The GOP will pick up seats: Part 5

In this installment another series of reasons why the GOP will pick up seats and the Democrats will lose seats will be highlighted. Note that with the exception of number 35 “Immigration” these items have been largely ignored by the “experts” in the media. They are not, however, ignored here.

Obviously this installment could not serve its purpose unless it addressed the Foley seat situation. On this one again I am very optimistic, yes optimistic.

This is contrary to everything the Democrats and the media want us to believe, my research revealed:

A) Yes we can put a second name on the ballot; B) Yes Foley's name remains, but any mistaken vote for Foley goes to the replacement;

C) Foley won the seat with 68%, meaning 19% would have to stay home or 10% would have to vote Democrat, neither is very likely; D) The likely replacement is Joe Negron who is a GREAT candidate, earlier this year when he was looking at running for AG, he raised a million dollars and is very popular in that district:

E) The essence of this whole thing will be seen by activist GOPers in Florida as a rat dirty trick and it will backfire because the one thing no smart Dem wants to do is feed the Fla. GOP red meat like this; F) This gives us yet another minority Congressman, always help anywhere but more so in Florida:

G) Before this, the rat candidate had just 300k. He still has only 300k and there are just 5 weeks to go; H) If this was such a helpless/hopeless situation why would 5 GOPers IMMEDIATELY announce they were interested? They KNOW it is a straight ( pun intended) ticket to Washington;

In a report released earlier this year, Zogby reported that 58 percent of rank-and-file Democratic voters say their leaders should "accept their lower position in Congress and work together with Republicans to craft the best legislation possible."

Yes it goes back to February, but 58% giving up is a deep hole to crawl out of and it may indicate how flimsy the “Democrats are ready to vote” talk actually is.

“So far this year, there has been no indication of a Democratic surge. In 36 of 39 primaries, the Democratic turnout has been lower than the average of the past 20 years. Only Connecticut, North Dakota and Vermont had higher-than-average Democratic turnouts this year.”

Of course this is only anecdotal, but after the Democrats lost yet another opportunity to make progress in retaking the House, when they failed to win Ca 50, Duke Cunningham’s old seat, a disheartened Democrat posted the following lament on “Democratic Underground”

Here is a rank and file Democrat’s take. Note this a grassroots individual writing, not a spinner.

“CA-50 was always a "safe" Republican district, but circumstances this time around (including polls last week showing Busby with a 5-7% lead) suggested that it might be different. Obviously, it wasn't.

”My mother lives in an adjoining district (at times, she feels like she's the only Democrat there), and had been certain all along that Busby had no chance -- that, down there, most people might become disgusted by Republicans, but would never vote for a Democrat even so.

“Which is a problem, because we're going to have to win some of those districts if we're to have any hope of regaining even one chamber of Congress in November.

”And that's what worries me...that, while we've all been reveling in Bush's plunging approval ratings, we've been assuming that someone angry at the Republicans is someone who will vote Democratic. And "it ain't necessarily so.

"It seems to me that, for too many people, the Republicans may mess things up, but the Democrats are so unimpressive, so irrelevant, that they aren't even worth considering, no matter how bad things get.

”And I hope somebody in our Party knows how we can change that impression in the next five months....because I sure don't.”

While the June 6, the special election in Ca 50 was one win for Republicans, it was several loses for the Democrats. Aside from the election, they lost the issue of a “culture of corruption”. Nevertheless the biggest loss they suffered was in their attempt to excite their base and Independents.

Independents comprise 26.3% of registered voters; they were only 14.1% of special election voters.

The bad news for the Democrats was Independents stayed home, but more than this, their own voters stayed home as well.

Yes, they over performed statistically. They got 37.5% of their voters out in a district where they are just 30% of the registered voters.

Nevertheless, 37.5% is not any indication of “determined” Democrats willing to crawl through broken glass to get to the polls.

By contrast, GOP voters over preformed by 48/44%. Not eye popping, of course, but impressive for a special election and noteable when juxtaposed with the Democrats 37.5% in what was talked up by national Democrats a “big” special election, one that show the country how fired up their people are.

I say they have not and I believe they can not over come their problems no matter how many psy-ops polls and feel good pieces the old media writes.

“Angry taxpayers on Tuesday tossed out the two Republican Senate leaders who helped engineer last year's legislative pay raise, an issue that apparently cost 15 House members their jobs, too.

Senate President Pro Tempore Robert Jubelirer of Altoona, and Senate Majority Leader David Brightbill of Lebanon County conceded to their challengers, becoming the first lawmakers in major leadership posts to lose a primary election in 42 years. The House defeats would be the most since 1980.

"We have had a dramatic earthquake in Pennsylvania," said Jubelirer, a 32-year legislator.

“The defeats of Jubelirer and Brightbill "will send shock waves throughout he political establishment for years to come," said Mike Young, a retired Penn State University political science professor.”

“A warning shot was fired the other day by Democracy Corps, the party polling firm founded by James Carville and Stan Greenberg. Its latest report concludes that "Democrats are underperforming," that "the current measures of Democratic turnout and enthusiasm are not impressive," and that unless candidates "show voters something more," they could face "a stay-at-home protest."

“The problem is, Democrats are profoundly divided about what to do in Iraq, and Bush's political team - backed by GOP congressional unity on the war - is mapping plans to exploit that.

In the Virginia Democratic Senatorial primary held June 13, 2006 James Webb emerged the winner. Virginia is an “open primary” state meaning any registered voter of any party can vote. Webb won 52/48 and the turn out was 3%! [ Meaning he got 1 ½% support].

“If the Democrat’s intend to run on an assumption that American’s are ‘deeply disappointed or frustrated’ with how things in this country are going, they didn’t proved their point with this “election” [ Ca 50].”

“…. we are starting to wonder about some Democratic polling. Do the numbers tell us not only where a race is now but also where it is likely to be in a few weeks? Sure, polls are snapshots. But are they presenting the whole picture? Or are some Democratic polls showing Republican candidates with artificially low numbers by not forcing respondents to choose a candidate, thereby boosting the percentage of undecided voters?

For example, in NY-20, an August 29-30 McLaughlin & Associates poll for Rep. John Sweeney (R-NY) showed him leading attorney Kirsten Gillibrand (D) 53% to 36%, with 11% undecided.

An independent August 21-23 Siena Research Institute poll had Sweeney leading Gillibrand 53% to 34%, and 13% undecided.

And finally, an August 29-31 Global Strategy Group survey for Gillibrand showed her trailing 47% to 39%, with 14% undecided.

Yet, the DCCC released a September 5-7 poll by Grove Insight that showed Sweeney leading Gillibrand 43% to 31%, with 26% undecided.

In this extremely polarized environment, how could one-quarter of the electorate be undecided? And why is the undecided in the Grove Insight poll almost double the other three polls taken earlier in the race?

We aren't suggesting the numbers are made up, only that the poll's methodology may have produced a result that overstates the percentage of voters in play and understates Sweeney's true standing in the district.

Sweeney was one of those “Republicans identified as first called “vulnerable”, then moved to leaning Democrat. This race is still called a ”tos up” by many wishful thinkers in the media. Hmmmmmm!

In FL-22, an August 20-24 Benenson Strategy Group survey for the DCCC had Rep. Clay Shaw (R-NY) leading state Sen. Ron Klein 42% to 38%. But 20% undecided seems surprisingly large in a race in which both candidates, and even outside groups, have been spending heavily on media for almost a year.

In contrast, a Democratic poll in Pennsylvania's 4th district, which has been a slow-developing contest, showed the total undecided at eight points, with Rep. Melissa Hart (R-PA) leading Jason Altmire (D) 48% to 44%, with only 8% undecided.

The lesson is to be cautious about believing everything that you are seeing. In some cases, large numbers of voters truly are undecided. But in other instances, a huge undecided may well reflect a poll that seeks to understate the fundamental partisanship of a district.

A great example is in NE-3, where a September 20-21 Penn, Schoen & Berland survey for Scott Kleeb (D) shows him trailing state Sen. Adrian Smith (R) 40% to 31% with a whopping 29% undecided. President Bush won the district 75% to 24% in 2004, so you can bet most of those undecideds won't be voting for Kleeb.

“There has been a palpable shift in the mood in Washington in recent weeks. No longer are insiders in both parties sharing predictions of a Democratic rout of Republicans.

“A 58 percent majority of Democratic insiders polled by National Journal, as well as an overwhelming 94 percent of Republican insiders, say the Republican National Committee is doing a better job for November than the Democratic National Committee.

”John Zogby, whose polling until recently forecast a Republican debacle, now says a big reason for the mood shift is that President Bush is regaining crucial support among his party's voter base by emphasizing national security -- his strongest suit -- as often as possible.

”In a mid-August Zogby poll, only 62 percent of likely Republican voters gave Mr. Bush an "excellent" or "good job" rating. But by mid-September, Mr. Bush's approval rating among Republicans had reached 76 percent.

"You have to turn out your base for congressional elections, and if the president has 62 percent approval among Republicans, you have a third who don't approve and a lot of people who might stay home," says longtime Republican strategist Charles Black. "When the president has 76 percent Republican approval, it makes it a lot easier.

”Mr. Zogby allows that "things could happen, but right now, I think Republicans hold their majority in both houses." He said he doesn't think anger against Mr. Bush is sufficient to turn Congress over to the Democrats.

"The president is slowly but steadily regenerating support among his own base," he says. "I saw him do it before, going from 78 percent Republican approval before the 2004 GOP convention to 91 percent before Election Day."

”Republicans are doing a better job than Democrats of communicating with their core voters, says Mr. Zogby.

"I think Republicans are talking in an effective way to their base, which is particularly concerned about terrorism," says Mr. Zogby. "But Democrats, whose base wants to hear how we get out of Iraq, simply dance around the answer. Democrats are acting like John Kerry in 2004, trying to appeal to swing voters in yet another election in which there are no swing voters."

Here’s what Charlie Cook has to say last spring. You decide if conditions have changed or Cook is just showing his true colors these days

“Despite national political trends indicating that the GOP is in serious trouble, a race-by-race "micro" analysis suggests that Democrats cannot easily seize control of the House or the Senate this fall.

“In the House, where Democrats need a net gain of 15 seats, only about three dozen are truly in play today. So far, 17 Republicans and 10 Democrats have announced their retirements. Ten of those Republicans serve in safe GOP districts, where Democrats stand little chance of winning. Meanwhile, despite their Herculean efforts, Democratic recruiters have enticed few first-tier challengers into running this year.

“Instead, the party has an abundance of second- and third-tier candidates who could never prevail on their own and would need a hurricane-force wind at their backs to cross the finish line first.

“Despite record spending for primaries, [in Ohio] Democrats barely improved on primary numbers they had in the state back in 2002 for mid-term elections. Nationally, while approval numbers for Republicans edge down into the "teens," Republican turnout has been surprisingly good, and it now appears that several seats targeted by Democrats in Ohio, California, Texas and Florida will not be in their column in November.

"Pelosi's been talking a good game, but her party's numbers aren't holding up," says a Democratic leadership aide who is working behind the scenes to remove Pelosi after the mid-term elections”.

"Stop measuring for drapes, Nancy," Boston Herald columnist Virginia Buckingham writes. "If Democrats can't win a special election for a seat left open by the guilty plea of a senior Republican congressman for bribery in a political environment that can politely be described as more sour than milk left on the counter for a week, how can they expect to win back control of the House of Representatives, handing the speakership to Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.)?

"It turned out that the issue which voters cared about in the 50th was not 'corrupt money from Duke Cunningham and Tom DeLay' as Democratic candidate Francine Busby and Dean hoped. It was the hot-button that plays right to the GOP's strength — illegal immigration."

At the end of an interview with Howard Dean, Campbell Brown of the Today Show said this:

"I got to tell you. If I'm a voter, come November and you want me to vote Democrat, I still don't know what I'm voting for."

The power of ballot initiatives to bring out conservative voters can’t be over estimated. In 2004 each of the eleven state ballot initiatives to stop gay “marriage” passed with strong margins. The weakest vote was a 55/45 victory in the People’s Republic of Oregon.

Well constructed and pointed ballot initiatives are poison pills for Democrats. This year there are a number of these measures on various ballots across the nation.

As a measure of how frightened Ballot Initiatives make Democrats you need only look at how vigorously they worked to successfully take initiatives to balance the state budget, stop eminent domain and recall judges off the ballot in Montana.

T.A.B.O.R. or Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, Ballot Initiatives are designed to shrink state government through a constitutional amendments that must be approved by voters. These anti-tax measures will work on a formula connecting inflation and population growth by imposing a cap on the revenue the state would be allowed to spend each year and any excess must be returned to taxpayers.

These anti tax measures are now on the ballot in Maine, and TABOR initiatives will soon qualify in Maine, Oregon, and Nebraska.

T.A.B.O.R. initiatives will help Republicans in Oregon and may even help in Maine.

The “65% Plan,” will remove funding decisions from communities and mandate that 65% of all state education funding be spent “in the classroom.” Because this will divide teacher unions from custodial, and other ancillary unions it will weaken the Democrats ability to unify.

The plans will force state lawmakers to limit taxes. The 65% Plan Initiative ballot measures are on their way to being on the ballot this year in Colorado and Oklahoma.

“Arizona lawmakers agreed to let voters decide whether to deny more state services to illegal immigrants and whether to make English the state's official language.

The GOP-dominated Legislature rejected other ballot measures to criminalize the presence of illegal immigrants in Arizona, set state punishments for businesses that hire illegal foreign labor and stop communities from prohibiting police enforcement of federal immigration law.

This issue worked to the advantage of President Bush and conservative candidates around the country in 2004. It was a big winner then and it will be a big winner in November. These measures are moving forward in Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Massachusetts, Florida, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia, and Wisconsin. It will be helpful in Arizona, Tennessee, Virginia and Wisconsin, and could help in South Carolina and Florida.

" [ Wisonsin]Voters will get to decide Nov. 7 whether to approve a constitutional amendment that would bar the state from recognizing same-sex marriages [ and the death penalty]. They will also likely get to vote on whether the state can impose the death penalty in certain murder convictions.

"The combination of the gay marriage initiative and the death penalty initiative is going to be more helpful to the Republican candidates," said Dhavan Shah, a University of Wisconsin-Madison journalism professor.

“A proposal allowing same-sex couples to obtain some of the same protections as married couples under state law is headed to the voters. State representatives voted to re-adopt the proposal (House Bill 1344) Thursday, meaning it now will appear on November's ballot. "The voters will have the final say on this," said Sen. Joan Fitz-Gerald (D-Golden).

The ballot also could have a proposal asking voters to ban gay marriage as well as one that would bar any arrangements that are similar to marriage.”

“The state Legislature moved Thursday to give voters a say on whether Wisconsin should lift its 153-year-old ban on the death penalty, the longest state ban on the practice in the nation.

The state Assembly narrowly approved a resolution to hold a statewide advisory referendum in the Nov. 7 election asking voters whether they favor the death penalty in cases involving first-degree murder convictions backed up by DNA evidence.

Fighting back against the Supreme Court’s Eminent Domain decision will be a powerful issue this cycle. Anti-takings initiatives are being pushed by anti-government activists in response to the controversial Kelo v. New London decision. In this decision, The Court ruled that local governments could seize property for private interests. In doing so, it throw out 225 years of measured and fair eminent domain practice that Americans understood and supported.

State property rights activists are rallying their troops all over America. Where ballot initiative is an option they will have no trouble gaining steam and power as we move toward November. Since the most egregious examples of abuses of this new eminent domain ruling are almost universally being perpetrated by local Democrats, and the liberals on The Court are the ones who forced this on America, there is absolutely no way that Democrats can even mitigate the damage they will suffer from this issue.

Even in states that don’t have ballot initiatives, Democrats will be forced to come out against Kelo or suffer the consequences. This will divide local Democrats from state and /or federal level Democrats. Right now the media might think that it can make this go away by ignoring it. The anger over this issue is beyond anything these people can imagine.

These initiatives will energize conservative voters by framing yet another issue as an encroachment on basic rights by big, irresponsible government. It will help the GOP in Senate races because the solid argument can be made that Republican Senators will not confirm the type of liberal judges that gave us Kelo.

This issue is moving in Arizona, California, Colorado, Michigan, Missouri, North Dakota, Oregon, and Washington. It will be helpful everywhere, but more so in Michigan, Colorado, and Missouri.

Today, the Protect Our Homes Coalition will announce that they are turning in over a million signatures in County Registrar offices all around the state, virtually assuring that this important measure to protect Californians from eminent domain abuse will appear on the November ballot.

"North Carolina-based BB&T bank was the first in the nation to stand for principle by announcing that it would not longer finance development projects if they involved taking private property by eminent domain. Now the bank is paying the price. The urban renewal agency of the city of Charleston, West Virginia is planning to pull $2.37 million out of BB&T because of it's anti-eminent domain policy."

The Michigan Superme Court has approved a ballot measure to be considered next November that will ban some aspects of the states affirmative action program. It focuses on the state’s involvment in the admission process used to award seats in Michigan’s universities.

Demands for "preferential treatment" for individuals based on race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin coming from a group called “By Any Means Necessary” will be a contant reminder to conservatives to get out and vote come next November.

The following numbers tend to indicate that the “hot bottom” issues to be voted on in the various ballot inititives would favor the GOP.

”Republicans and Democrats differ according to what they find morally acceptable, according to a Gallup poll of 1,005 adults released yesterday, with Democrats more likely to call the death penalty and wearing fur morally unacceptable, and Republicans more irked by sexual looseness and embryonic stem-cell research.

“Specific issues rated by GOP respondents: Death penalty (accepted by 82 percent) ( Democrats 63 percent ),

human cloning (8 percent) (Dems 8 percent), adultery (3 percent) ( Dems 5 percent).”

These number point to “broken glass” Republican voters as relates to ballot inititatives.

Although it will not be a “ballot initiative”, another powerful grassroots movement that will work to the Republican’s benefit and hurt Democrats, is the “Castle Doctrine”.

Recently the Ohio legislature's criminal justice committee began consideration of the "Castle Doctrine". The Castle Doctrine, a movement supported and promoted by the NRA, will restore Ohioans' right to self-defense by removing a private citizen’s "duty to retreat" in the face of criminal attack.

The movement toward giving citizens a right to self defense without having to back down and without having to be concerned with undue civil liability it growing. It will pitt Democrats against their anti supporters.

It will cause them to go on record as either for or against the average citizen’s right to self defense especially in their own homes. This will be a winning issue for Republicans everywhere it surfaces. It will hurt Democrats everywhere it surfaces. Americans are tired of backing away from attackers and they will vote accordingly. Alabama and Mississippi have recently passed Castle Doctrine laws and there are more to come.

“Legislation broadening the legal use of deadly force passed the House on Thursday [ May 4, 2006 ] and is headed to the governor for his signature.”

“The Michigan Senate has approved legislation aimed at fortifying and clarifying self-defense rights.

“The measures would allow people to use deadly force -- with no duty to retreat -- if they reasonably think they face imminent death, great bodily harm or sexual assault. The legislation also would protect people from civil lawsuits if they have used force in self-defense.

“The six-bill package is backed by the National Rifle Association but opposed by anti-gun groups.”

No matter what lies the Democrats and the media want to tell us about sentiments toward abortion, the truth is that more people want abortions restricted than want them increased.

Because of the appointments of John Roberts and Samuel Alito, as well as the South Dakota law banning abortion, the proponents of abortion are in a high state of agitation. They will put the Democrat’s heads in a vice over orthodoxy on this issue.

Watch what is happening in Pennsylvania. Bob Casey is attempting to startle the fence on abortion. He wants to run as both a Democrat and a pro-lifer.

The Democrat’s far left will not allow Casey or anyone else to run as a pro-life Democrat. This will cause any number of problems for Democrat candidates all over the country.

“PIERRE, S.D. - Four Republican state senators who voted against a bill to ban most abortions in South Dakota were defeated in Tuesday's primary election. Just how much their opposition to the legislation led to their losses was not immediately clear, but abortion opponents in the state have long had a firm grasp on the Legislature.”

Several lawmakers who supported the abortion ban were successful in the primary.”

"The size and magnitude of the demonstrations had some kind of backfire effect," said John McLaughlin, a Republican pollster who said he was working for 26 House members and seven senators seeking re-election. "The Republicans that are tough on immigration are doing well right now." April 18,2006

“Two other key factors[ as to why GOP is looking better and better for November 2006]: The Bush economy looks pretty good, and there's a rising heartland rage over illegal immigration.”

We can count on the Democrats to over reach on this issue as they as do in every issue. Already Sen. Kennedy has been encouraging illegal aliens not to report for deportation. This is an important element of his own bill. They just can’t help themselves.

“In a political season when most of the news has been bad for Republicans, the Congressional debate over immigration has produced a bit of movement in favor of the GOP.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national opinion survey found that 37% of Americans now trust Republicans more than Democrats on the issue of immigration. Just 31% trust the Democrats more. In late March, the two parties were perceived equally on the topic, with 38% favoring the GOP and 37% preferring the Democrats.

A separate survey found that, in a hypothetical race for Congress, a plurality of Americans would vote for the candidate who favors more enforcement on the immigration issue

“Contrary to scenes of hundreds of thousands of united Latinos marching across the country in support of immigration reform, a sizable number of the ethnic group opposes the marches and strongly objects to illegal immigration.

"That's the objective of the marches -- to give the impression that all Latinos are for allowing the illegals to become citizens," said Phoenix resident Lionel De La Rosa. "Well, I'm not."

The 71-year-old Texas native and Vietnam veteran said he favors punitive measures more in line with the immigration bill passed by the U.S. House in December that would have made it a felony to be in the United States illegally.

"I'm for that 100 percent," he said. "As far as my Latino friends are concerned, they all agree on this."

A 2005 survey by the Pew Hispanic Center found that Latinos in general have favorable attitudes toward immigrants and immigration.

“But when it comes to illegal immigration, significant numbers have negative views of illegal immigrants.

“The survey found those feelings are strongest among middle-class and middle-age U.S.-born Latinos [ who are more likely voters].

“…U.S.-born Latinos looked … less favorably toward illegal immigrants than foreign-born Latinos. More than a third of U.S.-born Latinos said illegal immigrants hurt the economy, compared with just 15 percent of foreign-born Latinos.

(A) Gallup Poll (March 27) finds 80 percent of the public wants the federal government to get tougher on illegal immigration.

(B) A Quinnipiac University Poll (March 3) finds 62 percent oppose making it easier for illegals to become citizens (72 percent in that poll don't even want illegals to be permitted to have driver's licenses).

(C) Time Magazine's recent poll (Jan. 24-26) found 75 percent favor "major penalties" on employers of illegals, 70 percent believe illegals increase the likelihood of terrorism and 57 percent would use military force at the Mexican-American border.

(D) An NBC/Wall Street Journal poll (March 10-13) found 59 percent opposing a guest-worker proposal, and 71 percent would more likely vote for a congressional candidate who would tighten immigration controls.

(E) An IQ Research poll (March 10) found 92 percent saying that securing the U.S. border should be a top priority of the White House and Congress.

What about Pete Wilson, the former governor of California? Didn't he try to crack down on illegal immigration and wasn't there a backlash against Republicans because of it?

This myth that has been seized upon by pro-illegal immigrant forces, but it doesn't bear up under scrutiny.

In 1994, Pete Wilson supported Prop 187, a bill that cut off government services to illegal aliens. Prop 187 passed with the support of 59% of the voters (including 31% of the Hispanic vote).

So, did Wilson get buried by the "backlash?" No, instead he won a 15 point landslide victory.

Fast forward to 2006. The current Governor of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger voted for Prop 187, had Pete Wilson as the co-chair of his campaign, said he would not approve driver's licenses for illegal immigrants, and was still elected in a very liberal state that's 34% Hispanic.

The idea that being tough on illegal immigrants is guaranteed to cause a massive backlash for Republicans at the polls simply isn't true.

JEFFERSON CITY — The Missouri Senate voted Wednesday to crack down on undocumented immigration, giving the Highway Patrol new enforcement authority and punishing contractors who hire undocumented workers on public projects.

The measure passed on a 29-3 vote with significant bipartisan support. The bill, which now can go to the House, represents the toughest set of restrictions on undocumented immigration lawmakers have approved so far…. the bill, SB 1250, to gets a House committee hearing next week.

… three Democrats, including Sen. Joan Bray, of St. Louis County, voted against the bill.

“There's a real war going on in U.S. border states involving private citizens and Mexican army units, illegal smugglers and vicious alien street gangs. [. . .] [T]he Department of Homeland Security concedes there have been 231 'documented' incursions by Mexican military or police units (or drug smugglers dressed in uniforms) during the last 10 years."

"An Alabama employment agency that sent 70 laborers and construction workers to job sites in that state in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina says the men were sent home after just two weeks on the job by employers who told them 'the Mexicans had arrived' and were willing to work for less."

“Gov. Jim Doyle vetoed a bill Friday aimed at making it harder for illegal immigrants to receive government benefits, saying it went too far in requiring proof of citizenship of all beneficiaries.

“….His Republican opponent, U.S. Rep. Mark Green of Green Bay, said he would have signed the bill. "Taxpayers should not be forced to pay for benefits for illegal immigrants," he said in a statement.

"Rahm Emanuel, who heads the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, played down the import of Busby's loss for the Democrats' hopes in November. Waving off the immigration issue, he said, 'Not every district is going to be on the border of Mexico.'

"I have news for him. Not every district is on the border with Mexico, but just about every district feels like it is."

Washington political pollster Frank Luntz, who in an earlier private memo told Congress that Americans are not only ready for an overhaul of illegal alien policy, "they are demanding it," is now warning members that the competing House and Senate solutions must contain one consensus: "No amnesty."

"Any Republican who votes for legislation on illegal immigration that walks, talks, looks or smells like amnesty will reap the wrath of a Republican electorate who see more and more reasons to stay home in November with each passing day," Mr. Luntz says in a memo we obtained.

“…. His research paper concludes "conclusively that any association with amnesty will turn the so-called Senate heroes of this summer into the martyrs of November."

“The City Council [ of Hazleton] approved a law Thursday night designed to make this small city in northeastern Pennsylvania among the most hostile places in the U.S. for illegal immigrants to live or work. The 4-to-1 vote came after nearly two hours of passionate debate. Opponents argued it was divisive and possibly illegal, but supporters argued illegal immigrants' growing numbers have damaged the quality of life here.

"We must draw the line, and we are doing it tonight," Mayor Lou Barletta told a packed council chambers.

Barletta proposed the Illegal Immigration Relief Act last month as a response to what he said were Hazleton's problems with violent crime, crowded schools, hospital costs and the demand for services.

The ordinance would deny licenses to businesses that employ illegal immigrants, fine.

NEW YORK (UPI) -- Impatience with the U.S. Congress' delay in passing immigration reform has led at least 30 states to pass their own punitive measures for illegal workers.

The National Conference of State Legislatures has recorded at least 57 state laws enacted to make it harder for undocumented workers to find jobs or receive public services, USA Today reported Monday.

Among them is a Louisiana law approved in June that fines businesses that have state contracts and more than 10 employees if they don't fire workers known to be undocumented. Also in June, Colorado enacted a law that prohibits awarding state contracts to businesses that knowingly employ illegal immigrants.

Under federal law, states must provide some services to illegal immigrants, such as public education and emergency medical care, but they do not have to provide food assistance, healthcare, unemployment benefits or other services, the report said.

”Gov. Bob Riley announced on Thursday Alabama will have 70 state troopers empowered by the federal government to arrest illegal aliens before the end of the year.

“A group of 43 influential opinion leaders – including Alan Keyes, Phyllis Schlafly, David Horowitz and Swiftboat activist John O'Neill – have signed a declaration pledging to withhold support for any candidate, Democrat or Republican, who votes for legislation providing "amnesty" or a guest-worker program for illegal aliens. “

Note the age of the news pieces I have included in this essay. Believe me I make daily judgments about what to add, what to leave in this piece.

Nevertheless, the heat on this issue has stopped rising. It has done so because the House has not let it go and local towns and states have started to fight back.

Voters don’t care who gives them results on this issue. Indeed most people don’t know a Congressional bill from a city ordinance.

What voters who care about illegal aliens do know is that they see progress and will not throw Republicans out over inaction.

They will give the benefit of the doubt to Republicans and Democrats for that matter who show they listening to voter outrage over this issue.

That will neutralize the issue until after the election, provided the Senate is smart enough to vote for the fence.

On first glance this might sound like “a wash” as an issue, but it is not. It is another loss of an issue for the Democrats. They were salivating at the idea that Republicans would be seen as mean anti Hispanic fanatics.

In the last three elections 98% of incumbents were re-elected. In the absence of a genuine driving issue, not one fancied by the Democrats and their tools in the old tired media, how do the Democrats win enough seats to take control of the House? The answer is they can’t.

Running against well entrenched and well financed incumbents involves something that the Democrats don’t talk about much: The $50,000 factor. All over the country, both parties have held their state conventions.

At these meetings each side nominated people for congress. There were lots of cheers and pats on the back, and tough talk from the challengers. What doesn’t get much attention is that these candidates will have to put up anywhere between $50,000 and $100,000 of their own money.

Since 1972, when one candidate has a money edge of $200,000 or more over an opponent, that candidate has won 93% of the time.

This is where “the rubber hits the road”. How many Democrats actually have the money to risk and the nerve to do so will be the question. Many “experts” like Rothenberg and Cook think the Democrats have not recruited enough top tier candidates. Now you have a better understanding of why.

The next installment, 6 in this series will be posted on Monday October 9, at 8: 00 AM EST. The reasons it will cover are as follows.

Remember: Feelings are for love songs. Facts are for predicting elections. Now more than ever we need to buckle down and resist ratmedia psy-ops attacks designed to break our morale. Stick together and we win. Allow them to break us down and they win.

If the GOP picks up seats after all the crap they've had to deal with, it will be a miracle.

There will have to be a lot of resignations among the Dems, if that happens. Dean, Pelosi and her mafia, Reid, Emmanuel, etc....

"The stark lack of enthusiasm among the Democrat rank and file "

And of course...this is completely unreported by the LSM. I've said this for the past few years...the rats aren't enthusiastic at all, as evidenced by their inability to raise funds thru the DNC. Even big donors backed off. I don't care how many bajillions hitlery raised, she isn't going to give it up, she'll save it for her own fat self for 2008.

Great work!!

Now more than ever we need to buckle down and resist ratmedia psy-ops attacks designed to break our morale.

"Psy-ops attacks." That's what it feels like... being beaten down. It's getting harder to pay attention to the news. I have to tell myself I need to do it for the sake of future generations.

5 posted on 10/02/2006 5:51:03 AM PDT by syriacus (Don't elect a president whose wife wants to run for the presidency. His 1st loyalty will be to HER.)

Could you make your post just a little longer next time?

He did. The orignial version is here

"Am I just a Republican cheerleader engaging in wishful thinking?"

It certainly appears that way.

I never read looooonnnggg posts. Figure that its a need to write a book and instead they post on here.

Nice Work Jmarone. Remember the same posters who are knocking the GOP chances now, are the same ones who predicted a President Kerry.

Negron will keep the Foley Seat

Kean will pickup the NJ seat also.

Sweeney was one of those “Republicans identified as first called “vulnerable”, then moved to leaning Democrat.

Unadulterated BS. Sweeney wins this race hands down.

By the way, I share your optimism.

Bill someone has to be. If we let the Bias Liberal media keep pumping up the daydreams of the DEMS we will lose by default.

Watch for Pedophile Garry Studds name to be big this week.

He was DEM Rep from Mass in the 80's and 90's who was busted with a Male minor. Tip O'neill let him stay on.

Also Barney Frank was censured for helping his gay lover on parking tickets.

I will make two predictions that are totally contrary to what the MSM wants us to believe:

1) Burns will win in Montana, but it will be very close.

2) Even though I don't like him, I believe Lincoln Chafee will win, but again, it will be very close.

As to the House, I don't see many opportunities for us, it looks like 1998 all over again, the dems are trying to slime us and the MSM is helping all they can. I still think we'll lose between 7-10 seats, but we will maintain control of the chamber.

13 posted on 10/02/2006 6:03:21 AM PDT by no dems (I'll take a moral Mormon over a demonic Democrat or repugnant RINO anyday.)

Keeping the Senate in GOP control is more important that keeping the House. Why? Because I believe the Prez will have the opportunity to appoint, at least, one more Supreme Court Justice before he leaves office in two years and it's the Senate that does the "confirmation thing".

14 posted on 10/02/2006 6:05:12 AM PDT by no dems (I'll take a moral Mormon over a demonic Democrat or repugnant RINO anyday.)

I'm with you, buddy. I have been betting on Republican gains for quite some time now. I'm glad to hear I'm not alone.

You can't beat something with nothing, and nothing is all the Democrats have.

15 posted on 10/02/2006 6:09:45 AM PDT by gridlock (The 'Pubbies will pick up at least TWO seats in the Senate and FOUR seats in the House in 2006)

37) We have DIEBOLD < insert sound a mainiacal laughter here >

16 posted on 10/02/2006 6:12:30 AM PDT by gridlock (The 'Pubbies will pick up at least TWO seats in the Senate and FOUR seats in the House in 2006)

Great point. Ginsberg and Stevens might retire. the only problem is the House is much tougher to get back. It only took us 40 years to get it back last time

"You can't beat something with nothing, and nothing is all the Democrats have."

Nothing, that is, except 90% of the media 24/7.

Keeping the Senate in GOP control is more important that keeping the House.

If Dems take the House, impeachment is right around the corner.

I think that will tick off the public, but the lib base will demand it.

To all who complain that my posts are too long, remember it was the Hairy Ape who once said: "It houyts ta think."

Each of these sections are writing to people who sway opinions in their own slice of the world. If only people like Rush and Sean and Levin and Boortz and Gallagher etc. read these essays and NOBODY else does, I have done my job. For others,this data is "water cooler" talking points. If these essays are too long for you, well that's your problem, isn't it?

20 posted on 10/02/2006 6:35:54 AM PDT by jmaroneps37 (DON'T BELIEVE PESSIMISM: FEELINGS ARE FOR LOVE SONGS. FACTS ARE FOR PREDICTING WHO WINS IN NOV)

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.