Earthdweller's argument after your post. Nice job.
Posted on 06/02/2007 10:22:51 AM PDT by nj26
President Bush’s advocacy of an immigration overhaul and his attacks on critics of the plan are provoking an unusually intense backlash from conservatives who form the bulwark of his remaining support, splintering his base and laying bare divisions within a party whose unity has been the envy of Democrats.
It has pitted some of Mr. Bush’s most stalwart Congressional and grass-roots backers against him, sparking a vitriol that has at times exceeded anything seen yet between Mr. Bush and his supporters, who have generally stood with him through the toughest patches of his presidency. Those supporters now view him as pursuing amnesty for foreign law breakers when he should be focusing on border security.
Postings on conservative Web sites this week have gone so far as to call for Mr. Bush’s impeachment, and usually friendly radio hosts, commentators and Congressional allies are warning that he stands to lose supporters — a potentially damaging development, they say, when he needs all the backing he can get on other vital matters like the war in Iraq.
“I think President Bush hurts himself every time he says it is not amnesty,” said Senator Tom Coburn, Republican of Oklahoma, referring to the bill’s legalization process for immigrants. “We are not all that stupid.”
This week, in discussing Mr. Bush’s recent comments accusing conservative critics of the immigration legislation of fear-mongering, Rush Limbaugh told listeners: “I just wish he hadn’t done it because he’s not going to lose me on Iraq, and he’s not going to lose me on national security. But he might lose some of you.”
Such sentiments have reverberated through talk radio, conservative publications like National Review and Fox News. They have also appeared on Web sites including RedState.com and FreeRepublic.com...
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
I’m done with Bush, and republicans are not far behind. I have defended Bush on many occasions, but now I am done.
This mess of an immigration bill, and the continuing mess in Iraq will guarantee a democrat in the White House in ‘08.
I’ve often wondered how many folks in D.C. peruse this website.
The current irrational tone on FR?
Here is an article posted here by quidnunc 10/12/98
You’re a late comer.
The Chicago Sun-Times
October 12,1998 John O’Sullivan
How Immigration Jeopardizes Serenity of GOP
The census will shift House seats from states with few non-citizens to states with many. That’s just a start. What with Monica Lewinsky, a shaky Dow, the coming impeachment hearings and elections in less than a month, the Republicans are feeling pretty hotsy-totsy. They have a spring in their step, a lilt in their voice and a song in their heart (namely “Don’t Blame Me”). The prospect of increasing their majorities in the House and Senate, and even of initiating a new Republican era, seems set.
And yet, and yet. … Last week, a cloud no bigger than a man’s hand appeared on the horizon and threatened to rain eventually on their parade. It took the form of a report, “Remaking the Political Landscape,” from the nonpartisan Center for Immigration Studies. This is a study of how immigration affects U.S. population growth, which in turn determines the apportionment of seats in the House of Representatives.
Its conclusion was that as a result of immigration, 13 seats will change hands after the 2000 census, going from states with few immigrants to states with many. And since the number of seats is an important measure of a state’s influence in Washington, this represents an important redistribution of political power.
For Illinois, it is a wash. The state neither gains nor loses seats for this reason. But the Midwest as a whole is a big loser. Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin and Kentucky all lose seats, which is especially bad news for Michigan and Ohio, because they each lost a seat after the 1990 census.
But the Midwest’s political influence is not the only casualty. Democracy also sustains a flesh wound. For this trend takes away seats from states where an estimated 98 percent of the inhabitants are U.S. citizens to give them to states such as California where one inhabitant in five is a non-citizen. And because non-citizens cannot vote — well, not legally — this means the creation of “rotten boroughs” where a congressman can be elected with less than 50,000 votes, compared with five to 10 times that number everywhere else. That also redistributes political power unfairly.
The Center for Immigration Studies, mindful of its nonpartisan standing, steers away from the thorny question of how this will affect, ahem, Republicans and Democrats. But Professor James Gimpel, author of “The Congressional Politics of Immigration Reform” (Allyn and Bacon, Boston), is less discreet. He declares straight out that it will benefit the Democrats.
“The effect will be to create lopsidedly safe Democratic districts where there is no real democratic accountability to the voters,” he says. He cites the 33rd District of California, where a Democrat holds the seat with 82 percent of the votes cast — an unimpressive 47,000.
This “redistribution effect” is more important than it may seem, because election often turn on tiny majorities. Compare the 13 seats it transfers with the 31 House seats that changed hands in the last election to gauge its potential for remaking the political landscape.
But it is by no means the greatest danger that immigration poses for the GOP. That lies in how immigration is changing the ethnic demography of America. The Census Bureau estimates that, largely as a result of immigration, the ethnic makeup of America in 2050 will be as follows: non-Hispanic whites, 53 percent; blacks, 15 percent; Hispanics, 21 percent, and Asians, 10 percent. And because different ethnic groups have very different voting patterns, that demographic change will bring a major political transformation in its wake.
So the GOP has a choice. It can either seek to reduce immigration-and thus its political effects — or it can change all of its other policies to appeal to an electorate with Democratic loyalties.
Indeed, in Texas, Gov. George W. Bush already has embarked on the second course. His television ads invite the voters to vote for Bush and says, “Who cares if he’s not a Democrat?”
What? You’re from Texas and you haven’t heard it? Maybe that’s because it’s in Spanish.
John O’Sullivan is editor at large of National Review.
(John O’Sullivan in the Chicago Sun-Times, October 12, 1998)
Doesn't surprise me a bit. One observation: I doubt it was really the first time.
“Doesn’t surprise me a bit.”
What’s really surprising is the NY Times editors did not catch that one of their underlings actually reported a hint that it might not just be conservatives who are troubled by this bill.
When you think about it,
The President is for it,
Both houses are Democrat,
Why care about Repub “conservatives”?
Except...
I think it was Bilbray that said no bill is better than a bad bill. Kudos to him and the others fighting this nonsense.
I agree with everything you’ve said Cicero. The strange thing is that the ‘pro-amnesty’ posters here lately at FR (the last few days, especially) aren’t even trying to persuade anyone. They aren’t taking to time to go over this bill and point out where we’ve ‘gotten it wrong’, or anything of the sort. They are just repeating the same rhetoric we’re hearing from Congress and our President over and over. Plus, when anyone presents them with honest-to-goodness hard evidence, as well as serious suggestions besides amnesty they pretend they haven’t heard a thing, or resort to personal attacks. It’s quite frustrating. I’d really appreciate an honest-to-goodness discussion of solutions, and an explanation of how exactly this bill is ‘good’ for the country instead being treated as an incompetent child...
Our elected officials are there to speak FOR us, not TO us it’s about time they remembered that...
“I doubt it was really the first time.”
I’m pretty sure you’re right about that...
We should rebuild the grassroots conservative movement. From the Reagan Revolution of 1980 through the Contract with America in 1994, it was this movement from outside Washington that carried us to the first center-right majority governing coalition in more than 60 years. The problem has not been with conservatism or with our voters.
The problem has been with Republican leaders who forgot who elected them and what values their supporters expected to see implemented in Washington.
-- Newt Gingrich, 11-13-2006
Now I would call that an A number one bot statement.
Please FReepers, don’t stop or slow down in your communications with your congresscritters....lets keep going with those letters, emails, calls and any other method you can find to let those traitors in Washington know that we are mad as hell and we’re not going to take this any more.
Prove that statement! If you cannot then you need a ZOT.
“The NYT Bathhouse boys reading FR see that it advocates impeachment and death for the Pres and his family, daily. And reports it to the entire world.”
What utter bunk!!
Yeah, I've seen it. There's a disdain that oozes from their comments-not "I don't agree with you and here's what I think and why" but "I (we) know what's best. You sit back and shut up." And of course you're a racist or bigot if you disagree with them.
we are not slowing down one bit. I have neighbors over Friday night to hear mp3 downloads of some of Mark Levin's comments. I have copied our Senators and the White House numbers and have been handing them out to neighbors to tell them to call first thing Monday. There are many people who still aren't aware of this Destroy America Bill. Once they find out, they are shocked and dismayed our leaders are so against the Will of the people.
All we can do at this stage is contact everyone we know and press them to call. We must not let up until this bill is buried.
Earthdweller's argument after your post. Nice job.
Hey...at least he’s coming out to fight global warming.../s
Sell his ranch in Texas! Where is this coming from? I certainly haven’t heard anything of the sort!
You are kicking a dead horse in my view, and you will have to dissolve the Constitution of the United States of America to do what you suggest. sorry but you are a traitor and nothing more. go peddle you "new world order" ideas somewhere else.
Are you kidding? I believe it’s the opposite! A whole lot of posts on here these days are people bashing the President (and other Republicans),and bad-mouthing and shaming his supporters until they wind up leaving! It’s mind-boggling how no matter what else he’s done that you’d think would make them happy don’t even matter anymore! I’ve found a very hostile climate on here anymore, except for a few threads! I couldn’t disagree more!
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.