Posted on 06/06/2007 11:23:41 AM PDT by ventanax5
George Bush’s political strategists have long promoted amnesty for illegal aliens as a device for increasing the Republican vote among Hispanics. They also warn that denying rights to illegal aliens will hurt the GOP. A Hispanic backlash in California after Proposition 187 (the 1994 voter initiative that denied illegal aliens many publicly funded services) turned the state from red to blue, they claim; a similar rout awaits the party if it does not embrace liberal immigration policies.
There is scant evidence for either of these ideas. The 1986 amnesty signed by President Reagan did not trigger a Latino surge into the Republican Party. And California’s Hispanics leaned as strongly Democratic before Prop. 187 as after it. Hispanic voting patterns in California have held steady since 1988—they vote approximately two-to-one for Democratic presidential candidates. California’s shift from red to blue would have happened with or without Prop. 187, as defense-industry whites left the state, replaced by liberal high-tech professionals, and as the Hispanic portion of the electorate tripled from 7 percent to 21 percent.
(Excerpt) Read more at city-journal.org ...
Even if this crap is true, it’s the wrong thing for the country. But among the leadership of both parties, there is little loyalty to the country over the party.
This is the reason GWB has turned the party more liberal lately. He has already put the deal in the works with Mexico and Canada. Most of us just don’t know it yet.
I certainly could not agree more with you.
Probably not “big business” but a lot of manual labor, including agriculture, construction and meat packing.
What if we were to break the analysis down further and focus narrowly on the same socio-economic demographic that Bush and Kennedy want to legalize and escort down the path to citizenship?
That group is lower income, more recently arrived, with higher criminal rates (putting aside immigration violations) than the hispanic population at large. This is the same demographic that supports leftists like Obrador in their home country, who people may recall tried to shut Mexico down with mass demonstrations and an occupation of Mexico City, when he very narrowly lost the recent election to Calderon.
I expect we would discover that this particular demographic that is to be made legal supports Democrats over Republicans at rates of over 80%, if not 90%.
The GOP is going to learn one simple fact real soon:
CORPORATIONS DON’T VOTE ON ELECTION DAY.
It’s about voters. As it was with Al Gore’s defeat in Florida. The own Republican party is digging its tomb.
These are small potatoes compared to real big business. I don't think the president and Republican Senators would all sell out their Country for lettuce growers and small home builders. I believe the answer must be that they really do want to bring about the end of the U.S. as a sovereign Country. When the Hispanic population gets large enough there will be nothing to stop a union with Mexico.
They will witness the collapse of SS and Medicare, and the collapse of the US dollar when they crank the press to cover all the SS debt. In 10 years, I bet a loaf of bread will cost 10 dollars, minimum.
And even more wierd is that we personally quite a few well-educated people in Eastern Europe (Christian and white hence not under special rules) who can not even get a visa from the US government to VISIT their relatives and friends here for a couple of weeks.
I think the decisions have been made to distort the demographics and the sovereignty of the United States for reasons we may never know.
As one who has been fighting the Left for over half a century, I can tell you that this compulsion takes many forms; but that it has been successful in intimidating others from challenging the underlying premises, there is little doubt. This is the reason for the tactic of hurling insults, every time anyone suggests that we have a legitimate interest in preserving the character of our communities as extensions of many Centuries of development by the European stocks, which settled them and continued their own development in developing those communities.
The notion--the insane notion--that by fawning over them, we will somehow make landless Mexican peasants--and landless in the sense that they do not even share the concepts central to Magna Carta, and through it to our Declaration of Independence, and the sanctity of private property to the Founding Fathers;--that we will somehow turn them into good Republicans, willing to defend the individual's rights to private property and the type of culture that we have been used to; would be comic, if it was not undermining our ability to provide our children, the same American lifestyle that we have come to take for granted.
I do not share the disrespect that some have demonstrated towards those Mestizo peasants. I wish them only good things, but in their own communities, in their own land. When I suggest that they have no concept of the values, sacred in our heritage, I do not mean that one of them who grows wealthy, will not be happy to acquire land of his own. But in all their revolutions, in Mexico, over almost two hundred years, have they ever rallied to a document with the complex understanding of our Declaration of Independence? Or did they simply revolt against a Government that did little for them, or with which they did not identify. Our Revolution was an infinitely more complex undertaking.
God Help our children, if we do not find that within those of us who understand this folly, the means to turn the political debate around within the next 17 months. Neither any of the Democratic candidates, nor McCain or Giuliani or several other Republicans, offer any hope for an American future.
William Flax
You know, there was a time when regular people could feel like they were special just because they were Americans and part of something great and good and bigger than themselves. Can I teach that patriotism to my children today? Will I be honest if I do? Does it work to point to the past and say “once we were great and good and we can be again?”
What motivates pro-illegal Republicans is not generally as much the votes of Mexican-Americans, I think, as it is the wealthy employers of illegal aliens.
This is a debate that has been going on in Republican circles since the early 90s. There was and is a group of Repubs who, despite a total absence of supporting evidence, argue that Hispanics have more conservative family values and so would be ripe for recruitment. Anyone who has been around Mexicans and other Latin Americans knows that is a load of doodoo. Their birthrates of illegitimate children is as high as anywhere on earth. Their governments have been preaching marxism and socialism to them for decades. They are already Dems before they get here, and are living proof of the old adage, “I’m paul and anyone who will rob peter to pay paul gets my vote.” The family values true believers have given cover to the open boders, cheap labor wing of the party.
” Its about cheap labor for big business, nothing more”
The stock market is at an all time high, partly because
big buisiness thinks Shamnesty is in the bag.
Yep, it’s businesses who want the benefit of being able to pay dirt-cheap wages to employees and push the real costs of these people and their families onto taxpayers.
Without the flood of low-income foreigners, the businesses would have to pay more, and some of them might even have to offer healthcare and other benefits, in order to attract employees.
Yes, because of the dirt-cheap illegals we are able to pay less for lettuce in the supermarket and certain other goods and services, but the benefit is more than offset by the higher taxes for welfare, schools, prisons, police and the giant future timebomb when these people, who pay next to nothing in taxes and social security, start collecting medicare and social security payments and the huge future social costs for their children who will NOT be willing to pick lettuce but will still be high school dropouts to a large extent.
Because the tax and social costs of the flood of illegals are both hidden and have a delayed effect, the true cost-benefit tradeoff is not apparent to most people.
I think it is only part that. I think Bush, Rove, Martinez et al actually believe this nonsense. At the root of their delusion is their own grandiosity: a belief that they have the insight, charisma, power of persuasion, etc to convince people to come over to their way of thinking and join their party. Of course this is absurd. How people vote is largely a function of their personalities and priorities.
In the final analysis, it comes down to the same old story. They dont call us the Stupid Party for nothing.
Not to get flamed or anything, (I am adamantly against this bill) but we shouldn’t paint with a broad brush-Cubans, Niceragauns, and now Venezuelans are mostly Republican. Anecdotally, I am considered a moderate in my household (married a Cuban) which is very scary since I am far to the right.
I am scary reading you, and I agree with Republican ideas in most of the fronts.
It’s about votes.
I would like to know the person that invented all that stuff about terrorists that spend days in the Mexican desert to enter the U.S. He had probably won the presidency for the Dems.
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.