Fred rolls out immigration plan: Enforcement by attrition
posted at 2:15 pm on October 23, 2007 by Allahpundit
A new CBS poll shows 53% of Democrats are satisfied that their candidates are addressing the relevant issues — compared to 14% of Republicans. This will help change that. There’s nothing not to like here, especially the centerpiece “enforcement by attrition” strategy that’s so often touted by strong borders advocates from Mark Krikorian to the boss herself. Shrewdly, there’s also a heavy emphasis on enforcing the law as it presently stands rather than passing a bunch of new mechanisms, which are simply not in the offing given the deep blue Congress Fred would almost certainly be saddled with. (A notable exception to that pragmatic approach: he wants to build and then expand the fence. It ain’t happening.) I could have done with more details about prosecuting criminal illegal aliens, too. As it is, all we get is “Deploy the additional assets outlined above to prosecute alien smugglers (‘coyotes’), alien gang members, previously deported felons, and aliens who have repeatedly violated our immigration laws much more vigorously.” Whether Congress would be willing to pour money into that is uncertain but it’s enough of a hot potato that simply having the White House place it on the agenda would probably compel them to address it.
Share your take below. My skepticism’s reserved mainly for the second half, particularly the part about limiting family unification for legal immigrants. Retaining or even expanding that policy is a core ambition for the left (including Hillary) and one on which they won’t give ground easily. On the other hand, the rest of the plan seems to liberalize the requirements for legal immigration somewhat so maybe that would be a palatable trade-off for them. High fence/wide gate, just as many conservatives have so often asked for. Tancredo notably excepted.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
I think Fred! just won the popular Red vote…
_Jon on October 23, 2007 at 2:18 PM
wow this is something conseratives here will like alot.
After following your guys discourse on immigration here, something i dont comment on not being american and all, i think Fred has hit all your buttons. Looks like you may have a candidate to your liking finally.
Still does he beat HillObama?
zane on October 23, 2007 at 2:19 PM
Hopefully this will inspire other candidates to address the issue from a bully pulpit.
Jaibones on October 23, 2007 at 2:19 PM
Awaiting the words “scumbag lobbyist” from you-know-who…
MadisonConservative on October 23, 2007 at 2:21 PM
Well congratulations Fred. “As the executive, I will do the job of the executive.” Most of the illegal immigrations issues can be resolved by enforcing laws on the book, including the wall. How about a promise to veto any bills that counter those enforcement laws?
He should change ‘surer’ to ‘more sure’. He’s running for President after all.
Spirit of 1776 on October 23, 2007 at 2:22 PM
FDT the next POTUS! Yeah baby!
(Allah- if the Chinese could build the Great Wall to keep out the barbarians back in the day- WE SURE CAN BUILD THAT FENCE!)
Ex-tex on October 23, 2007 at 2:24 PM
I have to admit it looks good, but so did Proposition 187. Give Fred a Republican Senate and House and there might be a very remote chance of its implementation, but I wouldn’t bet on it. Give Fred a Democratic Congress (which is infinitely more likely), then “Sleepy” doesn’t have a chance. You would be better off dealing with someone who has experience battling hostile legislatures…
I also note he make a big stink about cutting off funds to “sanctuary cities” in an effort to slam Rudy and Mitt. But that is unfair. You cannot criticize a local government for not reporting illegals to the feds when the feds were not deporting any of them. Once POTUS Fred starts to round up and deport the 12 to 20 million illegals, then the feds can start to fault the local governments for not cooperating.
tommylotto on October 23, 2007 at 2:26 PM
tick,tick…it’s only a matter of time
sunny on October 23, 2007 at 2:26 PM
We’re on about the same schedule as well. Didn’t it take about 1100 years to complete that thing.
sunny on October 23, 2007 at 2:29 PM
In this day and age where the Speaker of the House conducts diplomacy, judges issue law by fiat, and executives base decisions on how best to politicize and issue rather than what is necessary (see Gov. Blanco), saying “As the executive, I will do the job of the executive” is sadly a considerable step up.
Wineaholic on October 23, 2007 at 2:31 PM
You can’t slam local governments??? HUH???
Rudi had more uniformed Police officers in NYC than we had Border Patrol for the whole stinkin US!
Its one thing to point a finger at the Feds lack of enforcement, but Rudi aided and abeted… he ACTIVLY told his Police NOT to check into immigration status…
Hard to spin that into a positive no matter how hard you try…
Romeo13 on October 23, 2007 at 2:33 PM
The first concrete plan I have read.
La Raza will be p!ssed about this.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on October 23, 2007 at 2:34 PM
I know you would prefer csdeven, but here goes anyway…
Even a scumbag lobbyist, terrorist enabler, campaign contribution funneller like
Fred“what’s a dollar” can hire a bunch of flunkies to read the comment sections on Conservative blogs and put together a read meat immigration program that will be lapped up by his gulible groupies. But actions speak louder than words. He was soft on immigration in the Senate and he has an open boarders wanker as a co national campaign manager. Also, getting this plan through a hostile Congress would require energy and effort … So, its all a waste of time, just likeFred“what’s a dollar”.tommylotto on October 23, 2007 at 2:35 PM
They didn’t have a Congress trying to stop them. The emperor said it happened, it happened.
amerpundit on October 23, 2007 at 2:36 PM
Now let me see – who on earth could that be? Oh, never mind.
There is nothing new about Fred! saying ‘enforce the law’. I believe that is what a lot of posters on HotAir have been saying all along. I guess it will have more punch when President Thompson says it from the oval office though.
OBX Pete on October 23, 2007 at 2:39 PM
The NYPD has its hands full providing police services to 8 million New Yorkers. Border security is a federal issue. New York state currently only receives 79 cents for every dollar it sends to DC, now the Feds want to poach the NYPD too?
dedalus on October 23, 2007 at 2:41 PM
This makes a lot of sense. Sounds pricey, but I would rather have Federal money paying for this program any day before spending money on national health care.
I like his federalist approach. He is not dictating to the states and banning their practice of sanctuary cities. He would only deny them Federal funds, and let them deal with the consequences of their actions. The anti-nanny state!
Mallard T. Drake on October 23, 2007 at 2:42 PM
Well he just got my vote for the primary. Not even the “golden boy” Huckabee has a coherent policy on immigration and his track record is spotty at best.
bj1126 on October 23, 2007 at 2:44 PM
Only after Clinton legislating Judges, the ninth circuit court of appeals, the ACLU, MALDEF, LULAC, La Raza, every other law defeating civil rights circus court tool organization have been sent packing.
After lobbying by business interests is limited.
After the Executive office of immigration is expanded ten fold and the policy is changed to every immigrant can apply from home.
And after our fourteenth amendment is reviewed by SCOTUS and finally settled.
AFTER these actions are accomplished THEN the laws can be enforced and new laws will make a difference.
Until then every entity in this country except the citizens will have more effect on illegal immigration than we will.
If Fred wants votes he can go after the real villains and enemies of America.
If Fred has the stones to go after the bogus civil rights ACLU he’ll win with 2/3rds of the vote.
Everybody has a problem with the ACLU, with good reason.
Speakup on October 23, 2007 at 2:44 PM
Fred knows its a winner, and he’s going for it.
Bad Candy on October 23, 2007 at 2:46 PM
You are just wrong and uninformed, or rather obtuse, because I have educated you in the past. Rudy (with a y, numbnut) changed the NYC policy of not reporting illegals involved or suspected of criminal behavior. In Rudy’s NYC all illegals involved in crimes were reported to the feds. Hardly any of them were deported. Rudy reported more illegals to the feds every year than were ever deported by the feds.
Rudy cannot deport anyone as mayor. He has NY’s finest, but they are not the SS. What do you think he would have done with the 400,000 illegals after he had the cops round them all up — shoot them? There was nothing he could do without federal support and he was getting very little of that. KEY FACT: RUDY REPORTED MORE ILLEGALS THAN WERE DEPORTED BY THE FEDS. When the fed starts doing its job, then and only then does it have the moral authority to request cooperation from the local authorities that are being burdened by the federal government’s failure to do its job.
tommylotto on October 23, 2007 at 2:46 PM
You really don’t initially have to ask your Police to do that much more. When they stop someone for breaking the law, check out who they are, seems reasonable, if they can’t prove they are legally in the country you hold them until ICE arrives to send them away. It’s working in Irving, TX and it can work anywhere.
b4itsover on October 23, 2007 at 2:50 PM
Rudy touts this a lot but it does ignore the fact that illegals ARE criminals by virtue of being here and he ignored it. The “good non criminal illegals” he welcomed and even gave a public speech telling them as much.
bj1126 on October 23, 2007 at 2:52 PM
Don’t forget about all of the fed money that will be saved when we cut funding to the major Kalifornia cities (LA, SF) because of their sanctuary policies, and to the UC-chain of universities because of their pandering to illegals.
And most of the funding for the north-east / north-west.
Maybe we should consider cutting all funding to states who pander to
liberalsillegals.Timothy S. Carlson on October 23, 2007 at 2:52 PM
Just piss off already…….
doriangrey on October 23, 2007 at 2:52 PM
Fred, the scum sucking terrorist enabling abortion lobbyist is pandering to his brain dead supporters. He must be using some of the $8 million he has earmarked for his family and needs his gullible groupies to pony up some more bucks.
This is no different that what Mitt, Tanc, and others have already proposed. This is nothing new nor is it unique. “What’s a dollar?” has his wife writing this stuff and she is an idealistic 40 year old who isn’t aware that she doesn’t have the context of life experiences to give the message the fullness it needs to convince we thinking conservatives.
csdeven on October 23, 2007 at 2:53 PM
ALL of them? Really? Cite please.
Hollowpoint on October 23, 2007 at 2:58 PM
What’s your point dude?
Dread Pirate Roberts VI on October 23, 2007 at 2:59 PM
Listen y’all Fred as President cannot appropriate his own funds to enforce immigration law but he can certainly change the de facto policies, AND build the fence. The law has been passed and the money appropriated. Democrats canot stop him from building the fence. For Democrats to stop him they have to actively pass laws to stop him laws he will certainly veto. The Democrats do not have a veto proof majority and they won’t have it in 2009 either. He could mao mao Democrats into the gutter for not enforcing current laws. Ask yourself how do the Democrats sell it? We simply can’t build it even though we passed the law and we have appropriated the money. Bush will not build it but Fred will.
This is what I have been waiting for… Go Fred go!
Theworldisnotenough on October 23, 2007 at 3:00 PM
he-he. Good to see you in top shape. Notice how the decorum is lowered by the anti-Fred members? We have unprovoked ad hominem attacks already, i.e., “numbnuts” and “brain-dead” for starters. Kind of like BDS when the Left was so pissed that Bush was re-elected. Now it’s FDS.
jihadwatcher on October 23, 2007 at 3:01 PM
Good for you Fred! Love it.
Now, if elected, any of these Repulican candidates standing up for a tough illegal immigration policy back down once the time comes to actually do something about it, I am done with the party. I want results and will settle for nothing less then results. I’m sick of hollow promises. Bring me the results.
Zetterson on October 23, 2007 at 3:02 PM
Yeah I suppose I could support Thompson. At least he doesn’t seem to have had any opposing views toward illegal aliens in his past. It really makes too much sense to just build a fence and enforce the laws as they stand.
Hey Mexico could really show us how bad we are for building a fence by making their society better than ours thereby making us want to break into their country. They should want a fence to ‘prove’ how great, industrialized, and hard working their people are.
I guess I should support Fred – by default more than anything. I bet he’ll win TN.
ThackerAgency on October 23, 2007 at 3:03 PM
Oh come now! That charge can be leveled at any of the candidates. The, “he’s only saying that because he’s trying to win the base,” applies to Rudy, who is promising, oh boy is he promising, that he will, definitely will, don’t doubt me I will, nominate the kind of judges that us red meat red Americans would approve of. This plan by Fred is a good one. Even if you think that it would be impossible to implement, does that mean the candidates shouldn’t propose it? Still not convinced on Fred, but this is good.
Weight of Glory on October 23, 2007 at 3:04 PM
csdeven, you have really taken this to an art form. It’s kinda like we have our own Dennis Miller. You forgot to add CFR supportin’, lazy golf-cart ridin’, actor.
Weight of Glory on October 23, 2007 at 3:07 PM
I love the fact that Fred just pulled this issue to the right. He and Mitt are the only two major candidates to make such proposals to do what needs to be done in order to solve our illegal immigration problem. This will force the other candidates to either become exposed as amnesty apologists or move right on the issue as well.
This move could be a dagger in the bleeding heart of McCain’s bleeding campaign.
Zetterson on October 23, 2007 at 3:11 PM
Okay, I’m not going to concede that Jeri is writing Fred!s policies, BUT… if she was, what doesn’t give her the experience? Just because she’s ‘only 40′? Because she’s a woman?
I’m certain that she has input into Fred!s campaign, but I don’t think she is single-handedly hammering out policy for him.
Oh, and that ‘we’, as in ‘we thinking conservatives’ – is that the royal ‘we’, or the familiar ‘we’? Sounds rather exclusionary to me, like you are accusing the majority of conservatives in this country of being unthinking dolts – and I find that comment offensive.
Go back to the kid’s table in the corner and stop annoying the adults.
Not really – Miller’s comments are well thought out, and he is more articulate and has a better vocabulary. Not to mention a sense of humour.
Timothy S. Carlson on October 23, 2007 at 3:13 PM
Is it possible that Fred Derangement Syndrom is triggered by a traumatic event?
His reputation as a ladie’s man may have impacted a couple people posting in the comments.
So what was it? Mother, sister, daughter, wife, or girlfriend?
natesnake on October 23, 2007 at 3:16 PM
ouch!
Weight of Glory on October 23, 2007 at 3:17 PM
uncle?
sunny on October 23, 2007 at 3:20 PM
I’m not saying I support McCain over Thompson though I could support either with the R nom. . . but McCain has ‘asked for forgiveness’. He has said he ‘got the message’ and understands that people don’t trust the government to enforce the border. Both he and Graham are working toward reconciliation on that issue through a secure the borders first campaign.
I’m not saying it’ll be enough, but at least he now understands how important it is and won’t likely make the same mistake again.
ThackerAgency on October 23, 2007 at 3:20 PM
uncle?
Say it aint so Fred! Say it aint so!
natesnake on October 23, 2007 at 3:24 PM
Every time Fred! is mentioned a csdeven loses it’s wings.
- The Cat
MirCat on October 23, 2007 at 3:25 PM
Yup I heard that. I don’t believe it for a second. It is impossible for me to ever trust them on that issue ever again no matter what they say about it now.
Zetterson on October 23, 2007 at 3:30 PM
*sniff*
Hide your csdevens!
RushBaby on October 23, 2007 at 3:30 PM
Get bent. I’m neither a flunkie nor a groupie, and I resent the implication. Since he started his run, I’ve personally been underwhelmed with Fred, and this was one of those moments that finally seems to be making a certain old-school conservative light glow. Excuse me for being enthusiastic about someone against gun control, in favor of enforcing immigration laws, and not afraid to call a terrorist a terrorist without bringing up that he was the mayor of the city of 9/11 thirty-eight times in one breath. I’m still pondering either voting third party or not at all if the GOP lethargy returns after the primaries, largely thanks to chumps like you who help alienate fellow conservatives by demanding victory at any cost, including integrity.
With that said, I can direct this bit of vitriol at both you and your doppelganger. I notice you both use the same language at points. Not unlike the Democratic Party (or Keith Olbermann) and Bin Laden. I would wish that someone like Giuliani would be elected, you’d get a taste of Socialist Republicanism and figure out where you went wrong, but I’m not willing to risk the rest of the country because of seething GOP thirst for maintaining office.
You’ve got “scumbag lobbyist”, and I’ve got one for you: Comment Troll.
MadisonConservative on October 23, 2007 at 3:31 PM
Your stock is rising, Fred.
BDavis on October 23, 2007 at 3:32 PM
lol
sunny on October 23, 2007 at 3:42 PM
After what they tried to do (and in the case how Graham acted) there is no way in HELL I will ever believe this conversion.
Darksean on October 23, 2007 at 3:47 PM
First it was “he’s made no specific policy statements, only vague platitudes.” Then he makes one, and suddenly it’s “his wife is only 40 and has no life experience!” Better hang onto those goalposts tight; otherwise, they’ll be clean out of sight before you know it.
Mike H on October 23, 2007 at 3:48 PM
Wonder if he has committed to voting NO on cloture tomorrow on the DREAM ACT?
JiangxiDad on October 23, 2007 at 3:58 PM
Here you go:
tommylotto on October 23, 2007 at 4:00 PM
Rudolf “Sanctuary City Mayor” GiulianiaJohn “Lazy Americans won’t pick lettuce for $50 an hour” McCainMike “Love illegals and Tyson Foods are you are not a good Christian” HuckabeeFred “If the employers don’t swing it’s got no ring” Thompson.
MB4 on October 23, 2007 at 4:02 PM
HAHA!!
csdeven hates this from Fred because he knows how well it plays, and he knows Rudy cannot go where Fred boldy treads, on immigration.
And the people that defend Rudy on immigartion is ridiculous. Rudy actually has the balls to say he was “tough” on immigration. The stat he uses? He got 4,000 illegal immigrants deported. That’s 4,000 out of 400,000. And the Rudy apologists expect a sane person to believe that is the most he could have possibly done. And INS was refusing him left and right. Okay. I’ll simply ignore the rest of Rudy’s illegal coddling rhetoric and accept his ICE scapgoating at face value.
Freakin’ Rudy zombies…
Theworldisnotenough on October 23, 2007 at 4:03 PM
That was directed at me. I’m gaining on you csdeven…
Bwuhahahaha
tommylotto on October 23, 2007 at 4:06 PM
So you believe your lying eyes over Rudy then.
So do I.
MB4 on October 23, 2007 at 4:09 PM
I think the longer he stays in the less of an issue this will be for him (as a negative); I never thought he would politically have life after the amnesty bill, but now I think he still is a viable candidate with some gas left in his tank.
Spirit of 1776 on October 23, 2007 at 4:14 PM
That has to be the best right-cross of the week so far. Well written.
El Cazador on October 23, 2007 at 4:14 PM
Y solo alguien que cayo justo frente a la sandia camion, en la cabeza, iba a creer.
MB4 on October 23, 2007 at 4:22 PM
Just sent another $100 to the FRED.
I’m liking what I’m hearing.
stenwin77 on October 23, 2007 at 4:25 PM
I’m sure your $100 will go to line the pockets of Fred’s son, or pay the salary of Jihad Spence.
But I’m glad your likin’ what your hearin’
tommylotto on October 23, 2007 at 4:35 PM
And I’m sure your donation to any other candidate will be used 100% responsibly to save puppies and never go near a fund for anything but bumper stickers.
MadisonConservative on October 23, 2007 at 4:40 PM
LOL, by a cite I didn’t mean a campaign interview by Rudy. I meant actual evidence.
Hollowpoint on October 23, 2007 at 4:45 PM
I have no idea where my contributions will go, but I do know for a fact what Freddie boy does with his left over campaign cash. CLICK HERE FRED GROUPIES
tommylotto on October 23, 2007 at 4:45 PM
The only major point that I see that he didn’t cover was the problem of “anchor babies”. My guess is because that involves constitutional questions that will have to be defined in some manner.
maxine on October 23, 2007 at 4:53 PM
Allah, not to be a stickler, but isn’t it ATTRITION by ENFORCEMENT? Or am I missing some joke here?
NTWR on October 23, 2007 at 4:57 PM
Hillary has nothing in her resume that even resembles the qualifications needed to be president. In a sane world she would have no chance against Fred but here we have the northeast and the west coast allowed to vote. If it comes down to that I think Fred wins (but not by much).
duff65 on October 23, 2007 at 4:59 PM
Are you calling Rudy a liar? Can you please cite to some evidence to prove he is lying? While you are at it, prove
that the sky is not blue
that Fred did not work on the defense team of Lybian terrorists
that Fred did not Lobby for an abortion group
that Fred did not vote for a procedural move that helped allow the Mack Amendment to be included in S.1156 (the District of Columbia Appropriations bill). This amendment granted amnesty to illegal aliens from Nicaragua and Cuba and is expected to add close to one million people to U.S. population.
that Fred did not repeatedly vote to permit unnecessary visas to help foreign workers take American’s jobs.
that Fred did not vote in favor of the Abraham Amendment to strip the voluntary workplace verification program from S. 1644. Workplace verification programs help reduce illegal immigration by withdrawing the job magnet from illegal aliens.
that Fred did not vote for the Abraham amendment to S.1664 that stripped all legal reforms from the bill. The legal reforms would have eliminated lottery visas. S.1664 would have reduced overall legal immigration by about 2.1 million over a ten-year period.
While Rudy was struggling in NYC with the mess the feds were making on this issue, Fred was actually in a position to do something about it. But instead, he was too busy paying back favors to his lobbyist friends and helping out his buddy Spencer Abraham give our nation away to foriegn nationals.
Fred’s recent conversion on immigration ranks right up there with Mitt’s research on stem cells.
tommylotto on October 23, 2007 at 5:07 PM
How about making the terrible DREAM Act the top story until the vote is taken tomorrow??
toll free calls to your Senator at the Congressional switchboard:
800-862-5530
877-851-6437
866-220-0044
866-340-9281
and send free FAXes via good ‘ol
http://www.numbersusa.com
and go to your Senators’ web sites, as in:
http://reid.senate.gov/
and send them an email.
DROWN these idiots with complaints!
fred5678 on October 23, 2007 at 5:11 PM
I would not use that argument if I were you. Fred is the only candidate with less experience than Hillary. Come 2008, they will both have logged about the same amount of time in the Senate. At least Hillary was able to watch her husband exercise some executive power. Fred has never had anything even resembling executive experience.
tommylotto on October 23, 2007 at 5:14 PM
Gladly:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Fred_Thompson#Thompson_linked_to_advice_for_Libyan_terrorists
He provided John Culver with advice about the case. He did not work on the defense team. Nice spin, though.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Fred_Thompson#Family_planning_lobbyist
Technically, yes he did. He lobbied for the withdrawal of a rule preventing federally-funded clinics from suggesting abortion as an alternative. Amazing what happens when you get past sound bites to find out what really happened, isn’t it?
I’d go on, but I’m not the foaming person with derangement syndrome here. I’m not even sure I’d vote for Fred. I won’t be sure until a week before elections. I won’t stand for rhetoric based on sound bites, though.
MadisonConservative on October 23, 2007 at 5:15 PM
There. Fixed the only problem in Fred’s plan.
Now I’m going to email Rudy’s and Mitt’s campaigns to see if they support the (modified) plan.
fred5678 on October 23, 2007 at 5:22 PM
This is RED HOT item for me. Allowing illegal immigration causes law breakers to enter the US. Allowing for legal immigration causes grateful and ambitions immigrations to enter the US. It’s that simple.
Captain America on October 23, 2007 at 5:23 PM
And then there’s the whole thing where he let John Glenn out-maneuver him on an inquiry into Bill Clinton giving the Chinese military our MIRV technology…
NTWR on October 23, 2007 at 5:27 PM
Bwahahahahaha!!! Are you sure?
This is a very strange phenomenon that occurs with the Fred groupies. Someone says that Fred has brain dead (etc) supporters and the like, and all of a sudden, we have people coming out of the woodwork insisting that they are NOT said brain dead supporters.
Really? Who said you were? All you had to do to convince us that you are not a supporter of the brain dead variety is to simply keep your mouth shut. Yet here you are trying to convince someone you are not. Perhaps you are just trying to convince yourself?
As me ol’ gran pappy use ta say, when ya throw a rock at a pack of dogs, the you that yelps is the one ye hit.
csdeven on October 23, 2007 at 5:34 PM
Oh that’s it dude! It’s ON!!!!
Bwahahahaha!!! These clowns are sooooo easy.
csdeven on October 23, 2007 at 5:38 PM
Those are awful big shoes to fill, but I’m up to the task! I understand how much more extensive my grasp of the issues is than theirs. All they can do to respond is throw personal attacks at me. Truly the act of the desperate person who has reached the limit of their comprehension and skill.
csdeven on October 23, 2007 at 5:44 PM
Si mi gusta, mucho
TheSitRep on October 23, 2007 at 5:49 PM
er, Gucci loafers
tommylotto on October 23, 2007 at 5:58 PM
Here’s the mistake you make. When Fred gave legal advice to terrorists in order to help them avoid justice for 11 years. He did it for money. When Rudy enacted the policies he did concerning illegals, he had a grand strategy in mind that was meant to benefit the greatest amount of the people of NYC that he could.
Lets give credit where credit is due……
Rudy succeeded in lowering crime in NYC. No small feat and something to be proud of.
“What’s a dollar?” succeeded also. He helped terrorists avoid justice for 11 years.
The difference between the character of the two candidates is that Rudy’s efforts benefited many people. Fred’s efforts benefited him and a couple terrorists and insulted the families of those they killed.
The Fred groupies want to hide Fred’s successes and spin Rudy’s. We thinking conservatives want the truth to come out for the good of the process of vetting the field.
If you Fred groupies think that “What’s a dollar?” can flip flop from being a selfish scumbag that aligned himself with the worst dredges of our society, into a conservative just by parroting the plans that other candidates (that have ZERO involvement with those scum) have already put forth, and it be lapped up by we thinking conservatives, well, you’ve got another think coming. We are too educated and principled to fall for Fred’s lies.
And as long as you try to promote that scumbag, we thinking conservatives will be here to counter your misguided claims.
csdeven on October 23, 2007 at 5:59 PM
Sound bites???
I made a very long list of very specific allegations and requested proof that
You provided two links that proved: 1) Fred worked for the defense team of Lybian terrorists and 2) lobbied for an abortion group. Then you dismissed as empty rhetoric the long and specific examples of Fred’s prior actions demonstrating that his recent conversion on immigration reform is not sincere and simple pandering.
Fred “what you see is what you get” my butt.
“Ignore that open boarders proponent behind the curtain.” Boomed the voice of the wizard in a soothing southern drawl.
tommylotto on October 23, 2007 at 6:08 PM
Well, there were 281 people killed when Fred’s buddies blew Flight 103 out of the sky.
There were also many family members who had loved ones suffer from asbestos poisoning because Fred’s client was more interested in profits than people.
And there are many people who have reason to hate abortion groups because of the havoc they have wreaked on their families.
There are also people out there whose family members were given burning necklaces by another one of Fred’s buddies.
And there are surly people who donated to “What’s a dollar?”s previous campaign because they trusted him, just to watch him funnel that money to his son.
So, I’d be careful not to be critical of anyone who had a seemingly irrational disgust for the man. You might just be criticizing someone who has absolute moral authority.
csdeven on October 23, 2007 at 6:10 PM
Why is Fred referred to by detractors as “What’s a dollar?” I don’t get what this is in reference to.
aengus on October 23, 2007 at 6:41 PM
Hear, hear!
Harpazo on October 23, 2007 at 6:44 PM
I just found out about Fred’s reform plan so I’ll reserve judgment for the time being, but it looks like I’ve finally found a top-tier candidate I can support.
FloatingRock on October 23, 2007 at 6:45 PM
Oh, come off it… we both now that his $100 will go straight to pay you and csdeven to troll these threads incessantly until you both manage drive everyone else away from Rudy McRomney with your childish Fred Derangement Syndrome.
Watcher on October 23, 2007 at 6:53 PM
Maybe Edwards was right and there are 2 Americas because in the one I’m living in evicerating the health care system is not the biggest priority we should have.
Resolute on October 23, 2007 at 7:03 PM
Anyone childish enough to reject a candidate because of the actions of others deserves neither respect nor credibility. We thinking conservatives reject Ron Paul because of what he says, not because his supporters don’t like our guy.
You need to do more watching and less talking because you sound like a misguided shill for “What’s a dollar?” when you open your mouth.
csdeven on October 23, 2007 at 7:05 PM
I said that long ago.
I have long since given up trying to talk to FDSdevin. Unreasoning hatred is too rabid a beast to tame.
Random Numbers (Brian Epps) on October 23, 2007 at 7:47 PM
Fraud! Thompson, telling people what they want to hear so he doesn’t have to go off his record even since he became a lobbyist.
If Fraud! is so concerned about open borders, why does he hire open borders advocates to manage his campaign?
BKennedy on October 23, 2007 at 8:15 PM
Because he doesn’t want to fizzle like Tom “One-Note” Tancredo?
Random Numbers (Brian Epps) on October 23, 2007 at 9:47 PM
Nice try. You were wrong then and you’re still wrong. Your irrational refusal to deal with “What’s a dollar?” and instead attack me is a clear example that you are suffering from csdeven derangement syndrome. Relax sissy-mary. I am no threat to you. I am simply exposing Fred for the lying fake that he is.
Try to deal with it in a healthy way. Say, like accepting the fact that Fred has the least conservative record of behavior than any candidate on the rep side.
csdeven on October 23, 2007 at 10:59 PM
Will Fred actually spend the $4 billion on border security that congress approved, and that Dubya has yet to spend a single dime of?
paulsur on October 23, 2007 at 11:19 PM
At least he f*cking works, you apparently have mucho time to spend commenting on every Fred! thread.
Maybe if you were a better lawyer (and had a decent vocablulary and some argueing skills), you’d have a few clients as well.
omnipotent on October 23, 2007 at 11:44 PM
You’re brutal, Dude.
jaime on October 23, 2007 at 11:56 PM
OK kids, I have thought of a name for BKennedy, CSdeven, and TommyLotto. FRED-A-PHOBICS!
Gatordoug on October 23, 2007 at 11:57 PM
Fred-O-Phobes ! FOPs.
jaime on October 24, 2007 at 12:03 AM
Sounds like some corn-fed, front porch wisdom. Sort of like what Fred! puts forth. I think you are beginning to be assimilated!
Mallard T. Drake on October 24, 2007 at 12:12 AM
Once again I cite a long list of votes by Fred in the Senate inconsistent with his current tough stance on immigration and more consistent with his buddy buddy relationship with his open boarders crony campaign manager Abraham. Your response is to ignore these facts and insult my business skills. If you were in my spacious high rise Century City office where I run my own firm I would explain to you how class action litigation works and how if I only settle one case every other year, I’ll make more money than you do in ten. But that would be off topic. I’d much rather discuss Fred’s plans to sell out America to the highest corporate bidders, open the boarders to foreign nationals, and collaborate with terrorists. You’d rather discuss my business when you know nothing about it. Considering Fred’s ominous past and lack of credentials, I understand why.
tommylotto on October 24, 2007 at 12:13 AM
tommy, I hate to admit it, but I don’t think I have ever had a psychotic groupie go off on me to that extent before.
Imagine…….you have effective exposed Fred as the most dangerous candidate to the conservative cause, and instead of defending the guy you exposed or wising up and opposing this liar with the rest of us, these fools take it PERSONALLY and attack YOU. I guess get bad news and attack the messenger is another personality disorder of the Fred groupie.
I tip my hat to you sir, although I do not relinquish my crown. Sustained results are the true test of the superior exposer of “What’s a dollar?” for the lying sack of $hit that he is.
csdeven on October 24, 2007 at 12:14 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »