• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

GOP group rejects Minuteman candidate

donsutherland1

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2007
Messages
11,862
Reaction score
10,300
Location
New York
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
From Politico.com:

The first California Republican to announce his interest in running for governor is already running into serious intra-party resistance over his anti-illegal immigration stances.
The influential Lincoln Club of Orange County has released a statement opposing GOP Assemblyman Tim Donnelly, a former leader in the anti-illegal immigration group known as the Minutemen, who announced last week he would form an exploratory committee to run in 2014.

GOP group rejects Minuteman candidate - POLITICO.com

IMO, this is a welcome development. It is an early attempt to put aside angry, divisive, and unrealistic approaches that can only narrow the base of the GOP and undermine American conservatism. Instead, candidates should offer serious and constructive policy approaches.
 
From Politico.com:



GOP group rejects Minuteman candidate - POLITICO.com

IMO, this is a welcome development. It is an early attempt to put aside angry, divisive, and unrealistic approaches that can only narrow the base of the GOP and undermine American conservatism. Instead, candidates should offer serious and constructive policy approaches.

So they want to keep a true conservative off the ballot?

http://rlv.zcache.com/california_la...mper_sticker-p128879277810671609en7pq_210.jpg
 
From Politico.com:



GOP group rejects Minuteman candidate - POLITICO.com

IMO, this is a welcome development. It is an early attempt to put aside angry, divisive, and unrealistic approaches that can only narrow the base of the GOP and undermine American conservatism. Instead, candidates should offer serious and constructive policy approaches.

Interesting development in light of the Republican position that it is the Democrats who are blocking immigration reform.

But, then, it is the Republican position that Democrats are blocking everything that it perceives the voters are for.

Aren't the Minutemen a sort of vigilante organization? It seems to me that they may not want Donnelly to run because they don't believe he has a realistic chance of winning, and/or they don't want voters to associate Republicans with vigilantism.
 
From Politico.com:



GOP group rejects Minuteman candidate - POLITICO.com

IMO, this is a welcome development. It is an early attempt to put aside angry, divisive, and unrealistic approaches that can only narrow the base of the GOP and undermine American conservatism. Instead, candidates should offer serious and constructive policy approaches.

Securing our border to prevent terrorists, criminals, smugglers and the like from entering the country undetected is now "unrealistic"?
 
The minutemen don't stop anything but reasoned discourse. Their publicity stunts along the border would not keep terrorist or drug smugglers out, only unarmed folks seeking jobs. And that only on tiny segments of the border that are easily avoided.

I love the term 'true conservative'... covers a lot of ground and then again it doesn't. More a case of the term having a very selective meaning that even other 'true conservatives' disagree with.

I find it interesting this isn't liberals attempting to halt a minuteman candidate but rather a conservative group...

Interesting...
 
Jerry Brown will win re-election in a landslide, since California now leads the nation in job growth and the budget deficit is being reduced after the 8 years of disastrous GOP rule in that state.

California will not return to failed GOP policies.
 
Tim Donnelly gets fine, probation after plea on gun charges

Tim Donnelly gets fine, probation after plea on gun charges - latimes.com

A California lawmaker who was detained and charged with bringing a loaded firearm to an airport earlier this year pleaded no contest Monday to misdemeanor gun charges.

Assemblyman Tim Donnelly, a self-described tea party Republican from San Bernardino, was placed on probation for three years and fined $2,215 for an incident at Ontario International Airport in which security screeners discovered a loaded .45-caliber Colt Mark IV pistol and an ammunition magazine with an additional five rounds in his carry-on luggage.

The lawmaker has characterized the incident as an "honest mistake," saying he had forgotten to remove the gun from his briefcase after placing it there while working in his home garage.

I guess he also forgot to remove the rounds from his carry on luggage...after he placed them there.
 
LOL....It cracks me up when libertarians get mad Republicans don't adopt their agenda. Like rushing off to join the 0.009 crowd is going to put Republicans over the top in CA.

As to the minutemen so now the main stream wants to label pro American people racist? Shocking.
 
LOL....It cracks me up when libertarians get mad Republicans don't adopt their agenda. Like rushing off to join the 0.009 crowd is going to put Republicans over the top in CA.

Yep, these idiots that think the GOP needs to be the "big tent" party should STFU.
 
Securing our border to prevent terrorists, criminals, smugglers and the like from entering the country undetected is now "unrealistic"?

And you don't give that power to just ANYONE, especially someone who wears his racism on his sleeve. Again, Kudos to the GOP for rejecting him.
 
Securing our border to prevent terrorists, criminals, smugglers and the like from entering the country undetected is now "unrealistic"?

Realistic immigration reform would consist of a number of elements:

1. A degree of forgiveness for the undocumented immigrants already in the U.S. that transforms them into taxpayers and legal guest workers.
2. An expedited guest worker process.
3. Improved border control to keep out actual criminals perhaps utilizing tools such as "e-verify".
4. Incentives to encourage top-flight foreign students, particularly in fields with shortages of American workers, to remain in the U.S. with an expedited permanent residency and naturalization process.
5. Possibly an agreement with Mexico to encourage bilateral cooperation on border control (such an agreement would likely require points #1 and #2 as it would need to be mutually advantageous to both the U.S. and Mexico).

That's one sketch of a possible realistic approach to immigration policy. Other ideas exist.
 
Securing our border to prevent terrorists, criminals, smugglers and the like from entering the country undetected is now "unrealistic"?

Only if you are a pro-illegal who wants Amnesty, the dream act or some other form of amnesty are those unrealistic. Personally I think an anti-illegal immigration candidate running in a pro-illegal state has about as much chance of winning as mayor of Sanfransicko trying to run in a conservative state.
 
Last edited:
Even Thomas Jefferson acknowledged the need for blood to flow so that causes might be advanced, liberty in his case.

I would hazzard a guess that the average person's image of a militia member is about as accurate as his image of a terrorist. Bogeymen, employed to scare hell out of people, nothing more.

H.L. Mencken wrote about it in the last century. He thought that part of the goal of politics was to keep the populace alarmed, thus clamorous to be led to safety, by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.

Some terms scare some people, and vigilante is one. Vigilante may not be the most accurate term to describe what the militia spirit is, but it sure is helpful for propaganda purposes. :cool:
 
Jerry Brown will win re-election in a landslide, since California now leads the nation in job growth and the budget deficit is being reduced after the 8 years of disastrous GOP rule in that state.

California will not return to failed GOP policies.

Either this is meant as irony, or it is about a state called California somewhere in another dimension that shares only its name, but not its characteristics, with the one in this universe.
 
I think its pretty sad you call yourself a conservative and buy into the lame stream media's definition of him; have you ever met him? How do you know he wears "racisim" on his sleeve just because he wants our nations border secure - that alone does not make anyone a racist.


And you don't give that power to just ANYONE, especially someone who wears his racism on his sleeve. Again, Kudos to the GOP for rejecting him.
 
Jerry Brown will win re-election in a landslide, since California now leads the nation in job growth and the budget deficit is being reduced after the 8 years of disastrous GOP rule in that state.

California will not return to failed GOP policies.

You obviously dont live here in Cali do you? You might want to reevalueate your "facts".
 
Realistic immigration reform would consist of a number of elements:

1. A degree of forgiveness for the undocumented immigrants already in the U.S. that transforms them into taxpayers and legal guest workers.
2. An expedited guest worker process.
3. Improved border control to keep out actual criminals perhaps utilizing tools such as "e-verify".
4. Incentives to encourage top-flight foreign students, particularly in fields with shortages of American workers, to remain in the U.S. with an expedited permanent residency and naturalization process.
5. Possibly an agreement with Mexico to encourage bilateral cooperation on border control (such an agreement would likely require points #1 and #2 as it would need to be mutually advantageous to both the U.S. and Mexico).

That's one sketch of a possible realistic approach to immigration policy. Other ideas exist.

Were not these exactly what was always proposed each time a previous "amnesty" was granted?

1) That is pure amnesty BS, as it gives an advantage to those here illegally over those that remained in their country of origin. If anything, paying a fine of say $5K for each year they were illegally here will allow that individual to wait 2 years (outside the US) for permission to apply for legal re-entry into the USA. If you think, for one minute, that most illegals here will work as "guest workers" then you are mathmatically challenged, as there can be no need for 12 to 15 million "guest workers", when we have massive unemployment of U.S. citizens.

2) Agree, as long as no illegal is granted "head of line" consideration.

3) Absolutely required, simply for normal national security and law enforcement.

4) Great idea iff[I/] they are here legally, otherwise see #1. These are the "prime" immigration candidates, their is no shortage of unskilled/semi-skilled labor in the U.S. - 90% of this "problem" is the employer ignoring free market principles in setting wages.

5) No way that Mexico should receicve any preference for "guest workers" again (for at least 20 years) - that simply encourages illegal entry and allows employers to pretend to use foreign "legal guest workers" to keep their U.S. wages down. There is no shortage of fruit/vegetable pickers in the U.S., there is an artificially low wage offered to them, usually expressed in the form of "piece rate", rather than as an hourly wage. Only about 3% of illegal labor is used in agriculture, but they get many of the headlines.

No mention of serious fines for those that employ illegal labor - the biggest magnet program of all for continued labor abuse. I propose a citizen reward program (bounty) for tips leading to arrest/prosecution of those using illegal labor.
 
Cleaning up the freeloaders is simply an idea whose time has not yet come, even though the damage they have done in California and our country is obvious to the entire United States.

There's always a tipping point and that point has already been passed in California and the rest of the country, but the overwhelming suppressive power of liberal demanded political correctness has kept a public discussion of the 3rd world socialist immigrant problem off of the table, but that discussion is already being held all day, every day around water coolers, at home, in bars and restaurants, eventually, it will break free and there will be more than the liberal viewpoint on the table to be discussed and concluded.

California, presently 16 billion in debt, spends 10 billion taxpayer dollars per year to support illegal immigrants. Those sorts of numbers will drive the discussion and the candidates that are courageous enough will appear when the time is right. With Obama just re-elected by the immigrants, who have demonstrated not the slightest concern for the welfare of the United States, enough Americans have now been shocked into admitting what these people have done to us. It will implode within two years.

Prior to the last election, the following phrase was a staple of talk radio: "America may withstand four more years of Obama, but America cannot survive four more years of the Obama supporters." There will come a time very soon when the liberals will have to deal with that belief on the part of Americans.
 
Last edited:
With Obama just re-elected by the immigrants, who have demonstrated not the slightest concern for the welfare of the United States...

There is no polling evidence of any kind to suggest that people who voted for Mitt Romney or those who voted for President Obama did not have the best interests of the United States at heart. Disagreement on policy does not mean that one disregards the welfare of the U.S., or worse.
 
Also, it should be noted that the outline I sketched out (Message #14) would be consistent with the kind of balanced approach to immigration policy championed by President Reagan. In his signing statement for the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, President Reagan declared:

In 1981 this administration asked the Congress to pass a comprehensive legislative package, including employer sanctions, other measures to increase enforcement of the immigration laws, and legalization. The act provides these three essential components. The employer sanctions program is the keystone and major element. It will remove the incentive for illegal immigration by eliminating the job opportunities which draw illegal aliens here. We have consistently supported a legalization program which is both generous to the alien and fair to the countless thousands of people throughout the world who seek legally to come to America. The legalization provisions in this act will go far to improve the lives of a class of individuals who now must hide in the shadows, without access to many of the benefits of a free and open society. Very soon many of these men and women will be able to step into the sunlight and, ultimately, if they choose, they may become Americans...

Distance has not discouraged illegal immigration to the United States from all around the globe. The problem of illegal immigration should not, therefore, be seen as a problem between the United States and its neighbors. Our objective is only to establish a reasonable, fair, orderly, and secure system of immigration into this country and not to discriminate in any way against particular nations or people.


IMO, there is no comparison between the broad-based, optimistic, and inclusive variety of conservatism advocated by President Reagan and the narrow, pessimistic, and exclusionary imitation peddled by some such as Mr. Donnelly.
 
The GOP needs to move away from people like this so its probably a good move on their part...
 
Back
Top Bottom