One of the founders of the modern day conservative movement, M. Stanton Evans, posted an article yesterday which shows more than anything, the potential of the Gang of 8 proposal to unify the GOP.
Yes I know the prevailing “wisdom” as laid down by political pundits of the mainstream media and especially those on the left, is that it would be political suicide for the Republican Party to stand in the way of efforts to “bring out of the shadows” the 11 million or more illegals.
I take strong exception to this phony "wisdom." Those who say NO to this proposal to legalize the illegals, will be the future leaders of the GOP.
In fact, we aren’t supposed to call them “illegals” any more except in quotes. Even the word “undocumented” as it turns out, is a turnoff to some of these sensitive souls.
Before I tell you why this “immigration reform” proposed by the Gang of 8 can be a great unifier for the GOP, two things that are not a surprise, should be disposed of quickly.
First, the usual suspects in the media are the ones giving most of this “advice” to the GOP as to what it ought to be doing on the immigration issue.
These liberals, some of whom pretend to be “fair and balanced” reporters, favor Barack Obama and his policies by over 4 to 1 and always oppose conservative policy. For anyone in the GOP to be influenced by their stampede for any and all efforts to legalize the illegal aliens is a joke and tells us a lot about those so easily swayed by our opposition.
Second, there are always a few “conservatives” who for various reasons, are not on the same wavelength as most other conservatives. Nothing new here. I do not know and do not care exactly why Ann Coulter, for example, had such a thing for the Governor of New Jersey last year. Nor do I care. The lady is a consistent and fierce advocate for our cause, I admire her, and that the fact that on a few issues she isn’t with us, bothers me not in the slightest. I never heard any reasoning to switch me to her Chris Christie fan club.
But Ann Coulter’s speech at CPAC, had it been delivered on Thursday instead of on Saturday afternoon when the Presidential straw poll was finished, would have reduced the vote for Senator Marco Rubio by at least 5 points, and perhaps all 5 would have gone to another Hispanic conservative a bit more consistent on the immigration issue, Senator Ted Cruz. Coulter made it very plain that any Republican who was not solid on the immigration issue was off her favorite list, and that included Chris Christie as well as conservative Senator Marco Rubio, one of the Senate “Gang of 8” who propose the “comprehensive” immigration reform to legalize the illegals, aka amnesty.
The one thing you can depend on is that when liberals see anyone claiming to be a Republican or even better, a conservative, who embraces one of their issues, they will always confer instant sainthood (or at least: lots of media coverage) on that person.
And so of course, Senator Rubio being part of the “Gang of 8” is scoring him lots of media attention and he has used that to say very clearly, he is NOT for “amnesty.” No, he just wants to legalize the illegals so they can come out of the shadows.
Shades of “immanentize the eschaton,” that funny phrase that conservative intellectuals (starting with Eric Voegelin and on through Wm. F. Buckley) used to joke about, poking fun at liberals whose proposals always sounded like they really thought their adoption would bring instant heaven to earth.
Legalize the illegals similarly, will solve all problems for all people for all time, and help the GOP become the majority party by appealing to Hispanic voters who have until now been voting over 70% for the Democratic Party.
And if you believe any of that silliness being peddled by the Senate’s Gang of 8 and hysterically hyped by liberals and some gullible conservatives, you might also be interested in a sale price for a certain oft mentioned bridge in Brooklyn.
Yesterday’s column by Stan Evans, a former chairman of the American Conservative Union, and the author of the finest short statement of conservative principles ever written (The Sharon Statement of Young Americans for Freedom from 1960), actually ought to “seal the deal” against the Gang of 8’s “legalize the illegals” proposal. And Stan doesn’t even mention Marco Rubio once, for which I especially salute him.
I mention Marco Rubio because the left once again, does as it always does in a big battle such as their push for immigration. They find whoever appears the most influential, well known conservative leader available, and they highlight and showcase him to urge others to defect to their banner.
I do not doubt that Senator Rubio is well intentioned on this fight, but he has not addressed any of the points made by Stan Evans on today’s column, nor can he.
The irrefutable fact is that if the GOP is so stupid as to allow the sort of “reform” proposed by the Gang of 8 to become law, it will in fact, make the GOP as much of an irrelevant, minority party that it appears to be in California today, and for the same reasons.
While I have enormous respect for Senator Marco Rubio, that odd picture of him standing in the midst of some of the most liberal Senators like the very partisan Chuck Schumer and the so often wrong Senator John McCain, is not one many of us will soon forget. It is nothing short of brilliant on their part to allow Rubio to be their main spokesman for their legalize the illegals effort which, they say, is not really amnesty.
Consider how the left wins in focusing as much attention as they can on Marco Rubio. First, if a mere 25% of conservatives are now virtually certain to never vote for him for President because of his (as the undersigned is inclined), then they have just cut down or even eliminated a formidable future threat.
At the same time, that defection of conservatives who still admire Rubio but are now looking elsewhere for a future GOP candidate for President, will boost the prospects of a candidate the left agrees with on two thirds of the issues the conservative movement stands for (national defense and traditional values).
It will do this not by any new influx of voters but because the candidate closest to the libertarian candidate in the CPAC straw poll will now be “off my list” as Ann Coulter put it, for many conservatives.
In this way the left wins by focusing as much attention as they can, on Marco Rubio’s support for their legalize the illegals (aka amnesty) proposal.
Second, and of far more immediate import, if only 25% of conservative minded Republicans are swayed by the nice sounding rhetoric coming from Marco Rubio on the Gang of 8 proposal, then they will win. The Democrats will gleefully proclaim that there is a big “split” within the GOP. The House of Representatives will cave. The illegals will be legalized and on the path to citizenship which until now, can only be earned the old fashioned way – legally.
But our counter attack doesn’t have to take on Marco Rubio, nor in any way question his credentials as a conservative. Even though Rubio is acting like Senator McCain (who promised to Arizona primary voters he would behave if only they would renominate him), he has a far more consistently conservative track record than McCain ever did, despite his defection on this issue.
For us to win, as Stan Evans does, we should can stick to the facts and rebut the liberals, as he does in yesterday’s column.
Stan Evans has laid out the reasons why conservatives are on the rise in America today, despite the loss by a “severe” conservative in the last election.
Obama not only ran a better campaign (which he had been building for nearly 10 years, unlike Romney) but once again he sounded pretty conservative, did not unveil his far-left colors, and was never called to account for what he really was at any point during the campaign. Some “victory” for the left.
When Republicans did the “amnesty” deal last time, their vote totals among Hispanics actually went down, not up. And McCain didn’t do so well with this group as he had hoped when he ran for President – they deserted him for Obama overwhelmingly. So much for this silly idea that we will outbid Democrats in offering government largess to a large voter bloc.
Worse. We went from 3 million illegals to 11 million illegals – a boost which we conservatives predicted would happen at the time of the debate led by GOP Senator McCain, who like Marco Rubio today, was showcased all over the media for his “principled” stand for “comprehensive” immigration reform.
Now, GOP candidate for President Mitt Romney, who ran in the primaries to the right of his rivals on immigration (though rarely ever mentioning the issue once he had the nomination), actually did better against Barack Obama, than did candidate John McCain, the hero of the amnesty now forces four years earlier.
The media “spin” on all of this is to ignore the facts – and make it sound like 70% of Hispanics voting against the GOP is the real story. It isn’t.
The real deal is that there are 11 million immigrants AND THEIR VOTING FAMILIES who as we predicted before AND PREDICT AGAIN NOW, will never, ever change their allegiance to the Democrats who promise to give them so much.
The only change we’ll see if we listen to the “Gang of 8” is that once we legalize the illegals we will then (a) make it certain that sooner or later they will be voting for Democrats and (b) we will have a lot more than 11 million newcomers in the years ahead thanks to the new amnesty. In other words, permanent minority status in America for the GOP, as Stan Evans explains.
On the other hand, the “do not legalize illegals” (aka no amnesty) forces in the GOP can use this issue to separate the men from the boys (sorry Marco) and find the future leaders who can best make legal immigrants feel welcome while articulating our conservative principles consistently and persuasively.
There will be “bumps in the road” in using this issue to unify the GOP during the next several years. But the fact is, those who stand against the “legalize the illegals” forces will become the future leaders of the GOP. Those who are not there as leaders in this battle now, will not be considered our leaders in the future.