The trickle that soon became a river and then rapids and then a waterfall started yesterday with this comment by Senator Marco Rubio, as reported by Manu Raju of Politico:
"In the next Congress, I am committed to working on upward mobility policies that will ensure people who work hard and play by the rules can rise above the circumstances of their birth and leave their children better off," Rubio said in a statement. "The conservative movement should have particular appeal to people in minority and immigrant communities who are trying to make it, and Republicans need to work harder than ever to communicate our beliefs to them."
Rubio’s statement marks the beginning of a Republican soul-searching period where the GOP will begin to chart out how better to court rapidly-growing minority groups, most notably Latinos. In this Congress, Rubio floated the possibility of a deal on the so-called DREAM Act to help undocumented children, but he dropped the effort earlier this year.
Soon people like Charles Krauthammer and Jeb Bush joined the wet and squishy chorus along with Rubio until it became evident to me that the flowing liquid was urine and the waterfall was The GOP Establishment pissing down the backs of we conservatives [I don't know about you, but I'm sick to death of their pablum puking and their disdain for all of us].
Sorry, Mario, you’re wrong. The kind of minorities that are flooding into The United States [most illegally] are those who come from Leftist nations and bring their embedded Socialist/Fascist beliefs with them. This is especially true for those from Central and South America.
Further, while many may come here for the financial opportunities, way too many of them refuse to assimilate. One of the reasons is that The Establishment [legal, political, and social] tells them they don’t have to and makes it easy for them not to.
Jeff Goldstein sees through the idiocy of this tired and bromidic appeal:
And they’re [the GOP Establishment] coming up with answers: we need to run a more moderate candidate with more broad-spectrum appeal! Someone who speaks to the hopes and fears of Latinos. Someone who understands that the world is made up of varying shades of gray and who will be willing to sell bi-partisan compromise in exchange for an opportunity to take power. Someone like, say, a Jeb Bush! Or maybe a Chris Christie! Or, short of that, we can find ourselves a minority candidate and pimp the shit out of him or her. Because that’ll show that we embrace all people, not just angry old white cranks like those who make up the odious TEA Party movement. And it’s all about optics nowadays. We may not like it, but that’s Just How Things Are — and we realists, unlike the hidebound purists who are holding us back (how dare they fail to turn out for Mitt! He won independents! It should have been a landslide!) — understand that we have to make certain sacrifices to compete in a game of vote haggling.
Heather MacDonald has been studying Hispanics in America very closely:
If Republicans want to change their stance on immigration, they should do so on the merits, not out of a belief that only immigration policy stands between them and a Republican Hispanic majority. It is not immigration policy that creates the strong bond between Hispanics and the Democratic party, but the core Democratic principles of a more generous safety net, strong government intervention in the economy, and progressive taxation. Hispanics will prove to be even more decisive in the victory of Governor Jerry Brown’s Proposition 30, which raised upper-income taxes and the sales tax, than in the Obama election.
And California is the wave of the future….
…a strong reason for that support for big government is that so many Hispanics use government programs. U.S.-born Hispanic households in California use welfare programs at twice the rate of native-born non-Hispanic households. And that is because nearly one-quarter of all Hispanics are poor in California, compared to a little over one-tenth of non-Hispanics. Nearly seven in ten poor children in the state are Hispanic, and one in three Hispanic children is poor, compared to less than one in six non-Hispanic children. One can see that disparity in classrooms across the state, which are chock full of social workers and teachers’ aides trying to boost Hispanic educational performance. The idea of the “social issues” Hispanic voter is also a mirage. A majority of Hispanics now support gay marriage, a Pew Research Center poll from last month found. The Hispanic out-of-wedlock birth rate is 53 percent, about twice that of whites.
Time to stop kidding ourselves that the majority of Hispanics coming to this country are like the Hispanics of old or like the Cubans [who, by the way, don't like being lumped in with the rest].
Andrew McCarthy expands the discussion to, rightfully, include Muslims in America:
…Today’s bromides about “aspiring people who believe in the dignity of work and self-sufficiency” are of a piece with the [The Wall Street Journal’s] similar soft-spot for the “Arab Spring” and Muslim outreach. These GOP fantasies are similarly based on the wishful thinking that Islamists are also “cultural conservatives” sure to forge freedom-embracing democracies when empowered in the Middle East and become model Americans when courted here — sure to assimilate seamlessly into our society rather than seek to change it fundamentally.Falling in love with your own high-minded rhetoric is no substitute for clear-eyed examination that takes the world as it is, not as we would have it. In point of fact, Islamists, like many Hispanic political activists (think: La Raza), are statists. As I’ve detailed in The Grand Jihad and, more recently, Spring Fever, their thoroughgoing alliance with the American Left is ideologically based — it is not a product of insensitive messaging or “Islamophobia.” Islamists revile finance capitalism, favor redistributionist economic policies, and endorse nanny state regulatory suffocation as well as an ever-expanding welfare state. This is not because Leftists made inroads while conservatives idled. It is because — though this often seems unimaginable to [The Wall Street Journal] — Islamists, like many Hispanic activists, are the vanguard of a different culture that they passionately believe is superior to the culture of individual liberty.
There is no single-issue quick-fix to the challenge of ushering them into the Republican coalition. Rather, there is a choice to be made: either convince them that they are wrong, meaning make the unapologetic case for liberty and limited government; or fundamentally change who you are, meaning accommodate their statism.
…any “conservative” pundit or website that is talking about the need to appeal to Latinos (or any other ethnic or identity group) in a way that effectively surrenders first principles for a chance at taking power — deeming this move “realistic” or pragmatic, while sneering at the “purists” who simply Don’t Know How Things In DC Work — is not, in fact, conservative; is not, in fact, a constitutionalist; and is not, in fact, part of your “team.” In truth, they despise you, because they see you as an impediment to regaining power and to reasserting the status quo on the right. They are embarrassed by you. And while the left likes to keep you around so they can point to you as fringe extremists, the establishment right will work actively to sabotage your influence and dictate to you the terms of your political choice.
These are mere political creatures who for one reason or another have chosen one team over the other (perhaps they like lower taxes; or more business-friendly regulations) from which to base themselves. And having done so, they fight for the party brand, because it is part and parcel of their political identity.
For The GOP/Conservative Establishment we conservatives are their greatest enemy. It’s not surprising as we don’t throw lavish cocktail parties in our mansions.
The solution is not to pander, but candor. We must say what we truly believe — lay it out clearly for all to see. Those who possess any wisdom and/or Common Sense will join us. We’d be better off spending our time deciding whether we should continue to fight for all fifty states or consider gathering ourselves together and effecting a separation.