[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Immigration See other Immigration Articles Title: S.744 Passes Senate—Pyrrhic Victory For Treason Lobby The Treason Lobby won a Pyrrhic victory on Thursday, passing the nation-breaking Amnesty/ Immigration Surge bill through the Senate. This widely-anticipated action led to predictable Main Stream Media ululations, maudlin sentimentality, and veiled racial threats against the historic American nation on the part of the governing class and its clients. But patriots should not be cowed: there is real cause for optimism. The fact that Amnesty has passed the Senate means little in itself—it did that years ago. As Jim Antle notes on Twitter, “There has been 60 to 70 Senate votes for some form of comprehensive immigration reform since 2005.” So the whole point of the current full court press for Amnesty/ Immigration Surge following Barack Obama's re-election has been to overwhelm debate and create a sense of inevitability. Thus Lindsey Graham said that he wanted to get half of the Republicans in the Senate to back him. [Lindsey Graham: Marco Rubio 'Committed To Immigration Reform', By Elise Foley, Huffington Post, June 4, 2013] But in fact, only 14 of the 45 Republicans voted for it—a much lower share than in 1986 and 2006. Similarly, Amnesty backers confidently predicted at least 70 votes—as Chuck Schumer put it, “We need 70.” [Getting to Maybe, by Ryan Lizza, The New Yorker, June 24, 2013] Even opponents of the bill conceded that was likely to happen. But it didn't happen—the final tally was 68-32. This tells us there is trouble from within the Establishment. Even the celebratory press conference after the bill's passage seemed feigned and pathetic. Lindsey Graham made sure to thank President Obama for all his help—now that the bill is safely passed, the Beltway Right no longer has to feign opposition. He also threw in a prissy non sequitur attack on former Congressman Tom Tancredo, claiming that Republicans were coming around to Graham's own self-described “tough but practical” position. However, one could not help but notice that two faces were missing from the celebratory gaggle—Marco Rubio and Jeff Flake. Both avoided the press conference, as if they were ashamed. It won't do them any good—Rubio's favorability ratings among Republicans have plummeted. [Poll: Rubio’s favorability down among GOP voters, up among independents, By Caroline May, Daily Caller, June 24, 2013] After all, Rubio's role throughout this entire process has been to convince (= fool) conservatives that the bill ensures border security, when it does the opposite. Unfortunately, many conservatives are so desperate for minority frontmen, even stupid ones, that putative opinion leaders like Sean Hannity have gone along with this. Nonetheless, even Rubio couldn't allow himself to be seen celebrating the passage of the Ted Kennedy Memorial Amnesty. As for Jeff Flake, when he was running for the U.S. Senate, he said of Amnesty: However, Flake knows his role as a corporate lobbyist and a kapo for the regime. His post-election flip-flop was predictable. What is astonishing is that every single one of the Republicans who voted for amnesty was on record as having opposed it, as chronicled by Erick Erickson of Redstate. Perhaps the most contemptible: Orrin Hatch, who when facing a tough primary challenge bragged about his opposition to the 1986 amnesty but nevertheless voted to pass amnesty today. He stated, Those who supported Amnesty back in 1986 can perhaps be forgiven for their ignorance. But no such excuses are open to politicians today. To support it today is to confess utter stupidity (Rubio), sociopathy (Graham and most other Republicans), or cold implacable hatred of the historic American nation (Schumer.) What's Hatch's excuse? Patriots should take some small comfort in that Senators who opposed the amnesty had to break their word in order to do it. The Republicans and Red State Democrats who voted for amnesty are simply liars—and they are on record as such. However, it should also be noted that not all the reversals were negative. The Kentucky delegation of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Rand Paul voted against the bill. Paul, after protracted fumbling, is now loudly condemning Amnesty. He claims that his “turning point” was “when the Gang of Eight Republicans began to say that legalization of the undocumented workers here would not be dependent on border security.“ As for McConnell, well, his reasons are far simpler—he's up for re-election. The votes of Paul and McConnell are important because, in their own way, they each represent a critical component of the conservative coalition. Paul represents the rising libertarians ideologues, who are slowly taking over the Republican Party and making a big show of confronting the Establishment. However, they run screaming from any issues that might open them to charges of being Politically Incorrect. The CATO Institute, Reason Magazine, the former “paleolibertarians” and most of the various libertarian student groups have been on the wrong side in the Amnesty battle, seemingly comfortable with the idea of America being transforming into a permanent statist “democratic” dictatorship by Third World voters. Nonetheless, despite Paul’s wobbling and the efforts of the libertarian movement, Paul ultimately staked his claim to be the “anti-amnesty” Republican candidate in 2016. As for McConnell, his vote shows that whatever the private opinions or financial interests of the Republican Establishment, they still fear angry conservative voters. McConnell has taken care to court his younger colleague from Kentucky to guard against his right flank, and his vote against Amnesty has be seen as an effort to save his own skin. As Mark Krikorian acidly notes, he voted no “weakly” to keep his job, but is still trying to keep the “moneybags” on board. Which brings us to GOP House Speaker John Boehner. After signaling initially that he would not try to block the bill, [John Boehner: ‘Open’ House on immigration, Politico, June 11, 2013] Boehner is now trying to sound tough. [If John Boehner Isn't Bluffing, He Probably Just Killed Immigration Reform, by Brett LoGiurato, Business Insider, June 27, 2013] If the Speaker holds to his position of not bringing the bill to a vote unless a majority of Republicans support it, the bill is in fact “dead on arrival” as Senator Rand Paul claims. However, as New York Magazine’s Jonathan Chait writes, there is a sneaky way the Democrats could push through the bill—a discharge petition. If seventeen Republicans break ranks, the Democrats and their collaborators can force a vote on the exact Senate bill, without any edits or additions.[ How Immigration Reform Can Pass, June 27, 2013] This would also allow Boehner and the Beltway Right to whip up anger at Democrats who refused to “work together” for a “practical” solution—thus protecting them from angry grass roots conservatives and still getting the big money from donors. As Chait gloats, though turncoat Republicans would face furious conservative retribution, they would be well compensated by big money donors. So “progressivism” has been reduced to this—gloating that politicians can get away with lying to their constituents because donors will pay them enough to make it worth their while. Will Boehner hold to his newest position? Will he reverse himself (again)? Or will he try a clandestine betrayal of conservatives? All depends on the level of outrage from the patriotic grassroots. At this time, the signs are good. Wavering Senators like Paul and McConnell backed down, the Amnesty Establishment failed to get 70 votes, and everyone involved (even Schumer) at least has to concede the rhetorical points of patriotic immigration reform on border security. Despite all the rhetoric about this being a “historic” day, immigration patriots have been in this situation before—and won. That said, Boehner desperately wants to sell out his constituents, and the Beltway Right actively hates its own base. But neither is strong enough to openly betray them. The power is still with the American grassroots, and they should take heart from what happened in the Senate. Politicians who are up for election are still scared, and the real battle is still about to begin. As for Boehner and the straw men of the Republican Establishment—let them hate—so long as they fear. James Kirkpatrick [Email him] travels around the United States looking for a waiter who can speak English. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 2.
#2. To: Big Meanie, *Illegal Immigration* (#0)
immigration patriots What's that supposed to mean? Amnesty with another meaningless promissory note on border security? That's not patriotic or immigration or reform. It's traitors aiding and abetting invaders again. We already went that ridiculous route of the deceivers years ago -- Reagan, 1986: 3 million imports and about 400% more border-defiant illegals using our electorate at our expense for their benefactors. Border security with no Amnesty. Those opposed are like foreign agents. Senate roll vote for immigration bill Published June 27, 2013 / Associated Press WASHINGTON – The 68-32 roll call Thursday by which the Senate passed a comprehensive immigration bill. A "yes" vote is a vote to pass the bill. Voting yes were 52 Democrats, 14 Republicans and 2 independents. Voting no were 0 Democrats and 32 Republicans. Democrats Yes Republicans Yes Republicans No Independents Yes Flashback 2009: Rubio says Reagan made a mistake with 1986 amnesty
#3. To: GreyLmist (#2)
No surprise to see Boxhead and Frankenstein vote "yes." But of course.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
[Register]
|
||