Posted on 11/08/2012 7:42:15 PM PST by i88schwartz
Mark Levin responds to calls from conservative commentators, like Charles Krauthammer, to grant amnesty to illegal immigration in order to entice Hispanics to vote Republican. Levin explains why this won't work and what a slippery slope amnesty would be. (Mark Levin Show, November 8, 2012)
MARK LEVIN: You know, I've always known this, but I'm coming to the conclusion yet again that Republican leaders are really stupid people. And I'm coming to the conclusion that are an awful lot of stupid people posing as commentators on cable TV. I mean, where do these people come from?
Now, this immigration issue. How did this become the big issue after the election? It had nothing to do with the Republican loss.
###
LEVIN: I want to talk to Charles Krauthammer, who I like very much. I want to talk to all these GOP talking heads all over TV, some of whom are my friends, most of whom clearly are not. And all the rest of the Republicans who are falling into the race pandering and race politics stuff and sound stupid, and look stupid, and are embarrassing themselves. And are going to destroy the Republican party or what's left of it.
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
The majority of Hispanics (54%) self-describe themselves as white. Hispanics can be of any color. We should be rejecting such classifications. Mexicans are far different from Columbians, Salvadorians, Brazilians, etc. And the same holds true for Asians. The GOP has a minority problem, not an Hispanic problem.
Ronald Reagan said, “A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers. I do not believe I have proposed anything that is contrary to what has been considered Republican principle. It is at the same time the very basis of conservatism. It is time to reassert that principle and raise it to full view. And if there are those who cannot subscribe to these principles, then let them go their way.”
We have allowed the Democrats to define us. We are constantly on the defensive.
The Republicans need to expose the Democrats as the real racists and bigots who provide people, including newly arrived immigrants, with special rights and privileges based on race, ethnicity, and gender. For example, the definitions of Hispanic and Asian under Virginia minority business set aside laws are ludicrous. They make no sense. What do Japanese, Chinese, Indians, and Filipinos have in common except being from the same geographic region of the globe? Similarly, “Hispanics” encompass all of Latin America and the Iberian Peninsula, i.e., the former colonialists. These types of classifications are reminiscent of those under apartheid in South Africa, which had four main groups with a number of sub-groups and even “honorary whites.” Republicans should take the lead in abolishing these discriminatory programs in post-racial America and use immigration as an example of the unfairness of these laws.
There are other significant demographic changes that transcend race and ethnicity. The Republican Party should focus on those changes rather than its quixotic outreach programs. By 2030 one in every 5 residents of this country will be 65 and over—twice what it is now. The vast majority of these people will be on fixed incomes with Social Security being the sole or a major portion of their retirement income. As a result, taxes will become more and more of a concern among older voters. State and local taxes will have to fund much of the education and social welfare costs for immigrants and their children as the U.S. population continues to increase. Since the federal government only funds about 13 percent of the education costs with state and local governments funding the rest through mainly property taxes, an aging population on fixed incomes will balk at increased rates of taxation. And senior citizens vote at a higher percentage than younger voters. Even immigrants grow old and will vote their pocketbook.
And then there are younger voters who must bear the brunt of the out of control federal spending that will balloon the current debt servicing costs, which consume $200 billion annually of the federal budget. With entitlement programs increasing to more than half of the federal budget, it will leave declining amounts of money for discretionary items, including defense. In 1950, there were 16 workers for every retiree, today it is 3.3, and by 2030 it will be 2 workers for every retiree. As a result, the young will also become increasingly concerned about taxes and the costs of mass immigration that will require huge amounts of money for increased infrastructure requirements, higher energy needs, schools, hospitals, water treatment and sewage plants, etc.that will be needed for a nation approaching half a billion people and is the world’s biggest debtor nation. The Republican message of limited government and lower taxes will resonate with the young and old alike.
That may be a result of losing two elections to Obama, and congress in 2006.
Failure says something.
Fantasy talk? In your first sentence you say that such an amendment will be ratified and then you reverse yourself. The idea that there will never be another amendment to the Constitution is the real fantasy talk. I think that it will depend on what kind of public support such an amendment would get.
There are only 33 countries in the world that have birthright citizenship and only two developed countries, the US and Canada. Ireland was the last country in Europe to get rid of birthright citizenship and it did so thru a constitutional amendment. Again, it would be the last resort. Let's see if we can get Congress to pass a law first. Several Congressman has proposed legislation to that effect, including Steve King who was just reelected despite a major attempt by the Dems to defeat him.
I really don’t think most illegals want or care to be citizens. They don’t want to pay taxes, but they do want to vote for the bennies and not get kicked out. They want to roam freely back and forth over the border.
So far it has worked pretty well for them. LOL
Let’s hope failure doesn’t lead us to the wrong conclusions. If the GOP thinks that becoming more like the Dems will win them elections, they are sadly mistaken. If they do move in that direction, there will be a third party formed by disaffected conservatives, tea party people, and libertarians. Such a political realignment will help the Dems in the short term, but given the impending and ongoing collapse of the welfare state, the future will not belong to the Dems.
No, that amendement wont even get through a congress let alone the states. The idea is DOA..
If congress wont even pass it as a law how can it possibly be a successful amendment?
LOL. Now you are getting silly. If Congress doesn't pass a law, there is no way it can be challenged in the courts. Again, reread what I sent to you. I said a Constitutional amendment was the last resort if SCOTUS upheld a challenge to a law passed by Congress.
Considering that I just watched many here truly beleiving that Mitt would win in a landslide (unlike me) I can imagine lots of ‘wrong conclusions’
Look, its not just illegal immigration but its massive legal immigration for the last 12 years that has caused a HUGE prob.
And the new legal immigrants and their kids that are here now dont seem receptive to the ‘they must wait in line too’ arguments especially since so many jumped ahead of the others on family visas.
This is a disaster for sure
I am referring to legal hispanics who vote, not illegal ones who supposedly aren't supposed to vote.
Prop 187 was supposed to deny illegals many of the benefits they were/are currently receiving and it had the support of the hispanic community in the most radically pro illegal state in the union - until the democrats made it an issue of whites vs browns. And then 40% still supported it (a higher percentage than supported Romney)
Legal hispanics have the same financial concerns that the rest of us do, and that includes having to pay for wanton illegal immigration. If the GOP ignores this and goes ahead the Rubio/Bush/Krauthammer route it will be the final nail in their coffin.
Actually I don't think another nail is needed, its over.
Now you know that would never pass today in CA. Come on. Producers are fleeing CA in droves.
I am not talking 20 years ago, I am talking NOW
Family visas can case the same problems are illegal immigration the way it is is donre.
Now you got it. It is legal immigration that is the bigger problem. The 1965 Immigration Act changed this country forever and will eventually lead to its destruction. We are just beginning to realize the electoral implications. But if the GOP thinks that giving amnesty will resolve our problems, they are sadly mistaken. It will just hasten the process of making the Dems the permanent majority party.
The 1965 Immigration Act: Anatomy of a Disaster
And the new legal immigrants and their kids that are here now dont seem receptive to the ‘they must wait in line too’ arguments especially since so many jumped ahead of the others on family visas.
By 2019--7 years from now--half of the children 18 and under will be minorities as classified by the USG. Each cohort that reaches voting age, 18, will be increasingly minority and Democrat. By 2042 half of the country will be minorities. These are just irrefutable facts. And by 2050 one in five will be foreign born. For most people, their political party is inherited in much the same way they inherit their religion. Here are the Bureau of the Census projections on what will be our future demographically.
An Older and More Diverse Nation by Midcentury
"• In 2050, the nation's population of children is expected to be 62 percent minority, up from 44 percent today. Thirty-nine percent are projected to be Hispanic (up from 22 percent in 2008), and 38 percent are projected to be single-race, non-Hispanic white (down from 56 percent in 2008).
• The percentage of the population in the "working ages" of 18 to 64 is projected to decline from 63 percent in 2008 to 57 percent in 2050.
• The working-age population is projected to become more than 50 percent minority in 2039 and be 55 percent minority in 2050 (up from 34 percent in 2008). Also in 2050, it is projected to be more than 30 percent Hispanic (up from 15 percent in 2008), 15 percent black (up from 13 percent in 2008) and 9.6 percent Asian (up from 5.3 percent in 2008.)"
The future of this country will become more and more dependent upon Hispanics and blacks who have out of wedlock birthrates of 50% and 71% respectively and the highest school drop out rates. Our competitiveness in the global economy will depend on this workforce.
Not just NOW, I always got that. I am living it here in Maryland where the voters JUST Tuesday approved public tuition breaks to illegals and gay marriage in two referendums, after massive LEGAL immigration here for a decade or so .
Dont jump to conclusions about people. Politely ask them what they are talking about and you will sometimes find your assumptions are wrong.
Please don't lecture me. I have been working on the immigration issue fulltime for over 5 years. I lobby on the Hill and in Richmond. I have been civil in my discussion with you, as difficult as it is to ignore some of your snide comments. Have a good day. We have gone around this tree enough times.
I’m not sure what your argument is, not even sure we disagree. But my original point stands.
Speaking of "wrong conclusions," Back to the subject of the thread. In 2007, Krauthammer (I think sincerely at that time) strongly opposed the GWB amnesty. But here is what (probably also sincerely) he said after the 2012 election:
At least he says "amnesty" rather than "comp. immigration reform." But I think, and maybe both of you would agree with me that
1) "actual amnesty with enforcement." is the same foolish promise as the McCain/GWB 2007 amnesty
2) "Amnesty, everything short of citizenship" may be based on good intentions, but that part of any proposed law would be fought not only prior to passage and signing, but endlessly in the courts, new proposed amendments in congress, EOs, etc. And who would be fighting to uphold the "no citizenship" part of such a law? The same people who didn't show up to vote in 2012?
3) Krauthammer's notion is tantamount to a delayed surrender, even if he wrote the entire law himself.
If the GOP thinks that becoming more like the Dems will win them elections, they are sadly mistaken. If they do move in that direction, there will be a third party formed by disaffected conservatives, tea party people, and libertarians. Such a political realignment will help the Dems in the short term, but given the impending and ongoing collapse of the welfare state, the future will not belong to the Dems.
Whatever political parties come to power, the current GOP leadership is losing on all fronts. But also, despite all of Obama's outrageous abuses, those supposedly angry, motivated anti-Obama voters did not show up.
The Tea Party was a wonderful thing, but today, more than ever, with cell phones taking videos, honesty in a candidate is a liability exploited by ruthless professional politicians.
In the contest between traditional conservative values, and DEMographics, the latter won this time. As Kabar and sickoflibs have already stated, it's not just illegal immigration, but also legal immigration is also importing a huge number of leftist voters.
My being a punching bag on this thread by a bunch of the frustrated last night didnt help. The whole Mitt thing and election losss is driving many nuts.
And the cries for amnesty isnt helping.
There is one who was particularly obnioxus to me here and he just got skinned alive on another thread.
Worse yet,’pro-amnesty’ leftist voters because many were put at the front of the line on family visas when others have to wait close to 10 years to get one legally, and others just jump in illegally and bring their kids with them creating a huge political problem,.
Correct, but there are more ways than one to deal with that situation. "Path to Citizenship" doesn't have to be on the table.
Not splitting families up does as does having an actual functional workable outreach program which doesn't seem to currently exist.
It can be done, but it will take time and effort and money and specific targeting.
Big lesson from the O Campaign: Demographics and Microtargeting.
Start with the small business owners. There are lots of them. Win them over. Enlist them to talk to their community on your behalf. Run THEM for office. Get THEM into the local Chamber of Commerce. Standard drill stuff there.
In short, we have 30 days to learn how to become Union Organizers and get a nationwide Machine into place or we are going to be behind the 8-ball forever.
But you know that any good idea in theory will be screwed up by the Feds.
The family member free pass policy wasnt bad when legal immigration rates were reasonable but the massive increase this past decade or so from cultures so different than ours has caused a huge political problem wrt this.
If everyone followed the same rules then legal immigrants might be offended that others get to jump in line ahead of them (faster than them) by coming illegally, but so many family passes let so many immigrants legally jump in line and they feel empathy for others who cant.
One immigrant I know here in Maryland personally got his whole family in on family visas, as he came in himself when young, and he ABSOLUTELY worships Obama (who he relates to because of Os dad) and he calls lack of a legal green card ‘nothing but paperwork’. He absolutely relates personally to illegals living in Arizona.
This is a disaster.
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.