Earlier this year, President Bush tapped Sen. Mel Martinez to run the Republican National Committee instead of someone with actual political experience running a political party; someone like, for instance, former Maryland Lt. Governor and former Maryland State GOP Chairman Michael Steele. We all knew at the time that Martinez was picked for one reason and one reason only: He’s a Hispanic who supports Bush’s immigration/amnesty proposals. It was an affirmative action pick at its worst.
And now that the Senate’s immigration/amnesty proposal has gone down in flames, thanks primarily to Republican opposition, the nation’s top Republican party official is criticizing Republicans and threatening to yet again bring the bill back from the dead.
Martinez slammed Republicans who helped kill the Senate immigration bill on Friday, challenging them to come up with a solution other than “just build a fence along the border.”
Um, Mel. Couldn’t we just TRY to build a fence along the border first? I mean, isn’t it worth a shot?
Anyway, the Associated Press reports this morning that the Republican Party chief told the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials on yesterday that he intends to work with members in the House to try to revive the president’s amnesty proposal which Republicans in the Senate and grassroots Republicans from sea to shining sea have rejected over and over and over again.
This is what happens when you anoint a party chairman who is more interested in pursuing a personal agenda than the party’s agenda.
Interestingly, Martinez also complained that with the failure of the Senate bill, immigration reforms will now likely be addressed at the local and state levels, where some communities will become sanctuary cities for illegals while others will make it illegal to rent to them.
But isn’t keeping government decisions closest to the people what our Founders intended in the first place? And isn’t THAT what Republicans are supposed to be all about? Aren’t Republicans supposed to be opposed to a bigger and more intrusive federal government? Are Republicans now supposed to abandon this all-American principle in favor of…well, non-Americans?
According to President Bush and his affirmative-action pick for party chief: Yes.
Posted on June 30th, 2007 by Chuck Muth
Filed under: National
YOU SAID IT ALL !!! THANKS !!! Not we know where to direct our attention !!!
I’m new to the grassroots effort, but feel very proud that I was one of millions of Americans that pounded the Senate offices with emails, faxes and phone calls, when I could get through. I have read that the President is the one who appoints the RNC Chairman but is there someway that the Republicans can circumvent his choice of Senator Martinez? Can’t we rise up against the President choice and put Michael Steele in the position? I think Martinez will help Republicans lose the White House in 2008 because he is tied to President Bush’s apron strings.
Thank you,
Beverly Tice
You said it all !!! Now we know where direct our next salvo !!!
I think there’s a RACE between the DIMocrats and the republiCONS to see who is the most STUPID !
KEEP PASSING THE AMMO !!!
You said it all !!! THANKS ! Now we know where to direct our next salvo !!! I really believe there’s a RACE between the DIMocrats and the republiCONS to see who is the most STUPID !!!
Martinez must go home to Mexico and help that corrupt government to become a government for the Mexican people and not the corrupt few.
Martinez is not a Republican and should not be in the Republican Party.
Amnesty for Illegals is Treason against America.
Perhaps President Bush and Martinez could go and live in Mexico and strainghten out that corrupt Government. and their illegal alien problem.
Nobody in America would miss them.
Thank you.
Mr. Muth,
Your comments about Mr. Martinez reveal the confusion that exists today in the concept and application of Federalism, which the Founders set forth. Plainly the Federal Government, that is, as directed by the President, was failing to uphold the rule of law in promoting the hopefully interred “amnesty for law-breaking immigrants.” In that concept is the assumption of “government of the people, for the people, and by the people,” which was evidenced in the massive protest of the people to which many senators gave heed. To have cities take positions of sancturary and anti-sanctury posits the disturbing possibility with the political and cultural division between “red” states and “blue” states of a rupturing of our Federal Union. The Founder’s, whether Christian or not, believed in the rule of law under God. The assault upon this–from the cultural antinomianism of our time–arises from the atheist or at best agnostic worldview of contemporary physical and biological science, which has for several generations been preached in our government schools. Thus, the eroding of the rule of law results significantly from a anti-Christian, and thus religious, impulse. For Christianity rightly declares that God, the Father, is not only Creator of heaven and earth but the Present Ruler of the creation and upholder and empowerer of natural law for the glory of the Son, crucified and risen for the salvation of man, and the benefit of man.
I submit a corrected version of the preceding post.
Mr. Muth,
Your comments about Mr. Martinez reveal the confusion that exists today in the concept and application of Federalism, which the Founders set forth. Plainly the Federal Government, that is, as directed by the President, was failing to uphold the rule of law in promoting the hopefully interred “amnesty for law-breaking immigrants.” In that concept is the assumption of “government of the people, for the people, and by the people,” which was evidenced in the massive protest of the people to which many senators gave heed. To have cities take positions of sanctuary and anti-sanctuary posits the disturbing possibility with the political and cultural division between “red” states and “blue” states of a rupturing of our Federal Union. The Founders, whether Christian or not, believed in the rule of law under God. The assault upon this–from the cultural antinomianism of our time–arises from the atheist or at best agnostic worldview of contemporary physical and biological science, which has for several generations been preached in our government schools. Thus, the eroding of the rule of law results significantly from an anti-Christian, and thus religious, impulse. For Christianity rightly declares that God, the Father, is not only Creator of heaven and earth but the Present Ruler of the creation and upholder and empowerer of natural law for the glory of the Son, crucified and risen for the salvation of man, and the benefit of man.
Eva Bauman: “Martinez must go home to Mexico”? Please read Senator Martinez’ biography on his website. Senator Martinez is a native of Cuba, not Mexico.
I was against the immigration reform amnesty bill that was just killed in the Senate. But with all due respect, comments like the one above provide kindling for the charges of the amnesty proponents that the opposition is racist.
For the past several years, political pundits have talked about the possible splintering of the Democratic Party along its factions (minorities, organized labor, environmentalists, etc.). However, the immigration issue threatens to split the Republican Party just as badly. The amnesty bill was killed by the efforts of the social conservatives in the party. However, big business supported immigration reform, including the amnesty provisions. If anything, big business wanted a more liberal bill than the one that was defeated.
Corporations have already started shifting their political donations to the Democratic Party in response to last year’s elections. The failure of the amnesty bill will accelerate this process. To get a future version of this bill passed, there will need to be a large majority of Democrats in the House, a filibuster proof majority of Democrats and social liberal Republicans in the Senate, and a Democrat president. So you can already see where big business is going to put its money going into the 2008 elections.
Of course, there’s always the hope that Pelosi & Reid will do something so stupidly anti big business that the corporations will reconsider.
I do believe Mr. Martinez has lost sight of what his job is supposed to be. The post he has assumed is to help fellow Republicans get elected. The actions Mr. Martinez is pursuing will anger Republicans and stop contributions to the National Committee which will not help the party. Is Mr. Martinez able to distinguish between his own desires and the desires of fellow Republicans?
Rev. N. Alfred Balmer: You state that “the eroding of the rule of law results significantly from an anti-Christian…..impulse.” Can you reconcile your comments to the fact that the leadership of the Catholic Church in the US supports amnesty for illegal immigrants?
Mel Martinez thinks he is running his own little banana republic and is angry because the peasants revolted and rejected his amnesty bill. It’s time for him to get a reality check. He is our elected representative and he needs to be representing us not trying to dictate over us.
Check out www.recallmartinez.org
Be safe and be well.
The republican leadership (still an oxymoron) backed a socialist for senator from Rhode Island in 06 and backed Arlen Spector in 04. Does anyone think they will act differently in the next election? IAm I the only one who wants to puke when they hear the republican leadership say “Big Tent Party”. GOP stands for God Owful Party.
Howard
Martinez will choose a nominee who believes in amnesty with open borders! Many in the GOP betrayed conservatives, and they are not contributing any funds to the GOP.
Maryland State GOP Chairman Michael Steele; The Washington Post, 11.13.06 says this about him ” The glossy fliers bore photos of black Democratic leaders on the front. Under the headline “Democratic Sample Ballot” were boxes checked in red for Ehrlich and Senate candidate Michael S. Steele, who were not identified as Republicans. Their names were followed by a long list of local Democratic candidates.
An Ehrlich aide who agreed to discuss the strategy on the condition of anonymity said the purpose of the fliers was to peel away one or two percentage points in jurisdictions where the governor would be running behind. No one inside the campaign expected a strong reaction.”
I think we could have done better than either Martinez or Steele!
John Smith said,
“Corporations have already started shifting their political donations to the Democratic Party in response to last year’s elections. The failure of the amnesty bill will accelerate this process. To get a future version of this bill passed, there will need to be a large majority of Democrats in the House, a filibuster proof majority of Democrats and social liberal Republicans in the Senate, and a Democrat president. So you can already see where big business is going to put its money going into the 2008 elections.”
I would like to see the bill ressurected in the House and watch the Democrats squirm. With big business pushing for it and all the labor unions actively working against any form of amnesty or leaving the illegals in the country, it would make for an interesting fight.
I believe Oil Can Harry only brought the bill up for a vote because he knew it would go down in flames and it will go down to defeat in the House also. It can always be said to be another loss for Bush, as Oil Can Harry said.
Bob
Check out http://www.cis.org/articles/2006/back706.html
I think it explains very well what the mindset of our wannabe ruling class of Bush, Martinez, Reid, ect is. This guy nails it pretty good on the head especially when you see how angry Martinez is because the electorate wasn’t submissive, but stopped him. Good read!
The GOP can recover from this by 2008. But we won’t get the Hispanic vote anyway. But, if Martinez gets behind this in his Party role, the GOP is dead.
It is my understanding that contributions to the GOP are down 40%, I think that speaks volumes!! It is time that we stop showing up at the polls and voting for the “lesser of two evils” and only vote for a candidate that is truly a constitutional leader, upholding the platform to which they represent themselves. In our last election, I only gave my vote to one national candidate, and a few state and local ones. The others I left blank! If I had to choose between Rudy or Hillary in ‘08, I’d pick NEITHER! We must make clear our position, compromise (settling for less than the BEST, only gets us further away from our Foundations, and moves us onto shifting sand!
It is time that we invoke term limits at the polls! Let them loose their seats, maybe for the next term we will have better candidate from which to choose!
Concerning Martinez and Cuba… I grew up in Miami in the 60/70’s, with the major influx of Cuban “refugees”. By the time I was old enough to work, places all over Miami were only hiring “bi-lingual”. This didn’t mean English and (any other language), this meant spanish and another language! Rather than UNIFYING our nation, it is splitting it apart at the seams. It is like the tower of Babel. Everyone congregates together with those that they can communicate with. It affected english speaking businesses in Miami in a negative way.
There is too much of the attitude of “oh!, we may offend someone”, so we bend over backwards, to our own detriment to accomodate them, and then get kicked in the teeth. This at the hands of our own ELECTED legislators!!! UGH! (Including Martinez when he was governor of Florida!)
Some here are talking about staying away from the polls. That’s a bad idea in humble opinion. Just because our politicians have shirked their duty, does not mean we shirk ours. I’ve voted every election for over 25 years because I feel it’s my duty as an American Citizen to vote. There are many local races that need decided even if your unhappy with the candidates in the state and national races. Don’t shirk your duty to vote. If you don’t like the candidates for a particular office, then just leave that one blank or write in “none of the above”.
Be safe and be well.
Lisa,
I honestly believe that if you put the U.S. Constitution on a table in front of Caesar’s Palace in Vegas (and remove all the references therein to these “United States”), and asked American voters passing by to identify the document, most would not be able to tell you what it was.
VOTE! Vote intelligently! Take a look at ALL the candidate WITHOUT all the special interest money behind them! Do they know the Constitutions of Nevada and the U.S.? If running for State or local office, do they know the controlling laws of the office they seek? WOULD YOU TRUST THEM IN YOUR HOUSE IF YOU WERE NOT THERE?!
Mr.Clarke,
With the Rs siding with the unions and the Ds siding with big-buisiness, I ask, is this chess or public policy? WE our stuck in some time shift! Here is big-business’s view of the bill:
“As Congress continues to debate immigration reform, it is important to remember the critical role of immigrant workers to the U.S. economy. Immigrants are an important part of our nation’s history and have made contributions to our economy and culture. America’s current immigration system falls short of our national ideals and is not a viable system for businesses or workers. The U.S. population is aging and in ten years 77 million baby boomers will retire. Experts agree that one of the greatest challenges confronting the American workforce in the upcoming decades is that there will not be enough workers to fill available jobs. It is important Congress pass a comprehensive immigration reform package that allows current undocumented workers to earn legal status — and that will address projected shortfalls —while protecting U.S. national and economic security.”
–Mike Dendas
Immigration Staff
U.S. Chamber of Commerce
I have written to the RNC several times and have neve gotten an answer. I understand why, but that didn’t stop me. I wanted to make sure that they understood that they would never get another dime from me until they again began to support a conservative agenda. That also means anybody who supports this amnesty. I will agree that there needs to be immigration reform, but that’s just paperwork. The laws that we have are good enough. The Alcaldes of these so-called sanctuary cities should be prosecuted for aiding and abetting criminal activities (maybe the RICO laws could apply). If the local yokels won’t enforce the laws then maybe the Feds need to pick one city at a time and put a thousand ICE and Border Patrol in and see what they can shake up. Either that or withhold federal money. Neither of those will be tried though until El Presidente Jorge Arbusto out of office. I don’t see any of the “Nation of laws” being enforced while he’s there.
Southy: You wrote, “With the Rs siding with the unions and the Ds siding with big-buisiness, I ask, is this chess or public policy? WE our stuck in some time shift!”
Politics sure makes for strange bedfellows. However, the major constituencies of the Democratic Party seem like they should be naturally opposed to illegal immigration. You would think that the environmentalists would be concerned about the environmental damage done by the illegal border crossers. You would think that the human rights activists would be concerned about the treatment of illegal immigrants by coyotes during their border crossings, and also concerned about the worse than sharecropper treatment once they make it into the US. And of course you would think that organized labor would be concerned about wages being driven down by the presence of illegals in the US. However, it seems rare that any of these groups speak out about these issues. I guess they have so much invested in the Democratic Party that they figure if they overlook their individual agendas in the short term, then there will be a long term gain when the illegals become citizens and routinely vote Democrat.
I would like to make it very simple. Illegal aliens have broken our laws by coming or staying here illegally. They have shown they are willing to break or disregard our laws when it is convenient for them to do so. So I don’t want them here. I don’t want them to gain amnesty so they can start participating in our government and supporting laws that are not good for us that have lived here our entire lives. If people want to come here legally and become part of us, they are welcome. But if they want to come to change us and take over our lands, etc., I don’t want them and will fight to get rid of them. Thanks, Ted
Sen. Martinez ’s appointment by the President insures the defeat of the Republican Party for the White House in 2008. He is on a personal agenda and does not care a hoot about America; our way of life; our standard of living! I am talking about the American Middle Class which the President; Sen. McCain; Sen. Graham; and their liberal Democratic allies have given the proverbial finger to!!
Southy, I do vote, I have every year since Reagan first ran. It was my first time to vote and my first year active duty Navy! I value my vote too much not, to give it to the lesser of two evils, I think as you said, we should consider “None of the Above”, as in the Richard Pryor movie, brewster’s millions… if none of the candidate on either side are worthy, tell them so, and No one should win, they should all be barred from running again. EVER! What a hoot that would be! It would really make both parties stop and THINK!
The level of detachment that washington seems to have with the rest of the country really floors me. If they think that the immigants are poor, they need to be in Wal-Mart on Sunday afternoon when the buses come, and “the poor immigrants” are pulling out wads of cash to pay their bill!
The subject of the crimes committed by illegals was rather shoved aside as well. The tally is really getting up there in numbers, but these people will never show for a court date once released. They just disappear back into our society. Pathetic and shame on us! I really wish I had all of those days I campaigned for Bush back, I could really use the extra time now!
Lisa,
Glad to hear it! Keep on voting. But remember, in Nevada, if “none of the above wins” then the Party selects; if the leadership of the Party plays it right, they can make so that the seven members of the State Executive Committee decides who the “winner” is. IN this way the will of the people and of the Party is subverted.
Look for the candidate that ISN’T being pushed by a Party, who has limited funds (ie, hasn’t sold his soul for the dough and thus is not beholden to the money changers), and knows the laws and rules and regulations for the office they seek. And, would you trust this person in your home if you weren’t there?
Your point on the un-lawful illegal immigrants is right on point, too. Just recall that one of the alleged co-conpirators in the recent Luxor Casino/Hotel bombing murder was a bail jumper out of Oregon for sexual assault on a minor….how the hell he was let out of jail on bail being an illegal being booked on a felony is also an issue.
Why any legislator woould be opposed to planting a GPS tracker deep within this guys body and shipping him to some small island in the Pacific ocean is beyond me.
Keep it up (like I do
) Great site - loved the bit about yourselves.