McCain meets with La Raza

arbilad · Head Chef

McCain meets with La Raza

mirkwood · Senior Bucketkeeper

Yea I saw that too. La Raza is bad news for the USA. I should ask around more and see if the Repubs I know are voting for that idiot.

coolcucumbers · Senior Member

I never did like Mccain.

hiccups · Future Queen in Zion

Anyone have more good info on La Raza? It's new to me, so I'd like to learn a bit more about it before I can comment on this.

mirkwood · Senior Bucketkeeper

This is the agenda of the Nation of Aztlan.

You can read more about them here:

http://www.immigrationwatchdog.com/?p=811

hiccups · Future Queen in Zion

Gah. My head hurts. Think putting it in the sand would help? :sigh:

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

Dude. This guy's a professor at UTexas?? Freak. Makes me want to see that Expelled movie even more...

hiccups · Future Queen in Zion

Not that pandering is encouraged, but I hope that's what is going on with McCain here.

LoudmouthMormon · Profuse Pontificator

I worry if I've picked the right place to raise my kids, because we're south of Denver, which is a pretty hefty 'sanctuary city'. All I have to do in order to bring the immediacy of mirk's video home, is to think about Israel - where some settlements spring up, and then the govt makes some peace concession and remove them by force.

lundbaek · Profuse Pontificator

I expect a lot of LDSs will vote for McCain because Mitt Romney still supports him as of 8 May at least. Romney was on CNN last week and is still actively campaigning for John McCain. Here is the latest article on Mitt Romney that I have read, from May 8th.
http://partisanreport.com/blog/2008/05/ ... re-he-can/

There is an old adage that, for the most part, has proven itself to be true: "Birds of a feather flock together." In other words, one can discern much about a person by the company he or she keeps. Accordingly, here is a sample of the quirky company of Senator John McCain.
http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin447.htm

If it is true that "a man is known by the company he keeps," what does this say about Mitt Romney?

-- Edited by lundbaek at 16:20, 2008-05-13

Fregramis · Senior Member

And California wonders why their economy is in the pits.

Good gracious McCain, stand up to these people, don't pander to them. You haven't even closed the deal with conservative Republicans yet!

lundbaek · Profuse Pontificator

Neither Obama, Clinton, nor McCain have shown any desire to stop illegal immigration. On this issue, there is no difference between McCain and the Democrats. None. John McCain even voted to grant Social Security benefits to illegal aliens. And he joined with Senator Ted Kennedy to provide amnesty to illegal aliens some years ago in the first amnesty. So I have to assume that anyone who supports John McCain for president would be content with continued illegal immigration, amnesty for illegals, and welfare benefits for illegals.

mirkwood · Senior Bucketkeeper

Hey lund, is there anyone you like at this point? I've lost all interest/hope in the current selection...even 3rd party doesn't appeal to me.

lundbaek · Profuse Pontificator

I would have a hard time choosing between Ron Paul and the recently selected Constitution Party candidate, (Baptist) Pastor Chuck Baldwin. I have followed and supported Ron Paul as best I can afford for most of his 10 terms in the House. I have met and talked with Chuck Baldwin (in SLC last year) and read his weekly newsletter which is accessable on newswithviews.com .

Both men espouse limited government, personal liberty and a strong national defense.

Both believe our troops are no longer fighting a war; they are an occupation force, which occupies sovereign countries. And this is being done without a constitutionally required Declaration of War by the U.S. Congress. And they believe the invasion and occupation of Iraq was absolutely unnecessary.

Both recognize what is behind the fostering of illegal immigration and promotion of amnesty for illegals already here, and would immediately seal our borders from illegal immigration, and would also see to it that employers in America who knowingly hire illegal aliens are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Both would encourage Congress to pass Congressman Ron Paul's Sanctity of Life Act.

Both would end foreign aid and the current infatuation with nation-building, empire-building, and interventionism.

Both would cut back socialist welfare with an eye to eliminating it.

Both would take the preservation of our nation's sovereignty and independence extremely seriously, and keep the U.S. out of the North American Union and the FTAA, and push to get us out of NAFTA and CAFTA.

Both want to get the U.S out of the U.N. and get the U.N. out of the U.S.

Both would take the preservation of our nation's sovereignty and independence extremely seriously. This means that the burgeoning North American Union would be dead on arrival the day either were sworn in as President. Gone, too, would be the NAFTA superhighway. And for that matter, both would lead the United States out of NAFTA and CAFTA altogether. And any prospect for the FTAA would be dead as well.

Both would be the best friend that gun owners and law abiding gun dealers, homeschoolers, and veterans ever had in the White House.

Both would push to make the U.S. mostly energy independent by tapping known oil sources within the U.S.A. I'm not sure about promoting nuclear power.

Both would work hard to overturn the Sixteenth Amendment, which would repeal the Income Tax.

Both would push to eliminate the currently legalized money counterfeiting crime ring, the privately owned and controlled Federal Reserve.

Both would would end corporate welfare, and also work to disband the Department of Energy.

Both would work to end the Department of Education and many other federal departments.

I have heard statements by Chuck Baldwin and read statements by Ron Paul that express their awareness of a conspiracy to create a one-world dictatorship and make the U.S. subservient to it.

Both men espouse the U.S. Constitution and constitutional principles better than any LDS Republican or Democrat congressman or candidate for national office. One might think they were LDS who had read D&C 98:6

-- Edited by lundbaek at 21:19, 2008-05-17

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

How would one go about getting rid of the FedRes I wonder...??

mirkwood · Senior Bucketkeeper

I have read some of Baldwin's writings. I can't remember what it was off the top of my head, but he has said some things I really did not like.

lundbaek · Profuse Pontificator

To Cocobeem's question of how to get rid of the Federal Reserve: As I understand it, in 1913 Congress voted to give its constitutionally mandated responsibility "to coin money, regulate the value thereof..." to a consortium of private banks called the Federal Reserve System. This was unconstitutional, but the Supreme Court upheld it. This led to the devaluation of U.S. currency to about 10% of its 1950 value, or purchasing power, by my calculations.

To get out from under the Fed's control of our money, we would need to elect to Congress people who would insist on discharging its responsibility "to coin money and regulate the value thereof..." I don't know how a president could force something like that without the support of Congress and/or the support of the Supreme Court. A president could certainly demand it, but I don't know the mechanics of making it happen. That's why I said Baldwin and Paul would "push" to eliminate the Fed. I don't think a president could pull it off against a resistant Congress.