Posted on 06/27/2007 8:21:20 AM PDT by flixxx
REVIEW & OUTLOOK
Immigration and the GOP How to make Republicans a minority party once again.
Wednesday, June 27, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT
Immigration reform stayed alive in the Senate yesterday, albeit not without continuing rancor among Republicans. Restrictionists seem to believe the issue will harm the GOP if it succeeds, but we think the political reality is closer to the opposite: The greater danger for Republicans is if it fails.
We've written often about the merits of immigration reform, and we have our own problems with parts of the Senate bill. But it's worth spending some time on the larger politics of the issue, especially for Republicans. 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. Like Democrats on national security, this is a classic case in which pandering to the base will harm the GOP overall.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
Importing millions of new democrats helps the GOP?
“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.”
NO NO NO NO NO.
The “larger electorate” wants the dang border controlled, don’t these people believe the polls?
This is totally flawed thinking. It is true that only a minority wants to wall up the country. Me, I am all for immigration, and a lot of it, but just allowing in millions of mexicans per year is a total disaster. Control the border. After that, I have no problem legalizing a huge number of the illegals already here.
I think this is a very reasoned opinion about what will happen if there is no immigration legislation passed this year.Me too. The immigration issue is what doomed the GOP in California, a formerly GOP state. But does it have to be this bill? Is it this bill or nothing? Why is the fate of our party--and country--being held hostage against the fate of this one misguided bill?
“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” AND WANTS TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM??? HUH?? The solution is to ENFORCE THE LAW. Not make more laws. This is a problem only in that the congress has failed to enforce the laws. There is no more law needed to “fix” this problem. This is all BS! A ruse to give amnesty to potential Democrat voters or to appease large business campaign donators who want illegal labor
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.
The immigration bill will clearly mean the destruction of the GOP. Even under the best of conditions, Bush only received 40% of the Hispanic vote in prior elections. Illegals converted to citizens will create a even higher democrat percentage.
Generally I don’t put much stock in polls but trends going back years in polls that indicate between 70 and 80% want strict border control should be paid attention to.
This is a ping list promoting Immigration Enforcement and Congressional Reform.
If you wish to be added or removed from this ping list, please contact me.
Some other information for your reading pleasure:
Hiding The Cost Of Amnesty (George W. Wants To Expand Welfare State Alert)
What to Democrats [and Republicans who sell out on the immigration bill] cost you?
The Dems already have the Hispanics, that’s why they want the amnesty. MORE VOTES FOR THEM.
Don't forget angering and or demoralizing the base.
If we saw a person on the street (or building ledge) as actively suicidal as the "Whig Party mark 2", he would be sent to a mental hospital for evaluation and treatment.
This is completely, utterly false.
I'd also insist that the bad apples be separated before any mass legalization. Something like the Coryn Amendment which would exclude gang bangers, felons and terrorists. A sensible, mild-mannered amendment which the majority of our senators voted down.
I could get the same input at La Raza...
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.
Bus has been destroying Reagan conservatism. This is obviously a marching order, because he really dosn’t seem smart enough to devise such a strategy himself.
The GOP took the expedient (easy) route to what they thought were
new voters when they failed to stand-and-fight illegal immigration since
Simpson-Mazzoli passed in 1986.
Whether the “comprehensive immigration reform” bill passes or not,
they are probably doomed to generations of minority-party status.
They did it to themselves.
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.