Category Archives: Republicans

UPDATED: Republicans Find Religion On … Evolution

Democrats, Elections, IMMIGRATION, Multiculturalism, Race, Republicans, Welfare

“Republicans Find Religion On … Evolution” is the current column, now on RT. Here’s and excerpt:

“On the heels of Barack Obama’s Las Vegas run-on ramble on the necessity of immigration ‘reform,’ this week, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) announced that he too had “evolved” overnight on the issue. ‘I’m … open-minded enough to say that it is an issue that we do need to evolve on,’ the senator vaporized.

Paul is a Johnny-come-lately to his party’s devolution on immigration. The country was still surveying the debris left by the “D-Bomb” (where “D” stands for demographics), dropped on Tuesday, Nov. 6, 2012—when, one-by-one, key Republicans began to defect, pledging their commitment to an ‘overhaul of the immigration system’; to ‘reform’; to ‘a comprehensive solution’; to ‘fixing a broken system,’ all well-recognized euphemisms for amnesty.

A tipping point in the demographic shift in the US population had returned Barack Obama to power for a second term. A moratorium on mass immigration, buttressed by strong secessionist and states’ rights movements, might just help delay another such bomb from detonating . But the Republicans were having none of it.

House Speaker John Boehner was soon leading the party of turncoats to the promised (la-la) land, pledging that ‘a comprehensive approach’ was ‘long overdue.’ ‘I’m confident,’ Boehner promised, ‘that the president, myself [and] others can find the common ground to take care of this issue once and for all.’

In short succession, our wily pitch men were joined by Republican media mouths who had also ‘evolved’ overnight. Thus, in a career-clinching bid—presumably, to continue playing a part in national politics—Sean Hannity, an influential Fox-News personality, declared that he too had found religion on immigration and now supported a ‘pathway to citizenship.’

Another mantra mouthed by brother-believer Charles Krauthammer and echoed by Sen. Paul was that, ‘The GOP needs to do a better job of reaching out to Hispanic voters.’ Yes, ‘Inside each Latin American immigrant there’s a Republican waiting to get out,’ mocked Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies.

Mockery for this pie-in-the-sky is warranted. However dispiriting, the reason 71 percent of Hispanic voters broke for Obama is not because Republicans are mean to them—John McCain and George Bush demonstrated that they would wrestle a crocodile for any Hispanic convert, legal, illegal and criminal. This identity group’s political preference is because 60 percent of them live in or near poverty and ‘fully 57 percent use at least one welfare program.’

In his irrational ramble, the president waxed about legalizing the ’11 million undocumented immigrants [residing] in America,’ while at the same time praising the contribution made by their kind to the founding of great ‘businesses like Google and Yahoo.’

Fantasies about the future founders of companies like Google and Yahoo, aside—their highly educated corporeal founders are from Russia (Sergey Brin) and Taiwan (Jerry Yang). …”

Read the complete column, “Republicans Find Religion On … Evolution,” now on RT.

If you’d like to feature this column, WND’s longest-standing, exclusive paleolibertarian column, in or on your publication (paper or pixels), contact ilana@ilanamercer.com.

JOIN THE DISCUSSION, AND DO BATTLE FOR LIBERTY BY:

• Using the content-sharing icons on Barely a Blog posts.

• At the WND and RT Comments Sections, and on Facebook.

• By clicking to “Like,” “Tweet” and “Share” WND’s “Return To Reason” , and RT’s “Paleolibertarian Column.”

UPDATE: More of a reality check from Pat Buchanan:

Hispanics are not small-government people. They believe in and benefit disproportionately from Big Government.
Some 53 percent of Hispanic children are born out of wedlock, and 52 percent of Hispanic families are headed by single women.
Big Government provides their kids with Head Start before school, free K-through-12 schooling, Pell Grants and student loans for college, and two or three free meals a day at school for the kids.
Big Government provides food stamps, welfare for mom and earned income tax credit checks should she work. Big Government subsidizes her housing and provides free health care for the family through Medicaid.
A Pew Hispanic poll found that by 3-to-1, Hispanics would favor a big government with more services to a small government with fewer services.
Why would these folks vote for a Republican Party that promises to downsize the Big Government upon which they depend for sustenance, security and survival? Why would they vote for a party that is going to cut capital gains, income and inheritance taxes they don’t pay?

David Mamet Packs Heat, Sheds Light

Affirmative Action, Conservatism, Constitution, Government, GUNS, Hollywood, Individual Rights, Individualism Vs. Collectivism, Race, Republicans, The State

In “Gun Laws and the Fools of Chelm,*” the talented Hollywood playwright, author, director, and producer David Mamet motivates for his individual right to defend life, liberty and property.

As a conventional conservative or Republican, Mamet’s positions are often pat, lacking philosophical depth. For example: He fingers The Bureaucracy as ineffectual because lacking in compassion and common sense. However, like most members of the right-leaning establishment, Mamet is incapable of explaining the underlying dynamic or structure that accounts for the inversion of economic incentives in the bureaucracy, irrespective of the good intentions and good character of the bureaucrats.

Mamet also mouths the conventional conservative talking points about affirmative action: that it is based in the mistaken premise that “black people have fewer abilities than white people,” a notion Mamert calls “monstrous.”

The “I love blacks, so I want to make them compete on an equal footing” mantra is as prevalent a platitude among conservatives as it is stupid. Affirmative action is based on the immutable fact of blacks’ lower aggregate scores in academia and in other fields. The “monstrous” part of it is that quotas treat all individual blacks as part of an underachieving, oppressed cohort. As does it lump all whites—the poor, the underprivileged and the victimized too—in a group that needs to suffer for the sake of black upliftment.

Also lackluster or absent is Mamet’s defense of a natural right that predates the constitutional right to bear arms. But Mamet should be appreciated for writing very well, and for being a lone voice for reason and rights in Hollywood, writing that,

…there are more than 2 million instances a year of the armed citizen deterring or stopping armed criminals; a number four times that of all crimes involving firearms.
The Left loves a phantom statistic that a firearm in the hands of a citizen is X times more likely to cause accidental damage than to be used in the prevention of crime, but what is there about criminals that ensures that their gun use is accident-free? If, indeed, a firearm were more dangerous to its possessors than to potential aggressors, would it not make sense for the government to arm all criminals, and let them accidentally shoot themselves? Is this absurd? Yes, and yet the government, of course, is arming criminals.
Violence by firearms is most prevalent in big cities with the strictest gun laws. In Chicago and Washington, D.C., for example, it is only the criminals who have guns, the law-abiding populace having been disarmed, and so crime runs riot.
Cities of similar size in Texas, Florida, Arizona, and elsewhere, which leave the citizen the right to keep and bear arms, guaranteed in the Constitution, typically are much safer. More legal guns equal less crime. What criminal would be foolish enough to rob a gun store? But the government alleges that the citizen does not need this or that gun, number of guns, or amount of ammunition.

[SNIP]

* Chelm: From Mamet’s reference to Chelm, I concluded that he is probably Jewish (and well-educated, of course, which he is).

BHO Inaugural & MLK Day: Two Poxes In One Day

Barack Obama, Founding Fathers, Propaganda, Race, Racism, Republicans, Socialism

We are on the receiving end of two poxes in one day: BHO’s Inaugural and MLK’s Day.

Founding Father Thomas Jefferson was found unfit to have a holiday named for him. Instead, we celebrate a man whom America’s most engaging first lady deemed “terrible,” “tricky” and “a phony.”

Jacqueline Kennedy, as revealed from audio recordings of Mrs. Kennedy’s historic 1964 conversations on life with John F. Kennedy, held a low opinion of Martin Luther King, the man America has since deified. Jackie was unafraid to say as much.

There were many reasons not racist for which to dislike MLK, not least of them was the man’s dalliance with communists. “His associations with communists” is why Jacky’s husband, hero of Chris Matthews’ last book, ordered the wiretaps on King.

Mrs. Kennedy’s brother-in-law, Robert Kennedy—recounts Patrick J. Buchanan in “Suicide of a Superpower”—”saw to it that the FBI carried out the order.” Among his other endearing qualities, the not-so enchanting Martin Luther King had “declared that the Goldwater campaign bore ‘dangerous signs of Hitlerism.”

Indisputably, MLK set the tone for “assailing America as irredeemably racist” forever after. Other brothers have built on MLK’s work to sculpt careers as professional race hustlers.

Read Into the Cannibal’s Pot for more on MLK. But here is a short excerpt from the sub-chapter, “What Would Martin Luther King Jr. Say?:

The historical elevation of the democratic socialist Martin Luther King Jr. above the Founding Fathers is significant, since Jefferson’s libertarianism is inimical to King’s egalitarianism—never the twain shall meet. The attempts by many a modern conservative to conflate the messages of the two solitudes don’t pass muster. That King advocated a color-blind society is a pipe-dream exploded by historian Thomas E. Woods Jr. “Contrary to the sentiments he expressed in his famous ‘I Have a Dream’ speech, King favored racial quotas. In fact, he called for massive government spending [on blacks] to make up for centuries of discrimination against them—‘a broad-based and gigantic Bill of Rights for the Disadvantaged.’ Late in his life he grew more radical, calling for a socialist system in America.”

Thoughts On Gun Debate, Republikeynesians & The Practice of Proctology

Affirmative Action, Democracy, Democrats, Feminism, GUNS, Healthcare, Individualism Vs. Collectivism, Political Philosophy, Politics, Regulation, Republicans, Socialism

GUN LOBBY MADE ‘EM DO IT. Have you noticed how Democrats and their media lapdogs counter arguments for the natural right to self defense? They blame the “gun lobby.” Accordingly, it is not the gun owners who assert this right, but a monied gun lobby. This variation on the ad hominem argument allows these statists to bypass the debate about the right to defend life, liberty and property.

HOW LIKE DEMOCRATS. In arguing their case, tit-for-tat Republicans use the exact arguments their opponents use. Thus, instead of making a point against affirmative action and for individual merit, you find Fox Rinos like Dana Perino and Kimberly Guilfoile asking, “Where are the minorities” in Obama’s cabinet?

THE OBAMACARE SURVIVAL GUIDE. It’s a best-seller; # 47 on Amazon. I am sure that, like me, you know Obama-heads (doctors too) who shrugged off the idea that a further centralization of healthcare by “Obama’s Politburo Of Proctologists”— a modest healthcare expansion totaling $2 trillion—will cost them anything at all. I’m already feeling The Care. How about you? TAWE (The Ass With Ears) has sent the health care we had to hell in a handcart, for the ostensible benefit of less than ten percent of the population. In any case, if this “2,700 page law” made life easier, would the author of the ObamaCare Survival Guide be selling so many guides to so many perplexed people?