Posted on 01/22/2013 4:03:56 AM PST by Kaslin
Republicans who support amnesty are like global warming alarmists. They can't answer the most basic questions about what they believe. Since the Republican Party is now once again considering going to war with itself over amnesty instead of trying to move the ball forward for conservatism, it seems like a good time to ask some of the crucial questions that always seem to be conspicuously ignored because the pro-amnesty side has no answers.
1) How many net votes would the GOP lose if illegal immigrants become citizens? Barack Obama beat Mitt Romney 73% to 27% with Hispanic voters. Given that illegals are poorer, less educated and less law abiding than Hispanic Americans, we'd be VERY lucky to get more than 20% of their votes. So, if there are 12 million illegals, that means Democrats would have 9.6 million new potential voters while the GOP could add 2.4 million, leaving a 7.2 million vote gain for the Democrats. When Mitt Romney lost to Barack Obama by a little less than 5 million votes, how can allowing the Democrats to pad their totals by another 7.2 million potential votes help the GOP?
2) Why don't Hispanic voters already support the Republican Party since Reagan backed an amnesty in 1986? The only way the GOP could be helped politically by backing amnesty would be if our numbers with Hispanic Americans went through the roof as a result of the policy. Well, guess what? This concept has been tested in the real world. In 1984, Ronald Reagan received 37% of the Hispanic vote. Then, in 1986, he backed a "one-time" amnesty for illegal aliens. The result? In 1988, George Bush received 30% of the Hispanic vote. If the exact same thing happened again with 12 million illegal immigrants, it would be like the crack of doom for the conservative movement.
3) Doesn't the GOP's experience with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 suggest Democrats would get all the credit for an amnesty? The Republican Party has ALWAYS been the party of Civil Rights while the Democrats were the party of slavery, the KKK, poll taxes and Jim Crow laws. However, diehard racist Lyndon Johnson backed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for political reasons. Percentage wise, more Republicans in Congress voted for it than Democrats. Yet, who got all the credit? The Democrats. This time around, we also have a Democrat President while percentage wise, Democrats would support amnesty wholeheartedly while the majority of Republicans would oppose it. Why wouldn’t Hispanic Americans rightfully give Democrats credit for the amnesty instead of Republicans?
4) Why do Democrats want to make illegal aliens citizens if it will help Republicans? We've often heard that Hispanic Americans are "natural" Republican voters -- and maybe they are. It would be nice if someone, make that ANYONE in the Republican Party would abandon gimmicks like amnesty and actually do real, sustained outreach to Hispanic voters to convince them to vote for us. That being said, since 1980, Republican candidates for President have captured somewhere between 21% and 40% of the Hispanic vote. In other words, whether immigration was a hot issue or not, whether the GOP backed amnesty or not, or whether the candidate was Ronald Reagan or Mitt Romney, the Democrats have taken at least 60% of the Hispanic vote. That means what we're really debating is how many more people we're going to add to a demographic group that the Democrats are practically guaranteed to win. It only makes sense politically for Democrats to back that policy. Republicans? Now that's a lot harder to explain.
5) Is making 12 million illegals American citizens good for the country? That may be a quaint, seldom asked question in Washington D.C. these days, but the voters still seem to care about whether policies help or hurt the country. While immigration is certainly good for America, it's worth asking: Why would we want 12 million illegal manual laborers as American citizens as opposed to legally bringing in more scientists, engineers and computer programmers? At a time when 47% of Americans aren't paying income taxes, what percentage of these illegals would be contributing more to the tax base than they'd take out in services and welfare programs if they were allowed to become American citizens? Very, very few -- after all, don't the proponents of illegal immigration claim that they're doing crummy jobs for low pay that Americans just won't do (Yes, that's a phony argument, but still…). Furthermore, given how poor the job market is today, does it really make sense to give 12 million foreigners free reign to compete for jobs with American citizens who are desperate for work? Whatever happened to American politicians putting America first? Moreover, if we have a second "one time" amnesty, why wouldn't we have a third, a fourth, or a fifth? Obviously, the Democrats will want as many amnesties as possible for political purposes and the corrupt businesses that make a killing on illegal immigrant labor while passing on the costs to everyone else will keep pushing their stooges in the GOP to bring in more illegals. All that is aside from the fact that the moment you make 12 million illegals American citizens, both parties will have to pay attention to them. Naturally, the first thing they're going to want is to legally or illegally bring as many of their fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers, cousins and friends as they can to the United States. The first amnesty covered 2 million illegals. This one would be 12 million. It wouldn't be a surprise if the next one is 20-30 million.
6) Is it worth having a terrible 2014? Typically, incumbents face a "sixth year curse" that's phenomenal for the opposition. "In nine of the ten sixth-year Congressional elections since 1910, the president’s party has lost seats in the Senate and in the House. The average loss in the Senate has been 8.6 seats and in the House it was 30 seats." Is it worth putting all that in jeopardy by starting the same sort of interparty war that helped drive George W. Bush's approval rating down in the twenties? Do you want ugly, amnesty-driven primary challenges all across the country with millions of conservatives staying home because they're disgusted about being sold out by the Republican Party yet again? No matter how many things the Republican Party does right over the next two years, it's entirely possible that pursuing amnesty could put the Senate out of reach in 2014. Is it really worth it to give the Democrats their extra 7.2 million votes?
7) Politically, doesn't it make a lot more sense to take a security first position and do outreach? There's a reason that even John McCain started claiming he had a security first position on illegal immigration: It's because it makes perfect sense politically. We have almost universal agreement that the border should be secured. So, why not build the fence, get e-verify or the equivalent working and secure the border first? If the border (and our VISA system) is secure, then we don't have to worry about more amnesties. If the illegals that are here are locked out of employment, they'll start to go home. Although it's highly unlikely that we'd have any sort of real labor shortage driven by illegals, if we do, we could always pass a guest worker program. The end result of all of this would be that the venom would be taken out of the issue. No one would have to worry about whether politicians are telling the truth about securing the border because it would be done. Many of the illegals that are here would self-deport without work and the less illegals that are here, the easier it would be to come to a compromise over giving them some kind of legal status. There's a world of difference between dealing with 2 million people here illegally as Reagan did and 12 million, like we have today. In the interim, the GOP could start doing something it should have been doing all along, which is Hispanic outreach. Waiting for Hispanic voters to come to the Republican Party hasn't ever worked and probably never will. It's time for the GOP to go to the mountain instead of waiting for the mountain to come to us.
.
http://www.trevorloudon.com/2013/01/marxist-labor-leaders-used-latino-voters-to-move-california-left-implications-for-the-entire-us/
Marxist Labor leaders used Latino voters to move California left – implications for all Americans
Maria Elena Durazo of the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor, deliberately used Latinos to change Los Angeles.
Untold Story: How the Latino Vote Hit Critical Mass
Richie Ross.
Miguel Contreras,
Fabian Nunez
Bert Corona.
Harry Bridges
Frank Marshall Davis
Mexican American Political Association
Democratic Left, Fall 2000:
Steve Tarzynski
Stanley Sheinbaum
Karen Bass
Xavier Becerra
Henry Waxman
Maxine Waters
Progressive Los Angeles Network
Liberty Hill Foundation
Peter Dreier
Hilda Solis
Democratic Left, Winter 2006
Richie Ross, a Sacramento based Democratic Party political consultant along with union activist Maria Elena Durazo, her husband, her prediessor Miguel Contreras, California Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, linked immigrant union workers with immigrant voters to double the votes cast by Latinos in the early 90s.
In 2000, Latinos were told to pledge to get 100% of their family to vote.
In 2005, the Latinos increased their vote for Villaraigosa by 50%.
In 2010, Maria Elena and Fabian Nunez used the Arizona anti-illegal alien law to push for pushing a vote for Jerry Brown. Latinos accounted for 22% of California’s voters.
The Communist Party USA and Democratic Socialists for America are both committed to increase the Latino vote.
Maria Elena Durazo is closely allied with the two communist groups, Antonia Villaraigosa, and Gil Cedillo. They all trained under Communist Party USA activist Bert Corona.
A young Bert Corona was mentored by communist International Longshore Worker’s Union president Harry Bridges. It was Bridges that convinced Obama’s communist friend Frank Marshall Davis to move to Hawaii. Davis was a writer for the union’s newspaper.
Durazo, Cedillo and Villaraigosa were trained at Bert Corona’s radical Centro de Action Social Autonoma (CASA) in the 1970s.
Both Durazo and Cedillo were connected to another Corona founded communist party spinoff, Mexican American Political Association.
In 1998, the Los Angeles Democratic Socialists of America leader Steve Tarzynski sent an email to Los Angeles DSA comrade Harold Meyerson. Meyerson, a columnist with the Washington Post introduced Barack Obama to the wider American Public.
Tarzynski listed in his email, 25 people he thought should be on an “A-list” of leaders to strategize on the progressive movement. That list included Maria Elena Durazo, Miguel Contreras, Gil Cedillo, Anonio Villraigosa, Stanley Sheinbaum, Karen Bass, Xavier Becerra, Henry Waxman, and Maxine Waters.
Peter Dreier of Occidental College wrote of Villaraigosa’s victory and Labor Secretary Hilda Solis in the DSA’s Democratic Left, Winter 2006 saying that it is “just remarkable what L.A. has become.”
Sorry, I forgot links don’t work well here.
Here is a better link
http://www.keywiki.org/index.php/Miguel_Contreras
A fine editorial, but it makes the error of assuming that today's Republican Party is serious about opposing the Democrats. If the last two Presidential elections are any indication, this is not the case.
Today's Republican Party cares not a whit whether it gives the Democrats 7,200,000 new votes. That is, as long as the caviar at the latest cocktail party is fresh.
BTTT
Dear Lord, share Your strength and guidance.
Tatt
Stop birthright citizenship. No public benefits of any kind without proof of citizenship. Most would return home.
Bingo. Remove the goodies; remove the illegals.
Focusing on Amnesty is a mistake, here. Yes, there would be some eventual path to citezenship for illegal alieans. I grant that but, on the front end the country will finally get e-verification, updated social security cards and hence tracking, no access to social services unless one has a legal status, and harsh penalties for employers who employ illegals. In the end, hotels, vegetables, and housing prices will go up because the work will no longer be done by illegal immigrants. In essence, this means no more exploitation of the poor in the downtrodden which the Dems are supposedly for....
Look, I hate this problem as much as the next person but, we’ve absolutely got to get that front-end stuff in place. We’ve been lax and lazy as a society for 60 years when it comes to border enforcement and the GOP is now payig for it with a surge of ignorant uneducated workers coming in and voting for socialism. We’ve got to tighten up our game before we come a third world country.
I hate to be the one to bring it up---but it is unlawful to exchange legislation for gratuities and/or votes.
=================================================
If there's any dealing to be done, Repubs had better get on the stick----legislation should be amended to deny citizenship:
(1) to illegals who bought forged/faked multiple identities;
(2) to illegals who fraudulently voted in American elections;
(3) to illegals cashing US govt checks;
(4) to all illegals convicted of crimes;
(5) to illegals w/ fraudulent drivers' licenses......
(6) to illegals undermining the US ecocomy by sending money back to their homelands;
(7) to illegals affiliated with latino organizations undermining US ntl security;
(8) to illegals connected to the hatemongering "La Raza" and to "Raza Studies" that advocates killing Americans.
.............and so on and so forth.
====================================================
Former Cong Allen West should write letters to his colleagues, and to the media, emphasizing the following:
(1) decrying the agitation and intimidation tactics being used by latino groups,
(2) exposing latino groups using hatemongering for personal gain,
(3) emphasizing illegalities WRT threatening the US Congress for passage of self-serving bills, and,
(4) precpitating investigations into fraud and intimidation upon our electoral/legislative system by hatemongering groups.
=============================================
Some observers say Congress is in a state of paralysis WRT amnesty legislation. Obama is under constant latino presuure----forced to repeat and repeat his once-broken promise to win reform. Dems are floating proposals; Republicans, like Marco Rubio of Florida--with his eye on higher office----is positioning himself as a reformer.
Congress paralyzed? Nonsense---the Democrats are doing everything in their power to facilitate illegal activities on Capitol Hill. Read on.
AP broke the story WRT an illegal immigrant------ and registered sex offender----Luis Abrahan Sanchez Zavaleta----who was working as a volunteer intern for Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ).
The Peruvian ilegal was scheduled to be arrested but had not been due to "political concerns" (Menendez was running for reelection in NJ). The Homeland Security said the AP’s story about the delayed arrest was “categorically false.”
But Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa and six other Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee asked the Obama administration for details about the incident.
Guess what?
Obama’s Homeland Security Department lied to the AP. Documents show ICE officials in New Jersey advised that the arrest “had the possibility of garnering significant congressional and media interest” and were “advised to postpone the arrest” until officials in Washington gave approval.
The documents describe a conference call between Washington and New Jersey to “determine a way forward, given the potential sensitivities surrounding the case.”
The Repub senators said the documents show the delay was delayed six weeks just like the AP reported. They asked for details about the department’s review of potentially sensitive, high profile immigration cases when arrests are delayed. Menendez said that his staff was notified about the case immediately before AP’s story; he learned about the case from the AP and he knew nothing about whether or why DHS had delayed the arrest.
=============================================
Mmmmmm.......it's downright amazing how Obama and the Democrats suck-up for latino votes at the same time they're "defending" the US Constitution (snix).
Law-abiding Americans Must demand answers to these penetrating questions.
(1) Why are illegal lawbreakers given the protection of: (a) the federal govt, (b) the Obama Admin, (c) the DOJ, (d) a US Senator, (e) other govt officials/workers/agencies and institutions?
(2) Are Democrats and Obama acting on orders from foreign governments?
(3) Why is an illegal lawbreaker (a registered sex offender) offered more protections and rights than law-abiding Americans?
(4) What's the number of state/officiels/agencies/institutions protecting interests, as well?
(5) What are the penalties imposed on US and state govt officials for using tax-paid govt offices, govt resources, and govt authority, to aid and abet wrongdoing---and why are they not being mobilized?
======================================================
The illegal predator was billed as a "volunteer." So how did he subsist in pricey Washington? who was paying his rent? Who was buying his meals? Who was paying his carfare back and forth to the Senate?
===============================================
L/E should examine Sen Menendez's timesheets, employment contracts, and other govt documents filed relating to actuating the position for an illegal. Its a felony to falsify govt documents---forgery could also be involved. How many other govt checks is he cashing: (1) state pension checks, (2) govt bonus checks, (3) govt annuities, (4) federal SS checks, (5) federal SSI checks, (6) state UI and Workmen's Comp checks. And govt credit cards, expense accounts, adminstrative budgets, travel reimbursements, use of govt cars.......and so on.
What ever is done with people who came here illegally, it must NOT include the right to vote.
Let’s see.....how long ago was it that Regan passed the amnesty bill in 1986? How old are the first of hordes of babies born in welfare hospitals to previously illegals today? 26?
How many voted for Obama?
It’s pretty obvious why amnesty is important to the communist Democrats isn’t it?
If LA County does not contain at least 2.5 million illegal aliens, I will buy Villaraigosa and McIntyre a drink. The "12 million" illegals nationwide has been a standard line for years. Since they are illegal, no one actually knows. My bet is between 20 and 25 million. Our total Latino population is edging toward the 100 million mark. It is not too far-fetched to imagine that 1 in 5 is here illegally. Of course, many of the rest have illegal antecedents. This ain't really very good.
What also ain't really very good or logical is the Karl Rove hypothesis that "Latinos are the Republicans of the Future. Catholics, doncha know ... strong family values ... hard workers " etc ad nauseam.
What really happens is that the illegal latino illegitimacy rate is very high, welfare usage is very high, and all in all, it's a safe bet that the illegals cost us more money than they bring in in taxes and SS payments ... which is the left/euro/socialist rationale for illegal immigration. How the Democrats keep Latinos and African-Americans, who are the first victims of illegal immigration, in the same big tent is like dudes, beyond me!
If LA County does not contain at least 2.5 million illegal aliens, I will buy Villaraigosa and McIntyre a drink. The "12 million" illegals nationwide has been a standard line for years. Since they are illegal, no one actually knows. My bet is between 20 and 25 million. Our total Latino population is edging toward the 100 million mark. It is not too far-fetched to imagine that 1 in 5 is here illegally. Of course, many of the rest have illegal antecedents. This ain't really very good.
What also ain't really very good or logical is the Karl Rove hypothesis that "Latinos are the Republicans of the Future. Catholics, doncha know ... strong family values ... hard workers " etc ad nauseam.
What really happens is that the illegal latino illegitimacy rate is very high, welfare usage is very high, and all in all, it's a safe bet that the illegals cost us more money than they bring in in taxes and SS payments ... which is the left/euro/socialist rationale for illegal immigration. How the Democrats keep Latinos and African-Americans, who are the first victims of illegal immigration, in the same big tent is like dudes, beyond me!
“how exactly are you gonna ship ‘em all home?”
Simple!!!
Enforce existing law and fine anyone caught hiring one heavily on a first offense and mandatory prison sentence for a second offense including homeowners!!!
Make it illegal for any government to give them any form of aid.
They will self deport and all be gone within a year!!!!
And as long as...God forbid!...nobody calls them "racist"!
This is the best analysis of immigration I’ve seen. If you have a few minutes check it out...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t976q6CeN8Q
“
2) Why don’t Hispanic voters already support the Republican Party since Reagan backed an amnesty in 1986? The only way the GOP could be helped politically by backing amnesty would be if our numbers with Hispanic Americans went through the roof as a result of the policy. Well, guess what? This concept has been tested in the real world. In 1984, Ronald Reagan received 37% of the Hispanic vote. Then, in 1986, he backed a “one-time” amnesty for illegal aliens. The result? In 1988, George Bush received 30% of the Hispanic vote. If the exact same thing happened again with 12 million illegal immigrants, it would be like the crack of doom for the conservative movement. “
There’s all the proof ya need that HISPANICS will vote democrat/socialism no matter what the GOP offers up!
“Back when Regan made the first amnesty proclamation I told everyone who would listen that that was a grave mistake because now, millions of Mexicans would flood into the U.S. knowing that some time in the future another amnesty would occur.
My predictions were right on the mark.
America, as we know it, is over. Political Correctness, sensitivity, diversity, civil rights, the welfare system and a whole host of other parasitic maladies upon freedom and Constitutional laws has made a lawful and organized society a thing of the past.
We have crossed the line and will not be coming back over it again.”
I’d give anything to find something there to disagree with you about.
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.