Posted on 11/20/2012 6:09:37 AM PST by Kaslin
Set aside the idealized Hispanic of the Republican consultants' vision. What does the real Hispanic community look like today?
Let us consider only native-born Hispanics, U.S. citizens.
According to Steve Camarota of the Center for Immigration Studies, which analyzed Census Bureau statistics from 2012:
-- More than one in five Hispanic citizens lives in poverty.
-- One in four Hispanic-American men 25 to 55 is out of work.
-- More than half of all Hispanic women 25-55 are unmarried.
-- Half of all Hispanic households with children are headed by an unmarried woman, and 55 percent depend on welfare programs.
These numbers do not improve with time, as they did with the Irish, Italian, Polish, Jewish and German immigrants who poured into the United States between 1890 and 1920. Third-generation Hispanics do worse than second-generation Hispanics in all the above categories.
This is a huge community being sucked into the morass of a mammoth welfare state. Consider a typical Hispanic household with children.
It is headed by an unmarried women who receives food stamps and public housing or rent supplements to feed and house her children.
Her kids are educated free from Head Start to K-12 and fed by school breakfast and lunch programs. Should they graduate high school, Pell Grants and student loans are there for college.
For cash, mom gets welfare checks. If she takes a job, she will receive an earned income tax credit to supplement her income. If she loses her job, she can get 99 weeks of unemployment checks.
For health care, there is Medicaid and Obamacare. And like 45 percent of all Hispanic households, she has no federal income tax liability.
Why should this woman vote for a party that will cut taxes she does not pay, but reduce benefits she does receive?
Rename Romney's gifts "government services," writes Aaron Blake citing a Washington Post poll, and one discovers that 67 percent of Latinos favor "a larger government with more services."
These are big government people. And why should they not be?
According to Heather Mac Donald, writing in National Review, a 2011 survey found that California Hispanics by four to one objected more to the GOP on class-warfare grounds -- the party "favors only the rich," Republicans are "selfish" -- than to the GOP stand on immigration.
Writes Mac Donald: California's Hispanics will likely prove more decisive in passing Proposition 30, to raise state income taxes to 13.3 percent, the highest level in the nation, than to Obama's victory.
Nor is this unusual. Populist programs to stick it to the rich have always had an appeal south of the border.
There are 50 million Hispanics in America today. California is lost to the GOP. Nevada and Colorado are slipping away. Arizona and Texas are next up on the block.
With the U.S. Hispanic population in 2050 projected to reach 130 million, the acolytes of Karl Rove have their work cut out for them.
Very good point, and I think you are right. Perhaps he needed more to demonstrate, for the benefit of flush contributors, the essential RiNO posture of showing the Main Street Republican scum his ass, than actually unifying the Party.
He did say, contemptuously, about Texas conservative voters who didn't get a chance to vote before it was all over ('Rats pettifogged the State in court into moving the primary from April, when things were still hot and heavy, all the way to May 29th), that he didn't need to campaign here in Texas because "they'll come to me when I'm the last man standing". That was either carelessly or deliberately bad political speech directed to people he needed to turn out.
It's interesting that politicians still seem to think they can say something in a locked room full of sympathetic Hesychasmists, something mildly derogatory or even openly contemptuous of non-Hesychasmists, and it won't be all over the 'Net and percolating through society long before the election.
Two statements in cognitive dissonance.
Romney was right about the 47% (more or less -- it turned out to be 52% or something), and yes, he humiliated Obozo.
The point is, Zero didn't need to be or do anything, to be elected by the looters.
All a 'Rat President needs is the phone number of the Director of the IRS and Treasury Secretary.
"I am a RIVER to my PEOPLE!!!" </Anthony Quinn>
<Gunfire and ululation from desert horde>
They deliberately stay unmarried to qualify for the benefits
Thud-bump. Lay it out like it is.
The RiNO's lost because they're too gutless to say it or too rich to care.
Not really. I said they don't care. The reality is, they would have been dismayed if Bobo had talked any kind of fiscal sanity.
Romney didn't have to pwn Bobo in that First Debate, but he did. Perhaps you don't know any Libtards, but I do -- and they were and are still thoroughly eviscerated by that moment where Romney said, "Emperor, you have no clothes.", and then proceeded to adminster the greatest debate whuppin since Reagan exposed Carter.
Simple because We The People have been invaded/outbred in the intervening 42 years since the prior debate champ doesn't extinguish the fact that Romney's "J'accuse!" will hang like a millstone around Bobo for 4 years.
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.