-------------------------------
A Xenophobic Zeitgeist
The GOP may erase the gains it's made with Hispanics.
By Arian Campo-Flores
Newsweek, Sept. 24, 2007 issue


Lionel Sosa has long been one of the Republicans' most potent weapons come election time. A Hispanic marketing guru, he's crafted successful ad campaigns for presidential candidates from Ronald Reagan to George W. Bush aimed at drawing more Latinos into the GOP fold. So his presidential pick this time—New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, a Democrat—is startling. Part of the reason, he says, is ethnic loyalty: Richardson is the first serious Latino contender. But Sosa, who last worked for Bush in 2004, has also been dismayed by the way many GOP candidates have handled the illegal-immigration issue, advocating policies like building a border wall and employing rhetoric that he says is venomous and xenophobic: "It's just an exaggerated, unfriendly position that needlessly turns away Latinos."

That stance appears to be the root cause of a Hispanic migration from the GOP. In 2004, Bush got about 40 percent of that bloc—a high that largely resulted from an intense courtship by Bush and the now departed strategist Karl Rove. Yet in the 2006 midterms—held after a caustic immigration debate in Congress—GOP candidates got only 30 percent of that vote. Polls this year show Latino support for Republicans at similarly depressed levels.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20789363/site/newsweek/
----------------------





The Republican party..caught between iRock and a hard place. Ohwell whatcha gonna do. Should have secured that border when you had a chance, Dubya

If this guy, and any other hispanics, want a society that accepts massive criminal violation of federal law, they have no place in the republican party anyway - good riddance. The republican party should go after the 80% of americans, including many democrats, and including many hispanics, who oppose the massive illegal invasion of the US, and the lib attempts to grant the millions of criminals amnesty.

Reagan amnesty and Dubya's Dept of Homeland Security that can't even secure our borders.

Yeah, the 1986 law, passed by a dem congress, was supposed to be a once-and-for-all amnesty coupled with sanctions on employers who hire illegals. As (just about) everyone knows, the employer sanctions were never enforced, except for token raids well-covered by the lib media when the issue came up, and here are the libs 20 years later asking for a BIGGER amnesty, the ultimate consequences of which would have been, with importation of relatives (it is estimated by some) 100 million new hispanics in this country after 20 years, completely changing the character of this country and against the repeatedly expressed opinion of the vast majority of citizens.

Libs? What the heck are you talking about?

Oh..... you must mean that guy in the White House.

That liberal.....

I mean, he's the one who's leaving our borders open ('cause it's his Constitutional duty to protect them, and he's not doing it, am I right or am I right?)

And he's also the one who's not enforcing the existing law against the employers -

And he's also the one who wants to give "de-facto amnesty" to all the illegal aliens, present and future - which is a really stupid thing to do (notice I'm attacking the policy now, and not the man... ) - because that'll make all of Dobbs' predictiosn come true, and there won't be any more middle class in just a few years -

So yeah - if the Reps actually stood up on this issue (which would be, like, "impossible" as long as those id... sorry.... most of 'em still support George Bush), then I think it would be a huge campaign boost for them (in the general election, I mean, like if they could actually come to some kind of workable agreement in that regard and put it on the platform - but that's not likely to happen as long as the Neo's are still around)....

Thankfully they're not. Unfortunately the dems are more than happy to sell out their country.

__________________
All you need to know about the energy crisis:
ANWR Exploration Republicans: 91% Supported. Democrats: 86% Opposed.
Coal-to-liquid R's: 90% YES. D's: 78% NO.
Oil Shale Exploration R's: 90% YES. D's: 86% NO.
Outer Continental Shelf Exploration R's: 81% YES. D's: 83% NO.
Increased Refinery Capacity R's: 97% YES. D's: 96% NO

SUMMARY: 91% of House Republicans have historically voted to increase the production of America’s own oil and gas. 86% of House Democrats have historically voted against.

Some truth in that. However, it wasn't our leaders who did it; it was the citizens who did it. If you'll recall, Pres. Bush wanted a worker program and a way for them to work towards citizenship....which I told everyone here I agreed with because 1) there was no way we were going to round up 2 million people and send them anywhere, and 2) it was the most sensible way to handle the problem. So, it was mostly the really hard-core, uncompromising people on the far right who rebelled and got their representatives to vote against it.

Illegal immigration is still a problem. And I don't see that the Dems have any better solution. It's a problem for them too. For instance, what solutions does Hillary Clinton have in mind? Right now, she's kowtowing to hispanics for votes.....but what would she really do?

__________________
"This is a time for a national imperative not to fail in Iraq." Condoleeza Rice, January 11, 2007

Listen, please. Paying attention? Good.

1. The US, since it's very creation, has ALWAYS had a "way" for people "to work towards citizenship" - it's apply for it and get in line behind everyone else - what part of that don't you understand?

2. There has never been any need to "round up" 20 (not 2) million people - one simply has to actually enforce penalties against hiring them, and then they will go away themselves.

3. "The really hard-core, uncompromising people on the far right" are actually, according to polls, 80% of the population who didn't want the bill - if you are calling the average person in america "the far right" - it's obvious that it is YOU who are out of the meainstream of thought.

Instead of blathering away about the "right", at least get your brain around the key facts before you make stupid embarassing posts. All squared away now?? Good.

He was talking about those 20 million who are already here ILLEGALLY. Understand? Perhaps you weren't familiar with that part of the problem.

So, just starve them and their families to death, eh? And no thought of how that would effect our economy, eh? That's why YOU aren't running things. So, who let them come in illegally in the first place? FYI, it wasn't just this administration. Many of these people have been here for many years. How come libs weren't concerned with illegal immigration during Clinton's 8 years in office??????

Then you agree with me: it was mostly those on the far-right. I think you might do some more reading and see the people against it included many centrists and even Democrats and liberals. No way does the far-right have the Democrat Congress and Senate in their back pocket. If you can prove that is so....then go ahead. I never said it was ONLY the far-right.

Your childish, condescending remarks takes away from any points you may have made. Try not to get so mad as we're only discussing and debating politics here. And for future posts, remember that personally attacking a poster is forbidden and can get you banned.

__________________
"This is a time for a national imperative not to fail in Iraq." Condoleeza Rice, January 11, 2007

I KNOW he was talking about them. Are you having difficulty following the thread??

What did they do BEFORE they were illegally in the US - apparently not starve, eh?

The net cost to the US taxpayer over the lifetime of such illegal alien families, according to the recent Heritage study, is $2 trillion, so the effect expected over time would be a big boost. Keep up on the news, eh?

As a mod, you have a special responsibility to avoid such personal insults. I demand a retraction.

As I have already pointed out, both libs and republican pols have their illegitimate reasons for allowing historic wholesale violation of the law. The only people who can stop this now are grassroots conservatives.

Whaaaaaaaattttttt??????? Uh, maybe you should reread what I've posted.

Where?? Who???


I haven't made any personal attack, the only one in this thread was made by YOU, my comment was directed to the post, and was well-stated, not "childish".