Posted on 03/18/2013 9:18:23 PM PDT by montag813
WASHINGTON — On Tuesday Sen. Rand Paul will urge conservatives to abandon their long standing opposition to a pathway to citizenship for the millions of undocumented workers in the United States, bluntly warning to not do so Republicans "will need to resign ourselves to permanent minority status," according to excerpts of a Tuesday speech obtained by BuzzFeed.
In a speech to the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce Legislative Summit, Paul will lay out his case for a conservative, and Republican, embrace of comprehensive reform. "The Republican Party has insisted for years that we stand for freedom and family values. I am most proud of my party when it stands for both … Republicans need to give birth to a new attitude toward immigrants, an attitude that sees immigrants as assets not liabilities," Paul will say, according to excerpts of the speech.
Like many Republicans who back a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, Paul argues Latinos should be a natural wellspring of GOP votes that the party has increasingly abandoned.
"Hispanics should be a natural and sizable part of the Republican base. That they have steadily drifted away from the GOP in each election says more about Republicans than it does Hispanics," Paul will say, arguing that "Defense of the unborn and defense of traditional marriage are Republican issues that should resonate with Latinos, but have been obscured by the misperception that Republicans are hostile to immigrants."
Although Paul has long been supportive of comprehensive reform that includes some form of a pathway to citizenship for undocumented workers, Tuesday's speech represents his most detailed comments on the topic.
"Those who work for reform must understand that a real solution must ensure that our borders are secure. It must modernize our immigration controls and databases. It must allow for as much legal immigration as our workforce requires. And it must treat those who are already here with understanding and compassion—without also unduly rewarding them for coming illegally," Paul will say.
"We should be proud that so many want to come to America, that it is still seen as the land of opportunity. Let's make it a land of legal work, not black market jobs. Let's make it a land of work not welfare. Our land should be one of assimilation, not hiding in the shadows."
Paul also will take on many of the talking points used by conservative opponents of comprehensive reform. For instance, Paul will outright dismiss claims that undocumented immigrants have become a drain on the nation's welfare system, saying "I've never met a new immigrant looking for a free lunch."
If this country does become 50% “minority” by 2050, it will be because of those, like you, who continue to surrender on the invasion of its borders, continue to support/accept accommodation of those invaders & their offspring, and advocate addition policies certain to encourage even greater millions of illegals to invade our shores.
(Don't bother replying with the BS “we can't deport them all” argument. There have been countless posting on FR revealing how federal action, by past Presidents, caused the massive repatriation of illegals without the need to deport more than a small fraction of their numbers. FReepers who cared to know that alternative to surrender already know it.)
Rather than re-branding themselves as "the other Democrat Party," there's a simply program the GOP can use to seize the future.
Publicly declare and actually commit the entire party to:
1)Put Americans first by ending the surrender to invading illegal aliens;
2) Stop the disenfranchisement of legal voters by fraudulent/illegal voters by fighting all voter fraud everywhere in this country
there's a simply simple program
The 50% of color has nothing to do with undocumented people. That is what the census bureau projects by birth rates of U S citizens. Fighting voter fraud also has nothing to do with where these demographics are going. Math and science is not an ideology. This is the reality it is not something that can be stopped.
Voter fraud has to do with your posts citing EC totals in past elections.
Now, based on faulty/dubious polling and revisions by groups like the National Elections Pool, the "Bush won 44 percent of the Latino vote in 2004" myth was created. That was due to revisions of his latino vote percentages in places like Texas and Oklahoma ( we're talking about 59 to 74 percent ). Initially, the NEP was saying that Kerry was likely to defeat Bush, and well, when that didn't pan out, they were forced to "revise" their numbers in order to help save face. In the end, Bush still got under 40 percent.
Long story short, is that if you truly want to win and retain the hispanic vote, then you have to bring in the better skilled/educated immigrants from Latin America.
Look what happened in Florida : Prior to the 1980 Mariel boat lift ( 1960's and early seventies ) Cuban immigrants were from Cuba's bourgeois class who fled in the aftermath of Castro's revolution. From '80 forward, the Cuban immigrants came from Cuba's underclass.
Pre-Mariel Cubans and their children were decidedly anti-communist and pro business reflecting their bourgeois outlook and values. Post-Mariel Cubans and their children simply didn't have the same kind of ideological outlook and adopted an outlook typical of individuals on the lower half of the socioeconomic ladder; - consequently, they didn't have much of a problem gravitating towards the Democratic party.
The end result is that Obama ran away with Cuban American vote in Florida in 2012.
The same kind of turning point happened in with the 1986 Amnesty with regards to Mexican Americans. Millions of illegals were given amnesty; - millions more were legalized via the rolling extensions. All of those immigrants wound sponsoring all sorts other relatives to come to the country. These groups were at the bottom end of the socioeconomic ladder. And illegal immigration only got worse post-1986.
All of this wound up tilting the Mexican American segment of the electorate even further to the left. The GOP would actually be in a better position right now if the '86 amnesty had never been passed in the first place.
The old guard has been dying off, and the "new guard" is gaining ascendancy. That's the actual underlying reason for the declining percentages of the Latino vote.
Sotomayor deserved to grilled considering how this jurist said that she didn't even know, post- Heller, if a right to self defense actually existed. That type of position should have stunned anyone that considers themselves even remotely conservative. Then her ridiculous ruling that claimed that a job test, in and of itself, could be biased against black applicants. And thus, had to changed. Can anyone give me an example of a "biased" test question...? Answer : No.
The papers please controversy is nonsense. The Arizona legislation was based almost word for word on federal legislation that had been signed into law by Bill Clinton.
And what do you think happens in Mexico? Law enforcement down there has always had the right to inquire about someone's status. I'm talking from personal experience. You get pulled over for any sort of traffic violation, the officer in question does have the right to ask you those type of questions.
Moreover, our government and State Department have always recognized the right of law enforcement entities in other countries to ask these types of questions of our own citizens who are traveling and working abroad. Americans understand this sort of thing is S.O.P..
"150 Million Adults Worldwide Would Migrate to the U.S" - gallup.com
Solving the illegal problem in 1986, with an Amnesty (by another name*) for 3 million, gave us an invasion of 12-20 million new illegals today. How many of those 150 Million hopeful migrant adults - with how many million of their spouses and children - will be encouraged by another Amnesty (by whatever name) to join in a continuing invasion?
But some "conservatives"/GOPers do not want to stop this historically unprecedented outrage - they only want to throw out the welcome mat to maximize their minority cut of votes.
Coupling another Amnesty with a border wall would not be the answer, because even a wall with the security of the Soviet era Berlin wall would only reduce the flow of illegal invaders by half; half the illegals here today came here "legally" by misrepresenting themselves as tourist or other temporary visitors with visas and then never leaving.
Because the million/year legal immigrants that have been admitted are increasingly less skilled, less educated and less self-sufficient they have been pre-selected for a pro-welfare, pro-affirmative action, pro-entitlement voting Democrat future. Which means legal immigration laws needs to be brought back to their original and historical basis: to admit only those who will not be a burden on society or the government (including earned income credits).
* In 1986 it was call the "Immigration Reform and Control Act."
OK, I wish it weren’t true though. Sorry for late reply.
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.