Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Double Agent Karl - Machiavelli takes a look at the immigration bill.
National Review Online ^ | May 25, 2007 | John O'Sullivan

Posted on 05/26/2007 6:22:50 PM PDT by neverdem







Double Agent Karl
Machiavelli takes a look at the immigration bill.

By John O'Sullivan

From the desk of Nick Machiavelli, Senior Partner, Machiavelli, O’Blarney, Iago, Alcibiades, and Morris, Political Consultants

To: Karl Rove, The Smoke-Filled Room, Air Force One, Somewhere in North America

My Dear Karl,

When Lilith picked up your call on the answering service, I told her firmly that we must not say “I told you so.” And we won’t, really. But since you ask, I don’t think this thing is going to work.

Take a look, first, at the coalition you have assembled behind what you call “comprehensive immigration reform.” It’s a coalition of opposites — corporate America and Big Labor, left-wing ethnic lobbies like La Raza and the Republican National Committee, the Catholic bishops and left-wing Democrats, the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal.

To use your native language, though, it’s all hat and no cattle. In theory all these groups should add up to three quarters or more of the American people. But you can’t get even a bare majority in any poll for the bill that’s now before the Senate — however deceptively you word the questions.

Worse, the more information the pollsters give those questioned — about current levels of immigration, alternative policies, fiscal costs — the more strongly they oppose the legislation. So you need to get hurry this bill through the entire legislative process before Americans learn what’s in it.

Sure, I know you hope to get it through the Senate before Memorial Day weekend, when the senators will meet their constituents and feel some very intense heat. And that would be something — but not much. It would still have to get through the House after Memorial Day.

And after only two days your coalition of opposites is already beginning to break up. The Democrats don’t like the switch from an immigration policy based on reuniting families (well, families that vote Democrat anyway) to one of importing the skills America needs.

And Big Business is unhappy at being asked to check whether new employees are in the U.S. legally.

You and I know their fears are groundless. The restrictions are only — what’s the phrase? — “boob-bait for Bubba.” Teddy Kennedy’s staff wrote the bill with loopholes specially designed to undercut the restrictions. Democrats can drive all the voting families — and corporate America all the low-skilled workers — they want through these loopholes in refrigerated trucks.

Alas, Karl, you can hardly say so publicly — or, in these days of unpatriotic leaks, even privately. So this round of immigration reform is in trouble as its supporters bail out.

Over the weekend the New York Times jumped off the bandwagon. Senate leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi have both threatened to amend the bill significantly. And Senator Jon Kyl — its indispensable Republican supporter — has threatened to walk away from the bill if amendments upset its careful balance. A perfect storm is building here.

My question is: why should you mind if it fails? Indeed, why were you so keen on it in the first place? Sure, you want to safeguard cheap labor for corporate donors to the GOP — but that's not enough to explain this bill.

After all, the status quo gives cheap labor to corporate America. It will continue to do so as long as Junior Bush fails to safeguard the border and refuses to enforce employer sanctions. Though people didn’t like the status quo exactly, they weren’t as all-fired-up about it as they are about the “Not an Amnesty” bill. Junior could have continued it forever. So why this leap into damaging controversy?

Don’t tell me that the bill will win Hispanics over to the GOP? As we both know, Hispanics split roughly two-to-one for the Democrats in almost every election. Those Hispanics who lean Republican are generally hostile to illegal immigration. So the two main political effects of this national row over immigration are to dispirit the GOP's non-Hispanic base while driving Hispanic Republicans into the arms of the Democrats by “racializing” the immigration issue — i.e., by making it a test of ethnic loyalty.

I’m forgetting the most important point — there’s a third effect, too. If this bill goes through, it will result in citizenship down the road for between 12 and 20 million Hispanics, mainly poor, mainly low-skilled, and so mainly Democratic voters. That represents a net gain of between four and seven million votes for the Democrats at the very least. That’s why the Democrats are supporting this bill.

Notice, however, that they are supporting it very quietly, leaving the heavy lifting to you and the Senate Republicans. They know the legislation alienates their non-Hispanic supporters as well, not least Black America, and they need cover.

Of course, what a fool I’ve been! That explains everything. Karl, you’re working for the Democrats. I am, as ever, in awe.

Your friend and pupil,
Nick

P.S. My usual fee — plus I won’t say anything. Think of it as your own personal amnesty.

John O’Sullivan is the editor-at-large of National Review and author of The President, the Pope, and the Prime Minister. This first appeared in the Chicago Sun-Times and is reprinted with permission


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Editorial; Politics/Elections; US: District of Columbia
KEYWORDS: aliens; amnesty; backstab; betrayal; immigration; karlrove; machiavelli; rove; sellout; shamnesty

1 posted on 05/26/2007 6:22:52 PM PDT by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: neverdem
" Junior could have continued it forever."

Hehe, from now on he's "junior."

Much better name than king jorge.

2 posted on 05/26/2007 6:31:35 PM PDT by Bonaparte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

“Karl, you’re working for the Democrats.”

And so does your boss. Has it anything to do with sour grapes?


3 posted on 05/26/2007 6:35:45 PM PDT by 353FMG (Liberalism is a satanic cult.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Well, one thing this has succeeded in doing, and I don’t think it was their intent, is mainstreaming the immigration debate.

Up to now, they could pretend that only a few “racists” and one-issue extremists objected to illegal immigration and amnesty. Now, however, the cat is out of the bag.


4 posted on 05/26/2007 6:42:21 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

bttt


5 posted on 05/26/2007 6:45:07 PM PDT by Guenevere (Duncan Hunter for President, 2008!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Jim McGreevey, is that you?


6 posted on 05/26/2007 6:46:02 PM PDT by Calpernia (Breederville.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Karl, you’re working for the Democrats.

Maybe the Rats pay better. Karl is a political prostitute, he'll do anything for votes

7 posted on 05/26/2007 7:10:33 PM PDT by LFOD777 (In 2006, Washington spent $2.7 Trillion and ran a $248 billion budget deficit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia
LOL!....history, is repeating itself...history, is repeating itself. 8D
8 posted on 05/26/2007 7:13:34 PM PDT by skinkinthegrass ( just b/c, you suffer from paranoia, doesn't mean they're not out to get you....Run, Fred, Run :^)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
CALL! CALL! CALL! CALL! AND KEEP CALLING TILL THE LINES FRY!

WRITE! WRITE! WRITE! WRITE! TILL YOU RUN OUT OF INK IN YOUR PEN!

Bombard the Democrats as well, especially the ones that ran on an anti immigration plank and the ones in marginal districts who could be vulnerable. keep pounding on them.

STOP AMNESTY NOW!! WE CAN DO IT!!

The best way to stop Shamnesty

9 posted on 05/26/2007 7:51:57 PM PDT by Cacique (quos Deus vult perdere, prius dementat ( Islamia Delenda Est ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Do we call Republicrats the DOP?


10 posted on 05/26/2007 7:52:00 PM PDT by UCFRoadWarrior (Illegal Alien Amnesty Is Anti-American)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bonaparte

Big bump for Junior...


11 posted on 05/26/2007 8:25:04 PM PDT by dcwusmc (We need to make government so small that it can be drowned in a bathtub.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Karl? Is that you?



I like it.

>>From the desk of Nick Machiavelli, Senior Partner, Machiavelli, O’Blarney, Iago, Alcibiades, and Morris, Political Consultants<<

During the course of the Peloponnesian War, Alcibiades changed his allegiance on several occasions.

Iago is one of Shakespeare's most sinister villains, often considered such because of the unique trust that Othello places in him, which he betrays while maintaining his reputation of honesty and dedication.

They could have added Quisling. "Quisling" is synonymous with "traitor", and particularly applied to politicians who appear to favor the interests of other nations or cultures over their own.
12 posted on 05/26/2007 8:53:57 PM PDT by ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas
Excellent mini-dissertation there!
13 posted on 05/26/2007 9:07:24 PM PDT by starbase (Understanding Written Propaganda (click "starbase" to learn 22 manipulating tricks!!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Very clever—it almost made me laugh.

Then I remembered this whole thing is very, very real.


14 posted on 05/26/2007 9:35:13 PM PDT by calcowgirl ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wardaddy; Joe Brower; Cannoneer No. 4; Criminal Number 18F; Dan from Michigan; Eaker; Jeff Head; ...
Immigration: Solutions, Not Excuses

Whose bright idea? (Boondoggle: Changing the lightbulbs at NJ’s new Frank Lautenberg Station) If the dems can get millions of new voters from this immigration bill, expect more corruption like the Lautenberg nonsense.

Why a Bloomberg run could matter

From time to time, I’ll ping on noteworthy articles about politics, foreign and military affairs. FReepmail me if you want on or off my list.

15 posted on 05/26/2007 10:00:05 PM PDT by neverdem (May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
What Bush, and Rove and the Senate and the WSJ, etc. are up to is all explained by this article:

Immigration and Usurpation - Real reason why your Senator wants this immigration amnesty bill

16 posted on 05/26/2007 10:09:55 PM PDT by Plutarch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Plutarch

I read part of it. Bookmarking for tomorrow when I’m awake. But I think expanation for Republican support can be simplified by one thing...corporate blackmail.


17 posted on 05/26/2007 10:56:54 PM PDT by sageb1 (This is the Final Crusade. There are only 2 sides. Pick one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Plutarch

Thanks for the link. Not so long ago, I thought the dems might go the way of the Whigs. If this amnesty goes through, it might be the GOP.


18 posted on 05/26/2007 11:12:18 PM PDT by neverdem (May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

“My question is: why should you mind if it fails? Indeed, why were you so keen on it in the first place? Sure, you want to safeguard cheap labor for corporate donors to the GOP — but that’s not enough to explain this bill.”

THAT IS THE REAL MYSTERY.

Bush seems to have given up on other things without a big fight. Why does he soldier on with this issue???

He doesnt need to, for sure.


19 posted on 05/26/2007 11:45:05 PM PDT by WOSG (Stop Illegal Immigration. Call your Senator today. Senate Switchboard at 202-224-3121.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
Well, one thing this has succeeded in doing, and I don’t think it was their intent, is mainstreaming the immigration debate.

Another good thing, as a result of this coming up and being resolved now, will be that the failure of this bill could show how weak and how little support citizenship/amnesty provision has and put a kibosh on the entire issue for a long time - and will take this divisive (for GOP, mostly) issue off the table for at least 2008 elections. If GOP does well in 2008, they certainly could revisit the enforcement provisions that we now know public supports in very large numbers, and possibly even legal "organized" / "planned" limited guest-worker program which in conjunction with enforcement would severely crimp illegal migration.

It would be, likely, unintentional but very positive result of this charade, and a big blow to "progressives" and unions. If, however, the failure of this "comprehensive" project is an intentional outcome - then it is truly Machiavellian, and so then credit should be due to whoever "Nicollo" is.

20 posted on 05/27/2007 12:27:13 AM PDT by CutePuppy (If you don't ask the right questions you may not get the right answers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: WOSG
Bush seems to have given up on other things without a big fight. Why does he soldier on with this issue???

Maybe compassionate conservative means the modern Rockefeller Republican? I'm at a loss. After all the unfunded obligations of the welfare state and entitlement spending, September 11, 2001 should have settled the issue of illegal immigration.

21 posted on 05/27/2007 12:37:12 AM PDT by neverdem (May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy

I honestly don’t think it’s intentional. The donor money is all on the other side: free market, cheap labor.

Bush has wanted to push an amnesty bill for seven years, and they thought they saw their best opportunity with the new congress and Democrat support, with congressional conservatives too few to stop it.

Actually, it’s the mirror image of what clinton did, pushing through most favored nation status for China with the help of Republican support, since the unions opposed it.

Bush and Rove knew there would still be problems convincing the base, so they tried to do it behind closed doors and to produce a fait accompli, as numerous sources have pointed out. But they underestimated the reaction from the voters.


22 posted on 05/27/2007 7:20:14 AM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Cicero; neverdem
Well, one thing this has succeeded in doing, and I don't think it was their intent, is mainstreaming the immigration debate.
It has indeed, but IMO that was exactly the intent -- the Dhimmicrats have practically abandoned their alleged anti-war stance, have no leg to stand on in the immigration debate, and (thanks to Michael Moore, and the military hospital health care scandal) are about to head to national health care as the 2008 issue. Thanks Neverdem for the ping.
23 posted on 05/27/2007 8:22:10 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (Time heals all wounds, particularly when they're not yours. Profile updated May 26, 2007.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
True that, about Bush, but I wouldn't have him or anyone in WH in mind for my "if... intentional" comment. Bills in Senate and House do have a lot of details, and we know what usually is in the details. And, some time this summer, this immigration affair will be over, at least for this election cycle, so Republicans can concentrate on what unites them instead of what divides them, and see who they can and need to support in primaries.

I don't think there are a lot of "Nicollos" in GOP in general, simply due to the nature and moral principals of the base of the party (Dick Morris doesn't qualify despite his book as he is neither Republican nor "The New Prince"). Of high profile politicians, only Gingrich may come close, but that's also one of the things that hurts him with the base.

Of course, Machiavelli gets a bad rep but it's mostly stereotypical.

You may appreciate a take by Richard Vetere, New York based author of more than 40 theatrical plays, including his recent comedy - "Machiavelli" - http://www.filmreference.com/film/14/Richard-Vetere.html

"Princely advice"
"Lessons in Life and Leadership from Machiavelli"
........................( Yes, Machiavelli ! )

........................ Richard Vetere

Italian political strategist Nicollo Machiavelli was born in 1469 and died in 1527, but his ideas remain remarkably relevant . Sayings derived from his writings, such as "The end justifies the means" and "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer," are still in use, and his political treatise, The Prince, is still in print.

For many people, the term "Machiavellian" suggests manipulative behavior, and they mistakenly believe that Machiavelli advocated immorality. He was a realist who believed that a leader should put welfare of his people ahead of moral concerns, but he warned against immorality. Here, lessons we all can learn from him...

Anticipating the worst and taking action can overcome bad luck. Machiavelli acknowledged that our success and failure can be determined by things beyond our control, but he also believed that the role of chance could be minimized. It's bad luck to be wiped out by a flooding river, but if we constructed dams and dikes before there was a flood, the damage might have been minimized. Risk can never be eliminated, but it can be contained by those who plan ahead and take action.

Example: A businessman shouldn't blame fate when a deal falls apart. If he had been more proactive in laying the groundwork for other deals, the one failure wouldn't matter as much.

The only reliable allies are those who benefit from our success. Machiavelli warned princes against leading mercenary troops into battle. Mercenaries might not give their full effort or might turn on their employers. Instead, we should team up only with those who truly benefit from our victory or our opponent's defeat. People are fickle about all things except one - they will always look out for their own interests. As long as our success is in their interests, they will be on our side.

Before we place our trust in anyone, we must first ask, Are the interests of this person truly in line with our own? If not, is there a way to make it so? Machiavelli would be in favor of profit-sharing programs that give employees a stake in their employer's success.

Our activities during free time often shape our success. Machiavelli warned leaders that they must concentrate on the study of war even in peacetime. He recommended as appropriate hobbies hunting and reading books about great military leaders.

Free time and work time really are all part of the limited amount of time we have at our disposal to succeed at our goals. That doesn't mean we can't enjoy ourselves on our days off, but it does mean that we should search for productive uses for these hours.

Forgiving those who do us wrong is a mistake. When we forgive those who try to harm us, we undercut the efforts of those who are loyal. It is better to punish those who deserve to be punished and show love to those who truly deserve our love.

Passion is the best motivator. Machiavelli believed that you can't lead people into battle by explaining the logic of a situation - you must do so by inflaming their passions. Even in our everyday lives, it pays to seek out people who believe passionately in what they do. Speak with tradespeople and professionals about their businesses before hiring them. Try to gauge their passion for their work.

Trust enemies above friends for frankness. When Machiavelli advocated keeping friends close but enemies closer, he meant that we can trust our enemies to criticize us when we deserve to be criticized.

Friends are often less honest with us. Some become jealous of our success and secretly plot against us. Others agree with everything we say in a misguided attempt to protect our feelings, even when they know we are wrong. When we surround ourselves with flatterers, we're on our road to failure.

The hard route to the top is often the best. Some people are born into money and power, while others have to earn them. Don't waste time being jealous of those to whom fortune has given a head start - such people often lose in the end. Machiavelli saw that leaders who inherit their success are more likely to fail than self-made people who are forced to learn important life lessons during their own climbs.

24 posted on 05/27/2007 8:24:06 PM PDT by CutePuppy (If you don't ask the right questions you may not get the right answers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy

moral principals = moral principles


25 posted on 05/27/2007 8:32:25 PM PDT by CutePuppy (If you don't ask the right questions you may not get the right answers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

“free market”
We should all be in favor a free market.
It’s Econ 101-type common sense.

What is disturbing is the false parallel between free trade in good and the free trade in people, the latter which has huge political and social impacts that go far beyond free trade and impact us in ways that are calculable in purely economic terms.


26 posted on 05/27/2007 9:15:23 PM PDT by WOSG (Stop Illegal Immigration. Call your Senator today. Senate Switchboard at 202-224-3121.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson