Lindsey Graham and John McCain are described by the secular media as moderates.
A Moderate is a liberal who hasn't come out of the closet.
Monday, February 11, 2008
Monday, January 21, 2008
67% of South Carolina Republicans Rejected John McCain
I was surprised that John McCain did as well as he did in South Carolina. I was specifically interested in where he performed well and where he performed poorly. John McCain's participation in the Amnesty for illegal aliens, McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform fiasco and the Gang of 14 prove that he is not a conservative at heart. McCain "became" a conservative especially in regards to the above issues as he entered South Carolina. He debated that the Amnesty bill was not Amnesty and when he was cornered on the issue time and again, he would divert to "I think we should lower the rhetoric and move on." Which in other words means I don't want to be held accountable so please change the subject.
My interest in McCain's performance lied in the important issues and my belief that these areas will not be addressed IF he becomes the Republican party nominee. I do not believe the experience of John McCain being a prisoner of war equates to his ability to be a good commander in chief. If he is as strong on National Security and our defense as he professes, why was he willing to leave our border open until the voice of the people spoke loud enough that in his words "we have heard from the American people and they no longer trust their government, they want the border secured first." Well John McCain is a part of the government and he is part of the reason that the American people do not trust the government to keep its word. Leaders who run as conservatives who embrace liberal democratic views are not to be trusted. How competent is a commander in chief if he has to reach the point of hearing the voice of the American people before calling for the border to be secured.
I am sorry John McCain was a prisoner of war but I do not believe he is the best potential commander in chief because of it. How about spending, Congress has allowed rampant spending for the past 8 years and while I am glad John McCain stopped the funding of an overly expensive airplane contract, where has he contributed with any degree of energy an effort to stop pork earmarks. He hasn't because he has been party to the spending spree. He dodges the issue of voting against the tax cuts because he is attempting to play a great national shell game where the politician hides his record and dodges the evidence of who he is and what kind of leader he will be if elected as the President.
I can go on at length about the issues where John McCain has proven his true "stripes"; and those stripes are liberal; but I want to divert my attention for a moment to his buddy Lindsey Graham. Lindsey has worked diligently to become just like John McCain and he has mirrored McCain's sad positions more oft than not. I know Lindsey is hoping that since John McCain squeaked by with the SC primary victory that he can hope to enjoy the same level of 'forgetfulness' on the part of the voters of SC.
Lindsey needs to understand that McCain won SC because of the split vote among so many candidates. Let's look at the numbers for a moment. McCain came out with 33% of the vote.
That means that 67% of the SC Republican voters reject John McCain and his positions.
67% of SC Republicans did NOT want John McCain as their representative or the party nominee. Lindsey can expect to share the same level at best when we run in the spring.
I am running for the United States Senate to replace Lindsey Graham and I am speaking to the 67% or more of SC Republicans who feel as I do about these important issues. Join me in this campaign and let's prove to the pundits that SC still holds a majority of conservative republicans who will prove their discontent when they cast their vote for their next Senator.
The numbers and the odds worked against us in the Presidential race but we can loudly express our views in the race for Senate. If and I repeat IF John McCain goes on to become the Republican nominee how much more important will be the need to unseat Lindsey Graham so we can be a counter balance to the liberal policies that McCain is sure to try. I will as Senator stand firm on the policies and positions that I hold, it is because we have been betrayed in our conservative values from Lindsey and others like McCain that I have entered into this race. There is no acceptable reason for elected leaders to abandon their principles. When they run as strong conservatives, like Lindsey did, and then they promote these liberal positions, again like Lindsey has done, the evidence that their principles were ones of convenience rather than principles of conviction is hard to ignore.
Watch for our new website and continue to send in your comments and questions. I promise I will answer all of them. Join our team and support this campaign in a tangible manner. No contribution is too small and every amount entrusted for this effort will be well served.
My interest in McCain's performance lied in the important issues and my belief that these areas will not be addressed IF he becomes the Republican party nominee. I do not believe the experience of John McCain being a prisoner of war equates to his ability to be a good commander in chief. If he is as strong on National Security and our defense as he professes, why was he willing to leave our border open until the voice of the people spoke loud enough that in his words "we have heard from the American people and they no longer trust their government, they want the border secured first." Well John McCain is a part of the government and he is part of the reason that the American people do not trust the government to keep its word. Leaders who run as conservatives who embrace liberal democratic views are not to be trusted. How competent is a commander in chief if he has to reach the point of hearing the voice of the American people before calling for the border to be secured.
I am sorry John McCain was a prisoner of war but I do not believe he is the best potential commander in chief because of it. How about spending, Congress has allowed rampant spending for the past 8 years and while I am glad John McCain stopped the funding of an overly expensive airplane contract, where has he contributed with any degree of energy an effort to stop pork earmarks. He hasn't because he has been party to the spending spree. He dodges the issue of voting against the tax cuts because he is attempting to play a great national shell game where the politician hides his record and dodges the evidence of who he is and what kind of leader he will be if elected as the President.
I can go on at length about the issues where John McCain has proven his true "stripes"; and those stripes are liberal; but I want to divert my attention for a moment to his buddy Lindsey Graham. Lindsey has worked diligently to become just like John McCain and he has mirrored McCain's sad positions more oft than not. I know Lindsey is hoping that since John McCain squeaked by with the SC primary victory that he can hope to enjoy the same level of 'forgetfulness' on the part of the voters of SC.
Lindsey needs to understand that McCain won SC because of the split vote among so many candidates. Let's look at the numbers for a moment. McCain came out with 33% of the vote.
That means that 67% of the SC Republican voters reject John McCain and his positions.
67% of SC Republicans did NOT want John McCain as their representative or the party nominee. Lindsey can expect to share the same level at best when we run in the spring.
I am running for the United States Senate to replace Lindsey Graham and I am speaking to the 67% or more of SC Republicans who feel as I do about these important issues. Join me in this campaign and let's prove to the pundits that SC still holds a majority of conservative republicans who will prove their discontent when they cast their vote for their next Senator.
The numbers and the odds worked against us in the Presidential race but we can loudly express our views in the race for Senate. If and I repeat IF John McCain goes on to become the Republican nominee how much more important will be the need to unseat Lindsey Graham so we can be a counter balance to the liberal policies that McCain is sure to try. I will as Senator stand firm on the policies and positions that I hold, it is because we have been betrayed in our conservative values from Lindsey and others like McCain that I have entered into this race. There is no acceptable reason for elected leaders to abandon their principles. When they run as strong conservatives, like Lindsey did, and then they promote these liberal positions, again like Lindsey has done, the evidence that their principles were ones of convenience rather than principles of conviction is hard to ignore.
Watch for our new website and continue to send in your comments and questions. I promise I will answer all of them. Join our team and support this campaign in a tangible manner. No contribution is too small and every amount entrusted for this effort will be well served.
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
Monday, September 10, 2007
How Liberal is too Liberal
If you are conservative exactly how many bills and/or amendments do you expect your Senator to argue in support of from a liberal viewpoint ? My answer is none. Now I know there are those who will claim that there are 3 lanes in every road, Conservative, Liberal and Middle of the Road. What Middle of the Road means is that a liberal has moved toward the conservative viewpoint and a conservative has moved to the liberal viewpoint.
When we negotiate for what portion of our conservative views are included in a bill, we work to get all of the conservative positions fully represented and fully enacted. It will be true that sometimes, we will not always get everything we want and because of that we can say a bill is middle of the road or a compromise between our conservative values and the values of our liberal counterparts.
The dramatic difference is when we totally abandon the conservative viewpoint and if we begin to debate for the liberal position. We argue against the conservative values. We work against the Senators making a conservative stand. In taking the position of advocate for the liberal position we are now not conservative nor are we meeting in the middle of the road with a compromise of positions to be included but we are working to the cause and advancement of the liberal policy.
Here in lies the problem with Lindsey Graham's representation of South Carolina.
He is a conservative part time. He argues from a conservative viewpoint and he attempts to accomplish conservative policy.... sometimes. But he is also a liberal.. part time. He argues from the viewpoint of a liberal and applies as much energy in accomplishing the liberal positions and policies as he ever does for the conservative. He works against our values. This is why he moves to name calling and making petty threats about the state not receiving the next Post Office they desire etc..
In this duplicity of personality, this dual representation he causes the conservative values to suffer more than he causes our values to prosper.
Lindsey plays the political game; he professes one position and argues against it in Congress. It is like the argument for Amnesty of 30 million illegal aliens where he came out to a news conference and adamantly declared "This is Not Amnesty !" only to have to recant those shallow and false words later when he himself admitted the policies he proposed were in fact Amnesty.
Lindsey knows that most South Carolinians are busy with their lives and do not take the time to watch or guard the policies of our Senators. We shouldn't have to. We should be able to depend on their political integrity and trust them to represent us as they promised and with the values they professed to hold.
Lindsey prides himself on being rated a 90% conservative and when we examine his record we find that he voted with the liberal party and argued from a liberal perspective 13% of the time during the last 2 Congressional sessions. He is as liberal in those times as is the well known liberal Senator from Massachusetts, Ted Kennedy. Lindsey votes in agreement with Ted Kennedy when he is voting from his liberal personality. In fact as you review his record, you will find times where even Ted Kennedy voted for conservative values when it came to security and citizen protections. Kennedy voted with the Republican party in some critical areas where you would expect a Conservative Senator to be champion of the cause but Lindsey was found voting against the Republican party, against conservative values and more liberal in his stand than Kennedy.
One prime example of this was when the bill came before Congress which would have increased cargo container inspections at the point of origin and would have required 100% inspection for nuclear materials to prevent a terrorist group from using our shipping cargo containers for the purpose of shipping in a dirty bomb or the radioactive material to be used in a dirty bomb. We all know this is an area of risk and the 9/11 commission even called on us to tighten this area of vulnerability. The republicans in majority voted for this protection, the democrats in majority voted for this protection but Lindsey voted against it.
Similarly when the opportunity to protect American citizens from being sued when they in good faith reported suspicious activities. Ted Kennedy voted with the majority of Republicans and Democrats to offer this protection to the American citizen but Lindsey voted against.
Hypocrisy ? Liberal ? You Decide... When Congress voted to express the concern and the resolution that the new Iraq government Not grant Amnesty to any terrorist who had fought against, wounded or killed an American soldier and that the President issue this concern to the President of Iraq, the majority of Republicans voted Yes, the majority of Democrats voted Yes. And even our liberal Senator from Massachusetts voted Yes but Lindsey Graham representing South Carolina, the Senator who wants you to believe he fully supports our troops, he voted NO !
We can go on with further examples but if you visit the campaign website http://www.carnesforsenate.com/ and select the link to view Lindsey's Liberal positions, you will be taken to a page dedicated to catalog many of Lindsey's liberal positions.
How liberal is too liberal ? Now that we know Lindsey will tell us one thing and do another. Now that we have seen him push for the amnesty of 30 million illegal aliens, not once but three times. Now that he has said he will introduce and get the bill passed in piece meal fashion. How liberal is too liberal ?
Lindsey is too liberal. He has served one term and now it is time for him to go home.
We want, we expect and we demand consistent conservative representation from our Senator.
We are not bigots and we will not shut-up so Lindsey can pass his liberal agenda despite our objections. We will not give Lindsey another term to betray us further.
When we negotiate for what portion of our conservative views are included in a bill, we work to get all of the conservative positions fully represented and fully enacted. It will be true that sometimes, we will not always get everything we want and because of that we can say a bill is middle of the road or a compromise between our conservative values and the values of our liberal counterparts.
The dramatic difference is when we totally abandon the conservative viewpoint and if we begin to debate for the liberal position. We argue against the conservative values. We work against the Senators making a conservative stand. In taking the position of advocate for the liberal position we are now not conservative nor are we meeting in the middle of the road with a compromise of positions to be included but we are working to the cause and advancement of the liberal policy.
Here in lies the problem with Lindsey Graham's representation of South Carolina.
He is a conservative part time. He argues from a conservative viewpoint and he attempts to accomplish conservative policy.... sometimes. But he is also a liberal.. part time. He argues from the viewpoint of a liberal and applies as much energy in accomplishing the liberal positions and policies as he ever does for the conservative. He works against our values. This is why he moves to name calling and making petty threats about the state not receiving the next Post Office they desire etc..
In this duplicity of personality, this dual representation he causes the conservative values to suffer more than he causes our values to prosper.
Lindsey plays the political game; he professes one position and argues against it in Congress. It is like the argument for Amnesty of 30 million illegal aliens where he came out to a news conference and adamantly declared "This is Not Amnesty !" only to have to recant those shallow and false words later when he himself admitted the policies he proposed were in fact Amnesty.
Lindsey knows that most South Carolinians are busy with their lives and do not take the time to watch or guard the policies of our Senators. We shouldn't have to. We should be able to depend on their political integrity and trust them to represent us as they promised and with the values they professed to hold.
Lindsey prides himself on being rated a 90% conservative and when we examine his record we find that he voted with the liberal party and argued from a liberal perspective 13% of the time during the last 2 Congressional sessions. He is as liberal in those times as is the well known liberal Senator from Massachusetts, Ted Kennedy. Lindsey votes in agreement with Ted Kennedy when he is voting from his liberal personality. In fact as you review his record, you will find times where even Ted Kennedy voted for conservative values when it came to security and citizen protections. Kennedy voted with the Republican party in some critical areas where you would expect a Conservative Senator to be champion of the cause but Lindsey was found voting against the Republican party, against conservative values and more liberal in his stand than Kennedy.
One prime example of this was when the bill came before Congress which would have increased cargo container inspections at the point of origin and would have required 100% inspection for nuclear materials to prevent a terrorist group from using our shipping cargo containers for the purpose of shipping in a dirty bomb or the radioactive material to be used in a dirty bomb. We all know this is an area of risk and the 9/11 commission even called on us to tighten this area of vulnerability. The republicans in majority voted for this protection, the democrats in majority voted for this protection but Lindsey voted against it.
Similarly when the opportunity to protect American citizens from being sued when they in good faith reported suspicious activities. Ted Kennedy voted with the majority of Republicans and Democrats to offer this protection to the American citizen but Lindsey voted against.
Hypocrisy ? Liberal ? You Decide... When Congress voted to express the concern and the resolution that the new Iraq government Not grant Amnesty to any terrorist who had fought against, wounded or killed an American soldier and that the President issue this concern to the President of Iraq, the majority of Republicans voted Yes, the majority of Democrats voted Yes. And even our liberal Senator from Massachusetts voted Yes but Lindsey Graham representing South Carolina, the Senator who wants you to believe he fully supports our troops, he voted NO !
We can go on with further examples but if you visit the campaign website http://www.carnesforsenate.com/ and select the link to view Lindsey's Liberal positions, you will be taken to a page dedicated to catalog many of Lindsey's liberal positions.
How liberal is too liberal ? Now that we know Lindsey will tell us one thing and do another. Now that we have seen him push for the amnesty of 30 million illegal aliens, not once but three times. Now that he has said he will introduce and get the bill passed in piece meal fashion. How liberal is too liberal ?
Lindsey is too liberal. He has served one term and now it is time for him to go home.
We want, we expect and we demand consistent conservative representation from our Senator.
We are not bigots and we will not shut-up so Lindsey can pass his liberal agenda despite our objections. We will not give Lindsey another term to betray us further.
Saturday, August 11, 2007
Give him cover and he will try it again
There are tens of thousands of citizens in South Carolina that express their discontent for the actions of Senator Lindsey Graham. Senator Graham is up for reelection and now is the time to put words into action.
If Graham is reelected and has the security and cover of another 6 years in office, does anyone really believe that he will not return to his condescending attitude and attempt to promote and pass the same type of full amnesty for illegal immigrants that he championed in July ?
In light of local communities reacting to the attempt of Congress to pass amnesty, where many are putting forth their own local provisions and security laws, Mr. Graham’s response was ‘Mr. Graham said local governments should not pass anti-illegal immigration regulations but should trust Congress to address the issue.’ Kirsten Singleton; Morris News Service; Wed Aug 8th, 2007
We can go back to some of his comments on the floor of the Senate when discussion of not only bringing in 12 million illegal immigrants by granting them amnesty but about the volumes of immigrants who would be allowed to enter the country as well, as the family members of the illegal immigrants who would have received amnesty and legalized status.
Mr. GRAHAM. “So if you want to be the person who keeps families apart, bring this bill down. I assure families will not be reunified under the current system like they are here” (he is speaking of the immigration bill) , that we will have a dramatic increase in green cards to get these families reunited. We go up to 74 percent. If you want to keep families apart, bring this bill down and let the current system survive.
Secondly, when it comes to families, there are 12 million people here illegally. Is it not true that their families, under this bill--if they will do the right thing--will never live in fear again? ““(meaning not only will the 12 + million illegals be granted amnesty but they will double or triple that number by allowing the families to follow)
In the heat of the debate where South Carolinians and millions of other American citizens rose up to express their contempt for the amnesty plan, Mr. Graham’s response was to call us ‘Bigots’ and to say that if we would ‘shut-up’ then they could go ahead and get this bill passed.
Well Lindsey, listen carefully, those of us in South Carolina and those Americans who want to secure our country are not ‘Bigots’ and we do not intend to ‘shut-up’ or go away so you can get your amnesty provisions passed.
If we want to change our representation in the Senate, Now is the time to put our Words into Action. I am running for the office of United States Senator, representing the people of South Carolina, to replace Lindsey Graham. I am running because he has abandoned our concerns and best interest. He has expressed an attitude of arrogance and contempt for the very people who sent him to South Carolina. He championed the cause of granting illegal amnesty to over 12 million illegal immigrants and was willing to follow that numbers with millions and millions of their family members.
He voted against the Senate Amendment 1339 which would require the full use of the U.S. Visit System passed in 1996 and mandated to be fully operational by 2005. This plan provides for biometric check in and check out at the border. We discuss the contrast of this in another article, but Lindsey would rather promote a national identification card for American Citizens than he would for enforcing the protection at the border which would target the illegal immigrants.
Lindsey voted against the amendment offer by Senator DeMint which would require that the illegal immigrants being granted amnesty would be ‘required’ to have at least a basic protection of insurance coverage so the American taxpayer would not have to fund their healthcare as well. Lindsey Graham voted against that protection.
If you allow Lindsey Graham to have 6 more years, He will try again and again. He will promote the same plan and the same solution, amnesty, until he can find a time and a method when the American people are distracted and it will become law.
Join me in this effort, become part of the team. Between now and January 2008 we need to get the word out, donate to the cause, become active in the process and refuse to allow Lindsey Graham an opportunity to try amnesty again.
If Graham is reelected and has the security and cover of another 6 years in office, does anyone really believe that he will not return to his condescending attitude and attempt to promote and pass the same type of full amnesty for illegal immigrants that he championed in July ?
In light of local communities reacting to the attempt of Congress to pass amnesty, where many are putting forth their own local provisions and security laws, Mr. Graham’s response was ‘Mr. Graham said local governments should not pass anti-illegal immigration regulations but should trust Congress to address the issue.’ Kirsten Singleton; Morris News Service; Wed Aug 8th, 2007
We can go back to some of his comments on the floor of the Senate when discussion of not only bringing in 12 million illegal immigrants by granting them amnesty but about the volumes of immigrants who would be allowed to enter the country as well, as the family members of the illegal immigrants who would have received amnesty and legalized status.
Mr. GRAHAM. “So if you want to be the person who keeps families apart, bring this bill down. I assure families will not be reunified under the current system like they are here” (he is speaking of the immigration bill) , that we will have a dramatic increase in green cards to get these families reunited. We go up to 74 percent. If you want to keep families apart, bring this bill down and let the current system survive.
Secondly, when it comes to families, there are 12 million people here illegally. Is it not true that their families, under this bill--if they will do the right thing--will never live in fear again? ““(meaning not only will the 12 + million illegals be granted amnesty but they will double or triple that number by allowing the families to follow)
In the heat of the debate where South Carolinians and millions of other American citizens rose up to express their contempt for the amnesty plan, Mr. Graham’s response was to call us ‘Bigots’ and to say that if we would ‘shut-up’ then they could go ahead and get this bill passed.
Well Lindsey, listen carefully, those of us in South Carolina and those Americans who want to secure our country are not ‘Bigots’ and we do not intend to ‘shut-up’ or go away so you can get your amnesty provisions passed.
If we want to change our representation in the Senate, Now is the time to put our Words into Action. I am running for the office of United States Senator, representing the people of South Carolina, to replace Lindsey Graham. I am running because he has abandoned our concerns and best interest. He has expressed an attitude of arrogance and contempt for the very people who sent him to South Carolina. He championed the cause of granting illegal amnesty to over 12 million illegal immigrants and was willing to follow that numbers with millions and millions of their family members.
He voted against the Senate Amendment 1339 which would require the full use of the U.S. Visit System passed in 1996 and mandated to be fully operational by 2005. This plan provides for biometric check in and check out at the border. We discuss the contrast of this in another article, but Lindsey would rather promote a national identification card for American Citizens than he would for enforcing the protection at the border which would target the illegal immigrants.
Lindsey voted against the amendment offer by Senator DeMint which would require that the illegal immigrants being granted amnesty would be ‘required’ to have at least a basic protection of insurance coverage so the American taxpayer would not have to fund their healthcare as well. Lindsey Graham voted against that protection.
If you allow Lindsey Graham to have 6 more years, He will try again and again. He will promote the same plan and the same solution, amnesty, until he can find a time and a method when the American people are distracted and it will become law.
Join me in this effort, become part of the team. Between now and January 2008 we need to get the word out, donate to the cause, become active in the process and refuse to allow Lindsey Graham an opportunity to try amnesty again.
Did I hear Lindsey right ....Mexico is not corrupt???
Lindsey Graham said most of our illegal immigration problem was due to people coming from corrupt governments. He initially listed Mexico as one of the corrupt.
Rightfully so, but Lindsey the politician, ever willing, able and ready to straddle the fence came back and said No, I am not talking about Mexico.
What kind of leadership do we have in this Senator. Say what you mean, mean what you say and have the backbone to stand by your comments.
Well before we look at the news report of Lindsey’s comments lets look at just a couple of literally hundreds of available articles and sources that deal with Mexican corruption.
Excerpts from various news sources:
Mexidata.info http://www.mexidata.info/id148.html
“Monday, March 8, 2004Mexican corruption scandals go on and onBy Carlos Luken
Nobody smiles in the Mexican version of “Candid Camera.”In what is seemingly a pattern, Mexican audiences are being repeatedly roused with illustrations of politicians engaged in corrupt activities
==============================================
www.southalabama.edu/internationalstudies/sdmweb/crptn%20and%20political%20culture.pdf
Contemporary Mexican political history brims with dramatic, soap-opera-like scandals, wild accusations, seemingly credible evidence of widespread corruption (high and low; bureaucratic and political) ........
==============================================
http://chronicle.uchicago.edu/951127/lomnitz.shtml
Lomnitz: Understanding history of corruption in MexicoConference to be held on campus Nov. 30-Dec. 2 Although inhabitants of Mexico decry the presence of corruption in their society, corruption has been a force in public life there since colonial times, said Claudio Lomnitz, who joined the University faculty this fall as Professor in History. ……………………In Mexico, corruption consists of an intricate system of exchanges in which support for public officials is given in return for certain privileges.
==============================================
http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/americas/9902/25/us.mexico/index.html
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- As a decision nears on whether to certify Mexico's anti-drug efforts, the Drug Enforcement Administration says Mexico's efforts against narcotics trafficking are failing and corruption is hampering joint programs. ==============================================
AND FINALLY !!!! http://greenvilleonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070809/NEWS01/708090306/1004/NEWS01
Mexico not corrupt, Graham clarifies
Senator was referring to other countries in immigration remark, spokesman says
Published: Thursday, August 9, 2007 - 2:00 am By Tim Smith CAPITAL BUREAUtcsmith@greenvillenews.com
COLUMBIA -- A spokesman for U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham said Wednesday the senator wasn't referring to Mexico when he told reporters in South Carolina on Tuesday that immigrants coming to America are from countries with "mainly corrupt" governments........"The people who are coming here from Central America, Mexico and other places have one thing in common -- they are impoverished and their governments are mainly corrupt."
Wes Hickman, a spokesman for Graham, told The Greenville News he talked with the Republican senator Wednesday about the comments and Graham wasn't referring to Mexico. ……U.S. Rep. James Clyburn, a Columbia Democrat, said he was glad Graham clarified his remarks. “
=============================================
A Senator needs the backbone to stand on the truth and no back down when confronted. Graham had the statement right the first time but when faced with potential objection he appears to have recanted.
Mexico is not corrupt, Lindsey is not too liberal, and the people of South Carolina are not fed up with this kind of representation.
Just remove the little word ‘not’ from the above statement and we will have it correct.
Rightfully so, but Lindsey the politician, ever willing, able and ready to straddle the fence came back and said No, I am not talking about Mexico.
What kind of leadership do we have in this Senator. Say what you mean, mean what you say and have the backbone to stand by your comments.
Well before we look at the news report of Lindsey’s comments lets look at just a couple of literally hundreds of available articles and sources that deal with Mexican corruption.
Excerpts from various news sources:
Mexidata.info http://www.mexidata.info/id148.html
“Monday, March 8, 2004Mexican corruption scandals go on and onBy Carlos Luken
Nobody smiles in the Mexican version of “Candid Camera.”In what is seemingly a pattern, Mexican audiences are being repeatedly roused with illustrations of politicians engaged in corrupt activities
==============================================
www.southalabama.edu/internationalstudies/sdmweb/crptn%20and%20political%20culture.pdf
Contemporary Mexican political history brims with dramatic, soap-opera-like scandals, wild accusations, seemingly credible evidence of widespread corruption (high and low; bureaucratic and political) ........
==============================================
http://chronicle.uchicago.edu/951127/lomnitz.shtml
Lomnitz: Understanding history of corruption in MexicoConference to be held on campus Nov. 30-Dec. 2 Although inhabitants of Mexico decry the presence of corruption in their society, corruption has been a force in public life there since colonial times, said Claudio Lomnitz, who joined the University faculty this fall as Professor in History. ……………………In Mexico, corruption consists of an intricate system of exchanges in which support for public officials is given in return for certain privileges.
==============================================
http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/americas/9902/25/us.mexico/index.html
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- As a decision nears on whether to certify Mexico's anti-drug efforts, the Drug Enforcement Administration says Mexico's efforts against narcotics trafficking are failing and corruption is hampering joint programs. ==============================================
AND FINALLY !!!! http://greenvilleonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070809/NEWS01/708090306/1004/NEWS01
Mexico not corrupt, Graham clarifies
Senator was referring to other countries in immigration remark, spokesman says
Published: Thursday, August 9, 2007 - 2:00 am By Tim Smith CAPITAL BUREAUtcsmith@greenvillenews.com
COLUMBIA -- A spokesman for U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham said Wednesday the senator wasn't referring to Mexico when he told reporters in South Carolina on Tuesday that immigrants coming to America are from countries with "mainly corrupt" governments........"The people who are coming here from Central America, Mexico and other places have one thing in common -- they are impoverished and their governments are mainly corrupt."
Wes Hickman, a spokesman for Graham, told The Greenville News he talked with the Republican senator Wednesday about the comments and Graham wasn't referring to Mexico. ……U.S. Rep. James Clyburn, a Columbia Democrat, said he was glad Graham clarified his remarks. “
=============================================
A Senator needs the backbone to stand on the truth and no back down when confronted. Graham had the statement right the first time but when faced with potential objection he appears to have recanted.
Mexico is not corrupt, Lindsey is not too liberal, and the people of South Carolina are not fed up with this kind of representation.
Just remove the little word ‘not’ from the above statement and we will have it correct.
Say No to Bio-metric Social Security Cards
Why is Lindsey Graham wanting to establish a National Identification Card system? Why is he calling for a modification to the social security card replacing it with a bio-metric type of card? In 1986 after amnesty was granted to millions of illegal immigrants and we were promised that would be the last amnesty program because our leaders were going to ensure that the border would be secured moving forward. One of the provisions for allowing persons to receive amnesty was by filing for agricultural worker permit. The numbers of persons who reported filed false affidavits were in the hundreds of thousands and the capability of the government to verify those documents and claims were so poor that they, the government agencies, allowed those people in. The 9/11 commission reports that 2 of the masterminds behind the First World Trade Center bombing were immigrants allowed in under that failed amnesty program.
Now rather than deal with the illegals; (Hispanic, European, Asian, Middle Eastern or those of any other designation), and spending the time and effort to find these people and remove them from the country. Lindsey would rather spend billions of dollars enforcing a bio-metric national id card on us. He claims it will be used to ensure that employers are only hiring legal citizens but starting at the social security card level, allows those who have illegal documents to submit and receive a bio-metric testimony that will complicate ever getting the problem fixed. So if I am Jose and I have broken into the country, bought stolen documents that say I am John Jones and take those docs with me down to the Social Security office, they are to now give me a bio-metric social security card, when I leave the office I now have a government sanctioned bio-metric card that says I am John Jones. When the real John Jones goes to get his Social Security card converted to the bio-metric national identification card, Jose has already stolen it so the real John Jones is held back and impacted in multiple negative ways. No one knows where Jose is and extensive amount of time, effort and financial expense the real John Jones will have to go through to prove who he is will be staggering.
I am opposed to a National Identification System, like the bio-metric Social Security Card. Let’s go back to the basics and fully secure the borders. Let’s make sure that job gets done first and gets done right. I am not talking about adding cameras so we can see that they are coming across, I am talking about building a solid wall type of border. One that is unlike the chain link fences in sections of the border where they cut the fence and enter. One that is unlike the 10 ft metal fence designed and built so very easily someone can prop up beside it and begin to cross. Build a secure wall and secure our border.
Increase by 4 times the amount of Border Control Agents working to protect us. Increase by 3 or 4 times the number of ICE agents and empower by law Federal, State and Local law enforcement officers to be empowered and required to enforce all immigration law.
Stop the ability for Federal, State and Local Social Services to be received by non citizens. Stop the ability for financial institutions to grant financial and/or credit services to illegal immigrants. Increase the inspections and penalties for employers hiring illegal immigrants. Stop ability to receive driving licenses or any other form of state sanctioned identification.
We do not need a National Identification Bio-Metric card for American Citizens. We do not need to infringe and remove personal privacy protections from American citizens in the name of being more security minded against illegal immigrants. Go to the source of the problem and deal with it there.
Lindsey, drop your attempt to push this plan. Citizens of South Carolina, now is the time for all good men and women of conscience to stand up and say enough is enough. Let’s send Lindsey home. Join our campaign, donate to the cause, help in the effort and let’s change the voice of our representation in Congress.
Now rather than deal with the illegals; (Hispanic, European, Asian, Middle Eastern or those of any other designation), and spending the time and effort to find these people and remove them from the country. Lindsey would rather spend billions of dollars enforcing a bio-metric national id card on us. He claims it will be used to ensure that employers are only hiring legal citizens but starting at the social security card level, allows those who have illegal documents to submit and receive a bio-metric testimony that will complicate ever getting the problem fixed. So if I am Jose and I have broken into the country, bought stolen documents that say I am John Jones and take those docs with me down to the Social Security office, they are to now give me a bio-metric social security card, when I leave the office I now have a government sanctioned bio-metric card that says I am John Jones. When the real John Jones goes to get his Social Security card converted to the bio-metric national identification card, Jose has already stolen it so the real John Jones is held back and impacted in multiple negative ways. No one knows where Jose is and extensive amount of time, effort and financial expense the real John Jones will have to go through to prove who he is will be staggering.
I am opposed to a National Identification System, like the bio-metric Social Security Card. Let’s go back to the basics and fully secure the borders. Let’s make sure that job gets done first and gets done right. I am not talking about adding cameras so we can see that they are coming across, I am talking about building a solid wall type of border. One that is unlike the chain link fences in sections of the border where they cut the fence and enter. One that is unlike the 10 ft metal fence designed and built so very easily someone can prop up beside it and begin to cross. Build a secure wall and secure our border.
Increase by 4 times the amount of Border Control Agents working to protect us. Increase by 3 or 4 times the number of ICE agents and empower by law Federal, State and Local law enforcement officers to be empowered and required to enforce all immigration law.
Stop the ability for Federal, State and Local Social Services to be received by non citizens. Stop the ability for financial institutions to grant financial and/or credit services to illegal immigrants. Increase the inspections and penalties for employers hiring illegal immigrants. Stop ability to receive driving licenses or any other form of state sanctioned identification.
We do not need a National Identification Bio-Metric card for American Citizens. We do not need to infringe and remove personal privacy protections from American citizens in the name of being more security minded against illegal immigrants. Go to the source of the problem and deal with it there.
Lindsey, drop your attempt to push this plan. Citizens of South Carolina, now is the time for all good men and women of conscience to stand up and say enough is enough. Let’s send Lindsey home. Join our campaign, donate to the cause, help in the effort and let’s change the voice of our representation in Congress.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)