The only people who don’t like him are uber libs .

Buy Danish Rudycapo’s Madre Ciega on November 30, 2007 at 6:22 PM

That makes no sense as he is basically one of them.

Why would they dislike their own.

Big S on November 30, 2007 at 8:55 AM

Correct. See JP at 10:03 AM for more.

its easy to understand what he was forced to do, from a governing standpoint.
jp on November 30, 2007 at 10:03 AM

Exactly right.

MB4 on November 30, 2007 at 10:25 AM

And you live on another planet.
Seriously, that was pathetic. The Inquisition? That’s what you’re doing with Rudy.

Look, if you don’t like his immigration policies, fine, you’re entitled to your opinion, although much of it is superficial and does not reflect the sitation on the ground in NYC when he was Mayor.

However, your attempts to not credit him for a single thing he accomplished as mayor just sounds like so many droning left wing talking points. He was a fantastic mayor. Period.

The only people who don’t like him are uber libs who didn’t like what he did to reform welfare and replace it with workfare, his Broken Windows philosophy, his refusal to bow to the multi-culturalists, his crime initiatives, his union concessions, and so forth.

Why would Huck scare them more than Rudy? NYC was a sanctuary city.
jgapinoy on November 30, 2007 at 8:46 AM

For quite a few reasons. Huckabee remains in the open borders camp. Huckabee advocated more forcefully for illegals than Rudy did. Rudy just went along with the open borders position because it was useful as mayor of NYC–not out of any great intellectual commitment. And Rudy wouldn’t want to piss off his base by being pro-illegal after seeing what happened to Bush. I’m even opposed to most legal immigration, and Rudy does worry me there, but not about the illegals.

NYC was and is a sanctuary city.

jgapinoy on November 30, 2007 at 8:46 AM

Fixed that for you.

http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/judiciary/hju85287.000/hju85287_0f.htm

Local police can and should report immigrants to the immigration service in some situations. The decision to contact the immigration service, however, should be a matter of police discretion, not a federal requirement.

And the police are told to do what?

I’m cultish in my antipathy for all the candidates. Who is your guy? I’ll guess Tanc?

RW Wacko on November 30, 2007 at 10:43 AM

Jeff Sessions/Tommy Franks, but I will settle for Tom Tancredo/Lou Dobbs

Dumb, dumb, da-dumb, dumb, dumb.

Hening on November 30, 2007 at 10:44 AM

South Park reference?

It’s like a cult, and Rudycrapo is their Rosie O’Donnell.

MB4 on November 30, 2007 at 10:36 AM

I’m cultish in my antipathy for all the candidates. Who is your guy? I’ll guess Tanc?

It’s like a cult, and Rudycrapo is their Rosie O’Donnell.

Fair Tax?

No matter what it is, yeah it is silly to me, too.

RW Wacko on November 30, 2007 at 10:25 AM

Correct!

Trying to have a rational discussion with the Rudybots is like arguing with a Truther about what brought down the WTC. There is nothing you can say which has the slightest impact.

fixed

You can take the position that Romney’s numbers will be damaged shortly after the Dem’s big “funny accent” expose. How’s that?

Zetterson on November 30, 2007 at 10:24 AM

I didn’t think it was a big deal, either. Ay ay ay ay ay ay arriba arriba!

Seriously, though, it didn’t strike me at the time, but “funny accent” might offend a very small part of the population, yes. They would be unlikely to vote for Mitt anyway, and those people aren’t concentrated in areas that would really hurt Mitt. Florida, perhaps, but don’t see advertising dollars being spent to target Mitt on this; wouldn’t be a very good bang for the buck, unless it was VERY targeted, like in Miami or something.

I don’t think this one, manufactured “incident” is going to sway many people. However, if I start needing both hands to count the number of quotes or incidents that political opponents can use to create a “narrative” that Romney is racist. I understand that the plural of “anecdote” is not “evidence,” but it sure seems to function that way some times. I guess we’ll see.

Big S on November 30, 2007 at 10:20 AM

Fair Tax?

No matter what it is, yeah it is silly to me, too.

NYC was a sanctuary city.
The Earth revolves around the sun.

jgapinoy Galileo on November 30, 2007 at 8:46 AM

False.

Buy Danish The Inquisition on November 30, 2007 1638 at 8:51 AM

“When ______ becomes law, it will be like waving a magic wand releasing us from pain and unfairness.”

-From Huck’s website.

I’ll leave you to guess what goes in the blank, but this kind of talk sounds silly to me, and makes me think less of Huckabee.

Groups that support a crackdown on illegal aliens haven’t settled on their champion in the race for the White House, but there’s little doubt which Republican scares them most — former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee.

I don’t know why he would scare them.
He sounds wonderful on illegal aliens on his great web site.

Huckabee on illegal “immigration” from his web site

Maybe they don’t believe him.
I wonder why that would be.

Why would Huck scare them more than Rudy? NYC was a sanctuary city.

jgapinoy on November 30, 2007 at 8:46 AM

I saw Rudy on CSPAN few nights ago asked about this, he was able to give a long explanation and its very reasonable.

basically, NYC had around 500k illegals while he was mayor. The federal govt. was only deporting 2k a year, which left him with tons of illegals. So he was confronted with what to do with what he was stuck with….deny School to them and put well over 100k plus kids in the streets to create mischeif(Crime) or let them go to school. Deny the illegals access to hospitals or let them get treated so they aren’t out in the street spreading communicable disease….etc.

its easy to understand what he was forced to do, from a governing standpoint.

I disagree. Republicans have had issues with their image with respect to race issues since the 1960′s when they sided with segregationists on states’ rights grounds. Even current republicans who weren’t old enough to be involved in those debates, or who were on the right side of the Civil Rights issues, still suffer from the old “Southern Strategy.” Like the questioner in the YouTube debate said, there’s a lot of agreement on issues between many African Americans and modern mainstream Republicans, but we can’t get more than 10% of them to vote for us, since there’s a (somewhat correct) popular perception that the Republican party has embraced racists. There are real problems, and off-handed comments like Romney’s, no matter how well meaning they are, just compound them.

Big S, those statements together start to hint at a kind of foot-in-mouth disease that we can’t afford.

No, they aren’t horrible things to say, but they aren’t very smart either. And they’re nicely twistable!

MamaAJ on November 30, 2007 at 9:28 AM

No worries MamaAJ. The Dems can try to make an issue out of something truly innocent and well meaning like that if they want to fire up their base but as far as the election is concerned it will backfire on them. Political strategy 101. The independents who decide the election are far more reasonable then the Dem base. They will hear Romney’s words for what they were and they will see an attempt to distort them into something they are not for what it is. An independent, politically unafiliated VOTER will here those words and their simple response will be, “whats wrong with that? He was just saying that its wrong to discriminate based on race and accent alone.”

The Dem base will go nuts though. The only reason the Dems will attempt to make an issue out of that would be to fire up their base. In case you havn’t noticed, their base consists of a bunch of lunatics. Their really is no need to lose too much sleep over what they think.

I imagine that any large firm has at some point had an employee whose status was not legal at some point or another. I work in a very international industry in NYC (science stuff), and there are people from China, India, and parts of Eastern Europe who very often have issues relating to lapsed work visas. For the period of time that they don’t have a valid permit to work here, they are “illegal” or “undocumented” immigrants, even though they may have come over here legally. Talking about immigration as if it’s just a problem with swarthy, funny-accented people coming across the Southern border ignores the larger problem, and makes the person who brings it up look a little bit racist. I defended Mitt’s comment in the debate, and I have no knowledge of his firm’s specific practices. My point is that people slip through the cracks in many ways, and that he seems to have mentally backed himself into a corner on immigration that may cause trouble for him in the general election. That’s all.