Video: Susana Martinez lays claim to GOP future
posted at 10:41 am on August 30, 2012 by Ed Morrissey
I wrote earlier about the Twitter reaction from the media after Condoleezza Rice’s powerful, moving speech, speculating on her future as a Republican candidate for President or VP. The conventional wisdom holds that a person who engages in a prime-time effort at a national convention (and especially one who delivers as Rice did) has a burning desire to use the speech as a springboard for a future election. That was certainly true for Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, but Rice could have had the #2 slot this time, I suspect, if she truly desired it. She could have run for President this time too, or for the Senate in California against Diane Feinstein. Rice has never shown any desire for electoral office; I’d bet she might aspire to a place in the Romney administration, but even that might not appeal to Rice a second time around.
The evening did feature a woman who laid claim to the GOP future, though she didn’t get the same speculation as did Rice. New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez, the nation’s first female Hispanic governor, introduced herself to American voters across the nation last night in an emotional, humorous, and powerful speech. The most affecting portion came when she told the story of how she came to realize that she was a Republican:
I fear some of our leaders today have lost the courage to stand up. What we have now are politicians. They won’t offer real plans, and only stand up when they want to blame someone else.
And I don’t say that just because a Democrat is in the White House, I was a Democrat for many years, so were my parents.
Before I ran for district attorney, two Republicans invited my husband and me to lunch, and I knew a party switch was exactly what they wanted. So, I told Chuck, “We’ll be polite, enjoy a free lunch, and then say good-bye.” But we talked about issues — they never used the words Republican or Democrat, conservative or liberal. We talked about many issues, like welfare, is it the way of life or hand up? Talked about size of government, how much should it tax families and small businesses? And when we left that lunch, we got in the car and I looked over at Chuck and said, “I’ll be damned. We’re Republicans.”
Martinez’ story plays into one of the compelling themes of the convention, which asks voters to reconsider their partisan affiliation. That won’t work with the Chris Matthewses of the world, obviously, but they aren’t the audience. I mean that literally; on the NBC News website, the page that lists the Wednesday night speeches at the convention doesn’t have Martinez mentioned at all. Martinez spoke to those whose Democratic leanings are more habit than purposeful, who have found themselves dissatisfied by Hope and Change, and whose core values come much closer to the individual empowerment and economic freedom of the GOP.
Her message of Todo es posible will resonate with these voters. It’s also a good description of Martinez’ future in the GOP.
Related Posts:
Breaking on Hot Air
Menendez – Looks like we don’t have the votes for that immigration bill after all
America in decline – Bars selling rubbing alcohol as “scotch”
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Rubio could learn a lot from her ejemplo.
steebo77 on February 7, 2013 at 1:25 PM
And Rubio is our flag-bearing Latino… why?
Archivarix on February 7, 2013 at 1:28 PM
Not as much as between her ears. We have tried everything from amnesty and those in-between things, and none of them have worked. We keep coming back to the same thing every five to ten years. So, let’s try something new: Secure the borders, follow existing laws, and deport the illegals.
Nothing else has worked, so time to try something new. Not that we should be ‘trying’ this at all. It should have been done in the first place, decades ago.
Liam on February 7, 2013 at 1:30 PM
Oh sure, mass deportations is just the thing. There’s a policy America will rally around. Maybe we could even offer rewards for citizens who inform on people who they know who are here illegally.
/s
MJBrutus on February 7, 2013 at 1:32 PM
I think the 1986 “reform” debacle proves that this has to be a slow process with border security coming before we even talk about the space between amnesty and deportation.
But much as I respect and admire Susana “damn we’re Republicans” Martinez, I have to respectfully disagree with her on one point. As a voting bloc, Hispanics are indeed single-issue voters and that issue is amnesty for illegals. We just had an election that proved that. The rat-eared wonder offered up an Executive Order letting illegals under a certain age obtain de facto amnesty without passage of the DREAM act. He did so for one reason and one reason only- it secured Hispanic support.
Happy Nomad on February 7, 2013 at 1:34 PM
How about just enforcing the laws already on the books?
Too easy? No grandstanding involved? No glory forthcoming?
kim roy on February 7, 2013 at 1:35 PM
Rubio is the little Bush now.
Schadenfreude on February 7, 2013 at 1:36 PM
What was that they said to Sarah Palin??
Oh yeah, shut up, and sit down.
ToddPA on February 7, 2013 at 1:37 PM
Silly liberal. The United States doesn’t have to round illegals up and stage a mass deportation. Secure the borders and enforce the hiring laws. The jobs will dry up soon enough and there will be mass self-deportation. Concurrently, we can set up a guest worker program where individuals can work, for example, agricultural jobs with the understanding that they are simply visiting this nation and not here past a certain amount of time.
Wouldn’t that be a good first step instead of simply saying that it is too hard to do anything but gift citizenship to 11M criminals?
Happy Nomad on February 7, 2013 at 1:40 PM
Oh, yes, I’m a liberal. But Reagan was a liberal compared to a flaming ideologue like you.
And my sarc comment was a response to the person who proposed deportation so stop pretending that it was either my idea or even my strawman.
MJBrutus on February 7, 2013 at 1:43 PM
Because the laws on the books are too stupidly written to be enforceable and also too stupidly written to be acceptable to the public if anyone did try to enforce them.
MJBrutus on February 7, 2013 at 1:45 PM
Before you all jump on her about the space between deportation and amnesty, she did preface it with securing the border above all else. Granted there is space also between secure and secure-secure. And while the progressives want to make it a single issue for Hispanics, she is right to remind all that it isn’t. Especially in light of her road to conservatism. Good job, Governor.
AH_C on February 7, 2013 at 1:47 PM
Rewards aren’t necessary, but if they do try it I won’t complain.
I’ve listened to the left’s arguments for decades, and used to agree in part. But not any more; they over-used my patience. And I’m not alone. Every few years we have to go through this crap over and over, with the same tired arguments that didn’t work before when they became law.
So, no. Screw it all. I know I won’t see my desire come to pass, but you can bet your bottom dollar (if Obama doesn’t tax it away from you) we’ll all be discussing this issue again before the decade is out.
Liam on February 7, 2013 at 1:48 PM
She’s better than Rubio.
Jon0815 on February 7, 2013 at 1:49 PM
Ed, check out the Christopher Dorner Manhunt unfolding in California.
Manhunt for ex-L.A. cop Christopher Dorner in slaying of basketball coach, fiance
Former Los Angeles Police officer who has gone on a cop killing spree. The Los Angeles police department’s response has been, to randomly execute civilians who are driving around in similar colored vehicles as Dorner is reported to be driving around in.
SWalker on February 7, 2013 at 1:50 PM
Governor Martinez is correct – but, “what difference does it make” when “Savior” Rubio is a progressive “DREAMER”, and the GOP is willing to surrender America to make the Republican Party more palatable to liberals?
Pork-Chop on February 7, 2013 at 1:51 PM
Can’t get a single pol to mention birthright citizenship and affirmative action considerations with regards to enticements.
DanMan on February 7, 2013 at 1:53 PM
So you say, as well as implying here that since they are “too stupid” to just shrug and walk away.
I’d hate to be in a foxhole with you.
kim roy on February 7, 2013 at 1:58 PM
I don’t know how to take that because “flaming ideologue” makes absolutely no sense. You’d know that if you weren’t such a bourgeois terrestrial (see I can do it too!).
But you’re right, you were responding to the idea of mass deportation with snide hyperbole. Yet, of course, as bullies never do; you didn’t do anything but attack the idea of securing our borders and enforcing our laws. Obviously mass deportation isn’t going to happen but I can’t help but notice that in the space between amnesty and deportations you offer nothing up but insults. Typical liberal- can’t hold one’s own in a debate so he/she/it resorts to name calling and faux outrage.
Happy Nomad on February 7, 2013 at 1:58 PM
…note to Politburo Press and Republican establishment!
KOOLAID2 on February 7, 2013 at 1:59 PM
Swalker, you likely know this.
Schadenfreude on February 7, 2013 at 2:02 PM
Oh dear, I’m a bully too. So sad.
Here’s a clue, no charge this time. The only way to get laws that are any less stupid than the ones we have is to get politicians in to office who are less stupid than the ones who are there. Here in the real world, that means supporting politicians whose positions are closer to what you want but can also appeal to enough people to win an election.
Feel free to reread that a few times and move your lips as you do, if that helps.
MJBrutus on February 7, 2013 at 2:03 PM
So you can’t read either.
MJBrutus on February 7, 2013 at 2:05 PM
If she’s looking for something in between amnesty and deportation how about a 20% payroll tax (retroactive to the date hired) to be paid by the employers of illegal aliens.
Let the IRS enforce the immigration laws. It would even increase revenue. The democrats are all in favor of increased revenue right?
I bet they would put more effort into it the ICE has been under either democrat of republican administrations.
agmartin on February 7, 2013 at 2:05 PM
I see support waining Rubio .
To my other Gov….. Brava !
Lucano on February 7, 2013 at 2:06 PM
.
Hear THAT, Senator Schumer ?
We’re NOT going to allow the “path to citizenship” for illegals, to stand in the way of BORDER SECURITY ! ! !
.
… CHUCK U ! … you sorry excuse for a “public servant”.
listens2glenn on February 7, 2013 at 2:06 PM
HA had a clip of Schumer last week. Even as a radical leftie in full-throated support of just gifting all these criminals citizenship as if they are entitled to it….. he stumbled over just what to call them. Mostly he just refered to them as “the 11M” without ever coming near the acknowledgement that they are not in this nation legally.
And frankly, as one who is a citizen of this nation by birth and as one whose ancestors help build and defend this nation, I resent the way these politicians want to make citizens of people who so respect our laws they cross the border illegally, obtain bogus “documents” and otherwise ignore our laws.
Happy Nomad on February 7, 2013 at 2:07 PM
The failure of the leaders in Washinton D.C. to be responsible for their duty to secure the borders brought about this problem.
A failure now to act in a responsible way will only double down on the size of the problem.
Two mistakes do not add up they compound the problems.
Without Borders there is no U.S.A. and no need of a constitution or the rule of law.
All of this 100% comes from the fatal flaw of not properly securing the borders. South, North, East, West, air and water.
Now they have spent the U.S.A. to near bankruptcy by more failure of responsiblility.
They expect U.S. now to cover the crimes by the reduction of the value of our votes, our very citizenship, our lives.
First secure the borders.
Prove up that it is true and on going. Make it in stones to hard to remove when some lust for wage/vote slaves at a later date.
As of now the Personal Responsibility has come to U.S. each of U.S..
APACHEWHOKNOWS on February 7, 2013 at 2:09 PM
I read his manifesto, dude is mad as heII, but he does not come across as unhinged, crazy or stupid. Finding his badge and ID in San Diego is likely a distraction.
SWalker on February 7, 2013 at 2:11 PM
Has this become an IR thread? Lol
tommy71 on February 7, 2013 at 2:15 PM
On top of that, many illegals are on welfare, get Social Security Disability, and their kids attend public schools. Those that work aren’t paying taxes. When this is all pointed out, and Americans want it stopped, we’re treated with scorn by liberals who call us racist, mean-spirited, etc. It’s guaranteed liberals won’t settle for anything less than instant amnesty; anything in between including securing the border at last will be deemed as some form of cruelty by Conservative white folk.
Decades of that are exactly why I protest anything short of deportation upon detection of an illegal.
Liam on February 7, 2013 at 2:17 PM
Because he is in DC and she’s out in flyover country.
Odysseus on February 7, 2013 at 2:19 PM
Because hes young and good looking
ChunkyLover on February 7, 2013 at 2:20 PM
I agree Erika..I hope she does more to gain a higher profile on the national stage..:)
Dire Straits on February 7, 2013 at 2:22 PM
And because Karl Rove says so. Now fall in line and help Karl Rove and his democrat buddies destroy conservatism.
bgibbs1000 on February 7, 2013 at 2:26 PM
Electability is over-rated. I don’t have to be in 100% agreement with a candidate but character and principles matter. It is easy to do what the rat-eared wonder did and simply vote present to keep from having to take a position on controversial issues. It may have made him electable in the eyes of stupid people but it didn’t do a thing to make him an effective leader, decent human being, or fit for the office he holds.
Happy Nomad on February 7, 2013 at 2:26 PM
Susana Martinez is just outstanding. Her speech was great, I agree, but her ability to motivate purple voters to vote for common sense conservatism is her best political feature.
Please write about her often!
MTF on February 7, 2013 at 2:30 PM
OK. So how do we get better laws without getting better politicians?
MJBrutus on February 7, 2013 at 2:31 PM
Rubio’s hair looks awfully thin on top. I bet he looks like Rick Scott within the next five years.
BuckeyeSam on February 7, 2013 at 2:34 PM
Martinez is an ACTUAL wise Latina.
Sotomayor, not so much.
portlandon on February 7, 2013 at 2:36 PM
Precisely. That’s why I voted for John McCain and Mitt Romney.
steebo77 on February 7, 2013 at 2:36 PM
If you were half as smart as you pretend to be the answer to that would be glaringly obvious.
The United States Constitution, including Declaration of Independence and The Bill of Rights takes up a grand total of 4 single sided pages. Obamacare on the other hand is over 2000 pages.
Our Founding Father’s were profoundly wise men (Not that a useless imbecile like you could possibly imagine admitting that) they understood, the best laws/legislation are the simplest.
We don’t need newer better laws, we need fewer simpler laws. We are being legislated to death.
SWalker on February 7, 2013 at 2:46 PM
OK. So how do we get fewer and simpler laws without getting better politicians?
MJBrutus on February 7, 2013 at 2:49 PM
Break the political class as a group. It used to be that politicians went to DC and then returned home. Today, they simply leave Congress and hang out on K Street until the next poltical gig appears. Over time they aren’t really accountable to the folks back home. I know of a Congressman who attends my church. He met and married his wife here, his kids were raised here, and though he spends time in his district his roots really are in DC.
I would break the political class in three ways. Term limits for Congress. Return to the original intent of the Constitution and get rid of Senators being selected by popular vote. And finally, make the laws on post-political employment so strict that those leaving office will have no choice but to go back home.
Happy Nomad on February 7, 2013 at 2:52 PM
Happy Nomad on February 7, 2013 at 2:52 PM
Good start – also, age limit the senators and the other rats in DC. NO more clubs for incontinent fools like McCain, Reid, McConnell, Lautenberg and etc. They can’t go to the bathroom by themselves but they decide the fate of the land, yack.
Schadenfreude on February 7, 2013 at 2:58 PM
More fuzz deflection from the Godless left, just like abortion is really only for rape and incest. How stupid do these folks really think we are? Oh, they won the election….we are that stupid? I’m sorry, my bad. Where do I sign up for the party comrade?
Don L on February 7, 2013 at 3:01 PM
There was a real groundswell of support for the American Revolution too, wasn’t there?
FIFY
xblade on February 7, 2013 at 3:02 PM
That sounds good. Those ideas all require legislative action and that means that we need to get pols to vote against their own self interests. While there are a few people of conscience in public office I fear there are nowhere close to enough to get any of those measures passed. Instead “reform” means incumbent protection acts.
So, how do we get better politicians to pass these measures?
MJBrutus on February 7, 2013 at 3:04 PM
You don’t need better politicians to make less laws, or when it is necessary to make simpler laws. Better politician is an oxymoron. Right now politicians have incentives to write excessive worthless legislation. They are all jockeying for positions of power and authority in Mordor on the Potomac.
You are looking for the wrong solution, because you cannot comprehend what the actual problem is. Politicians are human, they get up in the morning and put their pants on one leg at a time just like everyone else. We are never going to get “Better Politicians”.
Read the US Constitution sometime, it might actually shock you what is in it. The Founding Fathers had a profound understanding of human nature. The US Constitution is full of constraints upon the both the Federal Government and the States Governments, not upon the citizens of the Union. For the last 100 years “Better Politicians” have consistently worked to erode those constraints, and to place more and more constraints upon the Citizens.
If America is to survive, it will only be by returning to the founding principals that our Constitutional Republic was founded on. It won’t be by getting better politicians, because their is no such thing as a better politician.
SWalker on February 7, 2013 at 3:04 PM
I prefer my original version. Thank you.
MJBrutus on February 7, 2013 at 3:05 PM
Yes, but as I told Nomad, those excesses of the past can only be remedied by legislative action. So how are we going to get enough politicians in to office who will work against their own self interests to get the job done?
MJBrutus on February 7, 2013 at 3:07 PM
Because he supports amnesty…just like the GOP elites he has sided with.
xblade on February 7, 2013 at 3:12 PM
Liars usually do prefer the lies they tell over reality. That’s why they tell them.
xblade on February 7, 2013 at 3:13 PM
Now you are starting to ask the right questions. It starts with identifying the source of the malignancy. It is not that the “Politicians” need to work against their own self interests, but that their interests have to be other than personal gain at the expense of those who elect them.
Over the last 100 years the political class has learned that they can make fantastic amounts of money by ignoring their constitutes, or by bending the law, or even by exempting themselves from the law.
SWalker on February 7, 2013 at 3:14 PM
Martinez 2016! That’s my candidate! Women,minority,conservative, govenror of a purple state.
Who else?????????? All you moderates want a Hispanic —well here is a FEMALE Hispanic who doesn’t hispander.
AGAIN Martinez 2016! Can’t lose.
BoxHead1 on February 7, 2013 at 3:44 PM
When was ever NOT the little Bush?
In 1996, an unknown Rubio offered to help Bob Dole’s campaign and Dole’s Florida director, Al Cardenas, was immediately impressed with Rubio’s potential and hired him. Rubio availed himself well, and two years later, he decided to get into campaigning for real and ran to become a commissioner in West Miami — a position that doesn’t sound like much of a position.
Rubio won, and on election night got a call from Jeb Bush, who by this time was aware of Rubio and his electoral potential no matter how inchoate.
TxAnn56 on February 7, 2013 at 4:06 PM
Martinez is right on the money. Oh and Marco Rubio is an establishment RINO now?!!? So I suppose that means cons will sit the election out AGAIN and hand it to Hilary if Rubio is our nominee…
Jack_Burton on February 7, 2013 at 4:08 PM
SWalker, lookie here – why would it be scrubbed?
Schadenfreude on February 7, 2013 at 4:28 PM
Bravo. Plus more from all the other Republican Governors not named Fat Bastard.
KMav on February 7, 2013 at 4:46 PM
If he succeeds in amnesty and then is rammed down our throats…..Probably.
KMav on February 7, 2013 at 4:48 PM
Funny that eh…
SWalker on February 7, 2013 at 4:58 PM
We know.
ddrintn on February 7, 2013 at 5:04 PM
And right on cue, MJBrutus comes out of hiding as soon as the GOPe’s new Inevitable Superelectable is anointed. Hilarious.
ddrintn on February 7, 2013 at 5:06 PM
Psst, a decade? We’re in the last of the ninth inning and were losing badly and they own the umpires….
In a decade you won’t be allowed to discus anything except the glory of the revolution.
Don L on February 7, 2013 at 5:52 PM
I will not vote for anyone who supports any form of blanket amnesty…ever.
I find it curious that every politician who discusses this issue uses the figure ’11-12 million people’ when they talk about EITHER amnesty OR deportation. Its as if it’s an ALL OR NOTHING proposition in their minds. Surely, several million of those ’11-12 million’ people would fail to qualify for legalization UNLESS WE ARE DISCUSSING A BLANKET AMNESTY and therefore the numbers for both deportation AND legalization would vary… not be identical.
So…when we discuss legalization… if there is to be even a faint veneer of credibility to these proceedings…we should admit that there will be those who don’t qualify for legalization…and a separate group who would qualify…. and therefore the numbers discussed…both in terms of numbers to be granted legalization AND in terms of the numbers to be deported…. should be revised.
There are obvious groups of illegal aliens who, regardless of how long they’ve been in this nation illegally, should NEVER be granted any form of legal status and should be, instead, apprehended and deported post haste. Gang members, felons ( including those who’ve committed identity theft or fraud), prostitutes, drug addicts and abusers, etc. would all be ‘undesirable’ for legal status. Those who cannot, or will not, support themselves should also not be granted legal status since they would become an immediate burden to the citizens and legal immigrants of this nation. 42% of ALL immigrants to this nation, both legal and illegal, who’ve been in this nation for 20 years or more are on one or more of the 83 separate federal welfare programs. Of all the people involved in this discussion, it is the American citizens and legal immigrants who deserve the most consideration and protection.
Further, though it shouldn’t be necessary to do so, I will point out that race, ethnicity, creed, age, gender, sexual orientation, or nation of origin, should have no bearing on qualification for legal status or for deportation.
Finally, none of this is going to work without greater border security, strict enforcement of our borders and laws. We must stop the flow of those self serving opportunists who demonstrate so thoroughly that they have no regard for either the rule of law or the rights of the citizens and legal immigrants of this nation if we are to maintain any semblance of control over our borders or immigration. Family reunification visas need to be stringently restricted to prevent chain migration and to prevent those who have brought their children here, thus placing those children in a position of being in illegal status, in hopes of bypassing the immigration system themselves through those children, from being rewarded for shattering our laws in their own right and forcing their children to be in violation of our laws, too.
We must regain control of our borders and our immigration system, and if we fail to ENFORCE THE LAW… we never will. The price for that failure would be the loss of our culture and, eventually, our sovereignty. We are a nation of laws and those laws must be enforce equitably without preference or prejudice.
thatsafactjack on February 7, 2013 at 6:18 PM
Surprise! Surprise! Surprise!
Solaratov on February 7, 2013 at 9:15 PM