Laura Ingraham to Rubio: Stop dividing the GOP with immigration reform

posted at 11:21 am on June 4, 2013 by Allahpundit

She’s more cordial than the headline suggests, emphasizing that reform would be okay if Rubio and the Republicans were in charge of border security rather than Obama and Schumer et al. I’m … less confident about that than she is. Still, the clip’s useful as a demonstration of how even prominent border hawks are willing to cut Rubio slack for championing a bill that they dislike, which is remarkable insofar as passage would be impossible without his support. If you’re looking for one member of Congress who, more than any other, is singlehandedly making earned amnesty happen this year, it’s Rubio — and yet, despite the criticism ramping up lately, I think he remains basically unbruised. Partly that’s because of his conservative-media charm offensive, partly because he’s been shrewd in pounding Obama on other issues while this plays out to shore up his right-wing cred, and partly because smart righties like Ingraham don’t want to sabotage a guy with a legitimate chance to win in 2016. His response to her here, on the alleged economic benefits of mass legalization, is debatable on the merits and dubious insofar as virtually no one involved in this process in Congress is pursuing reform for that reason. Democrats wants to pad their electoral rolls with newly legalized voters and Republicans want to pass something as a goodwill gesture to Latinos. But he can sell it, can’t he? The only way he’ll be really hurt come 2016, I think, is if the bill passes and starts to go off the rails in terms of enforcement before then. Even Rubio would have trouble selling that.

He claims, by the way, that there still aren’t 60 votes in the Senate for it. At the Examiner, David Drucker’s sources are telling him the same thing:

Democratic and Republican sources working to build support for the bill agreed that garnering the necessary GOP votes would require amending the legislation to strengthen its border security components. Additionally, there are senators on both sides of the aisle who don’t support the current measure because of provisions other than border security who also must be appeased.

The bill’s supporters are now focusing their efforts on wooing as many as five Democrats who might oppose it and about two dozen Republicans described as “gettable” or “maybes” but who for now are far from a “yes” vote. (Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., is not among those targeted.) The bill is scheduled to hit the floor next Monday, and Senate Democratic leaders said it may go up for a final vote before the July 4 recess…

Republicans on the fence include Sens. Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker, of Tennessee; Kelly Ayotte, of New Hampshire; Richard Burr, of North Carolina; Dan Coats, of Indiana; Mike Crapo and Jim Risch, of Idaho; Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson, of Georgia; Orrin Hatch and Mike Lee, of Utah; Dean Heller, of Nevada; John Hoeven, of North Dakota; Mike Johanns, of Nebraska; Ron Johnson, of Wisconsin; Mark Kirk of Illinois; Rand Paul of Kentucky; Rob Portman, of Ohio; and Pat Toomey, of Pennsylvania.

That’s a lot of Republicans looking for ways to vote yes. Rubio himself is working on a way to bring them onboard by rewriting the bill’s enforcement provisions so that Congress itself, not DHS, gets to write the plan for better border security. If you read last night’s QOTD, you know how skeptical border hawks are about that. Bottom line: Schumer and the Democrats will never agree to suspend the path to citizenship until Congress, which might be controlled by Republicans in 18 months, officially confirms that the border has been secured. The Democrats might tolerate tighter security but they’ll never tolerate making amnesty contingent upon it. Which, if you go back to the beginning of this fiasco, is what Rubio claimed he’d insist upon when he talked about border-security “triggers.”

Here’s the clip, via Noah Rothman. Apropos of nothing, I’ve been wondering since Sunday night’s cultural eruption over “Game of Thrones” how long it’ll be before political media starts working “Red Wedding” metaphors into its reporting. Here, let me be the first hack out of the gate: Is the Gang of Eight bill a “Red Wedding” for conservatives? And if it is, is Rubio Robb Stark or Walder Frey? I’m leaning towards Stark just because I want Schumer to be Frey, but depending upon how the next month goes, I’m willing to revisit that analogy.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Marco Rubio is an idiot, being manipulated by much smarter Democrats, who must be laughing at him uproariously behind his back.

HB3 on June 4, 2013 at 11:26 AM

I saw this and thought both were gracious and non-hysterical. I like Michelle Boss but if she disagrees she tends to become shrill. IMHO.

Marcus on June 4, 2013 at 11:27 AM

Ok, I’ll ask: what is a “Red Wedding”?

stenwin77 on June 4, 2013 at 11:27 AM

“Rubio” will be a Hispanic-slur by the time the Tea Party extremists are finished soiling his name.

Capitalist Hog on June 4, 2013 at 11:28 AM

As written, this bill is suicide for the GOP in 2014. And it would be horrible for the Senate GOP force Boehner’s hand.

Allow this to limp along to consume some political oxygen for the summer and then kill it. Obama will happily open his big mouth and become the poison pill. Blame him.

matthew8787 on June 4, 2013 at 11:28 AM

Oh Allah, forever you are going to “Me love you long time” to Rubio! Get off the damned horse will you?

journeymike on June 4, 2013 at 11:29 AM

Rubio should tryout for the Dolphins secondary. He has the backpeddling down pretty good.

VegasRick on June 4, 2013 at 11:29 AM

Ok, I’ll ask: what is a “Red Wedding”?

stenwin77 on June 4, 2013 at 11:27 AM

HBO Game of Thrones series. If you don’t watch it, you don’t want to know.

matthew8787 on June 4, 2013 at 11:30 AM

“Rubio” will be a Hispanic-slur by the time the Tea Party extremists are finished soiling his name.

Capitalist Hog on June 4, 2013 at 11:28 AM

Can someone translate this into sane for me?

I get that he hates the Tea Party, but, of course, I didn’t really need this post to know that.

makattak on June 4, 2013 at 11:30 AM

This bill will remain an anchor around his neck. He is contributing to his own demise.

LeftCoastRight on June 4, 2013 at 11:30 AM

“Rubio” will be a Hispanic-slur by the time the Tea Party extremists are finished soiling his name.

Capitalist Hog on June 4, 2013 at 11:28 AM

You mean, like “Tea Party extremists”?

HB3 on June 4, 2013 at 11:30 AM

I don’t watch that show but I was reading about it:
Red Wedding: invite a man and his pregnant wife and his mother to a reception then slaughter them. I believe the order was pregnant wife first then son in front of ma who gets her neck slashed last.

Marcus on June 4, 2013 at 11:30 AM

Bottom line: Schumer and the Democrats will never agree to suspend the path to citizenship until Congress, which might be controlled by Republicans in 18 months, officially confirms that the border has been secured.

And sooner rather than later they’ll say that the illegals don’t have to pay back taxes so that won’t deter the illegals from coming forward. And then they’ll say that the illegals don’t have to learn English or wait to get citizenship.

There is a need for real immigration reform but all Rubio is pushing is amnesty.

Happy Nomad on June 4, 2013 at 11:31 AM

I’m wondering where it is that a legal immigrant (not a citizen) is eligible to vote? Why do we on the right repeat that as if it’s true when it isn’t. Only natural born and naturalized citizens can vote. This is not automatic naturalization.

Oxrock on June 4, 2013 at 11:32 AM

“Rubio” will be a Hispanic-slur by the time the Tea Party extremists are finished soiling his name.

Capitalist Hog on June 4, 2013 at 11:28 AM

Right on time, the fat pig injects race into it.

VegasRick on June 4, 2013 at 11:32 AM

Gotta say, not much a surprise that Rubio is a US Senator…
and Ingraham is a talk show host.

verbaluce on June 4, 2013 at 11:32 AM

All good politicians are singularly self-involved persons. Rubio’s moves re immigration reform reflect his concerns regarding his 2016 re-election prospects in Florida in a presidential year. He and Toomey will be the number 1 and number 2 targets.

matthew8787 on June 4, 2013 at 11:32 AM

I do not see why not? We rid ourselves of the current defacto amnesty, require actual border security as precondition for anything the Democrats want (finally), and create an easier citizenship for skilled professionals.

Pretty much all of my representatives are able on the fence, leaning to support it: Paul Ryan, Ron Johnson and Scott Walker.

ZachV on June 4, 2013 at 11:33 AM

Marco operates at an extremely high
[(Word Count)/Veracity} ratio.

aquaviva on June 4, 2013 at 11:33 AM

I think the presumption Rubio will be fine in 2016 is off base.

MAYBE he survives in Florida only is he simply runs to hold his Senate seat.

But if he runs for POTUS, he’s through.

The conservative base will not support him because of his manipulation of immigration ‘reform’.

catmman on June 4, 2013 at 11:36 AM

Rubio is dead to me…. and to most other conservatives I talk to regularly. I think the RINOS and media are burying their heads in the sand wishfully thinking that Rubio’s stand doesn’t change anything for him.

Free Indeed on June 4, 2013 at 11:38 AM

Rubio knows exactly how horrible and devastating this bill would be to America and HE DOESNT CARE! I am so tired of of people saying he is being played for a fool… As if that’s better. The only thing this bill does other than funneling money to extremist groups is give open ended unlimited complete amnesty followed quickly by state and federal benefits. It also leaves the door wide open for a lawsuit to grant very quick citizenship to this group of 11-60 million…. Pick your favorite number nobody knows…former illegals who will then become “aggrieved second class citizens”

Caseoftheblues on June 4, 2013 at 11:39 AM

catmman on June 4, 2013 at 11:36 AM

If he gets his amnesty bill pushed through, and Obummer signs it into law, he’s through in 2016 anyway, because it won’t be someone with an R next to their name who’ll get all those new votes. Rubio will be saying “Madame President” to Clinton or “Mister President” to John Kerry, or some other socialist nightmare with a D by their name.

I can’t believe the Republicans are still falling for this stupidity…oh wait, that’s right, they are the Stupid Party. Silly me.

theotherone on June 4, 2013 at 11:41 AM

Actually Laura, immigration reform is a big deal. We want stricter boarder enforcement!

Bevan on June 4, 2013 at 11:42 AM

But he can sell it, can’t he?

Yeah, if you’re into snake oil.

Does anybody really think border enforcement will actually happen? I don’t. Who is going to enforce all this? The same government that will not enforce immigration laws now? How many new bureaucrats and agencies will be needed to enforce and monitor millions of immigrants going through this Rube Goldberg process?

This bill is a disaster. This will complete Obama’s transformation of America into a third-world gulag – and will be the end of the GOP as a national party.

TarheelBen on June 4, 2013 at 11:43 AM

The Dems want to add millions of government dependents to the democrat voter rolls and Republicans like Rubio want millions of illegals pandered to in the name of the republicans in hopes that some illegals might be appreciative somehow.

Who’s left to protect the American taxpayer’s interests? No one.

We Are Screwed

HotAirian on June 4, 2013 at 11:43 AM

I do not see why not? We rid ourselves of the current defacto amnesty, require actual border security as precondition for anything the Democrats want (finally), and create an easier citizenship for skilled professionals.

ZachV on June 4, 2013 at 11:33 AM

Wow, you’ve got that faux conservative group’s ad down pretty well. The only problem is that this legislation would eliminate defacto amnesty with the real deal. There is no intention in this bill to secure the border or put the illegals at the back of the line. Sorry if some of us don’t want to gift the illegals that which they do not deserve or have not earned. They are criminals living among us.

Happy Nomad on June 4, 2013 at 11:44 AM

I do not see why not?

We can’t pay for it. The basic welfare costs alone would make Obamacare look like a joke.

require actual border security as precondition for anything the Democrats want (finally)

We actually don’t, that’s just talk to fool the easily fooled.

and create an easier citizenship for skilled professionals.

ZachV on June 4, 2013 at 11:33 AM

Most of the people the Republicans are plotting to give amnesty to are unskilled, uneducated, and unable to speak English, with few job prospects

Doomberg on June 4, 2013 at 11:44 AM

I am so tired of of people saying he is being played for a fool…

Caseoftheblues on June 4, 2013 at 11:39 AM

Agreed.

I’m equally tired of spineless “conservative talk show hosts” (Ingraham, Levine, Hannity, etc) who kiss Rubio’s ass when interviewing him.

beatcanvas on June 4, 2013 at 11:45 AM

Levin

beatcanvas on June 4, 2013 at 11:45 AM

I think the presumption Rubio will be fine in 2016 is off base.
MAYBE he survives in Florida only is he simply runs to hold his Senate seat.
But if he runs for POTUS, he’s through.
The conservative base will not support him because of his manipulation of immigration ‘reform’.
catmman on June 4, 2013 at 11:36 AM

Presidential predictions years out are so amusing. Hell even after the first official Republican Presidential debate how many times is the guy left standing not who you expected.

So you don’t like him. Conservatives at CPAC sure as hell did. Oh, I know – that was so long ago when he was blonde and called himself Markus he was so “different” then.

Marcus on June 4, 2013 at 11:46 AM

Most of the people the Republicans are plotting to give amnesty to are unskilled, uneducated, and unable to speak English, with few job prospects

Doomberg on June 4, 2013 at 11:44 AM

To quote Bob Hope – “you mean like democrats”.

VegasRick on June 4, 2013 at 11:47 AM

Rubio’s presidential aspirations are DOA because of his amnesty position. Even if he begins to walk back from the edge, the conservative base of the Republican Party will not forget or forgive. We have two years to find 3-4 candidates who can beat Hillary or Joe or whoever the Dems run. Given the fact that Obama’s election effectively lowered the bar, we should probably be looking for someone with absolutely no experience and no track record so there’s no baggage.

ScottiesRule on June 4, 2013 at 11:47 AM

I think Rubio is going along with this charade as long as he can in an effort to shore up his cred on “wiilingness” to deal with immigration; however in the end I think he will “find” a poison pill in the legislation to vote against it.

Tater Salad on June 4, 2013 at 11:47 AM

Great. Rubio’s entire argument boils down to “this bill takes 10 years to implement, and in 3.5 years we can put a Republican in who will do it right.”

Sure, let’s go with that.

I’m sorry, but if Rubio actually believes everything he is saying about immigration reform, he is no friend to conservatives. He is pushing the same tired, worn out “comprehensive” approach that has failed the nation time and again. And, what’s worse, he’s using the same argument liberals always use to justify their socialist programs: “We know it didn’t work last time, but now we’ve got the right people involved, and they’ll really make it work this time.”

Immigration reform should be done piecemeal. We secure the border first and, as Laura Ingraham said, we have concrete, unchangable metrics in place to measure that. Only once that’s done do we pass legislation to address the other issues surrounding immigration.

Anything else is a recipe for disaster.

Shump on June 4, 2013 at 11:48 AM

I think Rubio is stuck because he has to make an effort since he has said he believes in COMPREHENSIVE reform, and may have promised it in Florida where it might have traction amongst his constituents. But the current bill, 1000+ pages: Forget it. It is nothing that Rubio says he wants, the democrat half of the group has ruined it as they intended to do all along.

Fleuries on June 4, 2013 at 11:48 AM

He is, in fact, a fool. A fool who wants power. Bad combination.

Take a look at his education history. Hardly a leading light of the Ivy League — more like University of Phoenix.

HB3 on June 4, 2013 at 11:48 AM

I’ve been wondering since Sunday night’s cultural eruption over “Game of Thrones”…

I am blissfully clueless about whatever “eruption” you’re talking about. Thank goodness.

KS Rex on June 4, 2013 at 11:49 AM

Rubio is deferring to Jeb Bush for 2016 and would rather run for re-election, preferrably with Bush at the top of the ticket.

Rubio is still very young. His road to the presidency may first include a stint as FL governor. GOP presidents do not come from the Senate, the last one elected directly to the presidency was in 1920, Warren Harding, nearly 100 years ago.

matthew8787 on June 4, 2013 at 11:49 AM

“Rubio” will be a Hispanic-slur by the time the Tea Party extremists are finished soiling his name.

Capitalist Hog on June 4, 2013 at 11:28 AM

I’ll be Brown all over by the time I’m done Soiling myself
on this thread.

FIFY

ToddPA on June 4, 2013 at 11:50 AM

Rubio vs. Ingraham is very good for Rubio.
She throws out some bizarre boogeyman red meat touchpoints for her base…which he ignores and instead responds substantively…resulting in a slightly confused expression from Laura.
But she so wants him to like her.
I don’t see he has the same concern…good for him.

verbaluce on June 4, 2013 at 11:51 AM

— and yet, despite the criticism ramping up lately, I think he remains basically unbruised. Partly that’s because of his conservative-media charm offensive, partly because he’s been shrewd in pounding Obama on other issues while this plays out to shore up his right-wing cred, and partly because smart righties like Ingraham don’t want to sabotage a guy with a legitimate chance to win in 2016.

I guess I’m not a “smart rightie” like Ingraham. Although he might be “shrewd”, I’m looking for principled, and Rubio has now shown the world he’s not.

He may be the nominee, but he will not be the recipient of my vote.

L.I.B.

M240H on June 4, 2013 at 11:52 AM

“Rubio” will be a Hispanic-slur by the time the Tea Party extremists are finished soiling his name. he figures out he is being set up to be the fall guy by the dems.

Capitalist Hog on June 4, 2013 at 11:28 AM

portlandon on June 4, 2013 at 11:54 AM

I think Rubio is going along with this charade as long as he can in an effort to shore up his cred on “wiilingness” to deal with immigration; however in the end I think he will “find” a poison pill in the legislation to vote against it.

Tater Salad on June 4, 2013 at 11:47 AM

No, I don’t think so. I think he believes that if he passes immigration reform, he will win the Hispanic vote overwhelmingly in 2016. This isn’t going to happen for the same reason the GOP will never win the black vote no matter how many black candidates they run.

He is being played for a fool, but it’s being done by people who are exploiting his unabashed hunger for power.

Doomberg on June 4, 2013 at 11:54 AM

If you’re looking for one member of Congress who, more than any other, is singlehandedly making earned amnesty happen this year, it’s Rubio — and yet, despite the criticism ramping up lately, I think he remains basically unbruised.

‘Earned’ amnesty? What the h is ‘earned’ about it? Looks more like ‘gifted amnesty’ to me.

slickwillie2001 on June 4, 2013 at 11:54 AM

He may be the nominee, but he will not be the recipient of my vote.

M240H on June 4, 2013 at 11:52 AM

Nor mine.

bazil9 on June 4, 2013 at 11:55 AM

Rubio vs. Ingraham is very good for Rubio.
She throws out some bizarre boogeyman red meat touchpoints for her base…which he ignores and instead responds substantively…resulting in a slightly confused expression from Laura.
But she so wants him to like her.
I don’t see he has the same concern…good for him.

verbaluce on June 4, 2013 at 11:51 AM

Oh look, the left is trying to pick our loser candidate again.

If they like him, he’s the wrong guy.

M240H on June 4, 2013 at 11:55 AM

Rubio looked like the proverbial deer in the headlights when Laura was speaking. Sad, he had so much promise in the Republican party. The only way to salvage his political career would be for him to remove his support from the bill and say he made a mistake trusting democrats.

fight like a girl on June 4, 2013 at 11:56 AM

The problem, of course, is that Rubio IS TRYING TO divide the GOP. Although we still don’t know who is pulling Rubio’s strings (Karl Rove, or obama), clearly he is on a mission to root out and destroy all remaining true Conservatives within the party. On top of Rubio’s ultra-liberal position on AMNESTY for illegals, he also recently held Chris Christie up as a model “conservative leader”, which tells us about all we need to know about Rubio.

Pork-Chop on June 4, 2013 at 11:56 AM

Why is anyone who claims to be conservative discussing Rubio (or Cruz for that matter) as a presidential contender? Per our Constitution, he is no more eligible for the office than is the current usurper. Excusing every ineligible politician simply because it has already happened is a surrender to the “progressive” program, and fundamentally anti-American. You don’t murder your mother just because someone else got away with it. No fewer than four supreme court cases have identified a “natural born citizen” as one who is born to citizen parents. Plural. Both mother and father. I thought highly of Rubio (neither of whose parents were citizens when he was born) until he signed onto this America killing bill, and would love to see someone like Cruz in the Oval Office. That doesn’t make it legal or acceptable though when they are both plainly ineligible for the office. Let’s not go down this road please. We are trying to save this country, not be complicit in its demise.

SteveThomas on June 4, 2013 at 11:56 AM

M240H on June 4, 2013 at 11:55 AM

Rubberneck and Gunlock Bill should be by any time now to jump on the bandwagon.

kingsjester on June 4, 2013 at 11:56 AM

Rubio is neither Robb Stark nor Walder Frey. He is Edmure Tully.

IronDioPriest on June 4, 2013 at 11:57 AM

The Dems want to add millions of government dependents to the democrat voter rolls and Republicans like Rubio want millions of illegals pandered to in the name of the republicans in hopes that some illegals might be appreciative somehow.

Who’s left to protect the American taxpayer’s interests? No one.

We Are Screwed

HotAirian on June 4, 2013 at 11:43 AM

What these “sophisticated” and “enlightened” GOP politicians fail to understand:

The Dems will add millions to the rolls of government dependency about 10 times faster than the GOP will create productive Hispanic taxpayers.

Unless and until the GOP explains to Americans the inexorable connection between political and economic liberty, this nation is headed for disaster… we have millions, likely a majority of Americans already, who do not understand how wealth is even generated in this nation. This so-called immigration reform is dealing with a symptom of the disease, not the cause.

matthew8787 on June 4, 2013 at 11:57 AM

“Border security for amnesty” is a trade as dumb as “land for peace”. We give up something substantial and permanent and we receive something undefined, that might last only a few years, just so we can repeat the exercise in another decade or two.

There is only one solution for the problem of illegals: Operation Wetback II.

If Rubio is on the ticket in 2016, Ill stay home. Im done voting for the lesser evil.

Valkyriepundit on June 4, 2013 at 11:57 AM

You mean, like “Tea Party extremists”?

HB3 on June 4, 2013 at 11:30 AM

“Extremist” is not a slur. It’s an accurate descriptor for those individuals occupying the Bircher wing of the GOP. Just last week you had Phyllis Schlafly calling for GOP to court “white voters.”

Any complaints from the right? Nope. Lovely.

Capitalist Hog on June 4, 2013 at 11:57 AM

Take a look at his education history. Hardly a leading light of the Ivy League — more like University of Phoenix.

HB3 on June 4, 2013 at 11:48 AM

Don’t we have far too many leading lights of the Ivy League in government? Maybe it is time to look elsewhere for our leaders.

Happy Nomad on June 4, 2013 at 11:58 AM

“Rubio” will be a Hispanic-slur by the time the Tea Party extremists are finished soiling his name.

Capitalist Hog on June 4, 2013 at 11:28 AM

Rubio is a slur because he lacks brain power — he just isn’t that very bright or presidential timber. He also lacks gravitas which is very, very important.

Punchenko on June 4, 2013 at 11:58 AM

The Scandal Trilogy is garnering plenty of goodwill for Republicans in 2014/16. Passing amnesty will kill most of it among conservatives.
This will splinter the party.

lynncgb on June 4, 2013 at 11:58 AM

partly because smart righties like Ingraham don’t want to sabotage a guy with a legitimate chance to win in 2016

*head desk*

This might be true if the GOP had a dearth of good candidates in 2016, but Good Lord, we’ve got the deepest bench to choose from in decades coming up.

Bitter Clinger on June 4, 2013 at 11:59 AM

“Extremist” is not a slur. It’s an accurate descriptor

Capitalist Hog on June 4, 2013 at 11:57 AM

Well you’re an a**hole. That isn’t a slur. It’s an accurate descriptor for those of your ilk.

Happy Nomad on June 4, 2013 at 12:00 PM

‘Under this theory, if Rubio gets his way, he’ll have another fig leaf scared conservatives can use to rationalize their support of legalization.’

- Today’s Gang of 8 Mystery, The Daily Caller, 3 June 2013

And, the obvious problem with this???

Remember last week when I said that the GOP has no one but itself to blame for Attorney General Eric Holder?

Yesterday, also on Laura Ingraham’s radio programme:

‘[A]approving Eric Holder was the worst vote I ever took in the United States Senate.’

- Senator Johnny Isakson, (R-GA), who has served more than eight years in the Senate

And, what has been his ‘best action’ in the Senate?

‘…the Georgia senator went on to say that the “best” action he has taken in Congress recently was writing a letter to Holder ASKING HIM TO RESIGN after the Operation Fast and Furious controversy — he said he HOPES his recommendation will eventually be followed.’

Awesome! Confirm the dishonest, radical, racialist Eric Holder, the man who secured a pardon for The Biggest Tax Cheat – $300 Million – In American History, and now that he has proven to be exactly what he was BEFORE Republicans insured his confirmation, send him a letter HOPING that he will resign?

After the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 some Progressives recognised the disaster to the country it was:

‘The United States cannot regain its competitive standing in the world by importing low wage workers from other countries. On the one hand, it engenders conditions this country cannot and should not tolerate. On the other hand, in the modern age, a nation’s wealth and prosperity is secured by high worker productivity and capital investment, not by the availability of low-wage labour.’

– Senator Eugene McCarthy (D-MN), 1968 Democratic Presidential nominee

‘The immigration Act of 1965 changed all previous patterns, and in so doing, probably changed the future of America … [it] was noble, revolutionary – and probably the most thoughtless of many acts of the Great Society.’

- Theodore White, American political journalist, historian, and novelist, Kennedy family intimate, coiner of the term “Camelot” to describe the Kennedy Administration, America in Search of Itself: The Making of the President 1956-1980, 1982

Ronald Reagan wrote that his WORST DECISION AS PRESIDENT was signing ‘Immigration Reform’ into law.

The real problem with these ‘worst vote/decision of my [Senate career, Presidency, term, whatever]‘ is that a mere recognition of the dreadful mistake does NOTHING to correct the results of it. Fundamentally changing the country’s demographics against the will of the people, as was been done with the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 and the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, is a catastrophic mistake. The citizens of a country should have an absolute right to determine with whom they want to share it.

It is a fatal mistake to open a country to immigrants, who do not share the fundamental premises upon which it was founded and succeeded. We are seeing the catastrophic results in the UK to massive, open immigration to Eastern Europeans, who seek both employment at a lower wage thereby cutting out the floor of the labour force, and Islamists, who do not respect democracy, the rule of law other than that prescribed by Shari’ah, and have an aversion for a government that does not rule on religious grounds. While the UK is a country founded on Judeo-Christian principles and law, the government does not function as a appendage of any religion, even the CofE, which is unlike the countries that many of these immigrants come from and desire. The fabric of society has been torn and the burden on the welfare state has been profound and is completely unsustainable.

The United States will suffer the same problems with continually opening up its borders while encouraging more and more individuals to seek benefits. It will also pay the price for not demanding assimilation – a melting pot – instead of the suicidal, multi-kulti ‘salad bowl.’

But, don’t worry! This time it’s gonna be different. For rrrreeeeeaaaallll!

Resist We Much on June 4, 2013 at 12:00 PM

court white voters? Why not.

“It was usually an effective tactic, another one of those tricks I had learned: (White) People were satisfied so long as you were courteous and smiled and made no sudden moves. They were more than satisfied, they were relieved — such a pleasant surprise to find a well-mannered young black man who didn’t seem angry all the time.” — Barack Obama

bazil9 on June 4, 2013 at 12:01 PM

He is, in fact, a fool. A fool who wants power. Bad combination.

Take a look at his education history. Hardly a leading light of the Ivy League — more like University of Phoenix.

HB3 on June 4, 2013 at 11:48 AM

My money says you don’t even have an AA much less a four year degree. I’m going to go with trade certificate, maybe forklift operator.

Capitalist Hog on June 4, 2013 at 12:01 PM

For verby and the Hog. Please read slowly, so you will understand why Americans do not want Illegal Immigrants rewarded for breaking the law.

A couple of years back, the following allegorical story went viral. You may have seen this already, but it explains illegal immigration as succinctly as anything I have come across:

Let’s pretend I broke into your house. When you discover me there, you insist I leave. But I say, “I’ve made all the beds, washed the dishes, did the laundry, and cleaned the floors; I’ve done all the work you don’t like to do. I’m hardworking and honest (except for breaking into your house). Not only must you let me stay, you must also add me to your insurance plan, educate my kids, and provide these benefits to my husband, too (he will do your yardwork, he’s honest and hardworking too–except for that breaking in part). If you try to force me out, I will call my friends who will picket your house and proclaim my right to be there! It’s only fair, because you have a nicer house than I do, and I’m trying to better myself. I’m hardworking and honest…except for, well, you know. I will live in your house, contributing only a fraction of the cost of my keep, and there is nothing you can do about it without being accused of selfishness and prejudice.

Oh yeah, I want you to learn my language so you can communicate with me.

Good plan..don’t you think?

kingsjester on June 4, 2013 at 12:01 PM

This will splinter the party.

lynncgb on June 4, 2013 at 11:58 AM

Amnesty will turn Texas blue, and end America as a constitutional republic.

It is treason, plain and simple.

Rebar on June 4, 2013 at 12:02 PM

Rubio is a slur because he lacks brain power — he just isn’t that very bright or presidential timber. He also lacks gravitas which is very, very important.

Punchenko on June 4, 2013 at 11:58 AM

The equivocation begins.

Capitalist Hog on June 4, 2013 at 12:02 PM

Pushing immigration reform for economic reasons (dubious as they may be) is one thing, but to do so just as a goodwill gesture to Latino voters? I just don’t get that. To be blunt, more and more people just want the gov’t to provide stuff, and they know which party is more likely to deliver it. No matter how hard they try, you can’t out-Dem the Dem party. Did the GOP gain anything politically by passing the Medicare prescription drug benefit? No, and in this case it will be a Dem Senate passing immigration reform, it will be a Dem president signing it, and it will be Dem cheerleaders in the media who will credit Dems for it. Where does someone like Rubio see the payoff in ’16, exactly? The idea that Latinos have been pushed away by the GOP over immigration is deeply flawed…these are NOT just conservative, Republican voters otherwise. And they’re not going to come home to Republicans next go ’round because some helped legalize millions more.

changer1701 on June 4, 2013 at 12:03 PM

Rubio had my support in the beginning. His effort at amnesty is not good.

It’s not possible for me to affect (by my 1 vote) his Florida standing but at this time he has lost my ‘primary’ vote if he runs for pres, although the Virginia GOP will make sure my vote doesn’t count by then anyway. They have their own “Good ‘Ol Boy” setup here.

TerryW on June 4, 2013 at 12:04 PM

court white voter? Why not.

bazil9 on June 4, 2013 at 12:01 PM

Capitalist Hog on June 4, 2013 at 12:04 PM

Capitalist Hog on June 4, 2013 at 12:04 PM

x
marks the spot.
You lose Fu7k head.

bazil9 on June 4, 2013 at 12:05 PM

Take a look at his education history. Hardly a leading light of the Ivy League — more like University of Phoenix.

HB3 on June 4, 2013 at 11:48 AM

Don’t we have far too many leading lights of the Ivy League in government? Maybe it is time to look elsewhere for our leaders.

Happy Nomad on June 4, 2013 at 11:58 AM

The problem isn’t the University of Phoenix vs Ivy Leagues, it’s bogus degrees from anywhere awarded on the basis of affirmative action. Forty years of AA have finally resulted in an AA president and an AA Attorney-General. Woe is we.

slickwillie2001 on June 4, 2013 at 12:05 PM

M240H on June 4, 2013 at 11:55 AM

I’ve said for a long time y’all had a crush on Rubio that would/could not last. But as he doesn’t need the right as he did before, he’s fine now to move fwd with mainstream Repubs. Will get Dem votes as well when running.
But don’t fret…you’ll always have Ted Cruz.

verbaluce on June 4, 2013 at 12:06 PM

Again!!…

Mark Rubio is NOT A NATURAL BORN American!!!!!!Father Born in Cuba!!! Put him up and he’ll end up like the Last Non-Natural Born Republican…Romney!!! We can’t protect the Constitution by not following it…Your parents must be US Citizens at the time of THEIR Births…they can not have been subject to any other Jurisdiction!
Vattel’s Law of Nations: § 212. Citizens and natives

The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.

http://blockyourid.com/~gbpprorg/obama/NaturalBornCitizenChart2.html

billofrights on June 4, 2013 at 12:06 PM

The equivocation begins.

Capitalist Hog on June 4, 2013 at 12:02 PM

Says the wolf in sheep’s clothing.

Bitter Clinger on June 4, 2013 at 12:07 PM

Capitalist Hog on June 4, 2013 at 12:04 PM

you do realize that is what Political Campaigns do, don’t you? They tabulate Demographics by age, location, sex, and, pull your panties up…race.

kingsjester on June 4, 2013 at 12:07 PM

…and partly because smart righties like Ingraham don’t want to sabotage a guy with a legitimate chance to win in 2016.

LOL, pardon my guffaw, but I’ll take exception to how ‘smart’ it is to support someone who’s actions *will* destroy the GOP, and who does *not* have a ‘legitimate’ chance to win in 2016.

McCain and Romney had *some* conservatives turn out for him. Rubio will have *NONE*, I don’t care who the Dem is. If the GOP hasn’t figured out that they’ve shot themselves in the foot with conservatives in recent history, and moves forward thinking somehow that it’s going to get *better* rather than *worse* in terms of conservative turnout, well… you can’t fix stupid.

The only caveat I’ll put here is that the *only* chance Rubio has is that enough Hispanics vote race over party. He must be thinking, “yeah, I’m going to help the Dems get 20million long-term new voters, but enough of them will vote race and vote for me while I’m on the ticket that I can win, and well, f*ck the GOP after that, who care.”

Midas on June 4, 2013 at 12:07 PM

M240H on June 4, 2013 at 11:55 AM

Rubberneck and Gunlock Bill should be by any time now to jump on the bandwagon.

kingsjester on June 4, 2013 at 11:56 AM

I whole-heartedly supported Romney. I fully operated on the Buckley rule; I believed him the most-electable of possible candidates.

In the election, he couldn’t even bring out the full base, let alone pull any real amount of supporters away from Obama.

The Buckley rule is no longer applicable if a majority is demographically impossible to obtain.

Marco Rubio is doing is best to ensure that impossibility.

Ergo, the impossibility of my ever voting for him.

Have a nice day in Dreamland.

M240H on June 4, 2013 at 12:07 PM

Rubio is such a rube in all of this….

He comes off as naive and clueless…..

redguy on June 4, 2013 at 12:07 PM

Rubio is Edmure Tully at best; Roose Bolton at worst.

IronDioPriest on June 4, 2013 at 12:08 PM

I think Ingraham’s principal concern is stopping a very bad bill. I doubt she’s given a second thought to whether Rubio likes her, as evidenced by her continuing to question the underlying dubious assumptions that Rubio relies on and the sophisms that he builds from them.

Once again, he insiste, in response to Ingraham’s concern about “comprehensive” legislation, that it’s not possible to pass legislation securing the border or revising legal immigration, except in a comprehensive bill. This is just false; you believe this only if you have bought into the liberal narrative.

And again, he thinks it will be good for the economy. There is no evidence of this. Liberals and bought-off Republicans keep repeating this in the hopes that no one will notice. Worse, we’re about to be asked to believe CBO scoring on this — the instructions to the CBO will be sent by some of the worst, lying Democrats ever!

Haven’t we seen enough of “comprehensive” legislation from this regime, starting with the stimulus, Dodd-Frank and the soon-to-be disaster of Robertobamacare.

I wish no ill will to the person or his family. But I sincerely hope if he continues to lie, as he has been doing, about the Gang of 8 bill, that Rubio’s political career disappears as suddenly as it began.

EastofEden on June 4, 2013 at 12:09 PM

I’ve said for a long time y’all had a crush on Rubio that would/could not last. But as he doesn’t need the right as he did before, he’s fine now to move fwd with mainstream Repubs. Will get Dem votes as well when running.
But don’t fret…you’ll always have Ted Cruz.

verbaluce on June 4, 2013 at 12:06 PM

Maybe you should figure out who’s gonna be your candidate before you worry about who ours is gonna be.

Bitter Clinger on June 4, 2013 at 12:09 PM

verbaluce on June 4, 2013 at 12:06 PM

Go play in traffic, you child-molesting f*ckwit.

Midas on June 4, 2013 at 12:10 PM

Go court pander to 98% of blacks…hmmmmm
Oh and the high school drop outs.
That will work, by golly. Cuz they are sooooo
interested in faqs. Nope..hue of skin.
Master manipulator in chief:

“To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists and punk-rock performance poets. We smoked cigarettes and wore leather jackets. At night, in the dorms, we discussed neocolonialism, Franz Fanon, Eurocentrism, and patriarchy. When we ground out our cigarettes in the hallway carpet or set our stereos so loud that the walls began to shake, we were resisting bourgeois society’s stifling conventions. We weren’t indifferent or careless or insecure. We were alienated.
But this strategy alone couldn’t provide the distance I wanted, from Joyce or my past. After all, there were thousands of so-called campus radicals, most of them white and tenured and happily tolerant. No, it remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names.” — Barack Obama

bazil9 on June 4, 2013 at 12:12 PM

Have a nice day in Dreamland.

M240H on June 4, 2013 at 12:07 PM

I wound up voting for, myself. I had no choice.

All a Moderate candidate got us was 4 more years of Obama.

Yes, you appeal to a majority, but, you do it through aggresive campaigning, speaking about Conservative American Values.

If Romney had done that, and foresworn Romneycare, instead of brag on it, he would be president.

kingsjester on June 4, 2013 at 12:12 PM

Mark Rubio is NOT A NATURAL BORN American!!!!!!Father Born in Cuba!!!

billofrights on June 4, 2013 at 12:06 PM

Wrong.

Here’s the law and, as I write in the post, PLEASE do not bring up Minor v Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1875), it is no longer good law because it was, effectively, overturned by the Nineteenth Amendment and should also not be cited as dispositive in any way, shape, or form on the matter of the definition of natural-born citizenship since the Court refused to rule on the issue:

Just Say “No!” To Birtherism!

FWIW, nothing in this post should be read as an endorsement of Rubio for POTUS.

Resist We Much on June 4, 2013 at 12:12 PM

I wish no ill will to the person or his family. But I sincerely hope if he continues to lie, as he has been doing, about the Gang of 8 bill, that Rubio’s political career disappears as suddenly as it began.

EastofEden on June 4, 2013 at 12:09 PM

You’re much nicer than I am about someone who is overtly doing things that will negatively impact *your* person and family as well as mine. I’m not in that gracious of a mood, frankly.

Midas on June 4, 2013 at 12:13 PM

Take a look at his education history. Hardly a leading light of the Ivy League — more like University of Phoenix.

HB3 on June 4, 2013 at 11:48 AM

Yeah those “leading light(s) of the Ivy League” are also the same ones who gave us Obamacare and are controlling / directing the IRS to target and destroy our nation’s most decent and productive citizens.

I’d rather have an average patriotic American’s leadership over some Ivy league “light” holding dominion over us any day of the week.

HotAirian on June 4, 2013 at 12:13 PM

Romney, not myself. Bad mouse.

kingsjester on June 4, 2013 at 12:13 PM

Take a look at his education history. Hardly a leading light of the Ivy League — more like University of Phoenix.

HB3 on June 4, 2013 at 11:48 AM

Anyone who attends a private university, for a law degree, that is not a T-14 school, IS A MORON.

Punchenko on June 4, 2013 at 12:14 PM

kingsjester on June 4, 2013 at 12:12 PM

Agreed.

M240H on June 4, 2013 at 12:16 PM

Rubio is a slur because he lacks brain power — he just isn’t that very bright or presidential timber. He also lacks gravitas which is very, very important.

Punchenko on June 4, 2013 at 11:58 AM

Yeah, Obama and Biden just drip with gravitas, right?

changer1701 on June 4, 2013 at 12:17 PM

Make E-Verify a national requirement for employment, and make the penalties for hiring an illegal very, very harsh, and border security will only be needed to keep out the drug runners and potential terrorists.

Let them go home, fill out the paperwork to come in as a guest worker, with no path to citizenship, and no access to any government largesse. If they want to become a citizen, get in line through existing channels. In the meantime, pay taxes and stay out of trouble with the law, or get shipped home with no right to return.

Eliminate the provision that makes children born here to non-citizens automatically citizens. Amend the Constitution if required to eliminate that madness, no other country in the world does that.

If Rubio supports those measures, he’s my guy. If he wants to be a Dem stalking horse for creating millions of new Dem voters, he’s a stooge and a useful idiot.

iurockhead on June 4, 2013 at 12:17 PM

Laura lost me when she joined up with Acid-Ann Coulter and Christie to twice help dump Sarah Palin. She’s just part of the elite GOP establishment-though gifted with a charming personality.

Don L on June 4, 2013 at 12:17 PM

ulsterman has something interesting its worth reading: http://theulstermanreport.com/2013/06/03/white-house-insider-democrats-could-give-a-sht-about-mexicans-its-all-about-2014/

A longtime Democratic Party political operative with direct experience at the highest levels of government, took a few minutes to explain how Senate Democrats (with an assist from some Senate Republicans) are using the pending Senate immigration bill to push that issue front and center for the 2014 Midterm Elections. The plan is simple – pass a bill in the Senate with the expectation of that bill to be buried in the Republican controlled House of Representatives and then hammer with the “do nothing Congress” message 24/7 leading up to the Midterm Election.

( White House Insider warns that Senate Democrats are using Republican Senator Marco Rubio and others to “run the ball up the field” on the immigration issue as a way to defeat Congressional Republicans in 2014. )

mrks on June 4, 2013 at 12:18 PM

you do realize that is what Political Campaigns do, don’t you? They tabulate Demographics by age, location, sex, and, pull your panties up…race.

kingsjester on June 4, 2013 at 12:07 PM

Blame elections. That’s good.

Take a look at his education history. Hardly a leading light of the Ivy League — more like University of Phoenix.

HB3 on June 4, 2013 at 11:48 AM

…Forty years of AA have finally resulted in an AA president and an AA Attorney-General. Woe is we.

slickwillie2001 on June 4, 2013 at 12:05 PM

Notice the similarities? (Accusing a minority being accused of being too dumb for their station by someone who probably did get accepted to a four-year university.)
Slick couldn’t even get through this thread without making my point. Where’s Schadenfreude to drive it home?

Capitalist Hog on June 4, 2013 at 12:18 PM

kingsjester on June 4, 2013 at 12:01 PM

Well your analogy certainly illustrates your view of all this.
But of course they didn’t break in…they were sought out and hired.
Though you didn’t pay them much.
You just told Immigration and the IRS they broke in.
So…what are you doing with your culprits here…arresting them?
Deporting them?
Also…you’re beds have filthy sheets on them.
And you’re walking around in very dirty clothes.
You floors are covered in grime and you have a sinkful of smelly dishes.

verbaluce on June 4, 2013 at 12:19 PM

Rubio, No amnesty. Secure the border. I want the illegals OUT. I want their children OUT. Got that?

Please spend your time on something important like repealing ZderoCare(tm) or getting rid of the corrupt regime that’s destroying our country. DO NOT HELP THEM BY GIVING AMNESTY TO PEOPLE WHO ARE CRIMINALS AND DO NOT BELONG HERE.

dogsoldier on June 4, 2013 at 12:19 PM

Capitalist Hog on June 4, 2013 at 12:18 PM

You and reality took divergent paths years ago, didn’t you, Skippy?

kingsjester on June 4, 2013 at 12:20 PM

Even With 70% of Hispanic Vote, Romney Still Would Have Lost … Winning Hispanic Vote Would Not Be Enough For GOP

In 2012, President Obama famously won 71 percent of the Hispanic vote to Mitt Romney’s 27 percent. If all other factors remained the same, how large a percentage of the Hispanic vote would Romney have had to win to capture the White House?

What if Romney had won 44 percent of the Hispanic vote, the high-water mark for Republicans achieved by George W. Bush in 2004?

As it turns out, if Romney had hit that Bush mark, he still would have lost, with 240 electoral votes to 298 for Obama.

But what if Romney had been able to make history and attract 50 percent of Hispanic voters? What then?

He still would have been beaten, 283 electoral votes to 255.

What if Romney had been able to do something absolutely astonishing for a Republican and win 60 percent of the Hispanic vote?

He would have lost by the same margin, 283 electoral votes to 255.

But what if Romney had been able to reach a mind-blowing 70 percent of the Hispanic vote? Surely that would have meant victory, right? No, it wouldn’t.

Romney still would have lost, although by the narrowest of electoral margins, 270 to 268.

According to the [New York] Times’ calculator, Romney would have had to win 73 percent of the Hispanic vote to prevail in 2012…Which suggests that Romney, and Republicans, had bigger problems than Hispanic voters.

The most serious of those problems was that Romney was not able to connect with white voters who were so turned off by the campaign that they abandoned the GOP and in many cases stayed away from the polls altogether. Recent reports suggest as many as 5 million white voters simply stayed home on Election Day. If they had voted at the same rate they did in 2004, even with the demographic changes since then, Romney would have won.

Likewise, the white vote is so large that an improvement of 4 points — going from 60 percent to 64 percent of those whites who did vote — would have won the race for Romney.

Resist We Much on June 4, 2013 at 12:20 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3