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

Skip to comments.

Immigration and the GOP (How to make Republicans a minority party once again)
wsj opinion journal ^ | 6 27 07 | wsj editors

Posted on 06/27/2007 8:21:20 AM PDT by flixxx

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-73 next last
To: flixxx
They’re caught between a passionate minority of their party—who oppose any reform that allows illegals a path to citizenship—and the larger electorate, which is more moderate and wants to solve the problem.

Then solve the problem. Just make sure the problem has been correctly identified, and that the proposed remedies actually solve it.

For instance, I do not see the problem as being a lack of unskilled workers, welfare recipients, or future Democrat voters.

21 posted on 06/27/2007 8:32:40 AM PDT by Logophile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

You are correct. If amnesty was the will of the people, the bill would have passed last year. Year after year, well-designed polls find that the vast majority of Americans want the borders secured. It’s not just a few right wing nuts, WSJ, and you know it. It’s the American people.


22 posted on 06/27/2007 8:32:44 AM PDT by LadyNavyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: flixxx

When it comes to immigration, F the WSJ! (Thank you Michelle Malkin)


23 posted on 06/27/2007 8:33:12 AM PDT by Niteranger68 (Amnesty….NO MEANS NO!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
a passionate minority of their party

TWJ - The New Socialist/Globalist Rag. Then can't stand that the majority of the American people are against this. Hopefully the WSJ will continue to become irrelevant.

24 posted on 06/27/2007 8:33:19 AM PDT by Altura Ct.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: flixxx

Spin, spin, spin, spin...more total BS. This piece is about as dishonest as anything I’ve ever seen in print.


25 posted on 06/27/2007 8:33:33 AM PDT by Bernard Marx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Asclepius
The immigration issue is what doomed the GOP in California, a formerly GOP state.

Don't you think it was immigration itself that doomed the GOP in California. The voter base changed. Demographics. This bill will make all states California demographically, and California will go off the reservation politically with naturalized illegal voters.

26 posted on 06/27/2007 8:33:47 AM PDT by Greg F (<><)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

Hannity had Dick Morris on the show last night and Morris hit the nail on the head. Morris said that Bush is adamant that the Mexicans coming over the border in droves will instantly become Republican voters that will allways remember the gringo president that made it all possible.

G.W. has to be smoking wacky weed and doing mushrooms and peyote!!!!!!

Morris said also, though that the Rats believe this too, but they know that the illegals will and already have voted for Rats over Re-pubics all the time.


27 posted on 06/27/2007 8:34:12 AM PDT by KeyLargo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sportsterinred

Unfortunately it is not. Using false documents to do so is, however IIRC.


28 posted on 06/27/2007 8:34:56 AM PDT by Iowegian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: zerosix

“Articles like this by not only WSJ but most especially the editors of
the Editorial Page, are the main reason we have cancelled our decades
long subscriptions.”

Same thing for my parents.
They tired of financially supporting editorial writing in favor of
the invasion of the USA by an army of identity theives.


29 posted on 06/27/2007 8:35:12 AM PDT by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: flixxx
How about: 1) anchor babies are abolished
2) no welfare for illegals
3) employers face one million dollar fines for each illegal employed.
4) rent to an illegal (one million dollar fine for each illegal in the property).

Then enforce the law, Secure the border.
Result - everyone but the illegals and their supporters are happy.
GOP sweeps to victory. Simple, yes, desired result, yes.

30 posted on 06/27/2007 8:35:31 AM PDT by From One - Many (Trust the Old Media At Your Own Risk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sportsterinred

Yeah, you only have to read into the second sentence of the second paragraph to know that the whole article is BS:

“caught between a passionate minority of their party”

How about correcting the to th passionate MAJORITY of the party and of the ELECTORATE!

The WSJ has lost all credibility on Shamnesty!


31 posted on 06/27/2007 8:37:56 AM PDT by jt2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: flixxx

“Restrictionists” is wrong.

“Pro-Law-Enforcement” is right.

WSJ are Pro Amnesty for Lawbreakers.


32 posted on 06/27/2007 8:38:32 AM PDT by Uncle Miltie (Confidence in Congress has hit an all-time low of 14%)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: flixxx

The WSJ editorial board is in severe denial about what the attitude of most Americans is toward legalizing the 10s of millions of illegals and allowing them to bring in and legalize additional family members from abroad.

Far from taking the issue “off the table,” if the bill passes, it will be a bigger issue in the upcoming election than if it fails. An enraged populace will seek to punish their representatives who so adamantly defied the wishes of the American people on this issue.

As to the political reality of which party these illegals will vote for, the WSJ is either completely disconnected from reality or, as I believe, is being intentionally dishonest here to fool the gullible. We are to believe millions of low income, uneducated Mexican and Central American peasants are NOT going to vote overwhelmingly for the party that promises them more government benefits and socialism? And that panders to the most racist and irrendist elements among them? The advice from the WSJ to Republicans is to allow tens of millions of future Democrat voters to become part of the electorate, because otherwise Republicans might anger hispanics? Perhaps the Republican party should simply disband now, so as not to offend its opponents.

And of course, the WSJ pulls out that favorite tactic of dishonest immigration demagogues, conflating illegal and legal immigration, pretending that those opposed to amnesty are simply “hostile to immigration.”


33 posted on 06/27/2007 8:39:33 AM PDT by SirJohnBarleycorn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jt2

The WSJ is repeating the big lie. A huge majority of Americans don’t want this “legislation” to pass. They want our laws enforced, the fence built and our borders closed. Period. We just cannot absorb large numbers of immigrants at the pace we are doing now. Nor do we want a bilingual or bicultural state.


34 posted on 06/27/2007 8:42:29 AM PDT by RKV (He who has the guns makes the rules)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Greg F
The immigration issue is what doomed the GOP in California, a formerly GOP state.

The open border crowd used a couple of high profile losses in the last election to blame strict border control for the losses . They refused to acknowledge that many of the democrats who were elected had taken a strong stance on border control. The recent vote in the house to cut emergency funding for sanctuary cities had around 50 democrats voting for it. Also there were congressional districts where "moderate" GOP incumbents lost to conservative GOP candidates.
35 posted on 06/27/2007 8:44:36 AM PDT by cripplecreek (Greed is NOT a conservative ideal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: flixxx
I think this is a very reasoned opinion calculated article about what will happen self-interests will be sacrificed if there is no immigration amnesty legislation passed this year.
36 posted on 06/27/2007 8:47:09 AM PDT by TheeOhioInfidel (DUNCAN HUNTER WOULD PARDON THE TEXAS 3.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman

exactly.


37 posted on 06/27/2007 8:48:13 AM PDT by Rodney King (No, we can't all just get along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Greg F
The basic argument is that it is too late, we must open the borders, give amnesty because the 8% hispanic vote is already so large that we cannot win without it. The editors of the WSJ ignore the fact that the latin Republican vote is to a large degree opposed to amnesty and open borders. They also ignore the cross-over vote of white Democrats on this issue, black Democrats on this issue, and the value of an energized base. They also ignore the current vote fraud in which illegals already vote, which would be reduced if their was good border security and enforcement of the current immigration laws against employers. They also ignore national security , the rule of law, fairness, and spin public opinion which is against amnesty. The biggest thing they ignore is that the name “Republican” means little to people anymore — a Republican party that gains a majority of the votes of 100 million naturalized illegals, their family reunification immigration, and their children would not be a conservative party anymore. It’s agonna swamp us who are currently American voters and our children. Won’t be our country anymore.

Very Excellent Post.

38 posted on 06/27/2007 8:50:48 AM PDT by TheeOhioInfidel (DUNCAN HUNTER WOULD PARDON THE TEXAS 3.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: flixxx
The Open Borders Crowd prattle is precisely what will happen to the GOP if the bill gets through. The GOP will help to create a predominately Left-leaning electorate with its own hands. Its not just politics - there are good reasons to vote NO on amnesty. The Wall Street Journal editorial board doesn't get it.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

39 posted on 06/27/2007 8:51:03 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VOA

Interesting, there is some news floating around out there with comments by former Sen. Alan Simpson (Simpson-Mazzoli).

From a speech at Texas A & M, he states that “all immigration policy is base (on) four things: emotion, fear, compassion or racism”. No wonder the administration is calling us fearmongers and racists - they truly believe in the Immigration Bible according to Simpson - part of his speech below:

“Former Senator Alan Simpson Speaks At Texas A&M Conference

COLLEGE STATION - Former U.S. Sen. Alan Simpson says that all immigration policy is based four things: emotion, fear, compassion or racism.
“Congress will pass or kill any immigration bill for one of these four reasons,” he notes, adding that these are also weapons used to distort the public’s view of the immigration issues.
Simpson, the coauthor of the Immigration Reform Act of 1986, spoke to a large group of scholars and policy makers attending a Texas A&M University conference titled “Presidential Rhetoric and the Politics of Immigration.” It was the seventh annual conference sponsored by the Program in Presidential Rhetoric at Texas A&M.
“During this year’s conference, we have been examining the use of language and symbols in presidential immigration policy and how this might influence public beliefs and attitudes,” said Martin Medhurst, coordinator of the program.
After telling the audience not to worry, he wasn’t running for anything, Simpson effectively used humor to bring up some serious issues. He pointed out that presidents are not good at dealing with immigration because of all the issues connected with it and because emotion, fear and racism tends to freeze people in place.
Saying there is no such thing as a “temporary worker from another country,” Simpson explained that this is because workers come and bring their families or form families here and they become permanent. Then he quipped that the poem on the Statue of Liberty doesn’t say anything about “legal or illegal tired, hungry and poor.”
“What is in our national interest?” he asked. “ The first duty of a sovereign nation is to control its borders so we must keep in mind what is best for all the nation.” Simpson added that acceptance of others cannot be forced.
“Political correctness just stuffs a sock in the mouth and doesn’t cure racism. It just tramps it down and later it comes out like Mount Vesuvius erupting,” he emphasized.
“Caring and finding common goals, destiny and language is what will bring people together,” he added. ...”


40 posted on 06/27/2007 8:52:04 AM PDT by antceecee (Western countries really aren't up to winning this war on terror... it might offend the terrorists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-73 next last

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