On Mar 29, 9:29Â am, Ted
hotmail.com> wrote:> On Mar 29, 6:05 am, Earth Mother
gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>>> February 29, 2008
>
>> "He Can't Win"--How Immigration Reform Patriots Betrayed Duncan Hunter
>> (And Tom Tancredo)
>> By Joe Guzzardi
>
>> Had I known in 2001 what I know today, I might never have signed on to
>> write columns for
VDARE.COM.
>
>> If, seven years ago, Peter Brimelow had told me that one day I would
>> be fielding irate letters from readers berating me for not rallying
>> the troops around the presidential effort of Senator John McCain (!),
>> I would never have believed him.
>
>> You can't imagine--or maybe you can--how maddening it is to pore through
>> a steady stream of correspondence telling me that, despite his obvious
>> immigration-related shortcomings (and plenty of other deficiencies),
>> McCain is our man.
>
>> Yet, inconceivable as this McCain mania was just a few short months
>> ago, that's where we are today.
>
>> To all who have written me with the "Let's Go McCain!" message, please
>> be clear on one thing: as a practical matter, it isn't possible to be
>> worse on immigration than McCain. He co-authored an amnesty plan with
>> the most Open Borders fanatic in the U.S. Senate: Teddy Kennedy.
>
>> Translation: no Democrat can be "worse"--they can only be "as bad".
>
>> As painful as the rah-rah letters are, the real frustration sets in
>> when other readers bemoan our horrible presidential choices vis-a-vis
>> the National Question.
>
>> "How can it be," hand wringers ask me, "that McCain, Hillary Clinton
>> and Barack Obama all favor amnesty and open borders? Where are our
>> candidates?"
>
>> That's a good question. Too bad it has a painful answer.
>
>> Our two best candidates--Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo--are now on the
>> sidelines because not enough patriotic immigration reformers supported
>> them.
>
>> Too many excused their shameful betrayal by identifying Hunter and
>> Tancredo from the start as losers--"They can't win."
>
>> Listen and watch here on YouTube to Sean Hannity asking Ann Coulter if
>> she really thinks Hunter "can win" And note Coulter's response: if
>> Hannity talked Hunter up, maybe he would.
>
>> From the outset, we realized that Tancredo was a long shot. Since he
>> became a prominent Patriotic Immigration Reform spokesman several
>> years ago, everyone from President George W. Bush to his hometown
>> Denver Post belittled him at every turn.
>
>> Nevertheless, Tancredo had third place as his goal--achievable given
>> his national standing as the most visible and admired immigration
>> reform crusader.
>
>> Sadly--and disgracefully--Tancredo didn't make it.
>
>> And why didn't Hunter, even without Tancredo's national following, do
>> better? Â
>
>> From Hunter's biography:
>
>> Â 14 terms in the House of Representative representing portions of San
>> Diego county--an illegal alien hot-spot, and promoting immigration
>> reform Â
>
>> Â Author of the House bill that mandates 854 miles of double border
>> fence between California and Mexico (Hunter on YouTube discussing the
>> fence here.)
>
>> Â Senior Republican on the House Armed Services Committee
>
>> Â Vietnam veteran serving with the Airborne and Army Rangers
>
>> Despite Hunter's strong resume that emphasizes his commitment to
>> immigration reform, national security and patriotism, voters
>> steadfastly refused to support him. Accordingly, Hunter dropped out of
>> the race after several poor showings.
>
>> In her op-ed, New York Times' editorial page editor Gail Collins
>> speculates facetiously that Hunter failed because he "really didn't
>> seem to be trying." Collins added sarcastically that she "went to more
>> states during the early campaigning period than he did." [Beyond the
>> Fringe, By Gail Collins, New York Times, January 27, 2008]
>
>> But the momentum that should have been behind Hunter pushing him
>> forward to "more states" never materialized.
>
>> You can parse Hunter's results anyway you want to. But it's impossible
>> to escape the raw fact that in the end voters (many of whom are now
>> grousing and groaning) preferred Establishment candidates.
>
>> The obvious result of Hunter and Tancredo's failed campaigns is that
>> we can't vote for them in the general election in November.
>
>> But there are other unpleasant consequences, too.
>
>> Both have announced their retirement from Congress. The best that we
>> can hope for--no guarantees-- is that equally passionate immigration
>> reformers will replace them. Hunter's son, Duncan D. Hunter, is one of
>> four Republicans running to succeed his father. [Relatives, Ex-law
>> Makers Vie for Legislative, Congressional Seats, By Steve Lawrence,
>> Associated Press, February 23, 2008]
>
>> And, because of the magnitude of their defeats, we now have to endure
>> the slings and arrows of the MainStream Media and its non-stop
>> pontificating about how immigration reform doesn't resonate at the
>> polls.
>
>> See, for one example, Collins' editorial cited above with its
>> reference to the "fringe".
>
>> Or read former Mexican foreign minister Jorge Castañeda's gloating
>> conversation with a Miami Herald reporter wherein he called Hunter and
>> Tancredo "two crazies...who went nowhere..." in the presidential
>> primaries. [A Mexican view of U.S. immigration debate, By Casey Woods,
>> Miami Herald, February 17, 2008]
>
>> (Read my response to Castañeda in my interview with Univision
>> journalist Bill McIntosh here.)
>
>> Or for the best (worst?) example, try on for size the Washington
>> Post's editorial, the latest in its ongoing series of attacks on
>> patriotic immigration reform, titled "Nativism's Electoral Flop" with
>> its rub-salt-into-the-wounds subtitle, "Bashers of Illegal Immigration
>> Are Failing at the Polls." [Nativism's Electoral Flop, Washington
>> Post, February 14, 2008]
>
>> Excerpts from the editorial about the candidates who promoted
>> immigration reform even if insincerely:
>
>> Â Tancredo: "styled himself as the nativists' champion, dropped out of
>> the presidential contest after never registering more than a blip."
>
>> Â Mitt Romney: "took his turn at strident rhetoric against undocumented
>> immigrants, to no discernible effect."
>
>> Â Rudy Giuliani: "all but repudiated what had been his constructive,
>> tolerant record on immigration as mayor of New York and then got
>> shellacked in Hispanic-heavy Florida."
>
>> Â Mike Huckabee: "took the most rabid line of all, promising to drive
>> all 12 million illegal immigrants from the country in four months; he
>> seems destined to be an also-ran, barring unforeseen miracles."
>
>> In contrast, about McCain the Post cannot be effusive enough:
>
>> Â "He now talks about the primacy of border security but continues to
>> express compassion for illegal immigrants, who, he notes, 'are God's
>> children.'"
>
>> Finally, beating up on us (again!), the Post has this closing
>> paragraph:
>
>> "No doubt, the unrealistic and irresponsible advocates of harassment,
>> roundups and deportations will show up at the polls this November, if
>> only to cast ballots against candidates who would embrace workable
>> reforms. The hope here is that their electoral clout will be
>> outweighed by a backlash among fired-up and fed-up Latino voters."
>
>> Of course, this is deeply dishonest. All the Republican candidates,
>> including McCain, ran away from amnesty. All of them emphasized their
>> determination to make the border secure. That's a big change. And the
>> presence of Tancredo and Hunter in the race had a lot to do with it.
>
>> Moreover, Huckabee and Paul, both still in the race, both signed
>> NumbersUSA's No Amnesty pledge. Maybe the GOP will be the McCain
>> coronation that the Washington Post would like--or maybe there will be
>> Dole-type doubts and despair, and the immigration issue will flare up
>> again in a good floor fight.
>
>> But the core question is whether the Post's central thesis is correct.
>> Have we--"the unrealistic and irresponsible advocates" of immigration
>> reform--failed at the polls?
>
>> Based on the evidence of Hunter and Tancredo's 1 and 2 percent
>> showings in the primaries and caucuses, the sad but true answer is
>> "Yes".
>
>> Apologists offer a million excuses for Hunter and Tancredo's dismal
>> showing: no GOP machine support, no money, no positive mainstream
>> media coverage. And, of course, issue theft by the other candidates.
>
>> All those reasons are valid--up to a point. But they all could have
>> been overcome with votes.
>
>> The failure is not in Hunter and Tancredo's campaign--but our
>> abandonment of them.
>
>> Maybe 2008 is the year we will finally learn our lesson:
>
>> Â Until patriotic immigration reformers learn to vote on their issue,
>> and on no other issue, regardless of party, regardless of whether
>> their candidate can "win", they will not get the attention of the
>> political elite.
>
>> Think of the success of the Right To Life Movement (with which I
>> personally disagree) in getting the GOP to toe their line. Their issue
>> polls far worse than patriotic immigration reform. But they are
>> prepared to go the mat for it.
>
>> Next week, reviewing in greater detail than ever before, my own 2003
>> California gubernatorial effort--referred to from start to finish as
>> the "he can't win" campaign-- I'll explain how today's poll failures
>> can with a collective effort become tomorrow's successes.
>
>> I wouldn't have won. But I easily could have made plenty of noise and
>> sent an unmistakable message--just as Patriotic Immigration Reform
>> movement could and should have done with Hunter and Tancredo's brave
>> candidacies.
>
>
> Right after McCain's speech this week on the economy, the first follow-
> up question regarded
> the immigration crisis. McCain said border security first, then
> "address" the problem of the
> illegal aliens already here. McCain stated they are "god's children",
> hence, I believe he would
> sign a bill granting amnesty. McCain remains a twisted lying old
> creep. I would rather see Obama
> or Hillary elected as it would be much easier to arouse the public if
> either were elected.
>
> Ted- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
