Thread: Pat Buchanan: Immigration's killing the GOP

INVASION USA
Pat Buchanan: Party could survive with a 'Put-Americans-First' border closing --WND




Immigration's killing the GOP

Posted: March 23, 2010
1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

"It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known."

From "A Tale of Two Cities," Sydney Carton's words, as he rode the tumbrel to the guillotine, came to mind on reading the latest statistics on what open borders has done to a Republican Party that altruistically embraced it.

The Center for Immigration Studies reports that, since 1980, some 25.2 million immigrants have entered legally and been granted permanent status with "green cards" to work and become citizens.

"Immigration, Political Realignment and the Demise of Republican Political Prospects" is the title of the CIS report, which understates the crisis. Bottom line: The more immigrants in an electoral district, the more grim the GOP prospects. Consider a few of the largest counties in the nation.

Between 1980 and 2008, Los Angeles, No. 1, grew by 2.5 million to 10 million people. The immigrant share went from 22 percent to 41 percent. Over those decades, the GOP share of the presidential vote fell from 52 percent in Ronald Reagan's rout of Jimmy Carter to 29 percent for John McCain.

Orange County, the bastion of Barry Goldwater conservatism, saw its population rise from 1.9 million in 1980 to 3.2 million in 2008, with the immigrant share rising from 13 percent to 34 percent. Reagan swept Orange County with 68 percent. McCain got 50 percent.

Will the Democrats preside over free and fair elections this fall? Don't bet on it! Read Whistleblower magazine's "Stealing the Next Election"

Consider Cook County, the nation's second largest. While Cook grew by 350,000 from 1980 to 2008, the character of Chicago changed, with the immigrant share of the population rising from 12 percent to 25 percent. In those 28 years, the GOP share of the presidential vote fell from 40 percent to 23 percent.

In Kings County (Brooklyn), the immigrant share of the population rose from 24 percent to 44 percent and the Republican share of the presidential vote plummeted from 38 percent to 20 percent.

Richard Nixon and Reagan carried California seven times on presidential tickets. Both carried New York and Illinois in their greatest victories. Yet the GOP has not won one of those three pivotal states even once in the last five elections.

If California, New York and Illinois are moving out of reach for GOP presidential candidates and the party is being annihilated in New York City, Los Angeles and Chicago, our three largest cities, what of red states Arizona, Texas and Florida?

They are going the same way.

Harris County, Texas, the nation's third-largest, grew by 1.4 million since 1980. Its immigrant population tripled as a share of total population to 25 percent. Where Reagan carried Harris with 58 percent, McCain lost it with 49 percent.

Dallas County added a million people to hit 2.5 million by 2008, as its immigrant population surged from 5 percent to 27 percent. Where Reagan won 59 percent of Dallas County, McCain got only 42 percent.

Phoenix is sited in the fourth-most-populous county, Maricopa. Its population in 30 years has gone from 1.5 million to 3.8 million. Where 5.5 percent of Maricopa was immigrant in 1980, the percentage is now above 15 percent. And where Reagan carried Maricopa with 65 percent, McCain, an Arizonan, carried Maricopa with only 54 percent.

In Dade (Miami), the immigrant share of the population has gone in 30 years from 36 percent to 58 percent and the GOP share of the vote has fallen from 60 percent to 42 percent. In Broward (Ft. Lauderdale), legal immigrants tripled as a share of the population, while the GOP presidential vote fell from 56 percent to 32 percent.

The correlation seems absolute. The more immigrants who come in and become citizens, the more Democratic the country becomes.

Why? Almost all immigrants, legal and illegal, are poorer and less skilled than Americans, and depend far more upon government.

According to CIS, of recent immigrants who became citizens by 2008, by 55-30 they identified as Democrats. Among immigrants who have not yet become citizens, 70 percent identify as Democrats, 15 percent as Republicans. The sooner Democrats get them naturalized, registered and voting, the sooner the bell tolls for the Grand Old Party.

Is the GOP problem its hard line on illegal immigration?

This is a myth. According to a Zogby survey done for CIS, 56 percent of Hispanics and 68 percent of African-Americans say legal immigration is too high. Only 7 percent of Hispanics and 4 percent of African-Americans say it's too low. On no issue is the gulf between elites and the people so wide and deep.

What would be a GOP policy that advanced both the national and party interest?

First, an offensive against the administration for laxity in enforcing our immigration laws against businesses that hire illegals. Each time a business is forced to let illegal workers go, the jobs go to some of our 25 million unemployed and underemployed.

Second, a Put-Americans-First moratorium on legal immigration until U.S. unemployment falls below 6 percent.

And what is Republican Lindsay Graham up to? Collaborating with Sen. Chuck Schumer on a path to citizenship for illegal aliens.

The Sydney Carton Party at work.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=130893

The correlation seems absolute. The more immigrants who come in and become citizens, the more Democratic the country becomes.

Tell us something we don't already know, Pat. Many of us have seen this coming for years. Excessive immigration is bringing what was once a great country to its knees. We're being destroyed from within by folks who don't have solid roots in this country and by politicians that only have their self interest at heart.

Originally Posted by MW

The correlation seems absolute. The more immigrants who come in and become citizens, the more Democratic the country becomes.

Tell us something we don't already know, Pat. Many of us have seen this coming for years. Excessive immigration is bringing what was once a great country to its knees. We're being destroyed from within by folks who don't have solid roots in this country and by politicians that only have their self interest at heart.

Exactly. Right On, MW, and well said.

yup. now, a bk country, borrows trillions, to provide free Health & Welfare for all (inc. legal and illegal aliens,) who will in turn vote to keep themselves receiving bennies, and so forth and so on. how soon till the tipping point where there's more voters for free bennies (Obama money?) than there are voters against perpetual and unlimited bennies? i would put forth that we're pretty much there now.

one more amnesty; and the bennies will flow in perpetuity. i'm just asking a question. i'm not trying to scare anybody.(well, maybe a little.)

you spose they'd be borrowing and commiting to borrow so much if there were really ANY kind of plans to pay it back? SOMEHOW I DON'T THINK SO.

the real question is how the money lenders (China) are going to respond when they figure this out; unless maybe they already have.

afp

sorry my friend, i really tried

Bennies in perpetuity only goes until the river dries up.

That's why socialism works until you run out of other people's money.

The silver lining is that Moody's is about to downgrade US government paper to less than AAA which means we won't be able to borrow any more money in this quantity. This disaster will soon be over and we'll start anew.

here here

afp

Originally Posted by wayneman

yup. now, a bk country, borrows trillions, to provide free Health & Welfare for all (inc. legal and illegal aliens,) who will in turn vote to keep themselves receiving bennies, and so forth and so on. how soon till the tipping point where there's more voters for free bennies (Obama money?) than there are voters against perpetual and unlimited bennies? i would put forth that we're pretty much there now.

one more amnesty; and the bennies will flow in perpetuity. i'm just asking a question. i'm not trying to scare anybody.(well, maybe a little.)

you spose they'd be borrowing and commiting to borrow so much if there were really ANY kind of plans to pay it back? SOMEHOW I DON'T THINK SO.

the real question is how tAnhe money lenders (China) are going to respond when they figure this out; unless maybe they already have.

afp

sorry my friend, i really tried

I know a lot of people are really disappointed by yesterday's vote on the health care bill as am I. But, I wasn't surprised. When we don't have our people in the Congress with majority control, we're going to lose. But by losing the good fight, we still gained because we exposed the winners as the losers they really are. Next time, we'll win.

See, what a lot of these people who support Obama Care think they got, isn't what they wanted or thought they were getting. There are a few of the provisions I support. I support a ban on denials of pre-existing conditions, dropped coverages when you get sick and no cause rescission with some reasonable definitions and qualifiers.

I think some insurance companies, not all, but some have abused this to the point of unfair trade practices including deceptive trade practices, if not down right fraud and trickery, which is already against US law, federal law, under our federal trade regulations enforced by the Federal Trade Commission.

A positive law banning these things is helpful because it removes any argument or ambiguities from the task of enforcement by the Federal Trade Commission. But first we have to get this industry under regulation by the Federal Trade Commission which is a simple 15 minute roll call vote on a simple little bill that's been in the US Congress for almost a decade that repeals the insurance industry exemption in the McCarran Ferguson Act of 1945 that exempts the entire industry from the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. That little bill is HB 1583 and applies to the entire insurance industry, not just the health insurance industry.

The Republicans aren't going to quit on this. They're going to propose repeal and replace bills that I believe the public will like much better. In order to pass them, we need to get people elected who will vote for them, so that's the task ahead. November elections. States are also filing lawsuits and declaring their sovereign positions. Civil rights groups are formulating lawsuits based on individual rights not to have insurance.

So, much is happening. It's not over until it's over and it's far from over. Plus, the bennies don't start until sometime in 2014 ... 4 years and 2 general elections away from now so we have plenty of time to explain why the bennies aren't what they were propped up to be and certainly aren't worth the theft of individual liberty to get them. When people realize that the IRS is the agency enforcing this insurance mandate, with the right to spy on them every month through their employers, insurance company, bank accounts and so forth, they aren't going to like the terms of this Devil's Bennies Bargain one single bit.

CITIZENS AGAINST PERPETUAL BENNIES.

i like the sound of that.

afp

Originally Posted by wayneman

CITIZENS AGAINST PERPETUAL BENNIES.

i like the sound of that.

afp

I love it!