Buchanan, one of the last sane conservative political strategists

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by spect8or, Sep 6, 2006.

  1. Can The GOP Be Saved? Not By La Raza
    By Patrick J. Buchanan

    Like the famous racehorse Silky Sullivan, Sen. Rick Santorum is known as a great closer. Yet, months ago, he had been virtually given up for dead by pundits in his race against Bob Casey, Jr., son of the popular, pro-life, former Democratic governor of Pennsylvania.

    One poll early this year had Santorum down 23 points, an almost insurmountable deficit. A Strategic Value poll had Santorum down 16 points.

    Now the senator who had been written off is finishing fast. An average of all polls monitored by the RealClearPolitics.com website finds him trailing by 6 points. The most recent Strategic Value poll confirms it. Casey is at 47; Santorum, 41 and rising.

    What accounts for the surge? The Washington Times traces it to one issue: "Republican strategists say Santorum's tough stand on immigration has been a key factor."[Santorum shrinks Casey's poll lead By Charles Hurt September 1, 2006] No. 3 in the Senate leadership, Santorum was the highest-ranking Republican to vote against the McCain-Kennedy amnesty bill that would open a path to U.S. citizenship for 10 million of the aliens who have either broken into our country, or are breaking the laws by being here, plus grant a full pardon from all civil and criminal penalties for the companies that employed them. McCain-Kennedy would further empower corporations to go abroad and hire what unions once called "scabs" to bring here to take jobs Americans cannot take at Third World wages.

    "We did a certain amount of internal polling and when it got to immigration, it was very clear," says Santorum's media consultant John Braybender, who prepared two tough ads on immigration. "Rick's position versus Casey's was overwhelming. If Casey or anyone else thinks this is not an issue in Pennsylvania, they should start talking to voters."

    Backing up Braybender is the same Strategic Value poll that found 79 percent of Pennsylvanians opposed to amnesty and 82 percent favoring a wall on the Mexican border. Pennsylvanians, like the rest of America, want the border secured and the illegals sent home.

    But what will it take to wake up Karl Rove, lately sighted at the Los Angeles convention of the National Council of La Raza, where he won cheers for urging legalization of "undocumented" workers and boos for speaking of border security? (The literal translation of La Raza is "The Race.") Imagine the reaction to David Duke organizing a "National Council of The Race."

    Two months from election day, Republicans, divided over Iraq, amnesty, spending, the loss of manufacturing and an economy that has left the working class treading water while the investor class is singing "Happy Days Are Here Again," are looking at the prospect of something somewhere between a defeat and a rout, or a massacre.

    Yet if Republicans wish to hold Congress, despite what they may deserve, the Bushites could do no better than to borrow from the Santorum playbook. What can Bush and Congress do in 60 days?

    One, publicly set aside the amnesty and guest worker provisions of the McCain-Kennedy bill. Bush cannot get them passed by the House in any event. Second, extract and enact the most urgent and popular provisions of both the Senate and House bills.

    Bush should request $3 billion to $4 billion to start a security fence along all major crossing points for drug-dealers, coyotes and illegals. Then have Homeland Security begin systematic and public deportation of felons and gang members who are not U.S. citizens. Tattooed thugs being put on planes in cuffs will do the GOP and nation a world of good.

    The FBI can provide the names. It has been tracking MS-13, or Mara Salvatrucha, the most vicious and violent gang in the hemisphere, with tens of thousands of members in the United States, for a year now.

    Then call on Congress to reclaim its authority to denaturalize and deport any new citizen whose conduct -- applauding Al Qaeda or engaging in gang activity -- suggests they lied to become U.S. citizens. Bush could then tour the border again and, this time, shake hands with a few of the Minutemen patriots he earlier derided as "vigilantes." Unfortunately for the GOP, Rove & Co. believe that if Republicans take the hard line on illegal immigration that Pete Wilson took in 1994, the GOP will be as dead nationally as it has been lately in California. They forget: Wilson converted a 20-point deficit into a 10-point victory, captured both houses of the legislature and brought in four new GOP congressmen.

    Arnold is the only other Republican to win statewide since then, and he ran against driver's licenses for illegals. No Republican who has taken the Rove-La Raza line has ever won the Golden State. Why is the GOP so mindlessly pursuing a transparently losing strategy?


    In pandering to La Raza, Rove may be playing for the long run. But as Lord Keynes said, in the long run we are all dead, which is where Republicans are headed if they don't get it right on this issue. Like Rick Santoru.

    END
     
  2. How Republicans can possibly miss that running on an anti-immigration platform would give them an incredible boost is one of the mysteries of our age. (Actually, it's not that hard - business elites only concerned about making a quick buck, and screw everyone else, and the fate of the country to boot.)

    I think it simply has to be that fear of being called a racist. I mean, if it was white Canadians streaming into America and Americans didn't like it, can anyone seriously doubt that the border would have been secured in a second? But since it's little brown Mexicans flooding the country, oh no, musn't be seen to be a 'racist'.
     
  3. Pabst

    Pabst

    A couple of things. First off anyone who uses common sense rather than a knee jerk bully pulpit knows there's ZERO chance that upwards of 10 million people are going to be successfully deported out of the U.S. It's just impossible logistically. It's great to pass laws. Now try to enforce them. Local police departments are apathetic about joining the chase. Reducing illegals in any meaningful way is not in the cards.

    Politically, both parties are paranoid over the Latino vote. Republicans are doing better than before at attracting Latino's but it appears the exit polls proclaiming Bush with 42% of the Latin vote were over stated. Most poly-sci guys put the # in the high-30's and Mexican specific in the low 30's. Republicans however think that their inherent platform of low taxation and pro-family will resinate with Mexican's. Perhaps it will. In reality it's the Democrat's who are selling out their base on this issue. Pabst, AAA, Hap and Spec aren't being beaten out of a job by a Mexican. However Tyrone and LaQuisha ARE being marginalized by an influx of cheap labor. I don't find it outrageous that the GOP is largely silent. I find it STUNNING that the Jackson's and Sharpton's are not up in arms. Mark my words, we'll see a day when even government jobs will go to Hispanics over blacks. At that point the Black Congressional Caucus will go ape shit. But you know what? No one will care because by then there will be twice as many Congressmen named Bonilia as Waters.
     
  4. "We did a certain amount of internal polling and when it got to immigration, it was very clear," says Santorum's media consultant John Braybender".

    Too bad he didn't poll some of the other issues.
     


  5. You don't to physically throw them out. Just pass legislation that would make their stay in America so uncomfortable that they leave on their own accord. Punish employers, deny them welfare and medical care etc.

    But the article wasn't about throwing out illegals. It was about making sure no more come. It's quite simple, the American public has spoken through numerous polls and the numbers, if Republican strategists would listen, are deafening.


    If Republicans didn't get a single hispanic vote but simply increased their white share by 5% they would utterly thrash democrats.

    Why on earth would low taxes resinate with Mexicans? They are huge consumers of government programs. And the 'family values' of Mexicans are astronomically overhyped. By any statistical measure, they are far less family value oriented than whites.

    So are millions upon millions of poor whites. (Doesn't any care about them?) You're right. In fact, I foresee an anti-immigration conservative and AFL-CIO coalition forming in the future.

     
  6. Pabst

    Pabst

     
  7. Pabst, I hope you can understand that I am perfectly serious in what I am about to say and I am not dissing you. My Dad is an inveterate traveller and I have been to about 30 countries in my life, including Oz on 3 occasions. I also spent a lot of time with Australians in Bali. I can say with absolute certainty that with regard to your feelings about non-white races, you would find a lot of like-minded people in Australia. In fact, there is not another country that I have been to that would be a better fit for you, just in case you decide to emigrate at any point.
     
  8. Pabst

    Pabst

    It would be tops on my list. Reminds me of 1950's California. Not that I was around then. Perhaps LoZZZeR can tell us about the Golden State post War......:)
     


  9. Well bro, naturally any effort to increase the white vote by such a margin would require an anti-immigration platform. Ending immigration is far simpler than some people think it is. It's not this unstoppable, inevitable wave that we have simply been damned by fate to experience. Look at Europe, that continent is being invaded daily by thoroughly incompatible Africans and Muslims. (It is impossible that such immigration could be positive for Europe.) The reason they come is they know Europeans lack the backbone or will to throw them back into the sea. If Europeans starting sinking a few ships watch how quickly they'd stop. (Or if Americans shot a few border jumpers or mined the border, watch how quick it would stop. You wouldn't even have to shoot many. Maybe a dozen.)



    Wait a minute, you can't just use vague terms like "largely". What proportion exactly are we talking about? I don't have the stats but I'd be willing to bet it's not even 20% that are business owners and probably much less. I fail to see the logic in appealing to such an insignificant minority.

    And what's a "reasonably" good job? Look at the numbers. Hispanics have children out of wedlock at almost twice the white rate (42 to 22%, while blacks are a staggering 70%). Births to girls younger than 14 are four times the white rate. Births to girls 15-17 occur at three times the white rate (higher even than blacks). And that's not because of "Catholic values" against abortion - hispanics abort at 1.5 times the white rate.

    With respect to cultural assimilation, they're being Catholic is obviously good, but you don't really think they're very committed Catholics do you? In any case, I would bet anything their identity as hispanics trumps their identity as catholics.



    But why Pabst? Seriously, why? Why should whites allow themselves to be pushed out (where are they 'on the way out' to, anyway?) by a people whose race is a centrepiece of their identity? These people aren't coming to America to be 'good Americans'. They see themselves as and are fully intent on staying Mexicans.


    Okay, it's going to get worse. But is that any reason not to try and limit the damage? I just don't get why you're so willing to throw your hands in the air over this. Europeans used to die by the millions to prevent precisely the effects that are taking place in America today - the invader takes over your cities, displaces your language, installs his own history, celebrates his own heroes and concerns himself with the welfare of his own kind. Isn't that what Mexicans are doing in America?

    I'm not sure I'd welcome you to Oz, bro. I'd want someone that's willing to fight the good fight, not throw in the towel as Australia giddies up to be swamped by Asians.

    That's a no brainer, who wouldn't. You are aware, though, that BA and Santiago are largely white? Argentina is even whitere than America, with the vast majority of its population descended from Spanish and Italians. Chile's a bit more mestizo but not overwhelmingly so. That's a far cry from the kind of hispanics flooding into America. Many of them are pure Indians - like those bowler hat wearing Peruvians and Bolivians - that have barely assimilated into Mexican culture (some still can't even speak Spanish) after 500 years, so the prospects of their assimiliating into anything like American culture any time soon seem pretty dim.

    I can't be bothered going over what I've just written, but if my tone sounds a bit exasperated, I hope you can forgive me. You're one of the good guys, but I have trouble understanding why you feel the way you do.
     
  10. Outside of Brisbane, Queensland's a nice conservative state (Australia's most). You'd like it there.
     
    #10     Sep 8, 2006