So, here is the comment:
The issues that have turned voters off from the Republican Party, and Republican candidates, have to do largely with Iraq and foreign policy, as well as the economy, and the unpopularity of the Bush administration.
Even many supporters of illegal immigration have acknowledged that, in elections, those opposing their position do have advantages, with respect to vote-garnering.
Furthermore, the immigration issue is not about "the right" vs. "the left" - there are deep cleavages on each side of the ideological spectrum, on this issue, with conservatives and liberals on each side.
As I've said before, there are many aspects of immigration reduction that are consistent with left-wing beliefs, values, and goals. Liberals have long been at the forefront of opposing illegal immigration, as well as reducing immigration levels overall, and some continue to do so.
As both liberals and conservatives pointed out, the 2004 Democratic presidential nominee could have defeated President Bush in the last election, if he had used the immigration issue. John McCain was even weaker than Bush on this matter however, and the "Republican" from Arizona, praised by supporters of illegal immigration, did miserably.
The last time a Democrat President won re-election, he took a stance in favor of stopping illegal immigration, and reducing legal immigration as well [in accordance with the recommendations of civil rights leader Barbara Jordan (D-TX).]
With respect to the Federation of American Immigration Reform (FAIR), this is widely-regarded as a mainstream organization, focused on matters such as workers' rights, the environment, and sustainability. Among those who have served on FAIR's Advisory Board include left-wing, anti-war icon Eugene McCarthy (D-MN), who was the co-sponsor of the 1965 bill that greatly increased immigration, environmentalist leader Paul Ehrlich and his wife (The Population Bomb), PBS anchor Bonnie Erbe, and Sierra Club leader (the recently-deceased) Dr. Alan Kuper).
This issue is not about left vs. right, or about "nativism" - It is about bettering the lives of all Americans (including immigrants), blue-collar workers and minority-Americans, in opposition to Big Business and corporate greed, and about protecting the environment through the moral means of stewardship and conservation, rather than through immoral means.
So as you can see, the argument is actually about Nationality, not Race, not Ethnicity. The PRO- side would rather make it about race and/or ethnicity to gain sympathy. They intentionally mislead the actual information about immigration and the laws to garner support for their 'globalization' ideals where all the world is one. Until they can argue with objectivity and intellectual intelligence vs the intellectual dishonesty they choose, they will forever be labeled as traitors to a Sovereign nation.
14 comments:
I was reading Dee's blog a while ago and she was on her usual rant about the Republican party being racist and that they will never gain the presidency again. An anonymous posted replied and he/she was right on. The first part is Dee's rant and at the end is his/her reply. I thought I would post it here before Dee deletes it.
"Bush and many of those in the RNC have splintered the Republican vote. With their current agenda, they have NO HOPE of EVER Gaining the minority vote.
The RNC has two choices at this point. They can pander to the racists, nativists, restrictionists and gain the majority of their CORE voters, leave the other portion of their conservative base on their own (Big Business), and NOT pander to the Minorities because IF they did they would have to listen to them and include them in their leadership.
At least they would gain 100% of their Core Voters.
The Republicans COULD become the American Hamas!!"
Totally false and hatefully ridiculous! Bush hasn't splintered the Republican party. His administration will go down as one of the worse but it isn't a bad reflection on the entire party. We had Nixon as president,didn't we? Yet we still had several Republican presidents since his catastrophe. What current agenda are you talking about? The Republican party has always had conservarative, traditional values and there will always be plenty of Americans who will adhere to those same values and thank God for that!
Minorities have always voted Democratic, this is nothing new. Once they start to realize that a social/liberal based country will destroy it they will come around.
Where do you get off claiming that the Republicans pander to racists, navisists, etc.? That is a really hateful thing to say and it isn't true. Just what aren't they listening to minorities about. Care to elaborate?
American Hamas? Just how low are you going to stoop here?
Patriot, I believe the reason that people like Dee and the HBers despise the Republican party right now is that blame them for the failure of CIR.
In reality, there were more Republican congresspeople who voted against CIR than Democrats; although, as Liquid rightly pointed out, there was opposition to CIR in both parties.
The ethnocentric Latinos also see Republicans as upholding traditional American, i.e., "WASPian" values. Their perception of Republicans is of representing "white" America which they despise. So it is really THEM who are the racists, but they do not see that. Dee's many references to "Mayberrian" America is a good example. She and those like her have so much contempt for what they perceive as a "white" America. Yet they do not have the same contempt for "brown" Mexico/Latin America. It's pretty obvious who the racists are.
Minorities and poor new immigrants have traditionally voted Democrat because Democrats promise more government programs. The Republican Party generally runs on a platform of smaller government, lower taxes. Since poorer people do not pay income tax (or much income tax), they could care less if taxes are reduced, especially when those taxes go to pay for programs which will benefit them. This isn't rocket science. It has nothing to do with Republicans being racist.
Liquid, kudos for another great topic. You brought up so many points in one entry that I don't even know where to begin.
I addressed a couple of points in my comments to Patriot.
I can say that in my own area, most people voted against Republicans, not so much FOR Democrats. The economy and Iraq were the main issues; although, the economy kind of eclipsed the Iraq War in the past six months or so, especially after September. People here were not voting on immigration.
That's why the pros are misinterpreting the election results when they assume that Obama's election indicates support for CIR. People weren't voting for Obama because they were rejecting "racism" or voting for "amnesty for illegals." Most were voting on other issues; such as the economy and Iraq. Many were disillusioned by eight years of the Bush administration and wanted a change. Obama tapped into that sentiment with the theme of his campaign being "Change."
Also true is that the immigration issue is not strictly a "liberal vs. conservative" issue. That is too simplistic of an anaylsis. It is much more complicated than that which Liquid did a good job of explaining.
Some Republicans support open borders; the Wall Street Journal has been editorializing for such for years now. An editorial board member has written a book on why open borders would be desireable for this country.
Many moderate liberals are against open borders and the destruction of our sovereignty, also explained well by Liquid. It is mostly the far left, internationalists in the Democratic Party who support the open borders. They do so because they are hoping the demographically transform the U.S. for political reasons.
So the globalist Republicans and the far left are actually on the same side of the issue for different reasons.
The environmental issue is one that really interests me. In the past it was the left who pushed the environmental issues. However, the far left today is willing to put this issue on the back burner. It is a matter of priority. Their #1 priority is to change the demographics of the nation in order to bring about a Socialist/leftist utopia. So they are willing to turn a blind eye to the environmental impact and ignore the possible consequences of adding another 100 million people to this country in the next several decades. You've got to break a few eggs to make an omelette you know. But it is fascinating to watch the far left who are obsessed with "global warming" and other environmental issues totally ignore the stress on our natural resources and sustainability. They aren't thinking about "soylent green" when visions of a perpetual lock on political power dances in their heads.
Alie, your remarks were so profound and so accurately described the mindset of Latinos in this country that I am in awe of you!
Aw, shucks, Patriot! Thanks for the compliment.
He's another gem from Chuey on HB. I tell ya, the hits just keep on commin' from this guy:
"If I were a Democrat I'd be praying that Palin stumbles her mindless way back onto the GOP stage and convinces the GOP faithful that she's capable of helping screw up another presidential election.
Of course, we cant give Palin all of the credit for the botched 08 election.
Credit should be given to many who helped screw up our country:
GW Bush
Dick Cheney
Karl Rove
John McCain
All Republican Senators (too many to name)
All Republican Congressman (too many to name)
Sarah Palin
And of course, last but not least all of the Kool Aid drinking Republicans fueled by jingoism and ignorance, whose myopic views of the world coupled with racially biased agendas made it possible for the rest of America to see how ignorant and backward the Republican party is.
To them we say THANK YOU!"
"Myopic view of the world coupled with racially baised agendas." Gee, Chuey, you'd know all about the "racially biased agendas, wouldn't you?
I can never get over the in-your-face hypocrisy and unmitigated gall of these people.
Me either, Alie. Grown people who cannot see their own hypocricies. Dee is right up there in the top three of them. How do these people sleep at night with their constant lies and hypocricies?
This is a case about Nationalism vs Globalism, not about Dems vs Repubs. The mindset of those that view the problem, as Chuey, Dee, and many others do, is that in their minds they can only see one dimensional. They only see the helping of the poor, ethnically like themselves. They wish to be governed by those people of their same ethnicity, because living under 'white rule' has gotten us into this predicament. Remember how they are always spouting about the Hispanics being the largest minority, how they want equality, yet they never define it.
"Equality" to them means Latino hegemony over the entire hemisphere, particularly the U.S. Although they rarely have the guts to come right out and admit their agenda, they do so in so many other ways.
Patriot, I wouldn't exactly call it the "Latino" mindset, but I WOULD call it the mindset of the ethnocentric types like we've run across on some of the blogs.
They despise what they consider "white" America. Like you said, they cannot stand that this country has been and is currently a majority white nation. They are eager for this to change and they make no secret about this.
IMO that's one of the reasons they hate the Republican Party and label it as "racist." The Republican Party is made up of a majority of whites. They see these whites and that party as standing in the way of their "brown" hegemony. As I pointed out before, it's not a concern about "diversity" as they have no problem with the majority of Latin America being "brown." They are not concerned with "diversity" there. And they are not concerned with "diversity" in areas where Latinos are the majority population either. It only bothers them when whites are the majority.
Their agenda is so transparent it isn't even funny.
This is a little off-topic, but since the subject of censorship and demonization of those who oppose the pro-amnesty position has come up, I thought it was worth a read:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=85926
The far left and pro-amnesty folks would like nothing better than to silence their opposition. They try to do it now by labeling any discussions on the adverse effects of open borders "hate speech." Anything they don't like or do not want discussed is labeled as hate speech and those who hold those positions "Nazis, KKK, racists, etc." They do a fairly good job of stifling honest discussion that we as citizens of this nation have a right to have. If they have their way, this censorship is only going to get worse.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=85926
LOL! I was just reading Dee's blog and Ultima is tearing her up! I love it! An anonymous person said they would like to kiss him for it. He is impressive with his knack for getting to the truth of the matter backed up by facts.
From "Porter Corn" on Dee's blog:
"If Jordan and the one who doesn't have the cojones to use his real name would pull their heads out of their asses, they would realize that Felipe Calderon, following on the heels of Vicente Fox's administration is doing extraordinary things to weed out corruption and better the lives of his citizens.
But 75 years of one party rule and all the problems that has caused cannot be erased overnight, nor in one 6 year Presidential term.
In the myopic scope of some, they refuse to acknowledge this and make really stupid and uninformed comments about something they know nothing about!
Ni modo!"
Is this what Dee considers a "civil" response? Telling people to "pull their heads out of their a$$es" and deriding their comments as "stupid and uninformed?" Where did either anonymous or Jordan insult Porter Corn?
Now if it were an anti-illegal responding in that basically condescending and rude manner to a PRO illegal, they's be warned or their comments removed.
What a joke.
You are right, Alie. Just like Dee did with me. Analisa came in there with guns a blazing and decided I would be her target for insults. Did Dee warn her about it? Hell no! In fact is was me that Dee chastized for defending myself. She is a sick, demented, hateful, racist individual and allying hypocrite to boot. I have never encountered a more disgusting American and human being in my entire life.
Post a Comment