Look who is advising McCain

Senator McCain’s Campaign Advisor for Hispanic Outreach has a Mexico First position. Michelle Malkin has detailed coverage.

In a recent video McCain states that he will secure the border. Senator what have you been doing about the issue over the past 25 years in Washington?


Comments

  1. Wow! Sonoran Alliance has stooped to a new low – race baiting. I really don’t think Mitt would approve. After all, his father marched with Martin Luther King. Mitt himself is a part of a controversial religious minority and he seems like a fair-minded guy. This video reeks of blowback.

  2. Get stuffed James A. That isn’t race baiting, its a look (albeit slanted) at a guy with an open-border agenda who is advising a Presidential candidate who claims to now favor a “secure border” after having pushed for amnesty and open borders. Its a legitimate issue.

    Incidentally, Mexicans are an ethnic group, not a race. Next time you hurl worthless charges, at least construct them properly.

  3. I understand now that if you hate an ethnic group you’re not a racist. To be a racist, one has to hate a race. That makes sense to me. I am still confused on one issue. Does hating an ethnic group make you a bigot or just someone who is not a RINO?

  4. John,

    1. Dr. Juan Hernandez has controversial opinions that are held by a minority of Americans. So what?

    2. Does the term cooption mean anything to you?

    3. Pete Wilson, Tom Tancredo, J.D. Hayworth . . .

    MLK, you bring up a question of semantics. Regardless, one can oppose current policy on illegal immigration without sounding like a race baiter. Secondly, a closed border is indepedent of immigration reform (see failure of comprehensive immigration reform for details). Third, why not look on the bright side, would you rather deal with Latin Americans who would like to become Americans or deal with Muslims who want to blow you up (see continent of Europe for details).

  5. This guy drives me nuts. When I hear him speak I want to stuff a sock in his mouth. His condescending mannerism and overt attempts to be jovial despite the issue sends me the message of absolute arrogance. The chronic action of circular, skip the meat of the issue and go to the personal interest is way too obvious. I want to tell him to speak English/American with either an American accent or a Mexican accent but his sounds like a phony self determined way of speaking in order to appeal to all. Besides that, I think his goofy little goatee is ugly. GAG!

    But, is it possible Hispanic Outreach might be something he is good at? It isn’t a policy position, but a strategy adviser. I think Al Sharpton exhibits behavior that if conducted by an Anglo would be called racist with a determined agenda, that I do not agree with. But if I wanted to know how to make a mark in the black community, how to get MY message heard…I’d sure ask.

    Now that brings about the question of why would he want to help me out if I wasn’t going to do his bidding? Perhaps there is a need that meets both interests in a way. We must deal with the Hispanic voter if we are to win, no matter the candidate. We must deal with immigration and our terribly broken borders. We must have some cooperation with Mexico for many things, including immigration.

    There are many citizens of Mexican origin that despise the current state of immigration chaos and also want order. Yet, they understand why this country calls.

    Someone who can advise on strategy and bring a sense of understanding to a target group that is not represented, in a way that brings the desired result would be valuable. That result is not amnesty or open borders, it is the promotion of the Republican party as the party of real opportunity and self dependence, a government of the people and not for themselves. In other words, the American way versus the way of Mexico. Sounds like he could be the guy.

    As long as I don’t have to look or listen to him.

  6. Kralmajales says

    What has HE done about it over the past 22 years? What has the entire GOP done about it in the last 8 years? And don’t forget that it was Reagan who actually pushed and passed what truly WAS amnesty.

    Seems that it is the GOP and its business backers that have been the party of amnesty.

  7. Ann, I agree with you 100%.

    Kral, you are not making any sense. Please explain.

  8. Frank Soto says

    I think that Krals point is fairly straight forward. Republicans claim that immigration reform is a big deal, and that they would do somethiing about it if only it wasn’t for the liberals. Further, McCain is clearly not a Republican on immigration, since he is not for kicking out all the illegals. HOWEVER (and heres the kicker) Republicans had control of all three branches for quite a while and yet the problem has become worse. FURTHER, the idol of the Republican party advocated, and granted ACTUAL amnesty.

    Kral, you make sense to me. I don’t know if that should be reassuring however.

  9. Kralmajales says

    Frank,

    You did a bang up job of saying exactly what I was trying to convey.

    Thank you.

    I hear crickets now???? Strange.

  10. Frank and Kral,

    Immigration reform is a big deal. The last immigration bill we had was 40 years ago.

    “McCain is a Republican on the issue.” I don’t know what that means because there are some in both parties who have disparate feelings on the matter.

    We held a six year grasp on power. We revisited the issue in 2005 as a part of the “bipartisan” 9/11 commission recommendations which I believe was to close the border. We found out as Reagan did post 1986, that this issue needs further discussion because of the strong feelings on the issue and the scope and severity of the problem.

    As to the problem getting worse stats for illegal border crossings are down. So check your facts, buddy.

    Whoever becomes a couple of things will happen:

    1) the border will be closed – a closed border is a double length fence, operatonal SBI, 30,000 BPA plus OP Streamline II.

    2) 2 million illegal aliens will be deported as they are according to Secy Chertoff criminals.

    3) Some of the illegals will self deport

    4) Statewide Voter ID laws (Sorry Dems)

    5) Other states may impose AZ Employer Sanctions laws – at their own risk

    * * *

    These are issues that are likely to be considered:

    1) Deporting or stopping payments to illegals on public assistance.

    2) a higher fine and new restrictions that would eventually lead to a path to citizenship.

    You see Democrats, once this border gets closed this issue goes away. So if you want to keep this issue alive, keep electing Grijalva and open border anarchists. You guys will get Romney. Even I will support him against Lady MacBeth.

  11. Geez, you miss a week, you miss a lot, eh?

    So long as you all debate things on a Democrat versus Republican scale, you’ll never resolve anything. Democrats and Republicans will both be convincingly shown to have taken both sides of every issue.

    Try it again, but this time using conservatives versus liberals, and you’ll make a lot more sense. Jim Kolbe was a Republican who regularly stuck his thumb in the eye of his party’s conservative platform. Using Kolbe as your model Republican would paint a picture of a Republican party that is much different from the actual party.

    Stick with right versus left and you will find a tremendous amount of consistency.

  12. Oh and hey Ann, what’s this I read about you and interns?

    Saucy..!

  13. See, just when you think you’ve got someone figured out… That’s what you get for being away for a week!

  14. Tim, I don’t know if you can look at this as a left right issue.

    No one else will stand up for the illegal, I guess I will take up the gauntlet. If I was living in Oaxaca, El Salvador, or Brazil, I would be an illegal. I have been around the world. This is truly a special place and we think and act different from everyone else because we aren’t bound by history the wayother foreigners. So the thirst for freedom is real.

    If you accept that, and you close the border, you get rid of the criminals and those on public assistance, what do you have against law abiding people who are powering our economy. I talked to a state legislator who voted for the Employer Sanctions laws and crops are rotting in Yuma. According to the SV Herlad, 10% of our statewide workforce is illegal. The Dems are outraising us 3 to 1 because we are demonizing Spanish speakers.

    This is something Tancredo’s campaign never answered – which is we get rid of the illegals. Then what? We have a moratorium on legal immigration. We have the most restrictive immigration laws in the world. Then what? How are we going to get services down in agriculture, construction, food services and hospitality? But suppose we buy American. Then what? We have the same problem as the Europeans (sans the muslims – thank allah). Can we reproduce at the rate of our replacement rate of 2.1 children? We have killed 50 million kids in 35 years of Roe v Wade. We have replaced them with 12 million illegals. No wonder Social Security is going bankrupt.

    I just wish the Nativists would see beyond the box a bit more. That is why I think McCain is the more rational alternative.

Leave a Reply