Wall Street Journal still pushing Hispanic vote chimera

The Wall Street Journal offers what is probably a daily attempt to support importing cheap labor in "Hispanics and the GOP" (possible author: Stephen Moore). It's difficult to point out all that's wrong with it or how similar it is to past efforts, but let's consider this bit:

While GOP candidates debated the urgency of erecting a fence from California to Texas along the Mexican border, Democrats debated in Spanish on Univision.

Actually, (to the chagrin of Bill Richardson), they "debated" in English. It was translated into Spanish. And, Richardson practically had a sign around his neck saying, "vote for me, I'm Raza". And, both Hillary and Obama were asked to defend their voting for the fence. And, leftie Elena Maria Salinas asked questions that indicated her support for illegal immigration, which the Dems answered as one would expect. Would the WSJ have the GOP reduce itself to that level?

To reverse current trends, the GOP need not resort to ethnic pandering, which is the left's metier.

I fail to see how they could avoid stooping to ethnic pandering, if they're going to support massive immigration from one region and especially from one country. And, that also means giving in to the racial power demands of "community leaders" who've made it clear that they put their race ahead of their country. So, how would the WSJ do it?

But Republicans would help their cause tremendously if the party at the very least adopted a welcoming stance toward Latino newcomers... Tone matters in politics, and getting people to vote for you is easier when you're not likening them to Islamic terrorists, or implying that Latino men are hard-wired for gang-banging.

Nice strawman. I'm not aware of GOP leaders that do that. Chuck Schumer did produce a video showing illegal aliens climbing over a fence and discussing the threat of terrorists infiltrating the U.S., which he quickly pulled because a couple racial demagogues complained. Should the GOP engage in such gutless behavior? Should the GOP turn a blind eye to terrorist infiltration because racial demagogues want them to turn a blind eye to massive illegal immigration by others of the same race?

There's much more, including this:

Republican pols may decide to follow Mr. Tancredo, Lou Dobbs, Fox News populists and obsessive bloggers down this path, but it's likely to lead to political defeat.

Oh well. Even if I were a member of a party I'd put what's in the best interests of the U.S. first, and I invite the WSJ to consider doing the same.


the attack will never stop until people star to understand this is a real war against the ideals of freedom and the idea against the BILL OF RIGHTS, ARMS are the only way to make a real future of LAWS Against our real enemies, Bush is a one world pig and so are most not all but most inside this government. think freedom think duty to the future of your kids not the third world Rats. Life my brothers and sisters of freedom and duty and understand what life means in this end game. the pigs at the wall street journal hate life and hate the ideals of a free people that is why the pigs want Mexico and its political pigs to have the vote and the power by the vote. John see you at the coffee shop.

The WSJ is worried about political defeat? For decades those who opposed immigration suffered "political defeat" as the govt cheered on by the WSJ left our borders wide open and our laws unenforced. Now, with the invasion at full flood and the country well on its way to Latino-flavored balkanized turd world sh*thole the WSJ is worried about political defeat? There isn't going to be a Republican party in the near future. What's the point anyway when we already have a plutocracy?

We must end all immigration to the United State of America from non Western countires. If we do not do this then America will cease to exist in just a matter of decades. We are destroying the culture of America each new immigrant at a time.

The WSJ is a bastion of wealth and elitism. They represent the wealthy stereotype the Party has had to live down for years. What do they care about average Joe Americans? On second thought, maybe there is not a stereotype.