Post-election reactions

Below is e-mail that is being received continually today about the election. I’ll start with what I think is the most important point for us to realize in the face of the inevitable lie that Republicans lost because of their opposition to illegal immigration. It is Point No. 2 from Roy Beck’s Action Alert:


Here are the eight most important first things you need to know about Tuesday’s elections and how they affect the desires and efforts of all of us to get control of our borders and overall immigration numbers:

… No. 2: Our allies did NOT lose because they were tough on immigration issues.

And House Republicans were not turned out of the majority because they stood against Pres. Bush and Democrats to stop their giant amnesty plans.

We can be sure of that because of scientific polling in more than a dozen battleground districts and states this fall. The surveys by The Polling Company found that in competitive races, large majorities of Democrats and Independents, and even larger majorities of Republicans, agreed with our positions on combatting illegal immigration and on reducing overall numbers.

I already started to hear a little bit of toxic spin in the TV commentary over the night. I am sure that Tamar Jacoby, the Wall Street Journal and other ubiquitous open-borders commentators will try to say that the losses of immigration-restriction candidates like Randy Graf and J.D. Hayworth in Arizona and John Hostettler in Indiana prove that hard-line positions against illegal immigration are losers.

But there is no logic in that. The polls showed that voters in the competitive districts, including in Arizona, agreed with us on immigration. If they agreed with us, why would they punish a candidate for also agreeing with us? They wouldn’t. Obviously, other factors (the war & scandal) were the driving forces behind the big Party shift.

James R. writes:

2008 Republican and Democrat campaign slogan:

“An enchilada in every pot”

Bruce B. writes:

Here’s a quote to help us keep our chins up, from Beowulf:

Wyrd oft nereð
unfægne eorl, þonne his ellen deah!

“For Wyrd oft saveth
earl undoomed if he doughty be!”

Clark Coleman sends this:

“Sharply differing views on the essential issues tells a large part of the story this e”lection. When deciding which candidate to support, more voters today said political corruption (41 percent) was extremely important to their vote than said the economy (39 percent), the issue of terrorism (39 percent), the war in Iraq (36 percent), values issues (36 percent) or illegal immigration (30 percent) was extremely important.”

LA says:

However I would add this. Since the GOP did not make an issue of their opposition to the Comprehensive Immigration bill, therefore other issues, issues in which the GOP did not look good, rose to the fore. It was their failure to make their opposition to open borders front and center that doomed them. It was the best thing by far that they had going for them, and they declined to go with it.

Tom S. writes:

I’d just like to say “Congratulations!” to all those conservatives who who stayed at home yesterday in order to “punish” President Bush, and renew conservativism. You have punished Bush by handing him a mandate to open America’s borders, his fondest dream, and you have renewed conservatism by giving America its most leftist House since the Great Society. What a brilliant strategy. Congratulations—you got what you wanted. I hope that you like what you are going to get…

LA adds:

Let us congratulate in particular John Derbyshire, who a couple of weeks ago urged conservatives to stay home and not vote at all, because, Derbyshire said, Democrats are now more in favor of immigration control than are the Republicans. Yep. That’s what he said. He heard it from the “brilliant” liberal spin artist Peter Beinart of The New Republic, so it must be true.

Jeff in England writes:

I’m glad the Democrats won so people will once again be reminded what a sham their particular form of liberalism is. The so called mainstream need to see millions more flocking across the border and Islam making many more inroads in the West and their streets falling apart even further due to crime. Now people will hopefully be reminded again that there is no real difference between these two liberal parties and even when there is, it matters for little . Republican liberal conservatism (and its twin neo-conservatism) has simply been a failure so the mainstream has turned to a more liberal liberalism thinking it will be better.

As I believe the ‘situation’ needs to get far worse before it gets better, I hope the Democrat victory encourages that. More out of control immigration, more anti-Americanism by immigrant groups, more segregation by Muslims, more family implosion, more educational collapse, more of everything that threatens the survival of the West. I won’t advocate violence against the West but I won’t be surprised if the Jihadist throatcutters are encouraged by the Democrat victory and attack us even more enthusiastically. The mainstream (one of these days we have to define it) needs to be weaned off this liberalism by further bitter lessons of real life. It is still addicted to that liberalism and not nearly ready to give it up.They will get a huge dose of it under Democratic legislative rule. Bush’s liberal conservatism was simply another more deceptive version of liberalism and an incompetent one at that. This latest version may be more competent but far more dangerous. Good, I declare. Let the mainstream be shown the abysss and stripped of their illusions. BRING IT ON!

Howard Sutherland writes:

From the Telegraph, on the rout of the GOP:

“The top Republican John McCain said the party was unmoored from its principles. ‘I think people have a frustration,’ he said. ‘It reflects on the president, as well. We can’t continue to frivolously spend on these pork-barrel projects and call ourselves fiscal conservatives.’”

McCain’s hypocrisy takes my breath away. He is, if it’s possible, even more profligate than Bush! To think he benefits from a reputation for integrity because the NVA thumped him in the Hanoi Hilton. He may have deserved that reputation then. Not now. HRS

Clark Coleman writes:

Now that Democrats control the House, we have one small silver lining. House GOP leaders refused to publicly expose the details of Jorge W. Traitor’s refusal to enforce our laws, out of party loyalty. The Democrats will be glad to embarrass Jorge at every turn. The details will be provided by immigration reduction groups.

From the NumbersUSA post-election email, the 8th point of 8 in their response to the elections is

“No. 8: The Democratic takeover may finally enable vigorous oversight over the Bush Administration’s failure to secure our borders, secure our green card and visa system and to provide robust interior enforcement of our immigration laws.

We had some great Republicans in the House trying to prod, push and plead with the Administration for better enforcement.

But the GOP leadership would never allow the oversight to be strong enough to embarrass the Administration to be forced to enforce the laws.

The Democrats may appreciate the chance to embarrass the Bush Administration.

Many of you may not be all that aware of the extent to which NumbersUSA is building a department of professionals to assist with congressional oversight of the Administration. The majority of news reports this past year that have questioned the Administration’s handling of immigration have been generated by our NumbersUSA team.

We look forward to helping the Democrats expose the Bush Administration’s weaknesses in protecting the physical and economic security of the American people through its lax handling of immigration matters. “

Erik E. writes:

So far I haven’t heard anyone talk about this rather interesting point:

In Arizona, Propositions 100, 102, 103, and 300 all won by large margins.

English Only, Prop 187 lite, no bail, etc etc—all are now the law of the State of Arizona. The ACLU’s collective head must be spinning at the number of lawsuits they are going to have to file.

Graf was stabbed in the back. That’s why he lost. No other reason.

Hayworth….oh, I remember JD when he was a fulminator on the radio. His mouth causes him trouble. And allegedly there are Anchor Babies now voting in his district. Could be. Another argument for restriction, not against it.

The Bottom Line: anger at illegal immigration is real and visceral. Bilbray and Hunter won easily.

Haven’t heard anyone point that out, just idiot neos from the East Coast spewing noise about what they know not.”

You point out that the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative won big. Great point—Barbara Grutter gotta be one happy camper this AM.

But in Arizona, an array of real immigration restriction laws now come into effect. Passed by popular vote.

When will someone talk about that?

Scott H. writes:

One scenario responding to Jeff in England:

- Housing Bubble bust (already inventories up, prices down, foreclosures up, $1 trillion in ARMs reset in 2007)
leading to:
- loss of jobs in related sectors
- less “disposable” income for home owners, leading to:
- loss of jobs for illegals
- couple that with:
Amnesty for 25-30 million (increasing every day now, especially with amnesty on the horizon)
- Mexitude emboldened, more marches and demands (the more they get, the more they’ll want)
- increased welfare, medical, social costs to actual US citizens (read white people)
- Oaxaca (see scenario in LA if demands not met
- Increased mass immigration from 3rd world countries
- Increased violence against whites in US
- Iraq withdrawal will embolden Moslems, they will perceive this as lacking courage to fight
- 1st Moslem elected to House
- CAIR legitimatized, leading to more dhimmitude from the political class
- Open Borders advocates (on the Repub side) get to blame the loss of power on evil, white, nativist,anti-immigration Know-Nothings and they will blame the resulting amnesty on the evil nativists for not supporting “Comprehensive Reform” while getting exactly what they want and taking no blame themselves

Until the gathering in the hills.

David B. writes:

I just heard Rush Limbaugh’s opening monologue. He said, “We don’t have conservative leadership at the Top.” Rush kept saying we don’t have it at the “Top.” He never said the word, “Bush,” he just kept blaming on some mysterious figure at the “Top.” No, El Rushbo didn’t say he was “surprised,” this time.

RB writes:

Things look pretty bleak. Unfortunately the following is now the most likely scenario as this new century unfolds. The treason party which includes the Bush-McCain Republicans and the Pelosi Democrats are now free to flood the country with millions of amnestied illegals, guestworkers and their consequent enormous chain immigration. While the US can survive some immigration, this enormous number (some estimates say 66 million over the next ten years—and of course untold numbers afterward) will lead to the end of the US in its present form. I foresee massive unrest and possibly civil war in the Southwest.

Also the enemies are gathering. Resentful masses from south of the border led by the likes of Chavez will enter into an alliance with the Muslims. Terrorists as well as ethnic agitators will stream into the US. Very likely America will fragment into even more pieces than the Soviet Union. Also, abetted by “the champions of the downtrodden working class” known as Democrats, big business will scour the world for cheap labor and this will include a reservoir of eager comers from teeming Muslim areas like Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indian Muslims, Egypt, Indonesia etc. These will form large Muslim enclaves here as is now the case in Europe.

With the end of America, there will be no one left to stand up to the growing Islamic power and Muslims will indeed take over Europe and most other areas of the world. In addition, they will accomplish what even Hitler was unable to achieve—put an end to Jewish history. The only way this world domination would be averted is if China, the one remaining superpower, and one without the destructive western guilt and PC mentality realizes that its civilization is now on the line and takes the sort of extreme action that westerners find so distasteful.

At this time we have only one slim hope. The Pelosi Democrats will so screw things up that the American people will rise up in revulsion and throw all, not just a selective few of the bums out in 2008. Ironically, the best thing that could happen is for the extreme left to force Pelosi and her colleagues to impeach and remove both Bush and Cheney. Under the Pelosi administration our national security will once more be in the hands of Jamie Garelick and her assorted clones. The Muslims will take good advantage of this to launch massive attacks and finally, Americans in their fear and confusion, will confront reality. Unfortunately, the medicine is very strong and most unpleasant.

The best thing conservatives and immigration restrictionists can do is to flood Democrat sites and blogs and egg them on with support for removing Bush and Cheney. If we can set the dogs to fighting with each other early enough it will distract and divert them from cooperating with each other in destroying America.

LA writes:

I had initially skimmed RB’s post and didn’t take in everything he is saying. He’s saying powerful things here and one point in particular stands out. The weakening of America through vast uncontrolled immigration means there will be no power in the world to stop Islam. Consider what this says about the neocons. Mark Steyn wants America to stand “Alone” against jihad and save what’s left of the West, yet he says not a word about stopping immigration. What Steyn doesn’t see (or doesn’t care about) is that without stopping immigration, there will be no America to stand “Alone.” For neocons immigration is simply a sacred thing, and no critical thought about it is allowed.

Ken Hechtman, VFR’s always informative leftist correspondent in Canada, writes:

It was a good day for us commie-dhimmi-hippie-faggots.

First-ever socialist elected to the Senate (Bernie Sanders, VT).

First-ever Muslim elected to the House (Keith Ellison, MN).

A new high-water mark of 44% in the Nevada Marijuana Initiative. Note that Nevada has the second-toughest marijuana laws in the US after Texas. If the language of the ballot measure had said “decrim” instead of “full legalization” they would have won.

A ballot measure on gay marriage was voted down in Arizona. That’s never happened before.

Dimitri K writes:

Is it a coincidence that it was the House, which stopped amnesty, was owerthrown by dems? Long before elections, I heard that House would be overthrown. How they knew it? I did not hear any argument. I heard a lot about “wrong ideas” but did not hear any example. And who are those “grass-roots” conservatives who voted for dems? Aren’t them libertarians who had joined Republicans once, and now they punished them for, including other “faults” from their point of view, stopping immigration?

A reader writes:

The people have got some of what they wanted. Rumsfeld is stepping down.

What if Bush had let Rum go before? People may have felt pacified, that he was hearing them, and not thrown out all the Reps!

Rhona N. writes:

I’m so frustrated with the news coverage of this whole mess. The thing that got me was in the news pages of the Wall St. J. calling the Hispanice vote “crucial” in this election. Now how in hell could that be? What, does wishing make it so? So this is what I sent to Steve Sailer and this is what he put on his blog.

’WSJ: “The crucial role of Hispanics:“ A reader writes:

The Wall St. Journal in its news pages points to the “crucial role of Hispanics” in this election? Can you find me a few where that was the case?

Oh, jeez, that again. If you prodded a Washington political reporter awake from a deep sleep and told him to start typing, his fingers would automatically punch in “the crucial Hispanic swing vote.” He probably has it on a macro.

Compared to the 2002 midterms, the GOP’s Hispanic share of the vote dropped from 38% to 29%, 9 points down, while the GOP’s white share dropped from 58% to 51%, or 7 points down. (Those numbers have changed slightly since my VDARE blog item of last night.) Since the Hispanic vote follows the white vote up and down, just about 20 points shifted toward the Democrats (it’s not a swing vote, it’s a vote that goes with the flow of the white vote), the relative loss for the GOP among Hispanics versus the last midterm was 2 percentage points, which it would be reasonable to attribute to the Fence. Multiply that 2 percentage point relative loss by the approximate 6 percent share of the vote that Hispanics made up in this electorate, and you’ve got an itsy-bitsy number: 0.12%.
In most of your big Hispanic states, California, Texas, Florida, New York, there weren’t too many close major races. Schwarzenegger lost the Hispanic vote almost 2 to 1, but still won overall in a near landslide.’

[end of steve comment]

I think I’m losing my mind on this. What really hurt was JD Hayworth losing. I didn’t expect Graf to win because he was betrayed. Our treasonous president is happy right now because he’ll get his nation-busting immigration proposals. Where are the American people on this? Do they have no clue as to what awaits them?

N. writes:

We can expect the San Francisco Democrats under Speaker Pelosi to take the Senate’s amnesty and run with it. Bush will sign it, perhaps with Vicente Fox and representatives from La Raza Unida looking on. This will lead to 20 million new US citizens on a fast track, so that they can be sure to pull the Democrat party lever in 2008, along with 20 to 40 million dependents.

I expect this to be a done deal by April of ‘07 at the latest.

Republicans ought to take a good, hard look at this last year, and realize that George W. Bush had a choice between a GOP controlled Congress, and an amnesty bill. He made his choice, and GOP diehards need to have that pointed out to them early and often.

LA replies:

The only thing that can stop the Comprehensive bill now is a mass rising of the people.
Ben writes:

“The best thing conservatives and immigration restrictionists can do is to flood Democrat sites and blogs and egg them on with support for removing Bush and Cheney. If we can set the dogs to fighting with each other early enough it will distract and divert them from cooperating with each other in destroying America.”

I agree with this. This is actually the best bet for us traditionalists. That the Democrats will be so busy “getting payback” that there will be no cooperation on anything. All the talk of Bush today about working together in bi-partisan this and that is bad for us and cannot be allowed to happen.

However, The conservative movement must now totally destroy President Bush’s legitimacy as a “conservative” leader and make him a figure of disgrace and reject his entire liberal Presidency. No defense of him can any longer be allowed and tolerated within conservative circles if we wish to restore conservative principles and stop this coming immigration disaster.

I actually enjoyed RB’s gloomy possible future. I like people who realize the crisis we are in.

LA replies:

Too late for this scenario. Pelosi has said that impeachment is off the table.
Ben replies:

So Pelosi said that impeaching Bush is “off the table”. Yeah, for now.

But any time that Bush is less than totally compliant with the Democrats, John Conyers can just clear his throat in a Judiciary meeting, and the machine will start rolling. Bush knows this.

Look at how fast Bush dumped Rumsfeld. Did you hear the press conference? I did, and the strain in Bush’s voice when he dissembled that Rumsfeld’s leaving had “nothing to do with election” was obvious and not at all pretty to hear. The threat of “Nixonizing”, as I’m already seeing it referred to on some weblogs, will keep Bush’s veto pen in the drawer.

So we’ll get amnesty, with a fast track to citizenship to enable the illegalst to vote in 2008, along with a new minimum wage of $7/hr or more, likely indexed to the CPI. Medicare reform, tort reform, Social Security reform are all dead, along with any reform of the UN. Just for a start.

All this talk about “blue dog Democrats” is whistling past the ‘ graveyard. As you pointed out Webb may be a cultural conservative, or he may not, but it won’t matter if Harry Reid is Senate Majority Leader; Webb, like all other freshman, will hop when the Dem leadership says “Frog!”, and that’s that.

Frankly I’m hoping for a big recession to hit as soon as possible, because it will leave a lot of illegals unemployed and encourage them to leave BEFORE amnesty kicks in. Don’t know if that will happen or not.

Paul K. writes:

I wonder if this election has shaken Bush’s faith that democracy is the solution to everything?

I just watched his 1 PM press conference. He didn’t mention his comprehensive immigration bill, but the last question he took asked if he thought it would now pass, as it is more popular with Democrats than Republicans. Bush thanked the reporter for bringing that up, claimed he had forgotten to mention it, and said that yes, that was something he and the Democrats could accomplish together, especially as the administration has now made real progress toward securing the border (yes, he claimed that). I don’t know if I’m reading too much into his body language, but he seemed unusually ill at ease while he talked about this, very shifty.

One of the things that annoys me about Bush is that he proudly describes himself as “optimistic,” as when a reporter asked him why he was so wrong about the outcome of this election. Being optimistic is fine, but not as important as being realistic, which Bush is not. Also, I get the impression that Bush associates his optimism with his faith; he should know that while hope is a Christian virtue, that’s not the same as optimism. Optimism, as the president exemplifies it, is more or less synonymous with denial.

Ben writes (this looks like a headline from Drudge):


I was listening earlier and turned it off. He must have said this after I turned it off. Amazing.

LA replies:

He’s saying he was only willing to be honest if Republicans are not in power. He should have been honest before.
An Indian living in the West writes:

According to Steve Sailer, Jews this time voted 87-11 in favour of the Democrats.

That’s an amazing statistic. Why were American Jews so anti-Republican this time?

David B. writes:

I heard the comment Ben mentioned. Rush said he had been standing up for people who don’t have the guts to stand up for themselves. He called them “those people,” and “the Top (again).” Rush also said, “The time the President was most animated in his press conference was when he said he would work with the Democrats on immigration reform. He’s says he’ll give them everything they want.” He’s still ranting about it as I type this. I’ll send you the thread when it’s posted at Rush’s site.

Tom S. writes:

Ken Hechtman writes: “It was a good day for us commie-dhimmi-hippie-faggots.”

No, it wasn’t—you only think that it was. I’m afraid that the end of Western Civ isn’t going to be as much fun as the commie-dhimmi-hippie-faggots think it’s going to be. In a few years, I’ll bet that Mr. Hechtman agrees with me…

Stephen T. writes:

RB writes that “big business will scour the world for cheap labor and this will include a reservoir of eager comers from teeming Muslim areas like Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indian Muslims, Egypt, Indonesia etc. These will form large Muslim enclaves here as is now the case in Europe.”

I don’t agree. For what purpose would this happen?

Bush and the corporate elite have as little use for millions of Muslim immigrants as they have for millions of Scandinavians or Pacific Islanders. I don’t even precisely agree that they wish to make this country simply “non-white”: I don’t expect to see Africans or South Americans being recruited for free citizenship, for example. Make no mistake: This is conceived and designed to be all Mestizo Mexicans, all the time. Amnesty or no amnesty, fully 40% (~ 40 million) of Mexicans *already* report that they are actively planning to enter the US in the imminent future given a green light of even possible amnesty.

Expect another 30 million over and above that, given formal guest worker program. These millions are the Dream Immigrant to the people who are making these decisions. In a quirk of “perfect storm”-style fate, we have the bad luck to border an almost unlimited amassment of persons who will arrive (culturally? genetically?) pre-loaded with the set of very unique characteristics that fully satisfy all requirements of those who wish to subvert our values, heritage, and economy for their own ends. No others need apply.

Andy K. writes:

One thing I haven’t seen mentioned is that the 2008 Primary season is only 15 months away.

Assuming a “Kill America Mass Amnesty” passes this spring or more likely summer, it would still be fresh on the minds of all Republican/Conservative primary voters. I’d like to see how any candidate who votes for an amnesty will explain it then and still hope to win. (John McCain call your speechwriter!) I think most of the angry voters last night were Democrats and Independents who were reacting mainly over Iraq and various Congressional scandals. Let’s see in early 2008 how angry the Conservatives are. Hopefully there will be a good candidate running that we can actually vote for, and not a bunch of carbon copies picked by the Party leadership to vote against.

Scott H. writes:

Stephen T. writes:

In a quirk of “perfect storm”-style fate, we have the bad luck to border an almost unlimited amassment of persons who will arrive (culturally? genetically?) pre-loaded with the set of very unique characteristics that fully satisfy all requirements of those who wish to subvert our values, heritage, and economy for their own ends.

He is exactly right. The Mexican mestizos have been a peasant class for over 700 years in their country. The more ‘white’ Spanish descendants run the country always have, looks like always will. The small percentage of Xicano/ La Raza activists will be bought off will a little fiefdom, some semblance of power, no real power. The Mexicans don’t want to be Americans, they want a Mexico that works. They bring their culture based on class and race with them and will not be able to escape it.

“We have not journeyed all this way across the centuries, across the oceans, across the mountains, across the prairies, because we are made of sugar candy.” Winston Churchill

David H. writes:

Mr. Auster,

Sadly your worst-case scenario has come true. And it didn’t take long for some conservatives (liberals) to blame Christians for this defeat; one blogger implies that the Republican Party may not be as inclined to court their favor in the future. Fine. I’ll still be an Orthodox Christian without the Republican Party. Where will they be without Christians? I find it, quite frankly, idiotic to blame Christians and not point out that MANY Americans were sickened by the pro-immigration stance of Bush and (erroneously) took it out on the Republicans in the House. By the way I did vote (all for Republicans—in degenerating West Virginia a depressing proposition but a necessary one) and I resent the implication that I am to blame for this disaster.

N. writes:

In which the One Man Truth Detector admits that he’s been supporting bad legislation, but for a higher purpose…

Excerpt: “I’m not trying to tell you that this is about me. I’m just answering questions that I’ve had from people about how I feel. There have been a bunch of things going on in Congress, some of this legislation coming out of there that I have just cringed at, and it has been difficult coming in here, trying to make the case for it when the people who are supposedly in favor of it can’t even make the case themselves—and to have to come in here and try to do their jobs. I’m a radio guy! I understand what this program has become in America and I understand the leadership position it has. I was doing what I thought best, but at this point, people who don’t deserve to have their water carried, or have themselves explained as they would like to say things but somehow aren’t able to? I’m not under that kind of pressure. Am I making myself clear on this, Mr. Snerdley? (interruption)”

LA replies:

He sounds like any cringing, favor-currying, mainstream conservative columnist, focused not on truth but on being a good team member and maintaining his place in the flow of things. He openly tells us that he only speaks the truth after it will no longer cost him anything. How can people respect him after this?

Think of the good he could have done over the years, in helping keep Bush and the Republicans on the straight and narrow, if he really had been a voice of truth.

RB continues explain his scenario for political guerilla warfare:

A few additional observations re your post election thread. You’re right; Pelosi has indicated that impeachment is off the table. But the left wing of the Democrat party are slaves to their own (quite unreasonable, considering how useful he has been to them) hatred of Bush. That can be used, they can be incited to harass and even turn on their own leaders once they see them as recalcitrant. Even if we don’t get impeachment hearings we can encourage as much strife as possible within the Democrats and between Democrats and Republicans. Also imagine the effect even talk of a President Pelosi would have on the volatile and paranoid Hillary who sees the honor of first woman president as reserved for herself. Incite the Dems to engage in gridlock—block appointments etc. In that recent series on the Roman Empire, it was shown how one man, Tiberius Gracchus, brought their whole republic to a standstill simply through use of his tribunal veto. It’s a dangerous policy given the enemies out there who are ready to pounce. But when there is nothing to lose there is no sense in playing it safe. Indeed, our Muslim foes have been quite successful in exploiting differences of race, class and ideology in the camp of their adversaries. We can learn from them.

I have often received e-mail from various immigration restriction proponents urging me to go to this or that website and sign a petition for or against certain legislation. Perhaps what is needed now is much simpler. A site where one can sign on to “taking the pledge” to vote against any congressman who votes for amnesty legislation. Ten million such pledges may rattle Republicans and even elicit sufficient electoral fear and inner patriotism among Pelosi’s coterie of blue dog Democrats to stand up on this issue. [LA says: Great idea. Maybe Numbers USA could take this on.]

I too heard Rushbo say that he would no longer carry water for certain Republicans. If he and Hannity and all the other Bushbots in the punditocracy are sincere in this then there is one really useful thing they can do. In the spirit of Senator Goldwater trooping up to the Nixon White House, they can use their unique access to Bush and members of his administration by filing up there and urging him to do something he personally detests but which is absolutely necessary to the future of their party. They can cajole, beg and bludgeon him until he agrees to withdraw his support for CIRA and even veto it. Can he be persuaded to do that? I don’t know, however Bush strikes me as being extraordinarily stubborn, but, paradoxically, as also somewhat weak-minded. He is always falling under the influence of “geniuses” like Karl Rove, Grover Norquist or Condi Rice; so maybe it’s possible for the guys he likes to exert enough influence on him. It’s up to their fans to badger them into doing it.

Finally, it may be true as one of your correspondents pointed out that Business can easily use the Mestizos across the border as their “guest workers.” However, they are only good for unskilled work in services or agriculture, or at best, semi-skilled construction jobs. Bill Gates and his cronies, however, have pushed a constant series of increases in H1B visas and would love to have a flood of cheap computer, technical and other skilled labor. These jobs require skills and intelligence that are generally absent among Hispanics but are present in the middle classes in India and China, which are a small fraction of the population but in absolute numbers are quite large. And the same skills and intelligence are found in considerable numbers among the educated in Muslim countries. So beware.

LA writes:

Here is the link to Rush Limbaugh’s confession today, which I discuss here.

Richard B. writes:

I totally agree with you that Bush wanted the Democrats to win. Had he sent Rumsfield packing before the election it may have changed some minds by showing flexibility and concern. He said he didn’t want a make a change and be seen as doing it for ‘political reasons’ before the election, but the political outcome was the Dems win. I don’t see the immigration bill being passed until close to the ‘08 election. Dems will use it to their advantage. Then again, maybe there is a deal cut between Bush and the Dems. Pass it soon while they ave momentum. I’m sick of it all.

Van Wijk writes:

You said: “The only thing that can stop the Comprehensive bill now is a mass rising of the people.”

Another poster mentioned gathering in the hills. I’m not sure if he was being facetious or not, but it is something all of us here need to start thinking about in earnest.

As I see it, we still have one huge advantage over our doomed European brethren: the 2nd Amendment. All traditionalists should go and buy a new firearm this month. Learn to use it if you don’t already know how.

Go camping this holiday weekend in the freezing rain with as few amenities as possible. Teach your children to live off the land, and make preparations to go off-the-grid. If this the beginning of the end for us, I’d rather live it like a true American than passively awaiting the ultimate violation.

If I should suddenly stop posting at VFR, you’ll more than likely know the reason why.

Tom S. writes:

I wouldn’t give up just yet. A lot can happen between now and 2008, and there will be plenty of opportunities for us to win the fight for Western Civilization. Our forefathers created the noblest civilization in human history, and now is our chance to prove ourselves worthy of them. Above all, we should never despair and never tire. The enemy never does. Let’s draw a deep breath, and carry on. Those who came before us met and surmounted greater challenges than this—we can as well. The men of the West didn’t beat the Huns, beat the Avars, beat the Muslims, beat the Nazis, and beat the Communists just to lose to this sorry lot.

Scott H. writes:

If we, as white men, as Americans, have to “go off grid” it’s way too late. The time to stand up on our feet is now while we are in the majority (population wise), and have some support. White men have to get up off the couch, turn off that d*** TV, and go outside. Mow your own grass. Become more self-sufficient. Learn to protect yourself and your family. Live below your means, and have a margin. I hope we don’t have to meet in the hills, it will be ugly then. When people post on other sites “The tree of liberty, from time to time, has to be watered with the blood of patriots and tyrants” I wonder if they know what that would really require. I would suggest reading Joseph Plumb Martin’s “Yankee Doodle Boy” and David Hackett Fischer’s “Paul Revere’s Ride” especially the section on the running battle of Lexington and Concord. Those folks were hard men, the likes of which we haven’t seen in more than a generation. I’m not sure I’d be up to the task they had. We owe it to them and our posterity to be up to our task. It’s our time, we will be judged by history.

Mark P. writes:

I’m very disappointed about the outcome of the election. The choice is now to either run to the hills (as one reader puts it) or to try to make as much money as possible so you can buy into the inevitable gated communities that will pop up to help isolate wealthy citizens from the coming chaos.

There is, however, a silver lining and the idea is to pay attention to the details in the amnesty bill. If a “guest worker” program is created that allows companies to ship foreigners in from all over the world to do the jobs Mexicans won’t do, then that will go a long way to reducing the power of the Hispanic Mafia.

The idea is to reduce the Mexicans to a powerless, deracinated mob by either pricing them out of the labor market or forcing their noses so deep into the grindstone that political activity becomes impossible. Corporate interests want a steady flow of cheap labor, not labor organized along Mexican nationalism, with its inevitable unionism. Bush could make the case to open “freedom” to the rest of the world, while corporate interests scour the globe for indentured servants or even slaves to work in company towns.

The trick is to maintain enough ethnic balancing so that the various groups of workers never gain any real power. These jumbled, non-English-speaking labor forces will check Hispanic power by threatening their economic security. Heck, these can even be used to bust-up Hispanic attempts to close shops.

Not a great solution, but better than the alternative.

Vivek G. writes:

As an optimist I view this result as: The people wanted some true Republican, and they found GWB Jr. too much of a Democrat and so they rejected his party.

On a pessimistic note: Liberals have been muddling with education for so long that it is not surprising that the electorate could not see the dangers posed by the Democrats.

If the immigration bill is indeed passed, it will be horrible for America (and also the world). As a few years down the line, the government in America (which will effectively be elected by the immigration vote bank) will push for such “immigration reforms” all over the world, through WTO, UN etc. The only beneficiaries of such non-sense will be Muslims and thieves.

RB writes:

Some additional comments on guerilla warfare. Before we take to the hills there are a number of other ways of tying up the whole system. We need some of our desperate friends in Congress to work on the following amendments or additions to proposed amnesty legislation. These might be know collectively as the “Samson amendments”.

1. The Asian Equality and Affirmative Immigration clause. OK, our betters have decided that we are to become a fragmented third world nation. But does it necessarily have to be a Mestizo nation? If you look at the numbers you will see that two of the world’s most important and populous nations, India and China have been grossly and unfairly underrepresented as a percent of immigration. We must do whatever is necessary to correct this vile and racist injustice. I propose that a special quota of 2 million annual visas each be reserved for India and China for the next 20 years over and above anything else in the amnesty bill. We are delighted to welcome 80 million new immigrants from these great nations and of course, they are entitled to sponsor additional family members. Both of these nations could easily send us these numbers and not even realize that they’re gone. It would be interesting to see all of the Latino ethnic advocates do the Ralph Kramden hmminy-hmminy-hmminy as they try to explain why that’s a bad idea. Think of the great support this will elicit from our, in some areas, significant Asian population. Also see how the business cheap labor part of the treason coalition salivates at the prospect.

2. The Language and Cultural Respect clause. Why should we only be bilingual, why not multilingual? Give Chinese, Hindi, Urdu, Arabic, Swahili and Haitian Creole equal standing as official languages in addition to that barracks room Latin dialect known as Spanish. It’s only fair.

3. The Community Quality of Life Enhancement and non Discrimination clause. Why should the “cultural wealth” resulting from our national abolishment not be shared by everyone? And why should the malefactors of great wealth not be required to share their lifestyles with our worthy new teeming masses? Require all towns, municipalities and neighborhoods in all states to set aside 10% of their area for settling these new populations. This would include all gated communities as well as places like, oh some examples from the top of my head, Hyannisport, Kennebunkport, Crawford, and Beverly Hills. And of course Senator Brownback will repent of his evil deed in having diverted all the great Somali refugees he brought to America away from his state of Kansas and will now welcome them to settle there.

4. The Environmental Impact Clause. Require all immigration legislation to be accompanied with an extensive report by the EPA on environmental impact including effects on energy consumption, land use and water resources. Lets see the liberals oppose that one.

Its time for my favorite Congressman, Tancredo to come out of his depression, there’s a lot to be done. Someone should send him the text of Krishna’s oration to Arjuna on the eve of battle.

LA replies:

Let us not forget the Equality of State Subsidization for Religious and Cultural Centers clause. Temples, mosques, churches, and community centers for all new immigrant groups must be built and paid for by the federal government. My gosh, the governments of England and France have been doing that for decades. How long are we going to lag behind the Europeans in this area?

Posted by Lawrence Auster at November 08, 2006 11:19 AM | Send

Email entry

Email this entry to:

Your email address:

Message (optional):