April 6, 2009

Yosemite Sam McCain blows his stack at Hispanics

From "McCain Rebukes Hispanic Voters" by Kirk Victor in the National Journal, via Larry Auster:
John McCain sounds angry and frustrated that, despite the risks he took in pushing immigration reform, Hispanic voters flocked to Democrat Barack Obama in last year's presidential contest. McCain's raw emotions burst forth recently as he heatedly told Hispanic business leaders that they should now look to Obama, not him, to take the lead on immigration.

The meeting in the Capitol's Strom Thurmond Room on March 11 was a Republican effort led by Sens. McCain of Arizona, John Thune of South Dakota, and Mel Martinez of Florida to reach out to Hispanics. But two people who attended the session say they were taken aback by McCain's anger.

What began as a collegial airing of views abruptly changed when McCain spoke about immigration" ... He was angry," one source said. "He was over the top. In some cases, he rolled his eyes a lot. There were portions of the meeting where he was just staring at the ceiling, and he wasn't even listening to us. We came out of the meeting really upset."

McCain's message was obvious, the source continued: After bucking his party on immigration, he had no sympathy for Hispanics who are dissatisfied with President Obama's pace on the issue. "He threw out [the words] 'You people -- you people made your choice. You made your choice during the election,' " the source said. "It was almost as if [he was saying] 'You're cut off!' We felt very uncomfortable when we walked away from the meeting because of that."

In 2006 and 2007, McCain was a leader on immigration, but his efforts ran aground largely because his legislation included what many Republicans derisively characterized as "amnesty," a pathway to citizenship for the nation's estimated 12 million illegal immigrants if they took a series of steps to earn legal status.

Having stuck his neck out in the past, McCain apparently is in no mood to do so again for an ethnic group he seems to view as ungrateful. ... Asked on the show whether he would work with Obama on the issue, McCain said, "At any time, I stand ready. But the president has to lead." ...

[Sen.] Martinez, who is Hispanic, continued, "John is John. Sometimes when he talks, he talks forcefully. He wasn't ranting or raving or anything. I have seen John rant and rave. I don't think this was one of those moments."

This almost sounds like Martinez is talking about Dodger slugger Manny Ramirez ("That's just Manny being Manny"), who is a lot of fun, but not what most people consider Presidential Timber.

But one person's straight talk is another person's vitriol. "My hands were shaking," one source said. "I was nervous as no-end." The senator's comments went on for several minutes at least. And by the end of the meeting, another participant, who had supported McCain in last year's presidential election, was so shaken by the display of temper that he decided it is good that McCain isn't in the White House.

McCain has become irate over immigration legislation before. During negotiations over a bill two years ago, he was so enraged by the comments of Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, that he got in Cornyn's face and said, "F-- you!" ...

Going forward, some of McCain's allies question whether Obama will be willing to lead on immigration, especially given what they saw as his failure to take risks to advance immigration reform when he was a senator. "He was AWOL most of the time," Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said of Obama in an interview in July. "I learned a lot about Obama on immigration, and it wasn't good. I learned that to talk about bipartisan change and to stick by a bipartisan deal are two different things. He came by several times, more [for] the photo ops. The only time he came by, he wanted to re-litigate something that had already been decided."

Asked recently whether he would be surprised that McCain's feelings about Hispanic voters and immigration legislation sound very raw, Graham, who also took risks in backing the legislation, which was very unpopular in South Carolina, said: "John understands politics. But he is a human being, like all of us, and it is disappointing because he really was the driving force on the Republican side... to produce a bill that would solve this problem. And the groups that were cheering him on were gone when he needed them."

Hispanics gave Obama a whopping 67 percent of their votes, more than double the 31 percent they gave to McCain. A former colleague of McCain's, Rick Santorum, R-Pa., who opposed immigration reform, told National Journal, "John risked a lot to go out there and do what he did. They basically turned their back on him, a guy who had done a lot more for them than Barack Obama ever would. So I can understand his anger, but I also know that John doesn't get over things easily." ...

Remind me again how the Republican Party came to nominate this guy for President?

By the way, I've been explaining for nine years that amnesty is not the royal road to Hispanic voters' hearts. With the exception of the Cubans and the born-agains, they tend to be natural Democrats for both tax-and-spend and racial reasons. But why should anybody listen to a crazed extremist like me when the statesmanlike Sen. McCain is assuring you of the exact opposite? Who you gonna believe, a wild-eyed nut like me with all my hatefacts and hatestats and hategraphs, or a thoughtful, judicious cross between Pericles and King Solomon like Sen. McCain?

My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

69 comments:

Anonymous said...

McCain is nuts and a jerk. Romney would be a far better president than either McCain or Obama. (I voted Libertarian).

Bill said...

Stupid Party indeed.

Are these washed up old Republicans really so clueless that they thought that Chicano farm laborers would instantly morph into third generation Old World immigrants?

I am starting to think that it isn't only the electorate that is functionally illiterate -- it's the elected officials as well.

testing99 said...

A lot of great Presidents were noted for their temper Steve. Calling McCain volcanic you might as well call him the heir to: Jackson, TR, FRD, Truman, Washington, and Clinton. All of whom had volcanic tempers in office.

Heck when one guy tried to assassinate Jackson at the Capitol steps, he nearly beat him to death with a cane. He had to be restrained by aides.

You are quite right on Hispanics btw. Though I believe Obama WILL push illegals Amnesty and Open Borders ASAP because it's a way to stick it to White guys, something Obama lives for.

clem said...

...or a thoughtful, judicious cross between Pericles and King Solomon like Sen. McCain...

If they can't decide what country and culture they want to be a part of, cut the immigrants in half, I say....

jody said...

mccain wants obama to give jack johnson a presidential pardon for violating the mann act in 1913.

mccain, who was an amateur boxer himself, has attempted to get this done before, previously asking gw bush, and now confident that half black barack obama will do the pardon.

i struggle to see why mccain would be interested in this for any reason other than his apparently intense need to pander to non-whites. in the past, mccain has even gone so far as to give the keynote at the national la raza convention.

jack johnson, of course, was a legitimate federal criminal, who transported women across state lines for prostitution. it's cut and dried that he broke the law and was convicted, so what possible reason could there be to pardon him other than the fact that he was a black athlete?

it's not much different than the modern apologies some states have issued for participating in the african slave trade.

you know ESPN will be totally interested in what mccain has to say about why a clear cut black criminal should be pardoned, while at the same time not giving a damn what he thinks about any particular boxing match.

coldequation said...

Now I expect McCain to admit that he was wrong all along about amnesty and push for enforcement-only. It's the only sensible conclusion he can draw from his failure to get Hispanic votes, right? Right?

David Davenport said...

[Sen.] Martinez, who is Hispanic ...

Hispanic?

I believe that ol' Mel has insisted that he is of purely European Spanish descent, and that his ancestors were among the first colonists in olde Spanish Florida, with no race mixing in the Martinez line between then and now.

Peter said...

"John is John" -funny, as Adam Carolla likes to say, repeating someone's first name is showbiz and political code for saying someone's an asshole.

Chief Seattle said...

John McCain losing the presidency is the best thing that could have happened to stop Amnesty. If Republicans had any doubt before that more immigration was a political loser, that's put to rest. And let's just hope that McCain's evaluation of Obama as unwilling to stick his neck out for Amnesty is correct. Maybe the takeover of the country will slow to the point where there's only 400 million people in 2050 instead of 500 million.

"hatefacts, hatestats, and hategraphs" - wonderful turn of phrase. I laughed hard.

RKU said...

Well, leaving aside all that endless "immigration" controversy...

Boy oh boy am I glad that You-Know-Who didn't end up with his finger on the Big Red Button!!!

Anonymous said...

If Obama is really a black nationalist at heart, he would be an immigration restrictionist. I think that on average blacks have a more negative view of immigration than whites. This is because very few blacks have been brainwashed by any sort of PC nonsense.

For example, why was Colin Powell against the war in Iraq? Probably because he knew that blacks had nothing to gain from it and something to lose from it - some of the soldiers killed in the neocon wars were going to be black. Someone like Rumsfeld wouldn't have thought of the war in such stark ethnocentric terms because the Rumsfelds of the world have long ago been brainwashed to believe that their potential ethnocentrism is the most evil thing in the entire Universe - our secular age's equivalent of the Devil.

Interestingly, Obama was against that war as well. I'm not saying that Obama will necessarily be less enthusiastic about amnesty than McCain was. I don't know. All I'm saying is that if Obama really is a black nationalist, then he would be against amnesty.

It could be that Obama doesn't have a political direction of any sort, that he's a weather-wane, in it strictly for fame and self-importance. If he's a weather-wane, then he'll be for amnesty because that's where the media and donor winds are blowing.

I guess we'll get an important clue about who he really is soon.

Anonymous said...

Ha! Love it! The man is a crank. Thank god for the depression that kept him out of office.

Republicans might want to think about their open borders, "city on a hill" view. There are alot of people who don't want unlimited immigration. This is obvious to Dems. Emmanual wanted to let the Bush admin lead on amnesty. This isn't rocket science.

If the Republicans want to be more amnesty than the Dems, well, asta amigos.

What is the Repub party anyway?
Abortion no.
Amnesty yes.
Iraq yes. (Iran, etc yes! Bomb bomb!)
CDO bubble - hell yes.

Someone explain why a working class person would vote for them. I'd love to know.

Hate to say it but it's fun to see Gramm and Rove eating it now. You guys got what you wanted. Hope your happy.

Anonymous said...

The white political establishment is starting to see the writing on the wall (after the election of Obama).

They were sure that the new "diverse America" was going to build shrines and statues in memory of their tolerance, but now realize that they're being muscled out of power and disrespected on the way out.

The business elites are rechecking their cost-benefit analysis and realizing that cheap labor stops being "cheap" when it can vote for a 90% corporate tax rate.

After reading about the bus-tours of executive houses, the business elites are having visions of Dr. Zhivago-like scenes where hordes of "diverse Americans" are pounding at their doors demanding "justice."

The Israel First-ers are forecasting American foreign policy in 30 years in the context of dropping Jewish birthrates, rising Arab birthrates, and a Turkish return to regional hegemony.

So the Establishment now faces a choice. They can go the "diversity is strength" route and hope that the new "diverse Americans" treat them as "heroes of tolerance" in America's "beautiful future of diversity." Or, they can put an end to the madness of political correctness and pretty much be guaranteed to remain the establishment?

A couple of suggestions I have:

1. Cut way back on immigration. This will raise the wages of American workers and cut back on the cost of government services.

2. Cut back on affirmative action and quotas. This is especially important for businesses. Allowing some "underrepresented minorities" into college or government service can be tolerated, but private business must be allowed to hire and promote the people who bring the most value to their organizations.

3. Stopped forced diversity. I'm talking here about forced busing, or distributing low income people into middle class communities. This causes middle income people to move away which causes more sprawl and leads to destroyed communities. People work hard to live around who they wish. When low income people can afford to live in a middle income neighborhood then they can move there.

Most important, we do need to have a "discussion about race." But this discussion must be a real discussion and not a Soviet style show-trial. WE must discuss education, crime rates, human bio-diversity, affirmative action, etc.. in a way that allows the public to hear all points of view and relative facts. This is probably more important than my other suggestions because it will allow us to grow. This is similar to an individual seeing a psychologist. By talking about our issues (caused from our history together) we can learn about ourselves and start making cognitive adjustments.

I know members of the elite read this blog. I want you to really think about the choices that you're making and how these choices will affect you kids and grandkids?

Langobard said...

Ah yes, Juan 'Sweat Stain' McCain spews his bad breath once again.

At least this time the targeted recipients are the Mestizos (AKA "Hispanics").

Finally this opportunistic Truckler has at least some pride and common sense in recognizing the (very) real ingratitude of the Mestizos!

Listening, RepubliCONS?

Langobard said...

"---I believe that ol' Mel has insisted that he is of purely European Spanish descent, and that his ancestors were among the first colonists in olde Spanish Florida, with no race mixing in the Martinez line between then and now.---"

Gee, that means that (s)Mel must be descended from a long line of, arghh, 'racistas'.

Could you imagine that, a "Hispanic" racist?????

Anonymous said...

What's scary is that McCain was leading Obama because of his selection of Sarah Palin.

Had it not been for the implossion Lehman Brothers , the old geriatric nutjob could have actually won.

Anonymous said...

Testing99, so McCain is Jackson cause he has a temper? It should have been obvious the Repub's weren't going to get much hispanic support. Hilarious.

I say keep it up. It will keep the Invade/Invite party out of office for a long time my friend.

At least with Obama the invade the world part is out. His lefty buddies are all for Darfur but they'll never reach a concensus where we need to invade the place.

The Sailersphere should be very happy Obama is Prez. Except for the religous wacko, Bush supporters. I'm sure you love the world now. Gracias Amigos!

Anonymous said...

Among the multiple qualities we desire in a president - intelligence, good judgment, leadership, courage - the most important one is: not-a-nut.

In the end, we did not elect McCain, but how did he and Palin even managed to be in the running?

Jim said...

It's clear to me that Obama has more interest in keeping blacks as the favorite minority and thus should be opposed to unlimited immigration from Mexico et al.

Anonymous said...

McCain vented at his fellow senators and leaders of Hispanic groups in the meeting.

This should show many of you how "the elite" think. The "elite" thinks that if your favorite radio talk show host or blogger tells you to be "for" something, then you, the reader or listener, will automatically be in lockstep behind them.


Do any of you -readers- of Steve's blog notice how passionately Steve makes his case for holding a certain position on any issue by the dispassionate usage of statistics, charts, analysis, comparisons of similar policies when applied elsewhere, INSTEAD of heated rhetoric? Several right-leaning blogs are this way (Parapundit, Inductivist, Dusk in Autumn, Audacious Epigone, etc) because the type of minds who read quantitative blogs are prone to requiring solid information before coming to a conclusion, as unbiased as possible. The left, who John McCain endlessly wants to appease, are much more motivated by symbolic acts, arguments, emotions, and pure moral vanity as much as anything else.



It sure is a cold night out here in the heartland tonight. Its not the global cooling (yet) though*, its the collective latino shoulder thrown at Juan McCain.


**http://www.iceagenow.com/US_Navy_Physicist_warns_of_crushing_temperatures_and_global_famine.htm
(I hope that dude isn't right)

Danindc said...

ehhh I always kind of liked McCain-seemed to have a good sense of humor (remember the roast during the campaign)... Romney would have been best granted

testing99 said...

Anon please. Powell was all for the war, seeing how his original policy in Iraq with Bush 1 was a complete disaster, Saddam both angry and defeated and uncontained without a constant American presence that was itself the target of attacks throughout the region and destabilizing. Worst of all, after that victory, no one was afraid of us anymore. Because they thought accurately that the US lacked the will to do much of anything in response to anything.

A dangerous problem for the US dating back to Jimmy Carter's provocative weakness. Powell only turned on the War when it became politically convienent among SWPL yuppies he's based on.

Moreover, Obama is the worst of both worlds as both an anti-Average White Guy Black Nationalist and SWPL panderer.

BOTH hate Joe the Plumber with a passion more than anything else, and so Obama WILL push Amnesty harder and faster than McCain would.

Anyone thinking otherwise is dreaming. Seriously.

No McCain is not Jackson, but merely having a tremendous temper is not a disqualification for office that Steve thinks it is. IF it were, neither Jackson nor Washington, both great Presidents, would have been elected.

McCain would have been the better choice because he would have needed Republican support, thus he would not have pushed hard for Immigration.

Obama owes Republicans NOTHING and their base EVEN LESS. So he, a man who his entire life has been out to stick it to them, will push it hard and GET IT DONE.

Obama = Done Deal on Amnesty. Period. That is it. It's a Democratic Congress. And if they pass Amnesty, it won't MATTER what the folks back home think, because the voters will all be MEXICAN! Voting for DEMOCRATS.

Morever, Paleocons live in a fantasy world of 1908. North Korea just shot another missile and eventually even THEY will get it right. While Obama guts missile defense, the Navy, the Air Force, and promises an end to Nuclear Weapons. Heck he's even flirted with unilateral nuclear disarmament.

Realty check: the whole world is going nuclear, particularly our enemies Iran, Syria, North Korea, helped by Russia which shares with Iran the need for Oil at $200 a barrel to keep their patronage regimes going. Which btw kills the US.

While Obama promises "Green" crap in a deep recession/depression. And the policy of kissing the hand of the Saudi King (literally). Who spent the money to get him elected.

The election was not a choice between good and better. It was a choice between bad and worse. And Obama is worse.

He'll flood the country with immigrants because he hates White Middle class guys more than he loves Blacks.

And he'll leave the country nuked and defenseless because he hates the nation as a not-so-secret Muslim. Check out the videos of him bowing and kissing the hand of the Saudi King.

Again: McCain would have needed the Republican BASE, while Obama just got Carte Blanche to screw them over (SWPL HATE the White middle/working classes, so too do Blacks and Hispanics). The whole point is to marginalize "Joe the Plumber" so he's a discriminated against minority in his own nation.

Mr. Anon said...

La Raza should tell McCain what Bluto told Flounder:

"Hey, you f**ked up. You trusted us."

David said...

Steve,

Please return to your Olympian tone.

Let us commenters do the raging and the frothing, let us indulge in the nasty sneering sarcasm, let us do the going-over-the-top bit. All that is unbecoming to you.

Besides - we're better at it! :)

Thanks.

David said...

I know members of the elite read this blog. I want you to really think about the choices that you're making and how these choices will affect you kids and grandkids?

Sweetie, they don't care. They have multiple passports. They just go over and live among their fellows in Vienna, then Tel Aviv, then London, then fill in the blank, then back again, etc. In social circles of cocoon-like protection.

Our nations are just places, geographical locations. Elites are their own nation. Their grandchildren will be just fine, don't worry about that.

Anonymous said...

t99 said

Check out the videos of [Obama] bowing and kissing the hand of the Saudi King.

Bush kissed his mouth and went on hand-holding strolls with him. (Would Andrew Jackson be caught dead doing this?)

Here's a particularly droll video to check out. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Captain Jack Aubrey said...

The business elites are rechecking their cost-benefit analysis and realizing that cheap labor stops being "cheap" when it can vote for a 90% corporate tax rate.

We're not there yet. It'll take a lot more to get them to wake up. They still believe they can get conservatives to vote for a GOP that supports open borders, lower taxes for the rich, and the "promise" (wink wink) of ending abortion.

McCain's anger actually seemed to suggest that he really did think Hispanics would fall in line behind him because of his support for amnesty - it's not just something he was saying to get GOP voters to support amnesty for the "good of the party."

The political leanings of Hispanics were a settled fact a very long time ago, and McCain hadn't a clue. Is this the kind of guy who might've been making decisions about Iraq, Iran, North Korea and God only knows what other hotspots?

I think the real problem with long-term congressmen is that they've been getting their talking points from lobbyists and political "intellectuals" (e.g., Bill Kristol) for far too long. There is no intellectual consistency in what they say and how they vote.

In the end, we did not elect McCain, but how did he and Palin even managed to be in the running?

I'm not particularly anti-Palin, but his choice of her over Romney demonstrated that the man wasn't enough of a grown-up to hold the job. Romney had a better resume than McCain, and his experience filled all the gaps in McCain's. Romney would've helped in Michigan and the Northeast. But for some inexplicable reason, McCain hated Romney. The fact that McCain couldn't overlook his hatred for his own benefit demonstrated what a small man he was.

John McCain losing the presidency is the best thing that could have happened to stop Amnesty. If Republicans had any doubt before that more immigration was a political loser, that's put to rest. And let's just hope that McCain's evaluation of Obama as unwilling to stick his neck out for Amnesty is correct.

McCain's loss gives the GOP a chance to hit the reset button. Obama might stick his neck out for amnesty, because 10 million more Hispanic voters would help permanently seal his "remaking of America."

However: he'll have to get the House to go along, and the House faces re-election every two years. Many would lose their jobs before the amnestied start voting.

The economic slowdown will also permanently slow the flow of immigration, especially when the government loses it's ability to borrow. If something can't go on forever, it won't.

PRCalDude said...

I know members of the elite read this blog. I want you to really think about the choices that you're making and how these choices will affect you kids and grandkids?

LOL. I got a hoot out of that one. Members of the elite? Thinking about their kids and grandkids? Why, they can just emigrate to, to, ..... nevermind.

Captain Jack Aubrey said...

Bush kissed his mouth and went on hand-holding strolls with him. (Would Andrew Jackson be caught dead doing this?)

Cheek-kissing is a greeting. Hand holding is a sign of trust in many parts of the world. Obama's bow, however, was a bow of submission - a bow that he did not give to Queen Elizabeth.

Heads of state do not bow to other heads of state. Period.

rast said...

I am not a mental health professional, and if I was I wouldn't diagnose someone whom I'd never met, but here goes anyway...

I truly believe McCain is bats**t crazy ("mentally ill" for those of you who like to be politically correct). I don't mean this as the common "someone who disagrees with my political views" term of abuse, but literally, as in "this man shouldn't be allowed to own or handle weapons, not even steak knives". I'm not saying it's his fault -- blame it on his VC captors if you like -- I'm just saying we're very lucky that his finger is nowhere near the red nuclear button.

rast said...

"For example, why was Colin Powell against the war in Iraq? Probably because he knew that blacks had nothing to gain from it and something to lose from it - some of the soldiers killed in the neocon wars were going to be black."

I'm not a Powell fan, but I've never heard that he's a black nationalist, and his reason for initially opposing the war is simple enough -- it was an obvious disaster that he didn't want staining his career. But he was too much of a coward to publicly fight the administration, and his political career has (I think and hope) been deservedly ruined.

Anonymous said...

"I believe that ol' Mel has insisted that he is of purely European Spanish descent, and that his ancestors were among the first colonists in olde Spanish Florida, with no race mixing in the Martinez line between then and now."

I don't believe it. Go to Wikipedia and look at the rectangle head.

Anonymous said...

McCain would have been the better choice because he would have needed Republican support, thus he would not have pushed hard for Immigration.

On the contrary, John McCain has spent his entire career, most famously during the Bush administration, courting the support of Democrats: Campaign Finance Reform, Kennedy-McCain Immigration.

You are a deluded fanboy. Where's this gimlet-eyed, calculating realist you assured us was polishing his quick wit in the pilot briefing room? Earth to McCain: low IQ ethno-nationalists vote DEMOCRAT!

--Senor Doug

Jun said...

Steve said: With the exception of the Cubans and the born-agains, they [Hispanic voters] tend to be natural Democrats for both tax-and-spend and racial reasons.

As an aside, that would be the white/Spanish Cubans (and, probably, Chinese Cubans) I think -- not so much Afro-Cubans.

Anonymous said...

This is finally some proof that John McCain is not insane.

When there are 40-60 (yep, you heard me) people illegally in this country who are ready to overturn the Republic so that more can come here, only a sane man could blow his stack.

When white Americans vote 50-50 according to conscience and everyone else (including the "model minorities") votes according to skin color, it is high time to re-evaluate the generalizations and universalisms and really ask about the future of this Republic.

To the people who think this outburst is proof that McCain is "nuts": Pick up your testicles, ladies. You are going to need them in the years to come.

ben tillman said...

The business elites are rechecking their cost-benefit analysis and realizing that cheap labor stops being "cheap" when it can vote for a 90% corporate tax rate.

What a great line!

togo said...

McCain's loss gives the GOP a chance to hit the reset button. Obama might stick his neck out for amnesty, because 10 million more Hispanic voters would help permanently seal his "remaking of America."

It's pretty pathetic having to place your hopes in the GOP given their track record. In fact, the whole concept of a "two party" system is pathetic. It always moves the debate toward the "center." The center may have been OK in Ike's day, but today the center is PC, Multiculturalism and Cultural Marxism. Plus big bailouts for private sector pirates and incompetents.

What is to be done? Armed revolt is suicidal, hiding out in the hills is both impractical and cowardly and "tea parties" are laughable. Instead start a campaign to institute proportional representation(the voting system, not the theory of perfect racial, ethnic and sexual "equity") in as many venues as possible. That way candidates who speak the truth (instead of the usual assemblage of cynical careerists-liars-whores-thieves)have a chance to get elected to public office.

Principled (don't laugh) representatives of the traditional American majority get to establish a base within the existing political system. Kind of like "guerilla foco".
Think of someone like Geert Wilders. Or the two Haiderite parties in Austria. Or-if you're pro-Zioinist-
Avigdor Lieberman.

The Patriotards who still swear fealty to the "two party" system truly live down to that appellation.

Truth said...

"For example, why was Colin Powell against the war in Iraq? Probably because he knew that blacks had nothing to gain from it and something to lose from it - some of the soldiers killed in the neocon wars were going to be black."

Oh, not because he didn't want thousands of innocent Americans to die?

"Moreover, Obama is the worst of both worlds as both an anti-Average White Guy Black Nationalist and SWPL panderer."

(LMAO) Son, you are really, really starting to sound deaperate.

Anonymous said...

testing99 - if you think the Iraq war has been good for the Joe Plumber's of the US, all I can say is how awesome it is your guy didn't win.

Futhermore, the amnesty bill was Kennedy-McCain, not Kennedy Obama. Obama can't be worse than McCain on this, McCain didn't want any restrictions period.

Anonymous said...

Hispanic business leaders

I'd say the emphasis here should be on the "business leaders" part rather then the "Hispanic".

Hispanics don't care about amnesty, the corrupt and incompetent "business leaders" of all races do.

Anonymous said...

The business elites are rechecking their cost-benefit analysis and realizing that cheap labor stops being "cheap" when it can vote for a 90% corporate tax rate.


You are severely overestimating the intelligence of our hapless business elites. That 90% tax business will not happen for a few more years, and by that time they'll have pocketed their $10 million bonus checks and be living in a gated community somewhere.

togo said...

It's easy to visualize this problem migrating north to already water-short
California Del Norte:
http://danielhernandez.typepad.com/daniel_hernandez/2009/04/mexico-city-to-turn-off-the-tap-totally.html

Mexico City (with already critically low water levels) will be completely shutting off the main flow of water
for the period of Apr 9 through Apr 12. That's 36 hrs without water for the main supply of water for a city of over 20 million people. How confident is everyone that the water will be turned back on on Apr 13?

One more reason we can no longer afford the pro-mass immigration idiots of the the two major parties.

clem said...

California man pleads no contest in selling of daughter for $16,000:

"A California man accused of selling his 14-year-old daughter into marriage for $16,000, beer and meat has pleaded no contest to felony child endangerment."

"Marcelino de Jesus Martinez had pleaded not guilty in February to procuring a child for lewd acts, aiding and abetting statutory rape and child endangerment."

What Would King Solomon Do?

Anonymous said...

Members of the elite? Thinking about their kids and grandkids? Why, they can just emigrate to, to, ..... nevermind.

Indeed. That's one reason you'd think the elite would be a bit more patriotic - there is no there there anymore, in terms of places to flee to. China? India? France? This time they've shat in all their nests.

Ronduck said...

Captain Jack Aubrey said...

But for some inexplicable reason, McCain hated Romney. The fact that McCain couldn't overlook his hatred for his own benefit demonstrated what a small man he was.

In McCain's defense, there is a large Mormon community here in the Phoenix metro area that is centered here in my suburb of Mesa. I wouldn't be surprised if McCain secretly despises them even if he has to get their votes to get reelected, since the Mormons have not always been easy to get along with. McCain may have confused Romney with the local LDS crowd.


Incidentally, these mormons are didivded on immigration. State legislator Russel Peirce is against illegal immigration, Jeff Flake is for it, both are Mormon.

Finally, I bet McCain lives in either Fountain Hills or north Scottsdale, both of which are rich, clean areas with low crime. McCain's neighborhood may influence his views on immigration, since he doesn't live in south Mesa, Phoenix or the west valley.

spacehabitats said...

"Remind me again how the Republican Party came to nominate this guy for President?"

Sure Steve, I'd be glad to. First of all, the political insiders that run BOTH political parties AND the mainstream media allowed Mitt Romney, with the Mormon glass jaw, to lead the polls in Iowa and New Hampshire right up until the weeks before the Iowa caucuses. Suddenly the media "discovered" a new darling in the guise of that evangelical "Romney-Killer" Mike Huckabee. Miraculously, the Iowan evangelicals, energized by the specter of a dreaded Latter Day Saint in the White House came out in droves to defeat Romney in the Iowa straw poll and the nomination was all but secured for McCain.

Why? Because despite the fact that he was largely despised by a huge segment of the Republican grassroots (primarily for his back-stabbing, pro-amnesty votes in Congress) they were not allowed to believe that anyone else had a snowballs chance in Hell of defeating the Democratic candidate in November. The Des Moines Register in Iowa and the Manchester Union Leader in New Hampshire coincidentally were both inspired to endorse John McCain despite the fact that he had been languishing in the low single digits in the polls for years.

Huckabee was a one-trick pony who could only win against a Mormon. But with the Iowa win under his belt, and just enough positive publicity to shut out any other potential candidates, it was all over but the shouting. Ron Paul, the only REAL choice left in the race, was relentlessly and blatantly ignored or marginalized by the press throughout the rest of the primaries.

I'm not saying the GOP didn't get what they deserved, the media played them like a Stradivarius.
But they WERE played.

There, did that help?

PRCalDude said...

Indeed. That's one reason you'd think the elite would be a bit more patriotic - there is no there there anymore, in terms of places to flee to. China? India? France? This time they've shat in all their nests.

I think they're just hoping they die before the wheels come off completely.

Jack said...

Realty check: the whole world is going nuclear, particularly our enemies Iran, Syria, North Korea, helped by Russia which shares with Iran the need for Oil at $200 a barrel to keep their patronage regimes going. Which btw kills the US.

What do you mean by "our"? Iran and syria are not in America's neighborhood.

Ronduck said...

Steve Sailer wrote...

By the way, I've been explaining for nine years that amnesty is not the royal road to Hispanic voters' hearts. With the exception of the Cubans and the born-agains, they tend to be natural Democrats for both tax-and-spend and racial reasons.

Actually, the Hispanic born-agains voted for Obama 50-34 (PDF).

Anonymous said...

The good news is that with McCain's defeat so goes the rest of the pro-illegal Republicans. It will be much harder to run in the next election cycle as a Republican if they are not solidly anti-illegal. I suspect the Repubs will lose some industry support but good riddence anyway.

Truth said...

"What Would King Solomon Do?"

Cut the author of your response in half.

Anonymous said...

The Business Elites are no where near re-evaluating their race-replacement program. That's just wishful thinking.

Victoria said...

McCain is nuts and a jerk. Romney would be a far better president than either McCain or Obama.

Had it not been for those evangelical nutcases, for whom Romney was not "Christian" enough and failed to exhibit the right attitude towards Jesus, he might very well be President today.

mccain wants obama to give jack johnson a presidential pardon for violating the mann act in 1913.

I've never read much about this Johnson and have never seen any of the dramatizations, since his life always sounded so repulsive. But are you sure the Mann act wasn't invoked because he was carrying on affairs with white women and just happened to travel with them, or did he actually traffic in prostitution, i.e., providing women for other men?

For example, why was Colin Powell against the war in Iraq? Probably because he knew that blacks had nothing to gain from it and something to lose from it - some of the soldiers killed in the neocon wars were going to be black.

Wow, you really have a naive understanding of things, if you think that black elites at the top give half a damn about what happens to the blacks on the bottom. Powell is about as "ethnocentric" as my cat!

In the end, we did not elect McCain, but how did he and Palin even managed to be in the running?

They were in the running for the same reason that the next Republican presidential candidates will be in the running -- they knew how to appeal to those evangelical lunatics, that is, profess love for The Fetus. That's all that's required to insure the nomination. The Single Issue zealots rule.

As an aside, that would be the white/Spanish Cubans (and, probably, Chinese Cubans) I think -- not so much Afro-Cubans.

Forget it. People on this side of the Atlantic don't seem to understand the difference between a real Spaniard, who is as white as any German or Anglo, and a "Hispanic" person, who is the result of Spanish men's sperm left in the wombs of the Indians and African slaves in North America during colonial times. To the typical American, Spanish means "Hispanic."

Cat Patrol said...

It was obvious even back in the 1990s that the media was grooming and promoting McCain to be President. That "maverick" label really just meant Liberal Republican.

I believe it is too late for our nation anyway, no matter if the GOP sees the light. Changing demographics have assured our destruction as a cohesive, advanced nation. White babies are already nearing minority status, and that 2042 prediction of when Whites fall below 50% is off by a couple decades.

Anonymous said...

"Remind me again how the Republican Party came to nominate this guy for President?"

Winner take all primaries.

Steve, have you petitioned the California Republican Party to award delegates proportionally?

Wouldn't it be better if the number of delegates were related to the number of Republican Reps and Senators, rather than just total Reps and Senators?

Why should a blue state like CA have so much weight in the GOP primaries?

---

We need closed primaries. Also, the deadline for registering for voting in the primaries should be set well in advance of the primary date.

---

Basically, only the hardcore party faithful should vote in the primaries.

Anonymous said...

You people who keep blaming Romney's defeat on his Mormonism are batshit crazy. The guy has ZERO charisma. The more people saw him, the less they liked him. End of story.

Jun said...

Anonymous said: You people who keep blaming Romney's defeat on his Mormonism are batshit crazy. The guy has ZERO charisma.

Maybe what we need around here is a president with a little (lot?) less charisma.

Mr. Anon said...

togo said...

"It's pretty pathetic having to place your hopes in the GOP given their track record. In fact, the whole concept of a "two party" system is pathetic. It always moves the debate toward the "center." The center may have been OK in Ike's day, but today the center is PC, Multiculturalism and Cultural Marxism. Plus big bailouts for private sector pirates and incompetents.

What is to be done? Armed revolt is suicidal, hiding out in the hills is both impractical and cowardly and "tea parties" are laughable. Instead start a campaign to institute proportional representation in as many venues as possible. That way candidates who speak the truth (instead of the usual assemblage of cynical careerists-liars-whores-thieves)have a chance to get elected to public office."

I agree. Placing our hopes on the GOP as it is now is a sucker's bet. They still stink. They really are the stupid party - the one's who aren't just bagmen for the wealthy, that is.

I used to think that PR was a bad idea. If it is, then it's a bad idea whose time has come. It's the only way for us to get some real representation. It will cause fractiousness, and may finally lead to the country breaking apart. But that's going to happen anyway, and when it does, I'd at least like to have someone representing my interests when the goods and real-estate are divied up.

Ronduck said...

Victoria said...

Had it not been for those evangelical nutcases, for whom Romney was not "Christian" enough and failed to exhibit the right attitude towards Jesus, he might very well be President today.

Those Evangelical "nutcases" are the only group that consistently votes Republican. Without them there would be no conservative movement in America. It makes sense that the GOP would at least take the considerations of the Evangelicals into account when campaigning, even if their promises to them are all lies.

David said...

It may be time to get Irish on their butts.

David said...

Bill said

Are these washed up old Republicans really so clueless that they thought that Chicano farm laborers would instantly morph into third generation Old World immigrants?

Yes. They watch television, which is now 100% propaganda for the multicult. Any real experience they have is in their neighborhoods (lily white) or their districts (Republicans largely are not from "vibrant" areas). They see the slappy-happy stuff on TV now and then, and so they think human differences are trivial.

They, like many of us, are living and dying in a propagandistic electronic cocoon.

Now I have to go watch "American Idol."

Anonymous said...

McCain's neighborhood may influence his views on immigration, since he doesn't live in south Mesa, Phoenix or the west valley.

In McCain's type of neighborhood Mexicans are an army of little men riding around in service vehicles and riding mowers. The Mexican army tank is a Toro.

Mormon elite are not particularly divided on illegal immigration. They are emphatically in favor of it. The last 3 governors of Utah, at least, support amnesty (Hunstman, Walker and Leavitt). The current AG supports it. Senator Bennett supports it. The LDS Church-owned newspaper and radio station have staunchly pro-amnesty editorial positions.

The LDS Church has always been on good terms with its richest members. While most moneyed men favor mass migration, the richest Mormons skew disproportionately towards businesses that benefit from it the most: real estate (Peery, Ivory, Fulton) and hotels (Holding, Marriott).

One factor in selecting the nominee is that the GOP prefers a familiar face. People who finished 2nd in the last open primary have a good shot at finishing first in the next. McCain (2000 & 2008), Dole (88 & 96), Bush (80 & 88) and Reagan (76 & 80). Romney still has a shot. He does seem a little too slick, a little too willing to adjust his positions to what the majority wants. I would argue that's a good thing.

Ronduck said...

Bill said...

Are these washed up old Republicans really so clueless that they thought that Chicano farm laborers would instantly morph into third generation Old World immigrants?

And how likely are the third generation Old World Immigrants to vote Republican? If the Republicans really think the third generation Mestizos will act like the Irish and Italians then they should look to Massachusetts as the future of the GOP.

Lucius Vorenus said...

Those evangelical nutcases were also the people who created this nation, back in the day.

Not that anyone cares about that.

Anonymous said...

"---In McCain's type of neighborhood Mexicans are an army of little men riding around in service vehicles and riding mowers. The Mexican army tank is a Toro.---"

Ha ha ha ha ha!

The illustrious Senator's new name:

Juan 'Sweat Stain' Insane 'Son of Cain'

Victoria said...

Without them there would be no conservative movement in America.

What conservative movement? Do you call those embarrassing, immature jerks who follow the Limbaugh-Hannity bandwagon the "conservative movement?"


Those evangelical nutcases were also the people who created this nation, back in the day.

Yeah, "back in the day." And those people would not recognize the fools who now parade around in their name, but are nothing more than Republican party flunkies.

Ronduck said...

Lucius Vorenus said...

Not that anyone cares about that

Why should they care? America is about to enter a new era where the Catholic church is the largest faith. Soon we won't have to think about those evil heretics who left the Holy Mother Church and divided the pious masses from their chaste leaders.

/sarcasm

Lucius Vorenus said...

Victoria: Yeah, "back in the day." And those people would not recognize the fools who now parade around in their name, but are nothing more than Republican party flunkies.

I'm not sure what you're getting at here [maybe I'm misunderstanding], but the modern-day evangelicals are just about the ONLY people in our society that the 17th-century Puritans would recognize.

[Maybe also the various Anabaptists - Moravian and Mennonite - but that's about it.]

Stan said...

I'm not sure what you're getting at here [maybe I'm misunderstanding], but the modern-day evangelicals are just about the ONLY people in our society that the 17th-century Puritans would recognize.

No. 17th Puritans would never recognize evangelicals. Evangelicals, unlike the anabaptists, have been shaped by and are a response to the materialist views of 19th century idols Darwin, Marx and Freud.