Sunday, July 13, 2008
|
|
A Choice For Latinos
|
|
Posted by:
Carol Platt Liebau at
12:58 PM
|
Barack Obama and John McCain are battling for Latino support.
If I were a Latino -- and one determined to vote on stereotypically "ethnic" issues like immigration -- there's no competition: I'd vote for John McCain, even if I actually liked some of Barack's positions a little more.
Why? Because McCain has actually taken the heat in order to espouse stereoptypically pro-Latino positions. What's more, he's the most stereotypically pro-Latino candidate Republicans could have nominated.
If notwithstanding that fact, Latinos flock in great numbers to support Barack, a lot of Republicans will figure that, if even John McCain can't win Latino support, there's no way any other GOP candidate can. As a result, Latinos will find themselves in the uncomfortable bind that too often confronts African-Americans -- taken for granted by the Democrats because Dems believe that Latinos will simply refuse to support a Republican. And Republicans will sadly conclude that they must look to other groups in order to build a winning coalition, with little political incentive to pay attention to stereotypical Latino concerns.
If Latinos support McCain, on the other hand, it keeps them viable "players" in both parties. Strikes me as an easy strategic choice.
|
|
That one issue is the main reason I don't consider Reagan a great president, only a near great one.
You are correct. For me this is the defining issue for me for it speaks of whether the nation will be made of primarily of the stock that established the country or is it going to become a third world boarding house where politicians of both parties can pit one group against each over for personal gain.
If McCain (and for that matter, Obama) has his way we'll be well on the way to see an increase in population of 100 million. These additional people will most certainly put such a sever strain on the "safety net" that bankruptcy is assured along with environmental damage, i.e., water shortages, like here in GA.
Then there is the additional use of energy. More will be needed.
Finally, there is this and I am cynical enough to believe it and that is our elites want this to justify either suspending what is left of the Constitution and the BORs or getting a convention where they can repeal it outright.
I have other issue with both major candidates that I consider of great importance, but this one most of all. |
|
|
That's great that Reagan had regrets. I don't like McCain's immigration plan either. My point is only that someone is not a RINO because they have a few different policy positions from someone who says they are hard core conservative. When you look back on Reagan, most people will agree that he was pretty conservative. Why don't you look back and consider him a RINO? Because he said he shouldn't have done amnesty? Bully for him. He still did it and people still consider him the rock of the modern conservative movement, other than AUH2O. People like to claim that Repubs and Dems are the same, but they can never give similarities between 2nd Amendment, abortion, missile defense, energy policy, taxes, judges... Does McCain want to double the capital gains tax? No, but Obama does. Is McCain for a missile defense shield? Yes, but Obama isn't. The list goes on and on with specific examples. I don't care that you don't like McCain on immigration. That's fine. Just admit that immigration is your only big issue. Don't be deceptive and claim that both parties are the same. Also, don't say that conservatives who are for lower taxes, less government, and strong defense, but for an immigration plan that some consider amnesty are RINOS. |
|
Good. I'm always happy to be of assistance to those in need of guidance. Now go back and peruse that Sailer column.
=====
Phil,
Hah, I've heard that one as well and coming from this crew I'm not surprised in the slightest.
|
|
|
Reagan considered his signing of the 1986 amnesty the worst mistake he made in office. I agree. |
|
|
Definition of "racist": NASCAR fan. |
|
|
that's good. You cleared it all up for me. |
|
I thought it was humor based in reality. I can see why you would consider that "racist", you, being a multicultist. I bet that knee must have hurt like hell when it hit you in the jaw.
Using the SPLC as a source just shows how bankrupt you are. Mo Dees has had problems of his own involving discrimination.
And no, I didn't misuse Godwin's rule. Go re-read the sentence I wrote. "A variation of Godwin's rule", knothead.
As far as falling prey to Godwin's rule it is Leftist and Neocons. As far as I am concerned other than Iraq, both groups have more in common with each other than they do normal people.
I seriously doubt that you even know what a "racist" is. |
|
|
He would be endorsing a 3rd party candidate. That notorious anti-Mexican racist staged his famous march from Sacramento to the San Diego to protest ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS. The farmers used illegals back then to harass and intimidate poor Mexicans to keep them poor and desperate, just like now. That is why the LEGAL Mexican immigrants reject illegal immigration. When did you RINOs start embracing Mexican stereotypes? None of the Mexicans I know wear sombreros or own a burro or go around saying "Si! Si! Senor!" |
|
|
easy. Hispander? I would consider that racist. Referencing Steve Sailer from VDARE (categorized by the SPLC as a hate organization) reveals your racist credentials. And the fact that you misdefine Godwin's "rule" which in fact refers to the use of Nazi analogies in debates just goes to show how stupid you really are. Although believe me, if there's any one group who falls prey to Godwin's rule, it's the conservatives more often than not. |
|
" On balance, McCain's way is a good realistic way to tackle a huge problem."
Yeah, surrender to lawlessness. The US military is authorized in the US Constitution to specifically protect the border. We'll just use our military from now on to do easy things like fight for Iraq's sovereignty, not ours.
You should change your moniker to "Art of the expedient". |
|
No, we should hispander to them, right?
Why don't you try to refute Sailer instead of trying to get by with this "racist" b.s. in lieu of an argument?
This is another case where a variation of Godwin's rule applies. |
|
|
the GOP strategery should be to keep all the hispanics just to give you guys an electoral advantage? No wonder people accused you of being racist. It's true. |
|
Right after the GOP's tepid showing in the 2000 election, I wrote an article "GOP Future Depends on White Vote" that got VDARE.COM in general and me in particular banned from FreeRepublic.com, the self-proclaimed “Premier Conservative News Forum.”
JimBob and his enforcers apparently thought it was “racist” of me to point out the indisputable fact that whites cast 81% of the 2000 vote. I heinously added:
"Here at VDARE, we've discussed repeatedly how dire will be the long-term impact of immigration on the Republican Party. It's crucial to understand, however, that the long-term has not quite arrived. The GOP [can] save itself by changing the immigration laws. This can be seen by examining the 2000 election results closely. The reason George W. Bush struggled so much to eke out a 271-267 win in the Electoral College…is not that he got crushed in the minority vote 77% to 21%. No, it's that he commanded only a measly 54% of the white vote."
More...
http://www.vdare.com/sailer/strategy.htm |
|
"And Republicans will sadly conclude that they must look to other groups in order to build a winning coalition"
Maybe they could look to the conservatives they've abandoned. |
|
|
Gee, was Reagan a RINO too? You believe in lower taxes, missile defense, pro life, war in Iraq, 2nd amendment, and an "amnesty" immigration plan, hey you're a RINO. |
|
It's not pandering when it's something McCain wants to do in any case. He hasn't changed what he wants to do--only the order of it. The original plan was to do things simultaneously, and the new plan is border security first, then a temporary worker program for people already here and willing to jump through the hoops. It's just a change of order. On balance, McCain's way is a good realistic way to tackle a huge problem.
|
|
|
McCain takes stereotypically pro-Latino positions? He may have in the past, but he's since flip-flopped on that in order to please his xenophobic base. If I were a Latino, I wouldn't trust McSame. |
|
1.74% of the total vote is what we're talking about.
Most polls I've seen say almost half of hispanic CITIZENS want the borders secured and the laws enforced. Millions of illegal aliens want amnesty, but should not really have a say, because they are illegal aliens. McCain may actually gain in hispanic votes if he gave up the amnesty talk and instead talked about retaining the rule of law and national sovereignty. |
|
That every single face these illegals will come in contact will be a liberal Democrat. All sanctuary cities are run by one-party systems and they are all Democrats. THIS GOP is NOT interested in us grassroots activists and offers no assistance to anyone down ticket. McCain has had to resort to confiscating GOP governors' campaign funds because of his lacking a base to work from.
If you want to win Latino votes, try appealing to the majority of them who are here legally, are either on the LEGAL pathway to citizenship or hare citizens already and on the LEGAL pathway to the American dream (like many of my friends).
Your way of pandering to them is asking my friends to walk away from their success and fall in line to following the new Latino leadership dictated by the white liberal elites who prefer their ethnic minorities to be humble and subservient rather than "uppity".
Just how desperate are you RINOs? |
|
Latinos are so stupid that they will only vote for a candidate who will assure them that poor as they might be, he will keep even poorer people coming to compete against them for jobs. And they don't have to obey the laws you were forced to obey nor swear allegiance to American either. They just get to cut in line because you are a sucker for being a law-abiding, loyal American immigrant.
Hard to tell the difference between liberals and Republicans anymore.
All it takes to be a good Republican these days is to abandon your principles and ideals and just march mindlessly in no particular formation but with a panicky urgency. |
|
|
On the other hand, this is precisely why a larger number of evangelical Christians are "playing the field" this year. |
|
|
|