Site Meter
Share

You do realize that Ronald Reagan would be very much opposed to the anti-immigration sentiment in Arizona.  He would be the first person, also, to condemn the anti-immigration organizations.

Nature abhors a vacuum.  Since the death of William F. Buckley, the conservative world has been lacking a leader.  Charles Krauthammer appears to be his logical successor and the voice of conservative reason and intellect.  Perhaps the very real problem is that Krauthammer appears to be one of the few intellectual voices of reason on the right.

If the right would listen to him when it comes to immigration reform, the GOP would grow into the majority party.  Cast aside his compassionate, logical, and humanly decent recommendations and the GOP is doomed to be a minority party.  When this happens, the US as we know it will die a miserable and pathetic death as the growing Hispanic majority will identify with the Democrats.

The real problem is with the exception of Michael Medved, few on the radio or television share Krauthammer’s intellectual honesty.  If their voice is not heeded, the GOP is dead.  Medved pointed to a column in the Politico by Alfonso Aguilar:

“…To those fiercely critical of undocumented immigrants, Reagan once quipped “it makes one wonder about the illegal alien fuss. Are great numbers of our unemployed really victims of the illegal alien invasion, or are those illegal tourists actually doing work our own people won’t do? One thing is certain in this hungry world: No regulation or law should be allowed if it results in crops rotting in the fields for lack of harvesters.”…Thirty years have elapsed since the Reagan revolution began, but many Republicans seem to have forgotten Reagan’s views. Arizona Republicans’ passage last week of a law that criminalizes undocumented immigrants and allows for the profiling of Latinos is the most recent example of this.

The fact is that, beginning in 2006, a small but loud group of GOP members of Congress, strongly supported by an anti-population-growth restrictionist lobby (when did these folks become conservative?), began a campaign to oppose any effort to reform our immigration system.

Sadly, many also started using incendiary anti-immigrant rhetoric — which offended most Latino voters.

This contributed significantly to the Republican loss of the House and Senate in 2006. It also contributed to Sen. John McCain, long an unquestioned supporter of immigration reform and a friend of the Latino community, receiving only 31 percent of the Latino vote in the 2008 presidential election. This was 13 percent less than George W. Bush’s Latino support four years earlier….Even more frustrating was that Republican leaders, most of whom actually support immigration, remained silent — apparently afraid of the anti-immigration advocacy groups.

Needless to say, the appearance of an anti-immigrant “know nothing” faction in the GOP is counterproductive ….”

In Kentucky, the latest polling puts Rand Paul ahead of Trey Grayson in the primary, but Grayson would defeat the Democrat candidates handily.  Paul would barely squeek by if he were to win at all.  Rand Paul is a sure fire way for the GOP to lose a Republican held Senate seat.  The Pink Flamingo WOULD NOT vote for Rand Paul.  I would not vote for the Dem, but I sure WOULD NOT vote for Rand Paul.  Only 19% of people in KY see themselves as “Tea Party”.  Let’s just hope Kentucky goes the way of Indiana and the Tea Party candidate gets squashed.

From Wednesday’s WSJ’s Political Diary:

“…”More down to earth is whether Republicans find some way to seize defeat from the jaws of victory . . . [such as] if they are perceived as defending Wall Street or if they trigger an uprising with Hispanic voters as a response to Arizona’s new immigration law. I don’t see any of those things moving numbers yet, and am focusing more on the possibility of the new rising populism and hard-edged conservatism. This, driven in part by the Tea Party movement, could help nominate Republicans who are simply too far from the general election mainstream to capitalize on what should be a great year for the GOP, or it could fuel independent or third-party conservative candidates who would siphon support out of the Republican column in November” — political analyst Charlie Cook, writing at National Journal.com on scenarios that could upset his forecast of big Republican gains in November….”

What if Charlie Crist wins the Senate election in Florida and caucuses with the Dems?  Will the extreme right admit that perhaps if they had treated him a little differently we would not have lost a Senate seat?  Just asking.  One of the problems is the fact that, while Marco Rubio is a great person, and would be my choice, he is also a Tea Party Candidate.  If Tuesday’s primaries were any indication, it is possible Tea Party Candidates are going to be slaughtered by the NORMAL Republicans in the primaries.  What will the Tea Partiers do when WE take back control of our party?

“…Tea party candidates also failed to show much muscle in Republican primaries Tuesday — even against the low turnout backdrop that should have played to their advantage. It’s a trend that first surfaced in Texas and Illinois primaries earlier this year, when the movement created energy though not enough of it to oust incumbents . In the March 2 Texas primary, for example, Debra Medina, the GOP gubernatorial contender linked most closely with the tea party, garnered 19 percent of the vote — not bad, but not enough to win, or throw the governor’s race into a runoff.In Ohio, tea party activists suffered other notable defeats in the races for state auditor general and state attorney general. In both cases, tea party support wasn’t enough to carry their preferred candidates over the finish line…”

Losing Hispanic support

“…Adam Bustos, a third-generation Mexican-American, has voted Republican since Ronald Reagan ran for president. But he has been reconsidering his party affiliation since Arizona State Gov. Jan Brewer signed the nation’s toughest immigration law last month.  “I’ve been thinking I might leave the party,” said Mr. Bustos, a 58-year-old Arizona native. “A lot of my Latino Republican friends have been talking about it after this law.”…”

Has AZ Governor Jan Brewer singlehandedly torpedoed the GOP’s chances in November so she can win a primary?

“...Texan Massey Villarreal, the former chairman of the Republican National Hispanic Assembly, , said, “It’s insulting to have Republican leaders across the country applauding this racist law. I’m sure this is going to hurt the Republican Party.”

That’s a reasonable prediction. Indeed, the electoral consequences in the near-future may prove to be significant — Latino voters are the fastest growing demographic group in the country, and as recently as 2004, the Bush/Cheney ticket’s success suggested Republicans were making gains with this constituency.

Those GOP gains are now fading very quickly, giving Democrats a possible boost, particularly in states like Arizona, New Mexico, California, Texas, and Nevada….”

“…While the GOP is on track to score big victories in 2010, it’s in grave danger of committing long-term suicide unless it’s rescued from right-wing madness. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., is not going to be the party’s savior — that has to be its 2012 presidential nominee — but the more the party follows his advice and example, the better off it will be….”

Believe it or not, The Pink Flaming did NOT write the above.  Mort Kondracke did.  Since Kondracke is a liberal, naturally what he has to say is not accepted by the far right – you know the ones.  They think Lindsey Graham is evil and must be destroyed.

“...However, Graham said the GOP will never be a national party until it changes course on immigration and improves its relationship with young people, who voted overwhelmingly for Barack Obama. “That’s why I’m involved in the climate and energy debate. I think Republicans need to be proudly for clean air. And, I think it’s important that Republicans repair the damage with Hispanics done in the 2007 immigration debate.”

Graham has been working across party lines on climate change legislation with Sens. John Kerry, D-Mass., and Joe Lieberman, ID-Conn., and with Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., on comprehensive immigration reform.

Both causes are in political limbo at the moment — victims of GOP opposition and Democratic gamesmanship — but Graham, at least, comes out of the effort a model problem-solver.

He contends that his approval ratings in South Carolina are holding up — 64 percent among repeat Republican voters — but he’s been censured by local GOP committees and subjected to savage personal attacks by anti-immigration nativists.

However, his political logic is one the GOP desperately needs to adopt to secure its future.

“If we just rail on illegal immigration, demagogue it and don’t have a solution that’s realistic, then we will become less and less relevant. The growth potential in America lies with demographic changes and independents. Independents are the fastest-growing group in terms of political identification.

“If you want to purify the party, then the cost is the ability to grow because purification is not a game of addition. It’s a game of subtraction. Coalition building is a game of addition.”…The GOP could square this circle by nominating an updated version of Ronald Reagan, who held the GOP base while winning over independents. The new savior will have to appeal to minorities, too.

In the meantime, the party needs to listen more to Lindsey Graham and less to Rush Limbaugh…”

The GOP is in danger of being destroyed by the idiots of the far right.

From Pubic Policy Polling:

“...After Democrats dominated the 2008 election in Nevada and Colorado, Senators Harry Reid and Michael Bennet have both been struggling in the polls so far this cycle. Part of the reason for their trouble has been an under performance with Hispanic voters. While Barack Obama won by 54 points with them in Nevada, Reid had only a 27 point advantage over Sue Lowden with them on our most recent poll. It’s a similar story in Colorado. Obama had a 23 point advantage with them in 2008, but Bennet’s lead over Jane Norton was just 47-35 when we polled the state in March.

Jan Brewer may well have handed Reid and Bennet the issue that will get Hispanics back to voting Democratic at the same levels they did in 2008. We’ve already seen a huge increase in Terry Goddard’s support among Hispanic voters since the new Arizona immigration law was passed, and it’s certainly something that could get Hispanics throughout the region rethinking their willingness to vote for Republicans this year….”

Let’s face it, the far right needs to be listening more to Michael Medved and less to Rush, Beck, Hannity, and Ingraham.

“…At FrumForum, Tim Mak has an interview with Michael Medved that hails the prolific commentator as “the bravest man on radio.”  It’s hard to disagree—Medved is one of the fiercest, most unapologetic advocates of conservatism around, and his show features dissenting callers more than most, regularly devoting entire “Disagreement Days” to letting disgruntled callers take potshots at him on whatever they like.

However, that’s not what Medved’s receiving a hero’s welcome for.  No, in Mak’s eyes, Medved’s courage comes from taking on—you guessed it—other conservatives.  He says a right-wing version of political correctness is setting in, he accuses Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck of saying “stuff that almost everyone knows not to be true, but nonetheless proves provocative and entertaining,” warns that the Republican Party, while not racist, is pursuing a losing strategy of “chasing more white votes”; and he believes the Tea Party needs to learn the lessons of the 1970s anti-war movement—“demonstrations accomplish nothing”:…”

And – the comments below the article prove case in point.  The extreme right dislikes Medved because he is rational.  Like Lindsey, he is intellectually honest, knows how to be have like an adult.  Unfortunately, of all the people on the radio who are conservative, Medved is probably the only grown-up in the room.

Share

3 Comments

  • Sanity102 says:

    You would have thought losing 2 major elections (Congress in 2006 and the White House in 2008) would have taught the talk show mafia that they will never have the influence they crave unless they can actually produce the numbers–and that all this anti-Hispanic talk does exactly the opposite as they preach to the choir.

  • SJ Reidhead says:

    Tell me about it!

    SJR

  • ReaganTMan says:

    This is a very thought provoking article even if I disagree with a lot of it. I don’t agree that the right wing is destroying the party. I do agree that the right wing can sometimes throw a hissy fit if it doesn’t get its way. I’m a Reagan conservative Republican. I believe that we have to grow our numbers and make the tent bigger because we need to defeat the Democrats who have large numbers. BUT, I don’t believe we need to moderate as a party. Our conservative issues and values, including immigration, are core convictions. They cannot be changed. They can, however, be included in the consensus building process.

    Being pragmatic means bargaining from a position of ideological strength. Being a purist is having that ideological strength. The balancing act comes when you have to actually govern and create consensus. We don’t need to moderate. Moderation will happen naturally in the legislative process. We just need to know where to draw the line on an issue. How flexible can we be without watering our philosophy down but how rigid can we be without being unreasonable?

    The issue is not our ideology. It’s about leadership. When it’s our turn to govern, we can’t be all utopian and idealistic like the left are about their ideology. We need to balance purism and pragmatism – a tough thing to do but it must be done. We need to stand for principles we won’t change but not be so rigid that we split our vote like we’re doing in California with Fiorina and DeVore.

    Sometimes the better man or woman is not always our man or woman, but at least it’s not their man or woman. We can work with Carly Fiorina in the Senate. We won’t be able to work with Tom Campbell. Is Carly Fiorina a RINO? No. Is she a hard right wing purist? No. But she is a conservative by most standards, even if she’s not perfect. Olympia Snowe is RINO. She makes Fiorina look like Ronald Reagan in comparison. Is DeVore the better conservative? Probably. Can he win in California? Probably not.

    Just because I ideologically believe that social security should be privatized, government regulations (particularly bureaucracies that enforce them) be done away with (don’t mistake that for oversight or fraud laws – I still want those) and Iran blown into a thousand pieces doesn’t mean that I’m going to get all hissy over a candidate who doesn’t see it the exact same way.

    I’d rather have a common sense conservative who can govern and get things done by pragmatic consensus yet without compromising our core values at the same time than an ideologue who won’t budge on anything until the government collapses under its own inability to act.

    While it may start with waving a Gadsden flag in a field, it has to end with gaining the power to sign one’s name on bills that will shrink the size of government, cut taxes and spending, repeal healthcare reform, strengthen our military and do away with bureaucratic nonsense. We need to be the adults. We need to act like adults now so that we can govern like adults when called upon.

    Until we do that, the “children” we currently have running our country will continue running it into the ground.

1 Trackback or Pingback


WordPress SEO fine-tune by Meta SEO Pack from Poradnik Webmastera