everything you hate about the GOP Left, the DemoRats are that much worse.

27 I think we should all learn the Michael Jackson zombie dance (like that wedding party did), march on Washington, and do it in front of the White House.

28 I say we send them midget porn.
Hoards and hoards of midget porn.

Now that's a symbol.

29 Um, if you register as Independent, you don't get to vote in GOP primaries, right? If I were Lindsay Graham, I would be glad that you people are not a primary threat anymore.

30 Yeah, AD.  Give it to Sir Tancelot.

31

You guys are a bunch of suckers for ever giving anything to any of these fuckers.

Don't tell me you check those little dipshit boxes on your 1040s as well?

32 How about we just boycott landscapers, restaurants, and big business like Tyson chicken? Let's get a list of the businesses who were in favor of this bill - the ones who's money talks so loudly - and hit them where they hurt. It might hurt them enough by the time the House starts voting.

33 Republicans/conservatives remind me of the irresponsible parent that has a demonic child.  "I will turn this car around if you don't knock it off - no Wally World, no Dairy Queen".  The Dark Seed continues, because he knows at the end of the day, the parent is a pussy.  If we don't send a message, guess what - we're pussies.  What does it matter if the person is a Republican or a Democrat if they don't listen to constituents?  As much as I hate to say it, a Democrat administration and congress could send a message to the RINO's.

34 The answer to RINOs is to become a DINO.  Democrat in name only.  Sign up and run in the democrat primaries and start voting for the most obnoxious DINO possible!

I'll run againts Diana "Im for Kids" deGette.  Just metioning her name is enough to put a man off sex for years. 

35 >>Um, if you register as Independent, you don't get to vote in GOP primaries, right?

Depends where you live. If you live in NH, one of the first, you can vote in the primary as an Independent. Besides, the primary system as it exists today is so screwed up that by the time my primary comes around, the decision has been made.

36 Why don't we start by taking the Republican Party back? 

It's a perfectly serviceable organization, except for the fact that it's run by a bunch of retards.  Give Mel Martinez the heave-ho.  Same with McConnell and Lott in the Senate leadership posts. 

These are obviously things that the grassroots are capable of themselves.  Maybe we should be encouraging the Cornyns, DeMints, Sessionses, and Fred!s of the world to bump off the Fredos of the party. 

The MSM was able to drum Trent Lott out of his leadership position over the weak and completely irrelevant Strom Thurmond brouhaha -- why can't we do the same over something that's actually important?

37

I cut the RNC off from my wallet 2 years ago. They stopped mailing me stuff after that.

In '08 I'm voting for challengers. All incumbents must go.

TERM LIMITS NOW.

PS- I despise all politicians. from local council-thing right up to Dubya. They are all equally worthless.

38 oops:  These are obviously things that the grassroots are not capable of themselves.

39 $25 donated to this organization isn't going to have a major impact, but

Buying a slut three martinis would.

40 What we need to do is hit the companies that are pushing for their cheap, taxpayer-subsidized labor.  Boycott Tyson Chicken or some other visible, national company.  It would require coordination (bloggers, radio) before viral word-of-mouth can really push it to friends and family.  A wide swatch of America should get behind it, including left-leaning blogs that are comfortable expressing concern about mistreatment of employees or blue collar wages.  (FYI, I think that everyone shares these concerns but liberals express it differently).

41

You folks keep acting like the problem is that you haven't found an effective way to communicate your wishes, and the depth of your passion on this issue, to your representatives. This is simply not the case. They've heard, and decided your concerns are secondary.

They've obviously decided it's in their best interests to do this no matter what the overwhelming desires of the American people are. The relative influence of lobbyist money, trying to capture a share of an ethnic voting bloc, personal belief, just "trying to get somethign done", etc is unimportant. The result is that despite receiving your message loud and clear, their internal self-interest calculations are more important.

Accept it - you are irrelevant.

42 We floated this idea when they brought up the earlier amnesty bill in May, but it never got off the ground: A March on Washington.

Obviously we morons don't have the organizational ability to pull it off, but don't tell me there isn't some truly conservative organization that can't do it.

I don't know what else would have the needed impact, because the way these senators are acting now you'd think somebody had their families tied up in a basement with guns pointed at their heads.

43

After the SCOTUS decisions that came down yesterday, this idea is kind of scary.  McCain/Feingold being knocked down a notch made me smile.  Then today...   two steps forward, three steps back... 

Primaries matter.  If we stop plugging our noses while we vote for the "moderate" because we think he's got a better chance of winning we won't end up with Sen. Arlen Specter!  I think the better solution is to put up Conservatives that are tried, true, and tested.  If they don't win the General Election, then how is this any different than voting for or donating to the DNC? 

We always have the pendulum swinging far one way or the other.  I, myself, would rather lose on principal than by acting like the proverbial pentulent child crossing my arms and stomping my feet.  I'm not sending any money to Mel...  I'm not using my money to support the RNC Senators in general ever again.  I'm done with the RNC/GOP coffers until we get a new Republican President who will put up True Conservatives to positions of RNC power.  I'll send my cash direct to the candidate...    not like it really matters with the BS I have here in California.  I called all three local offices, emailed, and called D.C. for Boxer and Feinstein...  believe me, Ace!  Democrats suck and so do moderate/liberal Republicans like Arnold!  You don't really wanna go there...

 

44 I have decided to support the D candidate to oust Bennett from Utah. I am going to get involved in the D party to push Jim Matheson, our fiscally conservative Blue Dog D Congressman to get rid of him.  The machine in this state is too firmly in place for Bennett to lose in the primary so it will have to come from outside the party.

Hatch will get my support.

45 The NRA / ILA does not fight for any ascertainable conservative interests that I'm aware of......

Well BC, I'm not sure whether you have an "awareness problem" or are just severely challenged when it comes to "ascertaining" .  Conservatives are the "true believers" in the Constitution of the United States, and the 2nd is a favorite and frequent target of nanny state liberals. Perhaps if you cannot make the conservative connection you should go back and read some Adam Smith, Thomas Jefferson, or Patrick Henry (or at the very least, Barry Goldwater).
A disarmed electorate is a compliant one, and no organization has defended the Second Amendment like the National Rifle Association.

46 Good.

Everyone who's saying "Don't do this, this will help the Dems!" is sort of forgetting something:  If this amnesty passes, it will all but destroy the Republican Party and conservative coalition.

That would sort of help the Dems too, right?

47

<blockquote>All incumbents must go.

--Barry in CO</blockquote>

Again, sorry Barry, but not a useful application of your outrage.  Not at all.  Are you going to throw out Coburn, Sessions, Inhofe, Tancredo, and these guys who defied their party leadership to do this?

No, we want to reward these guys.

Focus your rage where it will do some good.

48

re: March on Washington

Can you imagine how the MSM would spin an anti-amnesty march? I can.

49

Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face.  Do you think we would be in a better position on an immigration bill or an enforcement first position if Republicans would have retained the majority in 2006? You're damn right we would be and you can thank the same mindset espoused here that we're not.

I like my tax cuts, my guns,  the war on terror not the policing of terror, a conservative Supreme Court and Federal courts, pro business legislation, partial birth bans and the absence of so many negative liberal initiatives that I cannot begin to list them all. 

Good luck with your strategy for a better America.

50 Ace,
I agree with you, but it really depends on the candidate. I am lucky enough to have some very conservative Ds who I can help support to get rid of Bennett. In many states the selection flat out sucks nuts.
This is a shitty situation.

51 Hmmmm.

Sorry folks but symbolism is utterly stupid.  It's also the irrelevant threat of the absolutely powerless.  So if you really want to engage in symbolism then go right ahead.  Many people won't get it.  Those that do will be impressed for about 10 seconds.  Why?  Because people with power don't resort to symbolism.

If you want to make a real impression then don't resort to symbolism.  Resort to something that actually IS an expression of power.  Now what that might be?  *shrug* your guess is as good as mine at this point.  I'd advocate hauling as many people down to DC as possible to march, but that'll be moot since this bill will or will not have passed by that point.  So if anybody has a good idea, then let's hear it.

Me?  I'm considering heading over to my local GOP office and hauling a half-dozen bricks through their windows.

52 OMG!!!  When I saw this comment:  "There's an old saying...Fuck you in my ass!"  I almost spit out my scotch laughing my ass off.

Ace, as for what you say:  de-register--DONE!

Donating to the DNC:  can't do that.

I like the idea of donating to the NRA and sending these asshats a copy of the receipt.  I'll amend the idea to include a receipt for a recent weapon and ammo purchase.

Think about it.  These son-of-a-bitch bastards won't listen when poll after poll say 80% of Americans are AGAINST amnesty and these fuckwads do this anyway.  If we can't get them to pay attention to 80 PERCENT of AMERICANS, do we have any chance at all when just 55% of us are in favor or against something?  They have become arrogant.  They must go.  Every last one of those bastards.

Jefferson was right.  It's approaching time that the tree of liberty gets some refreshing.

53 Hmmm.

@ polynikes

Do you think we would be in a better position on an immigration bill or an enforcement first position if Republicans would have retained the majority in 2006?

Considering the number of Republicans leading the charge.  And considering that the Democrats are incapable of passing this bill by themselves.  And considering that many Democrats are against this bill.

Then I'd have to conclude that you really don't know what you're talking about.

54

Hey memo, aren't you supposed to be out buying ammo? or bricks.

Impressive intellect you got there.

55 Jaibones: Yeah, AD.  Give it to Sir Tancelot.

Why not? Is this not about sending a message? What do you have to lose, really? The resident Democrat won't listen to you. The resident Republican won't listen to you. How exactly do you get their attention in an  incumbency-based system designed to effectively ignore you?

"Sir Tancelot" has done more to advance this issue than anyone in government, and this is about much more than just illegal immigration. Look at it this way. You are convinced he shouldn't be elected. The MSM would never promote anything from the right unless it had RINO attached to its ass. So, the "loony" Tancredo who just happens to be right on many conservative issues cannot threaten you; ultimately, the mainstream RINO gets to run against the Liberal for the presidency anyway and Tanc never darkens White House doors. At the same time, you get to deny funds for those you don't support and send a message (and isn't that all the power we have now?) to those who you presumably did.

At this point what's the difference in who we elect? Government will expand, spending will escalate, unfunded mandates will be passed, the middle class will continue to dissolve, and the welfare state will grow. Does the rate at which the country turns nanny-socialist really matter? Or that it was conducted by majority "R" or "D"?

Heck, give because it makes you feel like you're really protesting. Nothing else is working and I don't expect to see million man marches storming the Congressional halls any time soon.

Or you could dial in to a staffer who records your opinion down onto a notepad to be summarily ignored by the "better of two evils" when sausage making is done and be called misinformed bigot for expressing your well-considered thoughts.

56

Contributing to Democrats is counterproductive.  Send your donation to the Minutemen Project and mail in your receipt to the RNC. 

57 thats actually a good idea, I will email nrsc to let them know that they get nothing and shumer will get $5.

58 Hmmmm.

@ polynikes

Hey memo, aren't you supposed to be out buying ammo? or bricks.

Impressive intellect you got there.

1. I've never talked about buying ammo on this blog.  Particularly since I've only posted a couple times here so far.

2. I was joking about the bricks.  Which you should be able to understand considering the entire point of my comment was that symbolism, i.e. throwing a brick through a window or sending a tea bag in the mail, was a dumb idea.

3. I do have an impressive intellect.  You should try working on yours since you're evidently incapable of stringing two thoughts together.  Which at least is something I can do.

59 Hmmm.

@ Warden

Contributing to Democrats is counterproductive.  Send your donation to the Minutemen Project and mail in your receipt to the RNC.

Only problem with that is that Gilchrist has consistently refused to allow any outside auditing of his organization, nobody knows where the donations are going and nothing that Gilchrist has promised has ever actually been done.

Unless somebody has information to the contrary it wouldn't surprise me if Gilchrist basically just uses the organization to pay his own salary and perks.  It's a tough thing to write since I tossed a hundred bucks at the Minutemen Project awhile back.  But I haven't heard anything to give me confidence in that group.

*shrug* but it's your money.

60

Tancredo also said at the last debate that "enough is enough" and called for a moratorium on legal immigration as well.

That's bullshit.

61 That would sort of help the Dems too, right?

Ace, as the old saying goes, "Two wrongs don't make a right."  And if we're so pissed that the Republican Party is taking a left, the last thing you want to do is take another left - 'cause then you're going BACKWARDS.

There are valid choices.

1. You can fight inside the Republican Party. For all my bluster, and all the time I've given during campaign seasons, I've never been to a local party meeting. I'm stopping that now.  I'll get involved and make sure my local party operatives are conservatives. If they aren't, we'll kick 'em out, or I'll run myself. Where do you think a Hagel or a Lott comes from? He's pandered to by a cadre of fawning idiots back in his state who let him get away with his crap. I'm responsible for Mel Martinez, and now I'm going to fix my mistake.

2. If you can't abide staying GOP anymore, don't just leave the Republican Party.  Kill it.  The system requires two parties, and you're right that third parties don't work.  But if the Republican Party really wants to be a clone of the Democrats, we need to euthanize it.  Some other party will have to rise to fill its place. That's how the Republican Party was born, that's how it should die (though I'd personally prefer option 1).

3. Give up.  Get out of politics.  Buy a gun and open another bottle of Val-U-Rite and let the rest of the world pass by and take care of itself.

62 Hmmm.

@ AnnonymousDrivel

Or you could dial in to a staffer who records your opinion down onto a notepad to be summarily ignored by the "better of two evils" when sausage making is done and be called misinformed bigot for expressing your well-considered thoughts.

Stop it.  You're starting to make me feel nostalgic for the GOP again.

lol.  j/k.

63

Just in case you think that Republicans are turning into Democrats, more Republicans are standing up to claim Iraq is a failure.

So you can clearly see the difference in the parties: One starts with an "R".

64 What about making a list of all the businesses that contributed to 'yes-to-shamnesty' senators and boycotting their products?

65

whoops...just noticed Jerry's comment #40 already covered it

66 or we can start our own "club for growth" style 527, that only contributes to enforcement politicians

67

Memomachine,

According to newspaper reports, they released an independent financial audit in 2006.

 

68 The Minuteman Project is good.  I think there's a defense/expenses fund for those two Border Patrol agents (I can't remember how to spell their names...) who got fucked over by the government after they wounded a drug smuggler while on duty--also a good use of money.

Too bad we can't arrange for some of these criminal aliens who've been raping and killing average Americans to attack some senators' families instead.

69 We have to make it clear that this is it, this is the Rubicon. This is, very seriously, the death of the Republican Party as we have known it.


Exactly. There is literally no reason to vote republican anymore. And don't give me any bullshit about the GWOT. They don't know what the fuck they're doing there either. Just because they're willing to use the military does'nt mean they know how to use it. That worthless sack of shit known as jorge bush has only accomplished three things in his second term -

1. Proving the democrats were right about him

2. Destroying the sovereignty of this country by essentialy ceding Texas, Arizona and California to Mexico. More states will fall as time goes on.

3. Killing the republican party.

I'm going to write my representatives and senators and urge them to impeach that worthless motherfucker.

70 I am Not George Bush, and I approve this message.

71

Hmmm....maybe I don't want to send the Minuteman Project money after all. 

What about the group that split off from it - The Minuteman Civil Defense?

72 Tancredo is a wingnut, seriously.  You make like him, but the public in general won't.

Fortunately, there is somebody else...

73 What about the group that split off from it - The Minuteman Civil Defense?

Good grief.  It's a friggin' Monty Python sketch.

74

NO way I'd donate to Schumer.  Way more Democrats voted for this POS bill than Republicans did.

Send your donation to Numbers USA.  These guys will be running attack ads in the states of Amnesty Senators who are up for election.  Funding them will really get the wafflers attention.

75 How about working at the state level? Looks like it can make a difference. If all the illegals are now legal, make it not much fun to be a non-citizen in your state. If that hurts some legal immigrants who are using gov't benefits, well, that's just too bad.

76 Cuffy Meigs: "Tancredo also said at the last debate that 'enough is enough' and called for a moratorium on legal immigration as well."

Wasn't that a temporary moratorium? Does it not make sense that this wholly corrupted and dysfunctional system be stopped until it has been retooled to a controllable process and that government prove its ability to function? I think it would be a good plan in that to escape the hole, one needs to stop digging. I'm almost certain he didn't suggest that immigration end, period. That would of course be foolish. Do you have some additional context for that reference?

memomachine,

Let's just say that my confidence in the democratic process is at its nadir.


sandy burger,

I understand that he's not charismatic, but he is a conservative (I thought that's what Republicans were) and took on this issue when no one else would. He deserves all the credit. What exactly did Fred T. do on this issue when he was in office? Seems to me that his idle hands were part of the problem. Likewise, Ted Kennedy's bungling hands are an even worse pair. That's not to say I'm equating the two for their damage to the illegal immigration fiasco; however, rhetoric of the sort from someone who is not currently in office or casting votes is rather empty. If this bill passes, Thompson's lovely speeches add up to exactly squat. Tancredo and a few others actually took risk when it was supposedly risky... and they were right.

Look. I like Fred!'s style, but I remain unconvinced of his conservatism. I think he's a good option, but until he runs and until he gets scrutinized like the other declared candidates, we are generally projecting our hopes on a candidate who may or may not be what "conservatives" want. Is he electable? Sure. And so was George Bush.

77

Posted by: Warden at June 26, 2007 04:46 PM (dvQIA)

 

I like that best so far.

1. Puts money into the pockets of people that, without a doubt, are pro- border enforcement.

2. Denies money going into the pockets that, without a doubt, are anti-border enforcement.

On top of that though, I will be donating to individuals; not the party.

I'll donate to Dole for 2008. She has listened to her constituents on this.

Burr on the other hand, doesn't come up for reelection until 2010. I'll donate to whoever goes up against him in the primaries; but if he makes the ticket, I'll donate to and vote for his libertarian opponent.  If there is no libertarian; I’ll write in my vote for Dramatic Chipmunk.

 

78

What we need to do is have a million anti-amnesty march on D.C!!!

As if the bill itself is not bad enough,  they want it signed before the 4TH of JULY holiday...the 4TH...INSULT TO INJURY.

They know come 08 that most of the anger will be gone and the people will vote for them regardless...the lessor of two evils...

until we break this cycle nothing will change.

this govt no longer represents the people and I think our forfathers had a solution for just this problem!!!

 

79 Rather than donate to Democrats, wouldn't it be better to pool that money in a Political Committee such as, oh say, the CNR.  It doesn't exist ... yet, but the Committee for National Republicans, or some such, would work in the inside the Republican Party to compete with the RNC, loosening the grip they have on who can and who can't be a Republican Senator.  It would be a spitting image of all that the RNC is but, say have it's own party like platform emphasizing adhering to the rule of law; a commitment to reducing corruption; fighting for responsible legislation properly funded and following up on programs to make sure they achieve their purpose.

A CNR could solicit the primary challengers to those Republican Senators who are incompetent in everything except in staying elected, which is by virtue of the rub each others back system, really makes it one of the easier jobs they have once they make it there so long as they have the backing of the RNC.  The Senators that commit to the platform will get as much assistance to take down the as the committee can deliver, and continue that support in varying ways to prevent the browbeating, arm twisting, stabs in the back like threats many of the principled Senators get now when they don't tow the line. 

The Contract with America worked well in unifying Republicans but it wasn't enough to keep them focused because of the same problem which we are witnessing now -- no threat of competition and no 'on the spot' organization to hold their feet to the fire, not to mention not keeping the platform filled with policy objectives to focus their efforts.

I'd suggest that this be the focus for now: bringing the Republican Party back to a place where it is both relevant and trusted with the hope it can regain the respect it had when I joined 35 years ago. I don't want to leave the Party of Lincoln because the carpetbaggers are running it now.  To me, there is too much history there for me not to make a concerted effort to kick the bums out.

Just a couple of other things. One, taking this approach doesn't forswear ever starting a new party.  On the contrary this approach may be an easier way to develop the foundation for it by having an orderly, operating, successful and experienced party with likely representatives already in office and having all but a new name after 4 or 6 years.  I'd just prefer to try rectifying the problem this way first.  Two, I would hope this new CNR could be of a form where the leading officials aren't all career politicians but folks from many walks of life, economists, lawyers, scientists, think tankers, bloggers, talk radio hosts, retired military, bloggers, ... and maybe even a few of us run-of-the-mill *bigots* to keep everyone else sane.  It's all right and good that we have lots of kibitzers on the outside yelling at the pols to do the right thing but we really do need to act on our self-interest and principles in an organized way.  It ought to work, shouldn't it, after all, the current crop of pols have done wonderfully at organizing for their self-interest.

In the end though, Ace, you are right.  Control of the money is the source of the power.  One can do bad or good with it.  Competition is the better guarantee of it being used for good, but wielding it individually just won't get it done.

Oh, one last thing.  Announcing an endeavor like this soon, like tomorrow, would send a bigger message than just more 100 to 1 phone calls and faxes.  It would show we really do mean business; that we are organizing, not scattering.

80 I don't like the tea bag idea. It's like something I would expect from the Democrats. A hallmark of liberalism is its preference for words over action, symbolism over reality. We need a plan with a lot of reality and just the right amount of symbolism to attract the attention of the power elite.

81 Oh, yeah, a successful upstart CNR would lead to the the formation of other ones, like the CSRN and the CCRN, obviously.  It would be fun to play in all the sandboxes.

82 Let's assume that this is about money and influence, nothing more.  This is about money flowing to bought politicians, and influence flowing to interests who wish to see twelve million freshly-minted Mexican Americans.

So far soft pressure isn't working.  Calls to offices: zilch.  Tea bags?  Doubtful.  Raging on the internet?  Rotsa ruck.

If the source of the problem is the money and influence then it follows that we go after both.  I think that means identifying and publicizing the collusion going on.  A huge part of that is obvious: boycotts, boycotts boycotts.  If big agra or whatever thinks they can push this through the "democratic" process like this (and it appears they can) then all we have left is voting with our dollars.  Think of the Danish cartoon buy-in but in reverse.

This is not insignificant.  Imagine a well-publicized campaign to identify the industries for boycott.  How about an unofficial registry (a wiki or somesuch) that identifies employers who profit from using workers who are not in the country illegally.  Now you've got people worried.  Now you've got shareholder concern.  Now you've got a pain that these men can actually feel.  The pain of pushing through this legislation has got to be greater than the pain of not pushing it through; without an apparent sense of shame or commitment to the people you represent this is all that's left (And it's a big one).

83                             A DAY WITHOUT LEGALS!!                                    

Lets choose a day for a general strike.  EVERYBODY stay HOME.  No Work, No production.  Put the fear of God into them!!!

84 AnonymousDrivel:
Look. I like Fred!'s style, but I remain unconvinced of his conservatism.

Me too.  But I am convinced that Tancredo is not gonna be president.

But forget about Fred, then.  Ending RNC donations is the main thing, in my opinion.  We brought this all upon ourselves by tolerating the likes of Trent Lott for so long.

85 <i>no organization has defended the Second Amendment like the National Rifle Association.</i>

Bull. Fucking. Shit.

The NRA has sold the Second Amendment further down the river than most of the gun <i>control</i> organizations in existence. The federal assault weapons ban, for instance? Thank the NRA for that one, in the name of "preventing even worse legislation".

To call them worthless scumbags is a tremendous insult to <i>actual</i> worthless scumbags everywhere, who the NRA is not fit to felch.

86 My two cents ...

I'm in favor of working within the Republican Party to take it over. I know this will take awhile to happen and that it certainly won't happen before the whole immigration issue is settled, for good or ill. But I think that's the most realistic and viable course to take. It's a long-term effort but if we win, we win big. And I can't, won't, give money to the Dems or support the Dems. Unless it's Lieberman. I'd support him. Right now, Lieberman is my favorite in either party, just about. But that's another topic ...

87 All of which is to, I think Dusty's "CNR" idea is a good. For a political action group within the Repub Party to gain control of it. Kind of what the Christian Coalition did under whatisname in the Reagan years. Okay, I know they didn't take control. But they exerted considerable influence.

88 Ralph Reed. Christian Coalition. Whatever you think about his religious orientation and whatnot, he was a great political organizer. Maybe we could learn from him. Say, to create a Conservative Coalition within the Republican Party. Or something like that.

89

Better yet- send a real check to an anti-amnesty Senator, with a photocopy sent to your pro-amnesty one- not only are you rewarding the anti-amnesty Senators, but demonstrating to your pro-amnesty one that your money is going elsewhere

I think that's the way to go for those of us in the Carolinas.  Support Dole and DeMint and stick it to Burr and Graham.  Or I could do something mature and send them pictures of open beaver shots from Hustler because they're being such pussies.

90 sandy burger:
"...But I am convinced that Tancredo is not gonna be president."

"But forget about Fred, then.  Ending RNC donations is the main thing, in my opinion.  We brought this all upon ourselves by tolerating the likes of Trent Lott for so long."

True. Tancredo won't be president, but he could possibly (slightly, anyway) be a viable VP. Or, much more likely, he could be a useful outsider serving practically as a third-party platform mover who, via this populist issue, force the "real" contenders and any Congresscritters to adopt his position. Tancredo has the credentials to push the issue even when no one else will, which was why he began his campaign anyway. For that he deserves money and support even though he won't win. To discourage his continued campaigning by denying funds or requesting the diversion of them to, say, Fred!, would be something of a disservice to reform and enforcement. Conservatives need the likes of the Tancredos to keep the right anchor.

As far as ending RNC donations, I wholeheartedly agree. If that's the most one is willing to do, that would still be an excellent start. If voting "anyone-but-the-Lott-like-incumbent" is step two, then two thumbs up. The Right could actually make progress by taking a step back for two steps forward in 2010+ assuming the GOP is actually worth salvaging or electorally capable of being salvaged post illegal-alien voting bloc expansion.

91 Well BC, I think we have zeroed in on your problems, and unfortunately they are manifest.  Perception, awareness, with some basic fact recognition / reality issues thrown in.
NRA fought the federal assault weapons legislation tooth & nail, pointing out the cosmetic nature of the definitions and providing reams of information demonstrating that so-called assault weapons are a negliable  influence on crime.  The Clinton administration  along with a democrat controlled house was able to overcome NRA's vigorous defense.  The real lesson came in the following election cycle when NRA grassroots efforts defeated several ban legislation supporters, a fact lamented loudly and frequently by the Clintonistas and the banners (led by Schumer and Kennedy).
It is absolutely incomprehensible that you cannot or are incapable of recognizing NRA's extaordinary track record.  That fact may perhaps be best illustrated by continous liberal gnashing of teeth whenever NRA is the subject, or the MSM's agendized portrayals of NRA membership as illiterate rednecks and rubes.  The enemy does not relentlessly attack those opponents they find ineffective or impotent. 
I suspect that you are neither a firearms owner or a strong proponent of the second amendment.  We tend to be much better informed, and certainly think more clearly than you have demonstrated any ability for.

It's apparent that it will be a difficult task for you, but reflect on it a little bit.

92 I think donating money to the Democrats is like cutting off our noses to spite our faces.  They're the worst of the two parties.  Like Vilmar said, let's donate to the NRA, and de-register as Republicans. 

In terms of another political party, I think you all should check out The Loyalist Party, as they are all for closing up our borders and putting a moratorium on all immigration:
http://www.loyalistparty.com/platform.htm

93 Again:

Instead of forming a third party outside the two parties, why not form a de-facto third party within the Republican Party?

94 ... that way we either gain control of the GOP or kill it and start anew. Win-win

95

I suspect pro-amnesty candidates are counting on voters' short memory.  How about large posters on private citizens' lawns listing how (local) candidates voted on immigration bills.  Do this for the week before elections.  While we might have to wait to get their attention (eg. Judd Gregg doesn't come up for reelection till 2010), I think it could have a dramatic, long term effect.

By the way, I've called and written my senators.  Finally got thru today to Judd Gregg and asked the phone person what were Gregg's reasons for voting as he did today.  She had no idea but said there would be a public statement later.  I told her I was heartsick and offended by his vote.  She said it was only a vote about cloture.  I told her I was very smart and believed 80% of US voters also very smart and would not fall for such foolishness.  She also tried to convince me that Gregg cares deeply about homeland security.  I told her I did not believe that and that I thought Gregg should dust off his resume cuz he'll be looking for a new job in 2010.

 

jmb

 

jmb

 

96

I called Sen Lugar's office today and told them he has lost my vote in future elections.  I was happy to see that my other Senator did change his mind on the matter, so maybe my calls helped Bayh to see the light on this issue.  Maybe my withdrawal of support on Lugar (along with everyone else that can call in) will help to spur him to vote against the final cloture of the bill.

What a sham we have here.

97

I aint giving a dollar, ever, to Chucky Schmucky. Ever. What a hole. But I am now an Independent. Looking for a conservative Demeocrat is like searching for a gas station with full service, but...

I had held out hope that the dipshits in the Senate would wise up, but I never really believed it. McCain. What an absolute asshole. Why would a guy who has wanted to be President for so long blow it up over this one issue? It's just nuts. And the President. What in the hell is he thinking? How can a guy be so right on the WOT, and so wrong about an issue like this? Fuck, my head hurts.

98

I'm sure this comment will get lost in the crowd of comments before it, and nobody will ever see it, so I'll let you  in on a little secret way I protested:

I sent the RNC a $500 check made out to the DNC. Where I had written: Pay to the Order of Republican National Committee ... I scratched that out and put in its place: Pay to the Order of Democrat National Committee.

I want to see if they'll try to cash it. If they fucking try to cash it, I'll sue them for forgery.

I'm quite sure they won't forward the check over to the DNC, so, costs me nothing.

And gets the point across.

99 Alamo:

I suspect that you are neither a firearms owner or a strong proponent of the second amendment.  We tend to be much better informed, and certainly think more clearly than you have demonstrated any ability for.

I suspect you're a fucking ignoramus. My collection, presently, is as follows: H&K USP45 with replacement Trijicon nightsights. S&W P99 in 9mm. Glock 17. Mossberg M590. Ruger GP-100 .357 magnum. Bushmaster XM15-A3. Springfield Armory super-match M1A with a replacement Hart barrel. And most recently a SigSauer SP2022 in .357 SIG. I am very nearly a single-issue voter with respect to gun rights.

If you think that the NRA "fought tooth and nail" against the federal assault weapons ban, you demonstrably have no earthly clue what you are talking about. The federal assault weapons ban was approved of by the NRA as a "compromise", ostensibly to spare us the oh-so-disastrous consequences of the much-worse regulation that the gun grabbers were favoring. The NRA supported (and still supports) NICS. The NRA lobbies for robust enforcement of existing gun laws, notwithstanding the fact that those laws are manifestly unconstitutional. They actually filed amicus briefs urging the Ninth Circuit not to hear Silviera v. Lockyer, because regardless of the merits it didn't square with their precious nationwide litigation strategy. And the fact that NRA-backed candidates defeated a bunch of Democrats in 1994, and that Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer say nasty things about them, hardly suggests that Wayne LaPierre and his cronies aren't a bunch of worthless asslicks.

The NRA is disparaging referred to, by serious proponents of gun rights, as "the hunter's auxilliary of the GOP" for good reason. They're despicable sellouts. Giving money to them in defense of gun rights is about as useful as wiping your ass with the greenbacks and then flushing them.

100 The Republican establishment ignores us because it thinks that we have nowhere else to go. Are they right?

The amnesty bill is not just some issue; it is the critical issue. It is the Rubicon, as Ace says. Ace is 100 percent right. If this bill becomes law, it should turn you and me instantly into enthusiastic blue dog Democrats.

The Democratic party is rotten but it is also most solicitous of the blue dogs' concerns, precisely because the blue dogs do indeed politically have somewhere else to go. The United States needs two good, patriotic national parties; right now, it seems that we have zero. If you and I have no influence with the Republican party, then it is time for political judo: we infiltrate the Democratic party.

101

The Tancedo quote from the GOP debate (6-5-07):

"Are we actually ready to say, enough is enough, we have to stop all legal immigration except for people coming into this country as family members, immediate family members, and/or refugees."

Amnesty is bad. Tancredo's xenophobia is worse.

102 Hmmmm.

@ Cuffy Meigs

You forgot the rest of the quote.  So I'm feeling helpful so I'll include it here.

VAUGHN: What is your question tonight? QUESTION: With regards to illegal and legal immigration, in your opinion, what does it mean to be an American? What are the tangible and intangible attributes of an American?

VAUGHN: Congressman Tancredo?

TANCREDO: It means, number one, cut from the past. If you come here as an immigrant, great, welcome. If you come here legally, welcome. It means you've cut your ties with the past, familial, especially political ties with the country from which you came.

But let's be serious about this, you guys. We can talk about all the immigration reform we want and what it's got to get down to is this: Are we ready for a time-out? Are we actually ready to say, enough is enough, we have to stop all legal immigration except for people coming into this country as family members, immediate family members, and/or refugees.

Are we willing to actually say that and say, enough is -- we have got to actually begin the process of assimilating people who have come in this great wave of immigration.

The process of assimilation is not going on. And how long -- how long will it take us -- for us to catch up with the millions of people who have come here, both legally and illegally, and assimilate them? I'll tell you this: It will take this long: Until we no longer have to press one for English and two for any other language.

103 Hmmm.

@ warden

According to newspaper reports, they released an independent financial audit in 2006.

Ahhh my bad.  Sorry I didn't know.

104

Working from "within" the Republican Party would be fine...but,

if this bill ever became law, it would be the end of the Republican PARTY!

and if it dosent, it leave's us at the point: THE GOVT TURNED IT's BACK on the American people!!!.

LETS MARCH!!!!!!!!!!!

105 Hmmmm.

@ AnonymousDrivel

Let's just say that my confidence in the democratic process is at its nadir.

*shrug* I can't blame you.  This is the first time I've ever seen such a universally unpopular bill get shoved through the Senate so incredibly fast.  And I find it just incredible that supposedly stalwart conservatives have been turned into little more than marionettes for Ted Kennedy.

I swear it's enough to make me start believing in pod people or something.  Even a couple of my co-workers, who are to the *left* of Kos, are absolutely against this bill.  Even some Kossacks are against this bill not in terms of amnesty but in terms of wage deflation created by the guest worker program.

People tend to talk about the last days of the Roman Republic when discussing modern America and it's social problems.  And usually I rather discount them because it's easy to be excessively gloomy about things that get overly dramatic.  Even those that get all worked up about the supposed North American Union stuff.  But discounting these things is getting harder and harder because the entire democratic process has been suddenly broken.

How on earth can anybody in elective office give the middle finger to the core of their political and elective support?  It's literally political suicide.  And it is such an obvious political suicide that I really have to question my view of the world as it is. 

If it's such an obvious means of political suicide, then why are they going through with it?  And if they are willing to commit the political version of seppuku then I have to ask the next question.

Is this amnesty the *last* thing they're going to do?  Or the *first*?

106 BC:

Amazing info re the NRA. Didn't know about any of that. Can you recommend an organization for serious gun rights proponents and 2d Amendment defenders?

107 Why don't we all just move to Baja?

108 Cuffy Meigs: "...Tancredo's xenophobia is worse."

Straight out of the Michael Chertoff/Linda Chavez/Lindsey Graham School of Debate. Well played.

109 But discounting these things is getting harder and harder because the entire democratic process has been suddenly broken.

I'm sympathetic. But things aren't that bad. It's just that this is all new to you. You should have been around in the 60 and 70s. Race riots, societal upheavel, Vietnam, a corrupt president forced to resign, corrupt vice president indicted, violence in the streets, nothing seemed to work, etc., etc., etc. It seemed like the end of days.

And my parents would tell me: "You should have seen it in the 30s. Intractable economic depression, fascism and communism rising and growing and strength and aggressiveness while democratic/capitalist countries seemed to be failing, 20 percent unemployment throughout the decade, FDR's New Deal a fraud and sham that made the Depression worse, war looming in Europe, war in China, violence in the streets, nothing seemed to work, etc., etc., etc. It seemed like the end of days to them.

It's not the end of days. It's the way of the world. Fight the good fight. Brace up, ruck up, move out.

110

Rememer back in October, when we had that big row over whether or not to support the Republicans. Most of us on the fence (so to speak) were convinced that voting for what they had was better than not voting "to send them a message"?

I see that paid off handsomely, now, didn't it?

 

111 memomachine,

RE: "Is this amnesty the *last* thing they're going to do?  Or the *first*?"

Full disclosure before you jump to my side. I'm further along on the NAU/SPP spectrum than many, if not most, commenters here; so, you have been warned.

My sentiment is that this is the first of such magnitude. Others will come due to the momentum such an impactful policy invites and the method by which it was attained. Read up on the SPP papers (all of those publicly available *.pdf's). This is not some hidden process. It explains administration policy wrt border security (or security in general), human/cargo processing, labor shifting, and the optimization of resources in neighboring states. It actually explains perfectly what we are witnessing, at least to me. With a shrinking of the world and the concept of global economies, the hypothetical of macroeconomic theory seems to be getting put into practice.

When I see an Administration and Senate work so hard at flipping the bird to the citizenry through both policy and process, then something in Denmark, er, Washington, DC and certain outposts, is rotten. When Democrats and Republicans just take turns expanding government, then I think the Fall of Rome analogy is apt. Perhaps it's Chicken Little-ish, but I'm always cynical of government. How anyone could not be after witnessing what we have seen during this whole process stretching for years seems to me to be as unbelievable as the national immigration policy itself.

To me, this is all a charade. I believe in democracy. I do not believe in our current version.

112 Steve (the artist formerly known as Ed Snate):
"It's not the end of days. It's the way of the world. Fight the good fight. Brace up, ruck up, move out."

I admire your optimism. I remain the skeptic, but it's good to know everyone isn't quite as jaded as I am here.

113 AnonymousDrivel:

I used to be jaded. But I was young. As I put some years behind me I became less jaded. I saw cycles where before I had only seen unique events. Unique, seemingly (but not actually) because they were new to me. The craziness and upheavels I saw when I was young were the first upheavels I ever saw and I thought they would be the last -- that I was witnessing the end of days. My parents and my grandparents too tried to tell me otherwise but I didn't believe them because I was young and sure of myself and thought I knew everything and that they were old people whose time had passed. Don't get me wrong, I do still get skeptical and I get plenty angry and sometimes depressed. But I always come out of it because I know now that life will go on after me. In the 60s we'd smugly tell our parents and grandparents "the times they are a-changin'" and that they had better get used to it, as if they hadn't seen and gone through big changes in their own lives. My grandparents on both sides of my family were all born in the late 1870s and early 1880s and they lived to see men walk on the moon and I had the temerity to tell them that they couldn't handle change. Well, the times are changing now. It may seem like the end of days but it's just that the times are changing. And the outcome is by no means settled or sealed.

114 What I guess I'm trying to say also is that it's not so much that I'm optimistic but that I know the world holds a great deal in store both good and bad that we cannot predict or foresee. I'm outraged by the immigration policies of the president and the Senate and I often get mad as hell about it all. But when I can make myself step back (not always an easy thing to do) I see that since I'm not in control of the universe it's no use getting too upset about it the way things are going. I'll do my best and fight the good fight and I'll fight hard but I'll also try to maintain perspective. Today I was out on a farm herding sheep with my border collie and a thunderstorm came in we kept working in the rain and it was fairly beautiful. The immigration issue didn't have any bearing on what we doing and live was pretty good for most of the day. It'll be pretty good on other days too.

115 Cuffy Meigs: "...Tancredo's xenophobia is worse."

Straight out of the Michael Chertoff/Linda Chavez/Lindsey Graham School of Debate. Well played.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at June 26, 2007 09:51 PM (Y0gTb)

 

I'm against this bill, dickhead.

116 Steve (the artist formerly known as Ed Snate),

Thoughtful response and perspective is always useful. My only caveat is the assumption that things will always improve. We have been exceedingly fortunate in this country and I never make an assumption that this upward trend is unending. Selfishly, I guess I know it all won't collapse in my lifetime though the relative comfort level could certainly drop. Unselfishly, I'm concerned about the legacy we leave for future generations.


Cuffy Meigs,

RE: "I'm against this bill, dickhead."

So what?

You smeared Tancredo with the xenophobia quip to try and discredit him (and, by implication, those who would support his overall immigration reform policy) while backing up the smear with a contextually limited reference via sin of omission. Why not excerpt the whole response since you went to the trouble of finding that quote (which I did appreciate)? Because that would diminish contradict your smear and your point that he is a xenophobe. That is the exact tactic Chertoff, Chavez, and Graham would use to discredit the opposition.

Again, well played.

117

Cuffy, as long as the "multicultural" poison continues to surge through the veins of the body politic, we probably have to cut back on legal immigration too. That's a fact. Tancredo is right. A temporary immigration moratorium until we can get our cultural bearings (and our legal enforcement mechanisms) as a nation again might just do the trick.

I can think of three kinds of legal immigration that have been abused: refugees becoming welfare dependents, family reunification so grandma and grandpa can collect SSI, and the H-1B indentured servitude. Moreover, with the "multicutural" poison pushed in academia and the media, many immigrants wind up with questionable loyalties anyway. Especially the educated ones that we want--they sat through MultiCommunist Brainwashing 101 when they were schooled here after all.

Seriously, Ace, think twice before giving money to Commiecrats ("blue dogs" who did the right thing on this immigration issue are okay). You want to sent a message? Send all your money, and primary votes, to Tancredo.

118 That is the exact tactic Chertoff, Chavez, and Graham would use to discredit the opposition.

Not true.  Chavez et al smeared a large, but undefined, group. As an example, since Graham didn't tell us which of us is supposed to be the bigot he's going to tell to shut up, we're left to assume we all are.  When confronted, like Laura Ingraham did with Chavez, no meaningful effort was made (that I ever heard) to narrow that focus.

On the other hand, Cuffy indentified one particular individual, offered the person's own words to provide context, and alleged the individual is a xenophobe. Another clear distinction is that Cuffy's charge suggests an irrational fear, while Graham & Co. charge hate and intolerance.

It's no surprise to anyone who's heard me call him a nativist (which is just clearly a fact, not a slur), that I agree with Cuffy.  Tancredo does seem to try and cultivate an irrational level of fear on this issue. No offense to the Tommy fans out there, especially since I can't stand listening to him for more than a minute or two without his squirrely little voice cutting through me like a knife, but he seems to offer less than reason when he talks.

119 I appreciate the distinction, TBR, but the tactic to which I refer is the smear to discredit or stifle an opposing point of view. Perhaps yours is a distinction without a difference considering the net effect of the claim. It's an unfair charge no matter how one slices it. Not to belabor the point, although it's too late for that now, but Cuffy's context from Tancredo was nothing of the sort. There was no context. It was narrowly excised to state what Tancredo really didn't say. Well, he said it... plus he said, importantly, more. The inference of his bigger point was that Tancredo's POV, and presumably anyone who agreed with Tancredo on the issue that a temporary moratorium should be considered while he and the nation welcomes legal immigrants (though CM left that portion out), is to be rejected outright. How does the charge of xenophobia reconcile with what Tancredo actually said?

Perhaps CM will elaborate on whether or not it was an irrational fear being  attributed to Tancredo, or hate and intolerance, or something else altogether, particularly given the whole of Tancredo's answer. The net result either way is an unsubstantiated slam, in fact utterly refuted given the particular reference, that dishonestly labels the man.

Just as Chavez's general charge and just as Graham's general charge, they are baseless. I don't need Chavez or Graham to direct their charge at me specifically to correctly assume that their vocalizations to my antagonism against their bad policy is indeed an offensive method to silence legitimate, not irrational, concerns. That an excerpted quote is used to perpetuate the smear when the ones making the charge know otherwise should be challenged, not justified. This shouldn't matter whether or not you approve or disapprove of a particular individual. One can legitimately argue that a temporary moratorium is bad policy. One cannot legitimately argue that suggesting such a policy is inherently xenophobic. The use of such a charged term is merely used to bias debate and to set the rhetorical battlefield to one's advantage in a politically correct manner as opposed to advance policy discussion.

But enough of beating that dead horse. I need to get some rest to redirect this energy into defeating this blasted bill, Tancredo's xenophobia notwithstanding.

120 Ah BC,

What a touchy little fellow you are.  Listing your weapons of choice is an interesting device, surely demonstrating your bonafides.  I'll take you at your word that you are "very nearly" a single issue voter; I would describe my voting  record similarly.  Beyond simply exercising my right as a voter, I choose to exponentially compound my influence by actively supporting and participating with the NRA, the most efficacious defender of my second amendment rights without question. The 4 million member NRA is considered by those neutral (academics who intensly research the influence of lobbies on government), opponents, and supporters to be the most effective lobby extant, regardless of issue, wielding influence far beyond it's numbers and positively affecting outcomes electoral and legislative on a national scale. 
While in theory I may in fact support your hard line, in practice I will choose effectiveness and competency every time.  An earlier poster asked what organization you support to amplify your voice, and that is an excellent question.  There are no other organizations that exert significant influence on the nation-wide stage, so I would suggest it is you despite your intentions, that "wipes your ass with greenbacks".  Or perhaps you choose to only vote, then go home.  I take my rights much more seriously than that.
The NRA is and will remain the premier defender of the Second.  Despite your whining about LaPierre "and his cronies" , you should thank them for the tranquil expiration of the federal assault weapons laws, expanded concealed carry rights, and the general cowing of many potentially rapid ban advocates. That NRA doesn't stand before congress and stamp their foot demanding uncompromised gun rights that you (and I)  may prefer is only an exercise in mature and well reasoned "strategy" of which you apparently are so disdainful. Rage and addled refusal to incrementally affect legislation may be considered noble by some, but again I will stand by the strategy that presently conserves my rights, and over time has and will continue to reaffirm our natural rights as recognized by the Constitution.
Far beyond simply existing as the GOP's " hunters auxilliary" (hardly a disparaging description), NRA remains the leading proponent and administrator of civilian and police marksmanship training programs and competitions.  The organization also performs significant outreach to millions of gun owners who unitl informed of the potential threats do not seriously consider firearms rights issues.
Again, you maty feel ennobled by clinging to your unyielding postions and loathing of NRA, but honestly do you believe that without their efforts your rights would not at this moment be much more aggreviously abridged?  Reflect on the attititudes of politicians and policy makers at the time of the 1968 Gun Control Act.  Any prognosticator from that era would have predicted the incremental erosion of gun rights, eventual draconian registration laws and an outright ban on sidearms.  I am pleased that with significant efforts of the NRA the control / ban advocates have been severely disappointed.

121 Hmmmm.

@ AnonymousDrivel

To me, this is all a charade. I believe in democracy. I do not believe in our current version.

Yeah it's pretty disturbing.  Frankly the whole NAU sounds so out there to me but I do see the similarities between the early stages of the EU and what's going on now.  Maybe our "elites" have decided that the "elites" of Mexico don't have it so bad with everyone else being peasants and having to use "jefe" all the time.  What I don't understand is how they think they can get that past all of the heavily armed Americans in this country.

Still.  It feels to me that there are other shoes to drop that we haven't seen yet.  And I still wonder if this nonsense is the last step or the first step in the current Kabuki.

122

For those of us who can't get to Washington soon enough, I like the idea of boycotting businesses if we can get a list. I also like the idea that we could send a message if we all took the same day to not show up for work. I know this is a hardship for a lot of us, but perhaps most of us could take a sick day or a vacation day. Maybe we can show businesses that American workers are more important to them than illegal imigrants, but this will only make an impact if we do it in very large numbers.

123 Alamo:

Listing your weapons of choice is an interesting device, surely demonstrating your bonafides.

It wasn't a demonstration of my bonafides. It was a demonstration that your "suspicion" that I'm not a gun-owner is something you pulled out of the filthy heat of your own ass.

While in theory I may in fact support your hard line, in practice I will choose effectiveness and competency every time.

If you want effectiveness and competence at selling out gun rights, then the NRA is indeed a great organization to be part of.

An earlier poster asked what organization you support to amplify your voice, and that is an excellent question.

JFPO, SAF, and GOA.

Rage and addled refusal to incrementally affect legislation may be considered noble by some, but again I will stand by the strategy that presently conserves my rights, and over time has and will continue to reaffirm our natural rights as recognized by the Constitution.

Translation: "I would prefer to legitimize lawmakers' efforts to abrogate our constitutional rights by begging and simpering and compromising and appeasing, all in the hope that they won't fuck me in the squeakhole too roughly." Yes indeedy, you're in fine company in as an NRA-ILA donor.

Again, you maty feel ennobled by clinging to your unyielding postions and loathing of NRA, but honestly do you believe that without their efforts your rights would not at this moment be much more aggreviously abridged?

I am 99.99% confident that if the NRA weren't run by a coterie of despicable sellouts that was enabled by people like you, then the organization would have achieved far more significant results than the rather marginal "gains" it can point to, currently. The "Imagine how fucked we'd be without them!" argument is the same tired horseshit we've heard for six years in defense of the Bush administration; what a parade of horrors we'd face at the hands of [gun-grabbers/Democrats/insert preferred boogeyman here]!

I'm long since done with that. I am not obligated to tolerate corruption, incompetence, and stupidity on my side of the aisle simply because the people on the other side of the aisle are even more corrupt, incompetent, and stupid.

124 Ace,
You have the answer!!!!!!!!!
Everyone in the party should become an independent for a year at least, and shock the shit out of them.  Can you imagine what would happen if there was a mass change of registration? 

125 ¥»¥Ã¥¯¥¹¥»¥Õ¥ì¥¢¥À¥ë¥È¥¨¥íSEXÉ÷¯¥ª¥Ê¥Ë¡¼½Ð²ñ¤¤¥¨¥í¥»¥Ã¥¯¥¹¥»¥Õ¥ì¥¨¥Ã¥Á½Ð²ñ¤¤½Ð²ñ¤¤¥»¥Ã¥¯¥¹ÁÇ¿Í¥¨¥Ã¥ÁµðÆý½Ï½÷½Ï½÷SEX½Ï½÷

126 discounthair straighteners
ghd hair
chi hair straightener
ghd straighteners
chi straighteners
chi hair
chi hair iron
hair straighteners ghd
ghd hair straighteners
free shipping!

127 discount Discount Boots
Womens UGG
UGG Shoes
UGG Australia
UGG UK
UGG USA
discount ugg boots
cheap ugg boots
air force 1 shoes
Nike air force
air force 1 mens
air force 1 boots
air force onefree shipping

128 buy air force 1 shoes
Nike air force
air force 1 mens
air force 1 boots
air force one
UGG Boots
UGG Australia
UGG Shoes
UGG Sale
Cheap UGG
mbt cheap
mbt sale
mbt uk
mbt shoes cheap
buy mbt shoes
shoes mbt saleform usa

129 buy discount ugg shoes
cheap ugg shoes
cheap ugg
ugg rainier
buy ugg
ugg usa
discount ugg boots
ugg 5825
ugg shoes sale
ugg sundance
ugg shoes
cheap ugg boots
ugg 5815
ugg sale
ugg uk
ugg knightsbridge
womens ugg boots
ugg boots
ugg australia
ugg 5819free shipping

130 soccer jersey supplier | Fake Watches | Fake Watches | Replica Watches | Replica Rolex | Replica Bell & Ross Watches | Gerald Genta Replica | Audemars Piguet Watches Replica | Replica Oris Watches | Fake Patek Philippe | Fake Philip Stein Watches | Replica Emporio Armani Watch | Ebel Watch Replica | Wholesale Zenith Watch | Breitling Replica Watch

131 Replica Cartier | Replica Cartier | Fake Watches | Fake Watches | Fake Watches | Panerai Watches | Fake Patek Philippe Watches | Concord Replica Watch | Rado Watches Replica | Replica Rolex Ladies Watch | Fake Girard Perregaux | Fake Daniel Roth | Fake Tag Heuer Watches | Fake Rolex Ladies Watches | Swiss Rolex Fake Watches

132 Replica Rolex | soccer jersey wholesale | Fake Watches | Replica Cartier | Replica watches | Fake Titoni Watch | Titoni Watch | Fendi Watches Replica | watches brand | Maurice Lacroix Fake Watches | Bmw Watch | Zenith Wristwatch | Fake Rado | Cheap Bell & Ross Watches | Blancpain Fake Watches