Monday, April 16, 2007

McCain Wouldn't Know Conservatism If...

...it bit him on the ass.

This just doesn't square.
G.O.P. Candidates Lay Into Democrats, Not One Another - New York Times

“The Republican Party — and conservatism generally — are a philosophy of strength,” he said. “Military strength, economic strength, personal strength and family strength.”

-Senator John "I never met an amnesty I didn't love" McCain

How could a person with any scruples whatsoever fish for votes with such soaring language when what he says runs so contrary to his grandest desire as a politician: giving amnesty to 20 million illegal aliens and setting off an unprecedented chain migration?

Please bear with me as I parse this quote and expound on the double meanings:

  1. "Conservatism is a philosophy of strength," but I believe our nation is weak and needs help from millions of indentured servants.
  2. "Conservatism is a philosophy of military strength," but let's disregard the fact that America's political-philospher founders warned against submitting to or leveraging into too strong influences and alliances with foreign powers.
  3. "Conservatism is a philosophy of economic strength," as long as the government is made stronger than the people through control of people's purse strings.
  4. "Conservatism is a philosophy of personal strength," as long as people don't display it in the form of speech too close to an election.
  5. "Conservatism is a philosophy of family strength," and we can't get enough of those strong Mexican families and we can't be deterred by mere citizens who because they want to keep their heritage will stand in the way .
It seems like every day Senator McAmnesty just keeps giving this Conservatives like me more reasons to despise him. Even if I didn't believe with all my heart and soul that the man truly wants to sell my child's future to the highest big-business bidder via amnesty, there's always his McCain-Feingold subversion of the First Amendment, his opposing tax cuts that work and his support for the gay agenda.

But even if none of those things were the case I'd still oppose him with all my being; my political gut and human instinct tell me that he is an evil person. When I see or hear him speak, it sets off alarms within me that have never been wrong in the 27 years I've been involved in political campaigns. It took an awful lot of working for candidates who set off my "creep-o-meter" before I started paying attention to my senses. The lesson has sunk in: I won't ever again vote for someone for whom I have such a visceral distrust.

The bottom line: I loathe John McCain and wouldn't vote for him if satan himself were on the other side - how would I choose between two equal evils?

Technorati tags: , , , , ,

Labels: , , , , , , ,

|

Saturday, March 17, 2007

Bush's Mexican Sell-Out Redux

Bush's goal regarding "migration" for this hemisphere, as made crystal clear by his remarks the other day, can only result in the growth of a metastatic fifth-column of those who while being technically "American citizens" will pledge their allegiance to Mexico.

Linknzona (newly added to my blogroll) noted that several bloggers have posted Bush's promise to the Mexican people to do all he can to grant amnesty under the guise of "comprehensive immigration reform." I published an article on March 13 as did TBC here, and Linknzona here.

My comments on Linknzona's March 13 post are repeated, at his request, here, and at his site:

"Over at my blog, I've expressed similar outrage regarding Bush's commitments to Mexican citizens. As soon as I read what he said, it started the wheels turning; there was so much concern on the part of the founding fathers about the risks involved in allowing foreign interests to influence this nation's sovereign responsibilities.

The first five Federalist Papers were warnings against allowing alien interests too much say in our affairs. Jefferson expounded in Notes on Virginia similarly. I knew there was a lot of source material out there that would, when placed in juxtaposition to Bush's words in Mexico, reveal why this president has become a threat to our sovereignty and a possible scourge who will be reviled by future generations of Americans. If he gets his way on Amnesty, his legacy will be to be remembered as the man who forced us to take the first big step toward our nation's dissolution.

After looking through my favorite historical quotes, I decided that George ashington gave us the best example to use for determining what's wrong with this president. He said in his farewell address:

"Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government. But that jealousy, to be useful, must be impartial, else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people to surrender their interests."

Bush sounds more like a man who thinks of himself as president of the Western Hemisphere, not of our sovereign nation. I believe that were Washington, Jay, Madison and Hamilton here today, they'd conclude that this man is behaving as a traitor and fight to have him removed from office.

It's tough to swallow, but his words and actions really have sunk to the depths of treason."
Others are expressing outrage in the Blogosphere, here, here, here, here and here, for a start. There are a lot of folks who are appalled by these comments. I imagine it's really hard to finally wake up and realize the president you supported and voted for doesn't care about you or your nation at all.


Technorati tags:

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

|

Tuesday, January 23, 2007

The State of Our Unraveling Union

Tonight, Jefedente Bush will deliver his seventh annual State of His Progress Toward Unraveling the Union Address. Unfortunately for America, he has sunk to such a pathetically low stature in the minds of even his loyal Conservative base that he can offer no plan on any substantial issue with a chance of getting traction in Congress; that is, except for his onerous immigration plan. It sickens me that the man truly believes that he will be doing right by future generations if he takes radical action to revise the ancestral foundations of our culture. And he's staking his legacy upon a plan the Democrats lust over because they know it will lead to perpetual domination by the left of our Federal Government as today's illegal alien criminals become tomorrow's most-government-dependent classes.

I have to hand it to stubborn son of a bitch. He has Faith....all of it misplaced. If you care about this nation's future and desire it to be a better place for your kids and descendants, then the things in which Bush has Faith should scare you:


  • He has Faith that adding 100 million people - becoming more than 20% of our population in my daughter's lifetime - from, mostly, a single-source alien culture will not radically alter or diminish ours.
  • He has Faith that Meztizos are as culturally compatible with us as a the Europeans who made up the vast majority of all American immigrants prior to 1970 and that they won't pose the long-term problems that our Hmong, Bantu and other exotic ethnic imports pose.
  • He has Faith that this nation will somehow become one with aliens we have not known through the ages despite our never having proved capable of assimilating large groups of newcomers who were not from folkways with which the majority of us and our ancestors could readily identify.
  • He has Faith in bureaucracy to manage a plan substantially larger and infinitely more more complex than the 1986 Simpson-Mazzoli reform, which up until now has been the most miserable bureaucratic failure since the programs of the Great Society.
  • He has Faith that the numbers of illegal aliens currently here are lower than feared by many reasonable people and that it won't be soon learned the number granted initial amnesty is to be double the officially projected numbers, as it became known after the passage of Simpson-Mazzoli.
  • He has Faith that his "No Foreign-Born Alien Left Behind" plan will not act as a magnet for additional waves of illegal aliens that will be larger and more desperate than this one.
  • He has Faith that when these amnestied criminals leverage "family reunification" laws to bring four or five times more people from the third world it will not bankrupt us or impact our middle class in any negative way.
  • He has Faith that creating a permanant cleft between citizens based on primary language preference will somehow enrich us, when history tells us that people that speak different languages cannot share a single culture...or a nation.
  • He has Faith that America's current ethnic majority will not react to the the threat of being displaced in the franchise by joining together into groups to promote their own ethnic agendas, nor will any of these groups promote radical agendas to restore what Bush so ignorantly threw away.
  • He has Faith that the anger sure to come, once it dawns on those who believed the spin, can be contained by political correctness and more blather about multiculturalism.

I've hardly scratched the surface with this. But I hope you, dear reader, get my point. I wish it were as simple as saying "we don't know what will happen if Bush gets his way on immigration." That wouldn't be half as bad as the truth. The truth is, we do know a lot about what will happen, and none of it is good for anyone on the right who isn't a corporatist desirous of instant financial gratification at the expense of the future. Nor is is good for anyone on the left who isn't politically motivated to create a permanent underclass of compliant, government-dependent serfs. Or is there something I don't understand about what happens when the nation with the largest per-capita carbon footprint grows by 25% in a single generation.

Have you noticed that Bush never talks about history, except when he is attempting to argue the validity of a logical fallacy? He only mentions the word assimilation in passing, but he is quick to mention the family values of our never-successful-at-republican-democracy neighbors to the south. If the family values of Mexico or Venezuela or Colombia are so compatible with ours, then why aren't they already living in nations and cultures with rich histories of stable liberty, like ours? If the family values of those with whom Bush wants to share our ancestral franchise, forever, are so admirable, then why aren't their nations doing so well that almost nobody wants to leave?

I've come to the conclusion that Bush either does not believe that there is a unique American culture, or does not believe that there should be a unique American culture. Either way, he must dislike something very fundamental about the ethnic majority or he would not be doing this to us.

With that, I'll leave you with one of the very first pieces I wrote for this web site, long before it had a blog:

Yes, there is a "unique American Culture"

Patriotic Americanism must continue to prevail over the desires of those who wish to deny that there is such a thing as "a unique American culture." Our ancestors anticipated attempts to lead our nation down a path to balkanization and expected us to stand fast against them. We must consistently refute lies that contend America was founded by and populated by people possessing broadly diverse perspectives and ideals. The ideas behind concepts like multiculturalism and diversity were anathema in the America of 1776 and for nearly 200 years thereafter.In their faith, habits and principles, the first American citizens were a most narrowly diverse lot, separated only by slight variations in Christian denomination. In their ethics, morals and values, the first Americans could only be described as virtually homogenous. It was the similarity not the diversity of our forefathers and founders that set the stage for America to become a great nation.

Those who advocate diversity and multiculturalism as being historically important to this nation's greatness are dangerously wrong. Using their twisted logic, we are to believe that the ideals driving Islamic terrorists to fly planes into buildings are societally compatible with the motivations that drive Presbyterian women to have fundraising bake sales. Diversity theory places Christian Baptism on par with Animist ritual mutilation of baby girls' genitalia. Diversity theory blindly accepts into our midst hordes of incompatible, poorly educated, virtually aliterate (if not outright alingual) illegal alien border-jumpers from third-world Kleptocracies because it is supposedly in keeping with "the things for which this nation stands." There is no doubt that our founders would be nauseated by such absurd notions.

Thomas Jefferson expressed concern about this issue in "Notes
on Virginia" (brackets added for clarity):

"…But are there no inconveniences to be thrown into the scale against the advantage expected from a multiplication of numbers by the importation of foreigners? It is for the happiness of those united in society to harmonize as much as possible in matters which they must of necessity transact together. Civil government being the sole object of forming societies, its administration must be conducted by common consent.Every species of government has its specific principles. Ours perhaps are more peculiar than those of any other in the universe. It is a composition of the freest principles of the English constitution, with others derived from natural right and natural reason. To these nothing can be more opposed than the maxims of absolute monarchies [the equivalent of today's despots, tyrants and kleptocrats]. yet, from such, we are to expect the greatest number of emigrants. They will bring with them the principles of the governments they leave, imbibed in their early youth; or, if able to throw them off, it will be in exchange for an unbounded licentiousness, passing, as is usual, from one extreme to another. It would be a miracle were they to stop precisely at the point of temperate liberty. These principles, with their language, they will transmit to their children. In proportion to their numbers, they will share with us the legislation. They will infuse into it their spirit, warp and bias its direction, and render it a heterogeneous, incoherent, distracted mass."

Jefferson chafed at the thought that we could, by inaction, surrender our homogeneity and he was greatly concerned that we might! All this banter about diversity and multiculturalism would have given him fits.

Nothing exemplifies how far we have strayed from the intentions and dreams of our founders more clearly than our current immigration policy. Yes, immigration is an important part of our history. But nobody from the pro-immigration camp wants to discuss the fact that the none of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were immigrants, they were colonist and British subjects. Every member of the Constitutional Convention of 1789 except Alexander Hamilton was born in the colonies. The absolute truth is that the vast majority of our first citizens were Americans by birth and the vast majority of Americans have always been "citizens by birth." We have never had as many as 15 percent of our residents being of foreign origin.

Cast in this proper light, the "nation of immigrants" mantra to which we are constantly subjected becomes tritely idiomatic. If we are to be strictly precise, our history is one forged by colonists who became the first American citizens via revolution. These originals were augmented by immigrants who were eager assimilants: All Americans. Before and until the immigration reforms of 1965, between one quarter and one third of all migrants to this land could not adapt and ended up leaving. Those who came here "seeking a better life" without possessing the all-important corollary "dream of becoming American" were roughly cast aside by a society that was decidedly intolerant of selfish opportunists who didn't want to "get with the program." Promoting diversity for the sake of diversity is as accepting of malignancies as it is of the benign; it will always be an utterly stupid practice.

The only way in which we can assure America's long-term continued success as a sovereign nation is to establish new policies promoting American cultural homogeneity via imposing strict limits on the number of immigrants, demanding rigorously-enforced visa and border laws and insisting that all new arrivals submit to and successfully complete compulsory "patriotic assimilation" courses soon after their arrival. Those who cannot accept our unique culture, mores and values as their own, forsaking all others, should be summarily returned to their countries of origin.


Technorati tags:

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

|

Monday, November 20, 2006

Fisking points: Hispanics (supposedly) react to GOP 's being mean

Last Sunday there was a "news" story in the St. Pete Times (Florida's second most liberal paper after the Palm Beach Post) that reads much more like an Op-Ed aimed at putting fear in the minds of all non-Hispanic Conservatives than it reads "news." This is just another example of a key tactic being employed throughout the MSM and the Corporatist wing of the GOP. It is nothing but a thinly-veiled attempt to use political correctness as a tool for silencing those of us who are opposed to our nation being picked apart by "multiculturalism" much like and expensive car parked overnight in a bad neighborhood will surely be less of a car by morning.


Make no mistake about it, many of our supposedly Conservative "leaders" along with their leftist-elite de facto conspirators are hell bent on performing the societal equivalent of broken windows experiments upon us. They're hoping we won't notice that a byproduct of their need for cheap labor or desire for creating new, compliant voting blocs will surely be the wholesale transformation of our culture, and with it will come the destruction ofthe very things that made and have kept us a great nation.


Let's take a look inside the mind of a couple of clueless reporters, Jose Cardenas and Adam Smith:


Hispanic voter shift: anomaly or new rule?

"Here's something Florida Republicans a year ago never dreamed possible: a Democrat representing heavily Republican Little Havana in the state House.

Of course they wouldn't have dreamed it. Now, why don't our intrepid reporters tell us right away how the demographics have shifted in that barrio? Folks, here's a hint: "Little Havana" isn't majority Cuban anymore. Every day it becomes more and more of a hodge-podge slum made up of various lower-class, government-dependent imports from Central and South America, the very sort of imports that, once they access our franchise, will vote consistently Democrat. These newspaper shills are counting on readers to grow tired of the story and stop reading. They start by claiming the Little Havana is a GOP stronghold and end by pointing out that it isn't.
But that's precisely what happened on Election Day, as Democrats in Florida and across the country gained ground among Hispanic voters. If the trend continues, it could have far-reaching political implications.

No it isn't "precisely what happened." Far from it. Toward the end of this article, there are hints that the reporters understand what went on, but just don't get around to reporting it. It would not help them advance "the cause" they favor; that is, the cause of mass immigration. They never get around to pointing out clearly that actual turnout data indicates that for the first time since the Reagan revolution GOP turnout was depressed across the board. The election had no far reaching political implications unless all GOP turnout has been permanently affected. That's highly unlikely.



On Election Day, for the first time since 1976 - when Jimmy Carter got at least half of the Hispanic vote here - the Democratic candidate on the ballot's biggest race got at least an equal share of their vote as the Republican, said Sergio Bendixen, a Democratic pollster in Miami.

Let's all just ignore the fact that the "equal share" was an historically unrepresentative one.


Democrat Jim Davis and Republican Charlie Crist each got 49 percent of the Hispanic vote, according to television network exit polls.

Exit polls are notoriously irrelevant. With the growing influence of absentee and early voters on election outcomes, polling people on election day, particularly as they leave polling locations, captures an ever-decreasing part of the whole picture.


"We now believe we are in a position to be much more aggressively competitive within the Hispanic community as a result of this success," said Luis Navarro,executive director of the Florida Democratic Party.

Now, would we expect him to say anything else?

Another exit poll by the nonpartisan William C. Velasquez Institute found that Davis received 53 percent of the Hispanic vote and Crist received 42 percent. The poll also indicated that two-thirds of Hispanic voters cast ballots for Democrats in their congressional races.

This is misleading on two counts: 1) It fails to note that one fifth of Florida's registered voters' Congressional intentions went uncounted because their Congressman was unchallenged in the general election; and 2) the reporters don't point out that the William C. Velasquez Institute is a race-baiting, pro-Hispanic, reconquista front group.
"The question is whether this is a trend or is it a reaction in '06 to A) the immigration issue or B) the anti-Republican feeling nationwide," said the institute's Alvaro Fernandez.

My question for Mr. Alvarez is: How important is finding results that skew your way to the prospects for your next Paycheck?


Nowhere was the swing for Democrats more evident than in Miami-Dade County,where Democrat Luis Garcia was elected to the state House in a district that includes Little Havana and that historically has been dominated by Republicans.

Here is presented a new version of the "Prop 187 killed the GOP in California" false meme. In California, the non-Latino white middle and upper middle classes have been fleeing since the court ruled - in declaring Prop 187 unconstitutional - they must bear the disproportionate burden of public service costs for illegal aliens and their misbegotten anchor babies.

The original Cubans in Little Havana are being replaced by lower class recent balseros and other low-skilled, low-wage social burdens we've imported from the Southern Hemisphere. It's going to elect Democrats from here on out. Hialeah has had a Democrat mayor for what, 20 years? Fact errors and omissions like this would have earned me an instant "F" in my college journalism courses.


Like Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who is married to a Mexican immigrant and speaks Spanish, President Bush has made Hispanic voters a priority.

Bush got about 40 percent of the Hispanic vote in 2004. But exit polls last week showed that Republican candidates for the House of Representatives received only about 30 percent of the vote, while Democratic candidates got 69 percent.


These guys just don't get it that they're not comparing mangos to mangos. Never mind that that they're trying to read tea leaves grown in a banana republic where nothing makes sense to those in possession of American sensibilities anyway.


This week President Bush named Florida Sen. Mel Martinez general chairman of the Republican Party, a move seen by both Republicans and Democrats as an attempt to woo Hispanic voters back.

Woo them back? Let's examine what that really means: If we're generous and grant that Martinez at the helm of the GOP means a 5% bump in the Hispanic vote, and conservatively estimate that in the process he jettisons 5% of the White vote, it means that the GOP is hoping to increase its representative share of 8% of the electorate by 5% while decreasing its representative share of 80% of the electorate by 5%.

So, in this best case Mel Martinez scenario the GOP gains four Hispanic votes for every 1000 cast and loses 40 votes for every 1000 cast. Since when is intentionally striving to attain a net loss of 3.6% of the vote a "good thing" in politics?


"Democrats should be happy that this vote swung back our way," said Simon Rosenberg, president of NDN, a liberal advocacy group in Washington, D.C. But "if there isn't comprehensive immigration reform there will be consequences for Democrats because then we will look like Republicans."

No, if there is "comprehensive immigration reform," you'll piss off just as much of the majority as the Senate did - maybe more. But I suppose they're your race baited talking points, so I won't quibble your with idiocy any Further.



In contrast to Hispanic voters around the country, who tend to vote for Democrats, Florida has long been an anomaly because of its Cuban-American bloc that prefers the Republican Party.

But not since 1996, when many Hispanic voters across the country were turned off by heated Republican rhetoric over welfare reform, have Florida Republicans fared so poorly with Hispanic voters. Al Cardenas, former state GOP chairman, said it was a direct result of the immigration debate.

"There was a lot of rhetoric during this campaign season that hurt the sensibilities of some Hispanics and the end result was a predictable step-back," Cardenas said.


And there has been a lot of invading going on for the last 40 years that has disgusted much of the majority and led hundreds of thousands of people, my family included, to abandon their life-long homes in order to maintain American standards of living and pass along an unbastardized cultural heritage to their children. I believe that in the minds of our leaders my family's long-term best interests should carry more weight than any foreign born's, regardless of their immigration status. And when half of any new ethnic bloc is here in violation of and disregard for our laws, I care less and less about how my antipathy appears to people who are naturalized but champion the "rights" of a class of people who should not be here. Do you get that, Al?
Rosenberg said the firm stand on illegal immigration by some Republican candidates could harm their party long term in Florida and some Southwest states. He compared it to California in the 1990s when then Gov. Pete Wilson promoted a ballot initiative that, before it was overturned by the courts, denied most public services to undocumented immigrants.

Some political observers say Wilson doomed the Republican Party among Hispanic voters in California, causing Democrats to eventually dominate state government.



We've already been over it. It's a travesty that Pete Wilson is continually demonized for the result of the voters' intent being tossed aside by the courts. It boggles the mind that so many people buy into the silly notion that a constitutional amendment aimed at curtailing illegal immigration that passed with a significant margin is the reason California is now a blue state. I guess it is true that people will believe anything if you tell them to believe it often enough. Grey Davis knew what he was doing when he refused to appeal the lower court's decision: He was intentionally making the Hispanization of California permanent in order to make it a blue state. Period. It worked.

There are strong inferences that must be considered by GOP leadership before it goes along with President Bush's desire to have Mel Martinez be the public face of the Republican Party. The GOP basically has written off California, but it expects a different result if it Mexifornicates the entire nation? Give - me - a - break!


In Florida, increasing diversity within the Hispanic community has gradually improved Democrats' chances at the votes of Hispanics, who make up about 12 percent of the electorate

South Florida remains largely Cuban-American. But Puerto Ricans and Hispanics from Mexico and Central and South America who are more inclined to vote for Democrats have increasingly moved to the state, particularly to Central Florida.

For example, while there are 736,000 Cubans and 90,000 Puerto Ricans in Miami-Dade County, according to the U.S. Census, in Orange County there are 115,000 Puerto Ricans but only 16,000 Cubans.



Here lies the real story: Except for a dwindling number of hold-outs who hate the Democrat party for JFK's abandoning them at the Bay of Pigs, Hispanics vote predominately for Democrats. Why isn't this at the top of the story? What agenda might these ethically-bastardized media folks be wanting to convey?

Shhh. Be very, very quiet. We don't want the natives to notice they're being disenfranchised in the name of cheap labor and votes!


"I think what has been happening in the last couple of decades, a large influx of non-Cuban Latinos have been moving to the area," said Annabelle Conroy, an assistant professor of political science at the University of Central Florida. "They don't have the attachment to the Republican Party that Cuban-Americans do."

In South Florida, increasing diversity in the Hispanic population also was one reason Garcia said he won his state House seat.

He pointed out that a well-known Cuban restaurant former President Ronald Reagan visited in the 1980s to promise that Cuba would be freed from Castro is now a Mexican restaurant.


So, La Esquina de Tejas is now a Mexican restaurant? I guess the Cuban power brokers eat somewhere else for lunch, then drive home to Kendall or Doral or something. There isn't "diversity" in Dade County. There are only pockets of cultural "singularity" whose residents seeth with disdain for those living in the other balkanized enclaves around them. I know there are some who find such things "refreshing," but it offends my sensibilities to witness the denigration of my heritage. I've lived in Miami. There's nothing there for any American soul whose attachment to the sacrifices his forebears made is still strong; there is an expectation there that American's must assimilate to them, not the other way around. And Mel Martinez wants their votes. The GOP will lose mine permanently in the process.


In addition to demographic changes, Garcia and Navarro, executive director of the Florida Democratic Party, said the party launched an unprecedented media campaign statewide to try to get more Hispanic voters.

In South Florida, the party ran Spanish-language radio and television advertisements highlighting to Cuban-Americans issues of concern to all voters, such as property insurance.

"Our voters are getting more sophisticated. They will vote on candidates and issues" besides those related to Cuba, said Garcia. "Keep in mind that this is not Little Havana anymore. It's like little Latin America now."



Using one election as a gauge of increased sophistication is like having one botox treatment and claiming to have had a face lift.


Along the Interstate 4 corridor, the advertising campaign featured bilingual spots targeting non-Cuban Hispanics on economic issues.

But not everyone sees gloom for the Republican Party among Hispanics in Florida. While Hispanics in Central Florida voted predominantly for Democrats, Crist still received 70 percent of the Cuban vote in Miami-Dade County, said Dario Moreno, director of the Metropolitan Center at Florida International University.


Let's not remind Dario that it wasn't all that long ago, before any of the Marielitos earned the vote, that the GOP always carried a guaranteed 90%+ of the same demographic. What a shocker! Who knew that people who grew up in a socialist country would end up leaning leftist when given the right to vote in the nation in which they found a home...one in a community that really wasn't all that different from the corrupt place they left. It's just easier to buy nice stuff in Miami than it is in Havana.


What made the difference in Miami-Dade, he said, was that some Cuban-Americans did not go to the polls because they were disenchanted by infighting among Republicans For the first time since I've been doing this..." he said, "Cuban voter turnout was low."

Another nugget of truth gets buried at the bottom. Nope, no hidden agendas to see here. Move along.

Cardenas said Republicans already have taken the first step toward getting theHispanic vote back in Florida and elsewhere.

"My sense is just as we did after 1996, we're going to make a comeback if we're smart about it," Cardenas said. "And the choice of Mel Martinez will go a long way to doing that."


Right, Al. And the trade off will be poison to the GOP base.

 


Technorati tags: ,, , , , , ,

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

|

Friday, November 17, 2006

What Makes (and might keep) the GOP Chumps

There are myriad reasons why the GOP got crushed last week and none of them have to do with the decline of the Hispanic vote from 2004. That election was an aberration, one that was mis-quantified first as 44%, then 40%, then 38%. These numbers bounced all over the place in various post-election analyses because the figures came from exit polling, which thanks to increases in early voting and absentee voting, are being made less and less reliable each election cycle. Campaigns and local partisan efforts specifically target their base for get-out-the-early-vote operations, which deflates election-day turnout: An increasing percentage of the most strategically important voters have already voted by then. Only in districts in which Hispanics are a true swing factor in the final total would they be subject to such intense courting. Since Hispanics represent only 6% to 8% of the electorate, those districts are few and far between. The Republican Hispanic vote is going to remain perpetually capped at between 30% and 35% in the same manner that the Republican Black vote is stuck at about 8%. Furthermore, as Cubans (the only loyal GOP Hispanics) get over their hatred for JFK, they're going to slide to the political left of center where they, based on their cultural tendencies, belong, so the GOP Hispanic vote is likely to decline...and immigration restrictionists like me will be blamed for causing natural declines in the Republican Hispanic vote.

The cold fact of the matter is that the ethnic and cultural economism and body politic of the Hispanic mean leans more to the left than our nation's majority ethnicity does. Naturalized and domestic-born Americans of Mexican descent in particular are likely to behave as an intransigent bloc resistant to GOP efforts to woo them. At least this will be the case as long as Republicans as a whole desire less government.

Call me all the names you like, but I'm not going to stop pointing out that the proponents of mass-immigration from the third world are hell-bent on making us a more stupid nation. The Mexican government is counting on it as it seeks to keep Mexicans, especially those who are American citizens, loyal to Mexico first. Part and parcel of this scheme requires faithful Mexicans in America to maintain their cultural antipathy for education. For the foreseeable future...at least throughout my lifetime and probably my child's...the Hispanic vote will remain more desirous of and likely dependent upon government programs. They'll want more of them so they'll vote more often for Democrats.

The Republican share of the Hispanic vote last week was at about the level we can expect going forward. Check out what Thomas Sowell has to say about the issue and I'll follow it up with my top ten list of reasons why the GOP got hammered.

Townhall.com::From champs to chumps::By Thomas Sowell

"If the people in the White House do not understand how outraged their supporters were at this year's attempt to pass an amnesty bill for illegals -- virtually guaranteeing that even more millions will come -- then it is hard to know what message they got from the Republicans' recent debacle at the polls.

Immigration was not the only issue but it was part of the more general issue of betrayal, which includes the Republicans' runaway spending, among other things."
So, here's my list. I might order these a bit differently if I thought about it long enough, but I think I cover most of the bases:
  1. Iraq - How I long for the time in which we had the intestinal fortitude to go in and kick ass so bad that even those who would like to martyr themselves are given pause. Except for the initial battle plan, this is a complete mess. And it's Bush's fault.
  2. Immigration - The governing majority party will never do well when folks in Nebraska are complaining about culturally incompatible mobs suddenly popping up amongst them and the major networks are showing footage of aliens marching with foreign flags on American soil.
  3. Spending - "Big-Government Republican" is supposed to be an oxymoron, you morons.
  4. Education - Get your stinking commie "No-Child-Left-Behind" hands off my kid! Got it?
  5. McCain-Feingold - Mr. President, did you know that you're allowed to veto legislation that violates the first amendment?
  6. George Bush - At some point, no matter how intelligent a person actually is, his inability to articulate in proper english stops being quaint. These days, even the most loyal Neo-Conservative Bush-ites cringe at the announcement of a Presidential addresss or press conference.
  7. Donut Hole - What a great idea to make old folks start paying full-freight for their prescription meds each year about the time the election rolls around! Not.
  8. Jobs - It doesn't matter how low the unemployment figures go if you're not considering those who have either become underemployed, quit looking for work or whose wages are being artificially kept static thanks to offshoring, inshoring and other factors. There are no rose-colored glasses effective at blinding people to their own situations no matter what the economists and statisticians are telling them.
  9. Honesty - This is from my gut. People are getting sick and tired of having to obfuscate their true feelings out of fear that they're going to violate the mandates of political correctness. When the President starts calling citizen volunteers like The Minutemen ugly names and stops talking about putting a halt to gay marriage, it looks as though the White House is soaked in a load of PC dung. And it probably is.
  10. Ethics - Not only have to many elected Republicans become greedy whores, they've also taken up the habit of straight-faced lying to the public by trying to redefine words to make them sound more palatable, i.e., Amnesty.
To top it all off, there isn't a single GOP candidate or rumored candidate for President in 2008 that inspires me at all. I'd say the GOP is in for a rough couple of years if it doesn't start to stand for America's working class citizens, many of them so-called Reagan Democrats, again.

Technorati tags: ,

Labels: , , ,

|

Monday, November 13, 2006

The Day the GOP Left Me

If reports are true, the Republican Party has officially left me. If dingbat Senator Mel Martinez is made GOP chairman, I'll no longer consider myself a Republican:

BREITBART.COM - Fla. Senator Mel Martinez to Chair RNC

"Sen. Mel Martinez, the first-term lawmaker who previously served in President Bush's Cabinet, will assume the chairmanship of the Republican National Committee, GOP officials said Monday."
To make its public persona the face of a foreign-born traitor to all that my ancestors made possible is the last straw. I'm a Republican no more. I don't know what I'll do about my voter registration because there are sure to be hordes of open borders scumbags recruited to run in GOP primaries, and some of them will probably be behind-the-scenes promotions of sovereignty-loathing swine to run against those who dare to remain members of the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus. My vote in the primaries will probably be more and more decided by a default position of opposition to whomever Martinez decides is worthy. I'll have to disinfect my wallet after every visit to the polls from here out; the stench of treason that emanates from Republican leadership will be unbearable.

Technorati tags: , ,,, , , , ,

Labels: , ,

|