Dem registration plan backfires, new citizens choose GOP
By gamecock Posted in Archived — Comments (31) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
It takes Toby Harnden, San Diego reporter for the UK Telegraph to reveal that:
Republicans winning new citizens for 2008 vote
10/11/2007
Minutes after taking the Pledge of Allegiance, new American citizens are urged to register as voters by Democratic activists who see them as natural party supporters who could hold the key to the 2008 election.
“For a long time, immigration was OK,” said Sara Wright, 49, a seamstress from Mexico who arrived in the US legally in 1986.
“But now, no more. A lot of really bad people come from Mexico and commit crimes.
“People are coming in and having two, three, four babies and going on welfare. Some are making money here and spending it back in Mexico.
"That’s not right. They should go back to Mexico and get a permit.”
Read all the good news via the link at the top of this blog, and arm yourself with ammunition when the conventional wisdom is spouted that we can't win elections unless we surrender to illegals.
See also:
The myth of the Latino voting bloc
The GOP has less to fear from a backlash than many claim.
By Steven Malanga
October 18, 2007When President Bush's immigration reform bill collapsed this summer, largely because of objections from his own party, open-borders advocates warned that the GOP would pay a harsh political price for killing the bill. Latino support had been crucial in electing Bush, the argument went, and Latino voters represented a rising electoral tide that Republicans were ignoring at their peril.
But such commentary is based on an inaccurate picture of the Latino voting public that emerged after the 2004 election and persists today. Just days after the election, for instance, Dick Morris, a former pollster and advisor to President Clinton, declared that Latinos had elected Bush; they represented 12% of the electorate, Morris reasoned, and 45% of them had pulled the levers for the president, enough to be decisive.
The Latino vote for Bush was far from decisive, however, and it may be years before it plays a pivotal role in a national election.
Read it all too via above link, and finally from 2001, read
Poll Says Many Hispanics Are Against Amnesty
We should have confidence that we can win over people of any race and ethnic background with the conservative principles that built this country, and quit cowering in fear at the feet of the Left dominated MSM.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
The HinzSight Report
The Minority Report
Race 4 2008
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson
FRED08
the subject line.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
www.fred08.com
I decided not to enforce the 13th Amendment or blue laws...
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
www.fred08.com
You just came late to the party. :>)
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
www.fred08.com
Is he about to say what I think he's going to say? Or does he just say it gives you the shivers or something?
As true today as when Bob uttered it new.
(Note - this clip is posted literally like 50 different times on YouTube).
Stop wasting time on registering legal immigrants turned citizens. Democrats need to focus on registering their core constituencies: illegal aliens, dead people, and cartoon characters.
Great post GC. I only regret I lacked the energy & talent to post something like this myself. Thanks for carrying the ball for all of us.
Thanks btw
How many U.S. elections are decided by illegals?
Hillary gaffe exposes three huge paths to a permanent GOP majority
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
www.fred08.com
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
www.fred08.com
Yosemite Sam is a shoe-in for Att'y General.
www.fred08.com
Redneck Hippie
in the part of the first article posted......came here in 1986. She was just taking her oath. Twenty-one years. You think someone like that wants to hear that someone who broke the rules, came here maybe 5 years ago, has probably been living on forged documents, and has paid no taxes is going to be able to get citizenship 5 years from now?
The fact is that the amnesty programs being peddled not only reward those who break the law, but in many cases, put them on a "path to citizenship" that is faster than the legal path. It should be an easier sell for us than the "open borders" crowd.
What we do need to do, though, is to build into our plans the counter-argument to the charge that being anti-illegals is to be anti-immigrant generally. We need to propose streamlining and accelerating the citizenship process for those who do wait in line and follow the rules. We need to alter the silly lottery system and other such visa rules that create long lines for individuals who would be assets to American society so that we don't see people waiting a decade just to get into the country. "Comprehensive Reform" should be redefined to be a marriage not of security with amnesty but a true reform of the legal visa system (in the style of the wholesale reform of the tax code that we advocate).
I know 2 people who are absolutely rabid, shoot-em-at-the-border anti illegal immigrant hotheads. Both of them are a bit brown in complexion and have Latin surnames.
----
Brian Epps
RandomNumbers.us
Baad Spelarz Uv Tha Wurld, Yunyte!
Think about its application to all those who argue -- in strategic terms -- that comprehensive immigration reform ought be opposed because "more legal immigrants = even more Democrats."
to regularized illegals that had been here for many years unless they returned to their home country and came in legally, but only after the border is secure against future waves.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
www.fred08.com
With respect to my own personal views regarding the aforementioned form of argument. I find that your data offers me relief, because I do not want the above equation to be true. If the equation were to be true I would just have to tough out my loss, because I personally find that too crass to be an acceptable reason for opposing immigration.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
www.fred08.com
Other than a few Amendments which deny the States the right to discriminate against voters older than 18 or on the basis of sex or on the basis of race, I believe the Constitution leaves it to the States to decide who is allowed to vote in their elections. That for example was how Wyoming got away with granting women suffrage when it was illegal in every other State.
While I really like your idea about denying them the vote and have proposed it myself a few times in the past, I am not sure how you would implement the concept of what would essentially amount to second class citizenship in a Constitutional manner.
I suppose the Feds could give them a Chartreuse Card (I think we have used most other colors) that gave them permanent residency but never put them on a path to citizenship. That would keep the states from letting them votes and might also be a basis for denying them other rights, benefits and services only available to citizens.
Of course the main reason why Democrats are supportive of illegals is because they think they will eventually become Democrat voters. You would have a tough time getting them to go along with this scheme and then you would need to defend it in perpetuity because there would be continued efforts to give them the vote.
as to state elections, I think you are right. It would take a Const amendment. But if the the issue were truly addressed, I suspect people in states would pass similar laws for state elections.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
www.fred08.com
The states would automatically deny voting privileges to them because they aren't citizens. They'd have to actually pass a law granting voting rights to non-citizens in state elections, which doesn't worry me much. I don't see states doing that.
Of course, in practice, a lot of these people get to vote anyway, since there has been a total refusal to require any kind of real documentation in most states. In our state you can simply get someone to vouch for you to register, or bring in a piece of mail to register, and you need nothing at all once you are on the rolls.
In one of our school district elections someone actually showed a green card... the one piece of ID she could have shown to prove she was NOT eligible... to register to vote and then voted. If she had shown a utility bill she would still be voting.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
The distinction between lawful and unlawful alien is a very important one, and is rightly emphasized.
But it's important to point out that as a practical matter, the difference does not matter to many Hispanic immigrants and other immigrant groups. There are oftenlawful and unlawful aliens, and full-fledged U.S. citizens, in the same extended, or even immediate family. This kind of mix is VERY common. Current and future citizens in these families WILL be upset by the government's tearing discrete members out of their families and out of the country. And they will blame Republicans as we appear to be so hot and bothered to purge the populace of these people.
Living in a city and neighborhood with alot of immigrants, both lawful and otherwise, and attending church with many such folks, I do believe that it would be a great shame if these generally hard-working and pro-family people should be driven further into the arms of the Democrats.
It would be greatly preferable if we made the following priorities:
(1) Close the d--n border
(2) Deport violent criminals
(3) Impose effective sanctions on employers (I will blog about this someday--the need for enforcement by civil actions by American workers and their law-abiding employers against those unfairly competing by using unauthorized workers)
(4) Otherwise leave those unlawfully present in the country alone, and maybe, and only once the above take place, provide certain opportunities for regularization.
"People will not look forward to posterity who never look backward to their ancestors." -Edmund Burke
is if the Bush administration had only done (1) and (2) in your list, they could have gotten a good comprehensive policy enacted, and Republicans could have taken the credit.
Unfortunately there is some truth to the claim that a certain portion of the Republican party is beholden to business interests who are only interested in cheap labor.
If the illegals are made legal and gain the legal advantages, they become like every other worker and cannot be easily exploited.
"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle
Bush is enforcing the law and building the fence. This needs more publicity.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
www.fred08.com
Enforcement has improved a little but it is a long ways from where it needs to be.
The fence being built is way behind schedule and it is not anything close to the double fence that we were promised. Only a few miles of double fence have been built. The vast majority of the fence built so far is just vehicle barriers that do nothing to stop pedestrians. The rest is single fence. The President's much vaunted "Virtual Fence" is several months late, still does not work and is not providing even virtual enforcement.
The President made a big deal out of putting the National Guard on the border. Things have improved there slightly but the problem is not even close to solved. Why were the National Guard removed?
1000 agents were recently quietly re-assigned from ICE Interior enforcement to Customs Duty. Interior enforcement is probably the weakest link in the illegal immigration enforcement regime. If the President was serious about enforcing the law why would he further weaken something that was already too weak?
For a brief while, about the time they were trying to push through the Comprehensive Shamnesty, I was really encouraged because enforcement activity went way up. There were several high profile raids. A lot of people predicted that these were just publicity stunts to build support for the notion that the Government had actually gotten serious about enforcing the law. I guess they were right because there have been no significant raids for a couple of months now. Is ICE having trouble finding businesses that hire illegals?
I think the enforcement is not getting much publicity because if anybody looks close they will see that the spike of enforcement we got this last summer was just that and now we are more or less back to business as usual.
Tex -
I read your post, and was sure you'd be damned to hell for it by the rabid packs of cons on this site. I was sad, because I agree with you.
Then, lo! Others here are agreeing with you! If your position is really popular with conservatives, then NO ONE IN THE OUTSIDE WORLD KNOWS IT! They figure we (conservatives) are all a bunch of jingoistic nativists speaking in code about illegal immigration. If the world and the MSM only knew that a sizable lot of us have the common sense and compassionate (for the deserving) attitude that you expose, WOW!
I would deport all criminal aliens, not only violent ones.
Also, I wouldn't "leave those unlawfully present in the country alone", since that's what we've been doing for the past 30 years. I agree that mass deportations could politically backfire, however. The press would exaggerate it beyond all reason. But they can be encouraged to leave through denial of services, and especially employment. Add to this incentives for people to leave in the form of loans, job placement, and transportation to their country of origin, and the numbers would definitely go down.
website: The Shield of Achilles
The article was an encouraging read but it was short on facts.
About the closest thing it had to a relevant statistic was:
"Previously, new citizens could be relied upon to vote Democratic by a ratio of up to 10 to one. But in San Diego this week there were indications that this could be changing. "
There was no indication of what we could expect in the brave new world of the Dem Registration backfiring. Will we achieve 50/50 parity with half the new citizens voting Republican? Or will we only get our butts kicked by 5 Dems to 1 Republican instead of 10:1 with new immigrants? That would be a pretty non-serious backfire for the Dems.
respect: GOP
no respect: Dem
Plus, I would not base my immigration policy on how people will vote, in fact, read this from my blog:
How many U.S. elections are decided by illegals?
It has been five days since John Fund revealed that:
The next day she took a firmer stand (sort of) by offering general support for Gov. Spitzer's approach, but adding that she hadn't studied his specific plan. She should, and so should the rest of us. It stops just short of being an engraved invitation for people to commit voter fraud.
The background here is the National Voter Registration Act, commonly known as "Motor Voter," that President Bill Clinton signed into law in 1993. It required all states to offer voter registration to anyone getting a driver's license. One simply fills out a form and checks a box stating he is a citizen; he is then registered and in most states does not have to show any ID to vote.
But no one checks if the person registering to vote is indeed a citizen. That greatly concerns New York election officials, who processed 245,000 voter registrations at DMV offices last year. "It would be [tough to catch] if someone wanted to . . . get a number of people registered who aren't citizens and went ahead and got them drivers' licenses," says Lee Daghlian, spokesman for New York's Board of Elections. Assemblywoman Ginny Fields, a Long Island Democrat, warns that the state's "Board of Elections has no voter police" and that the state probably has upwards of 500,000 illegal immigrants old enough to drive.
If the Long Island Democrat is only part right, New York is a blue state.
Fund continues:
The potential for fraud is not trivial, as federal privacy laws prevent cross-checking voter registration rolls with immigration records. Nevertheless, a 1997 Congressional investigation found that "4,023 illegal voters possibly cast ballots in [a] disputed House election" in California.
Multiply that by the remaining California congressional districts and the Golden State is amber.
Fund, relentlessly continues (Can our GOP President, elected leaders in congress and 2008 presidential nominees hear Fund?):
After 9/11, the Justice Department found that eight of the 19 hijackers were registered to vote.
The above constitutes subversion of government by the consent of the governed.
It’s quite a bit more important than:
a) Whether Hillary can take the heat of a debate (she can);
b) Whether Hillary wants to have it both ways and "triangulate" but just can't lie as well as her husband (she does and she can't); and/or
c) Whether the conventional wisdom that Hillary had the nomination locked up was wrong (who cares? Not this Rooster.)
I care about two things coming out of the debate and the explosive WSJ column: America and the Democratic Party's ongoing subversion of same.
Since the first cry of "bushlied" in late 2003 through Osama bin Laden's extensive use of elected Democratic Party leaders' quotes in his latest video this year, I have observed that Democrats say and do for free what al Qaeda, Saddam's lawyers and Iran's mullahs would gladly pay them to say and do.
Fund's facts and Hillary & Co.'s support for Motor-Voter, opposition to Voter ID laws and support for activist judges that make law (see write new constitutions), add up to how Democrats subvert self government here at home as well.
Isn't it astounding that all but Christopher Dodd (and who really believes that he actually opposes the subversion. Didn't he just decide he didn't care to be VP on a losing ticket?) among the Democratic Party candidates would not denounce a law that allows illegals to pick our leaders in elections here as well as pick leaders in their home countries and have a free pass to visit any place in America, like say, airports, Hoover Dam and nuclear power plants.
Did Muhammad Atta cast a vote for Bush or Gore?
Yet, despite the gifts from Tim Russert and The Trail of John Fund, silence on all but beltway irrelevancies from our Republican heroes.
The dirty little secret is that the Democratic party CANNOT oppose Motor-Voter and cannot abide Voter ID without committing political suicide.
The silent conservative majority and its elected leaders can remain silent no longer.
It was a great moment in American history when Richard Nixon conceded the 1960 election despite more grounds for a contest than Al Gore had in 2000.
And it was a great moment of shame when Al Gore rescinded a concession in 2000 after Florida and possibly forever poisoned our political processes.
Well, 2000 is over. Bush won.
Now, let's make sure America wins.
The GOP en masse and all Americans that care about our constitution must demand the following:
1) That a photo ID be required in all federal elections;
2) That all voter rolls be purged of illegals, dawgs and the dead; and
3) That Motor-Voter be repealed.
The overwhelming majority of Americans, New Yorkers and even rank and file Democrats oppose drivers licenses for illegals and support voter ID.
And all but a Fifth Column oppose allowing illegals to vote for America's leaders.
This is THE STORY. This is the path for the silent conservative majority to actually govern The Fruited Plain.
It’s the way to victory for the GOP in 2008.
Let the battle cry go out now! Rather than wait to whine in '09!
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
www.fred08.com
...on a side note, what does "nt" or "n/t" mean?
“.....women and minorities hardest hit”