November 16, 2012

Strange new respect for Republican Super PAC

As we all know from reading the national press, Republican Super PACs are the worst things in the whole world. And, immigration amnesty is the best. So, what do you get when a lavishly funded new Republican Super PAC is formed to push amnesty?

Strange new respect.

From the Washington Post:
New super PAC hopes to give cover to pro-immigration Republicans 
By Peter Wallsten, Friday, November 16, 9:51 AM 
Prominent Republicans are launching a new super PAC they hope will help begin repairing the political damage left by years of anti-illegal immigrant rhetoric that has dominated GOP primaries and alienated crucial Hispanic voters. 
The organization, to be called Republicans for Immigration Reform, aims to undermine what organizers call the “extremists” who have pushed party nominees to stake out far-right positions such as opposing a pathway to legalization for millions of illegal workers, students and children. 
Even before it raises money and establishes target races for 2014, organizers told The Washington Post, the group will help smooth the way for wavering Republican lawmakers to vote next year for an immigration overhaul, which suddenly gained momentum last week after GOP leaders watched President Obama’s dominance among Hispanic voters help carry him to an Electoral College landslide. 
Spearheading the group is Carlos Gutierrez, the Cuban American former Commerce secretary under President George W. Bush. He is joined by Washington lawyer Charlie Spies, co-founder of the pro-Mitt Romney super PAC Restore Our Future, which, illustrating the very trend that the new PAC aims to thwart, aired some tough ads during this year’s primaries accusing Romney’s rivals of supporting “amnesty” and being “too liberal on immigration.” 
“There’s currently only energy on the anti-immigration reform side, and we want to be able to provide some cover for Republicans that vote in support of an immigration reform approach,” Spies said. 
Spies and Gutierrez declined to cite a fundraising goal, but both enjoy close ties to corporate America, which generally favors looser immigration laws. A super PAC can accept unlimited donations. Spies’s pro-Romney group raised $142 million for the 2012 campaign, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. 
“This is not small ball,” Gutierrez said. “We’re serious, and we are going to push the debates on immigration reform to a place where I believe the Republican Party should be in the 21st century.” 
Gutierrez, who was a top Romney adviser, gained attention over the weekend when he told Univision anchor Jorge Ramos that the GOP nominee lost to Obama because the party “frightened the American people” during its primaries. 
He told The Post that he regretted some of Romney’s remarks on immigration during the campaign. Romney used the issue to fend of challenges from Texas Gov. Rick Perry and former House speaker Newt Gingrich, accusing both men of being soft on illegal immigration. At one point, Romney endorsed a policy of “self-deportation” for immigrants in the country illegally, adopting the language of some of the country’s most ardent critics of illegal immigration. 
“Mitt Romney’s comments were a symptom of the disease of the Republican Party, and the extreme far-right wing that is way out of the mainstream of Americans’ views is the cause,” Gutierrez said. “Governor Romney was forced to say things that got him into a lot of trouble. And the irony of it is that had he not said those things, he wouldn’t have been the nominee.” 
The result was Romney winning just 27 percent of Hispanics — fewer than John McCain won in 2008 and far fewer than Bush’s 40percent support level for his 2004 reelection. 
Bush and his senior strategist Karl Rove tried to push their party to the left on immigration, arguing that Hispanics were a fast-growing voter segment in key swing states. But conservatives rebelled when Bush tried in his second term to create a path to citizenship, and GOP orthodoxy ever since has required candidates to take a hard line against such policies. 
Spies said the new PAC will most likely favor whatever immigration plans are backed by House Speaker John A. Boehner and Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), a Cuban American and possible 2016 presidential candidate who is expected to be a central GOP player on the issue, though both lawmakers have staked out conservative stances in the past. 

34 comments:

Anonymous said...

conservatives rebelled when Bush tried in his second term to create a path to citizenship, and GOP orthodoxy ever since has required candidates to take a hard line against such policies


So what explains the John McCain nomination? Oh, hell, it's the New York Times ... it's not like anybody expects them to make any sense.

keypusher said...

The organization, to be called Republicans for Immigration Reform, aims to undermine what organizers call the “extremists” who have pushed party nominees to stake out far-right positions such as opposing a pathway to legalization for millions of illegal workers, students and children.

Good to know that opposing amnesty is now a far-right (i.e. illegitimate) position.

Beefy Levinson said...

Rush Limbaugh had a good line about stuff like this: when liberals get blown out like in 2010, there are never calls for them to rethink or soften their positions. On the other hand, everyone knows that nonliberals are irrational and extreme, so the burden is always on them to let go of their hatred.

Anonymous said...

America... the population that used to be a people.

Anonymous said...

How is it that Ann Coulter is the only Republican who is making any sense on this issue?

Anonymous said...

The Stupid Party indeed.

They will get their Amnesty alright, and it will be the end of both the GOP and the Nation.

I rather doubt that this Super PAC members are really Republicans at all.

One thing is for sure. The GOP will abandon conservatives. It was just a hustle anyway--they just used them.

Reagan was an exception.

The GOP should be ashamed of itself, but then so should the Nation for voting for the Democrats.

Prophet said...

Amnesty is coming, one way or another.

Either Obama will succeed on the legislative front or he will continue to provide amnesty through executive order.

Of course, for the Dems it is always preferable to do immigration reform in a bipartisan fashion since it provides them cover come re-election time.

Linna said...

As Sailer pointed out in the Vdare article, GOP lost especially because it lost the working class white voters in the Mid West and North.

So, why don't NY TIMES and others make much of this issue and recommend GOP to appeal to such voters? Because it means GOP-as-white-party reaching out to white voters in the name of white solidarity, and WE JUST CAN'T HAVE THAT. Not when the Jewish mode of white dispossession is 'divide and rule'.

So, NY TIMES and the rest wants to see GOP further divided from white voters in midwest and North and instead pander to Hispanics WHO WILL NEVER COME OVER TO THE GOP.

Anyway, politics isn't just about identifying your friends(real or otherwise) but your enemies. The Dems have a potent 'evil enemy' in the ANGRY OLD PRIVILEGED WHITE STRAIGHT MALE. Such enemy trope emotionally unites Jews, gays, blacks, feminists, young, Hispanics, and etc. Jews who control the DEMOCRATIC PARTY vilify this enemy and don't reach out to it.
GOP, in contrast, is NOT allowed to have enemies. It must be nice and be in 'model majority' mode.
During the Cold War, it had the 'big enemy' in Russkies, but GOP is not allowed to have domestic enemies since it would be 'racist', 'sexist', 'antisemitic', etc.
So, GOP cannot target or fight its enemies but 'reach out' and pander to them.

While American conservatives should look for new friends, it must identify and target its main enemies. Jews know who their enemies are. Even if white conservatives wanna be friends with Jews, Jews insist on white cons being their enemies. Just look at NY TIMES coverage of 'evil white conservative privilege'--though Jews are the most privileged.

In THE GODFATHER, Corleones thought their main enemy was Tataglia, but it turns out to have been Barzini. So, they plot against Barzini. All this talk about Hispanics is misleading because the real Barzini is Jewish power. It is the power behind Hispanic power. Gay power too wouldn't be much without Jewish support.

In GODFATHER II, Hyman Roth pretends to be friends with Michael. Though Roth knows Cuba is about to go down and fall to communists, he gives 'friendly' advice to Michael to invest million into Cuba, i.e., bet big bucks on a losing horse). Michael senses this. It's like Jews--libs and neocons--advising GOP to bet on the Hispanic Horse, knowing full well that it can never work for the GOP. Michael identifies the real enemy and the traitor in the family. He fights back.

This is what cons must do. But we have mediocrities, not someone as savvy and ruthless as Michael. We keep on getting suckered. One advantage of taking this bogus advice is GOP will lose even bigger in 2016. If it goes for amnesty, it will not only fail to win browns but lose white patriots. But with GOP finally dead, whites can dispense with party politics and focus on racial politics in a one-party state.

You can learn a lot from movies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vH32nqn-Olo

If Vito were a white conservative: 'Hispanics are a pimp. It was Jews all along.'

Anonymous said...

'“Mitt Romney’s comments were a symptom of the disease of the Republican Party, and the extreme far-right wing that is way out of the mainstream of Americans’ views is the cause,” Gutierrez said.'

I see, so now legitimate opinions are a disease and political discourse is becoming dangerous. It's about 10 years to what is happening in the UK where whites start going on trial for blog posts complaining about how diversity negatively impacts them. Latinos always sound like hateful, linguistically inept bullies -- wait until they have real power to kill off free speech and turbocharge affirmative action.

Hunsdon said...

We are all Bertolt Brecht now.

Anonymous said...

Amnesty begets amnesty, and the amnesty amnesty begets, begets more amnesty.

Look, the GOP is not your friend -- they are a well funded interest group conning whites out of their quality of life, their liberty, their jobs, and ultimately their country. If the GOP helps to pass this amnesty, the Tea Party needs to break off and take 30% of Republican voters with them.

Fuck the quisling GOP. Let them never win another goddam national election again. They lost the last election because they refused to use immigration policy and affirmative action as a cudgel to beat Obama.

They suck, suck, suck!

Anonymous said...

How come no one ever brings up how the last amnesty turned hispanics into a Republican majority?

Anonymous said...

Reagan legalized them in the first placed ,that's one area where he was no exception.

Carol said...

"So what explains the John McCain nomination?"

Or that of either Bush? Or Reagan, for that matter?

Eric said...

Either Obama will succeed on the legislative front or he will continue to provide amnesty through executive order.

Or the courts. The judicial branch has pretty much detached itself from any historical or textual moorings. Look at yesterday's sixth circuit ruling on MI's affirmative action ban. It reads like an Onion article.

Whiskey said...

I told you Steve. I predicted this. Obama wins, Republicans panic. They don't want to ... work for a living. So they'll do whatever they can to protect their officeholding. That's what Obama's victory means.

It means Open Borders, prepare to be a third class citizen, officially. You'll probably have to wear a White triangle like me and other White guys who are not gay, just to be easily identified.

Luke Lea said...

Will enforcement we can believe in be part of the package? That's all I want to know.

Corn said...

The Republicans rose from the ashes of the Whigs. Time to kill off the Republicans and let a new conservative party arise from the pyre.

Luke Lea said...

How about reducing legal immigration one-for-one for until all the amnestied are taken care of. That wouldn't mean reducing legal immigration to zero necessarily but it would mean cutting it back very substantially for a number of years, at the end of which Congress and the voters could decide whether they want to return to high immigration again.

Chicago said...

The goal is to take this country down to a third world level for most of it's residents. The small class of well-off people, heavily protected by robo-cop type mercenaries, will have their pick of low paid but desperate workers. Servants who'll keep their eyes down to the ground. A nation of interchangeable and disposable workers whose only value is in their current productivity for someone else. Laws will be whatever they say it is. Sounds like just another science fiction story but things come true often enough if one just gives it some time. The US will become one huge, heavily policed, electronic plantation and most people just peons vying to sell themselves for what they can get.

Anonymous said...

I think you've discovered some kind of political L'Hôpital's Rule!

haddox said...

Fleming is right and has been so for a long time (I'm finally cynical enough to admit it):
http://fleming.dailymail.co.uk/2012/11/back-to-the-drawing-board.html

Best description of the GOP base I've heard:
"For an analogy try to imagine soldiers in the French Foreign Legion. Risking their lives every day, living in squalor, getting beaten regularly by the officers, they swear they will not reenlist. Then when the day comes, their commander tells them they will soon be getting a swimming pool and a bordello staffed with real Playboy bunnies. Reassured, they sign on for another four years, and another and another and another."

Anonymous said...

Illegal immigration was almost never mentioned during the campaign (except for one question during the town hall debate). Neither candidate made it much of an issue, and a lot of voters probably did not know where either candidate stood on the issue.

However, now that the election is over, the media seems to have discovered that this was the primary reason for Romney's loss. It is interesting that they barely mentioned the issue before election day.

Mr. Anon said...

"Anonymous said...

One thing is for sure. The GOP will abandon conservatives. It was just a hustle anyway--they just used them.

Reagan was an exception."

Reagan was a "conservative" in the modern American sense - i.e. he was a Wilsonian liberal, not a reactionary. He had some good instincts, but ultimately he, or - more likely - his people, used conservatives just as much as the GOP does today.

I would like to believe that Ron was the real McCoy, but his record on amnesty tends to indicate otherwise.

Mr. Anon said...

"haddox said...

Best description of the GOP base I've heard:

""For an analogy try to imagine soldiers in the French Foreign Legion.""

Not bad. But the legionaires were at least promised citizenship for their service - and for those who lived, they got it. All we get is disenfranchisement.

Anonymous said...

From the "article":

far-right positions such as opposing a pathway to legalization for millions of illegal workers, students and children

Enforcing the law is a far-right position?

Gutierrez... gained attention over the weekend when he told Univision (anti-American hate-monger) Jorge Ramos that the GOP nominee lost to Obama because the party “frightened the American people” during its primaries

Yeah, I remember the waves of shock and horror terrorising the country at the time...

the disease of the Republican Party... the extreme far-right wing that is way out of the mainstream of Americans’ views

Immigration enforcement is is the mainstream American viewpoint.

This is journalism? They don't even try to hide their blatant biases anymore. Pure propaganda.

Anonymous said...

Mexicans msy not grow like wildflower by 2020 since their starting to have less babies and are finally getting a little older.

Evil Sandmich said...

I went to a Romney rally which was pretty sharp, except for one moment when they were playing one of their hype videos and Marco Rubio came on the screen to talk up Romney and an awkward silence fell over the crowd, as if Romney had Bill Clinton on tape talking him up or something.

jody said...

i like the part where common sense, and things which have been no brainer law for over 200 years, is now "far right extremism".

Anonymous said...

Linna wrote:

NY TIMES and the rest wants to see GOP further divided from white voters in midwest and North and instead pander to Hispanic

Karl Rove has advocated the same strategy. Silly me, I didn't realize that he is Jewish.

Linna said...

And look at Santorum, Bachmann, Romney, and Gingrich just suck up to Israel and Zionism--and despite the fact that most Jews detest American conservatism.

Who really owns the GOP? Who really owns the MSM? Which group must all politicians suck up to in order to win elections? If you haven't figured that out yet, you are one big dummy.

Anonymous said...

"The goal is to take this country down to a third world level for most of it's residents. The small class of well-off people, heavily protected by robo-cop type mercenaries, will have their pick of low paid but desperate workers. Servants who'll keep their eyes down to the ground. A nation of interchangeable and disposable workers whose only value is in their current productivity for someone else. Laws will be whatever they say it is. Sounds like just another science fiction story but things come true often enough if one just gives it some time. The US will become one huge, heavily policed, electronic plantation and most people just peons vying to sell themselves for what they can get."

That's true. But I think it's already been like that. It's just going to get worse.

Anonymous said...

"Who really owns the GOP? Who really owns the MSM? Which group must all politicians suck up to in order to win elections? If you haven't figured that out yet, you are one big dummy."

Take a look at this clip.

http://www.castefootball.us/forums/threads/15153-quot-English-quot-players-crying-racism-again?p=263064#post263064

ATBOTL said...

"The Dems have a potent 'evil enemy' in the ANGRY OLD PRIVILEGED WHITE STRAIGHT MALE. Such enemy trope emotionally unites Jews, gays, blacks, feminists, young, Hispanics, and etc. Jews who control the DEMOCRATIC PARTY vilify this enemy and don't reach out to it."

I would say that Jews do reach out to white conservative males, in the form of neoconservatism, and have successfully conned most of these fools into supporting ethnonationalism in Israel and ethnomasochism in the West.

It's rather amazing how the portion of the American population that has suffered the most from Jewish attacks is the portion that most supports Jewish nationalism.

I think a lot of white men under the neocon spell are participating in vicarious ethnocentrism.