Every legitimate survey taken shows that a huge majority of Americans support those two efforts; that majority includes a majority of Republicans polled. Here, for example, is a recent survey for Fox News that is representative of all recent legitimate surveys on legalization and a path to citizenship:

Fox News Poll by Anderson Robbins Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research (R). Feb. 25-27, 2013. N=1,010 registered voters nationwide. Margin of error ± 3.

Do you favor or oppose allowing illegal immigrants to remain in the country and eventually qualify for U.S. citizenship, as long as they meet certain requirements like paying back taxes, learning English, and passing a background check?

Clearly, the American people are for fixing immigration.

Pat Buchanan – Nativist and anti-Semite

Opponents are trying to poison the public with lies and hysteria. Who, the usual suspects — Pat Buchanan, former Congressman Tom Tancredo, Mexican-hater Senator Jeff Sessions Republican of Alabama, the AFL/CIO’s Democrat leader Richard Trumka and Ross Perot, all veterans of the Mexican-Hating Society that opposed the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) 20 years ago.

John Tanton, Nativist, Eugenics Activist

Joining the usual suspects are Mexican-hating Teamster President James P. Hoffa and John Tanton paid employees Mark Krikorian, Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), Roy Beck of NumbersUSA, the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) and ambulance chasing Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach who moonlights as a lawyer for the Tanton groups that are rooted in abortion and population control (Planned Parenthood and Zero Population Growth).

Ann Coulter, Nativist

Author/columnist Ann Coulter regurgitates her decade-old opposition to immigration reform by joining the pro-abortion population control people with a message of hate at a national conservative conference (CPAC); from Politico.com:

Republicans are grasping at these suicidal policies because they’re panicked, they’re demoralized after the last election…Stop panicking, Republicans!” Coulter also said she could no long support New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie in 2016, adding, “I’m now a single-issue voter against amnesty. So, Christie’s off the list.” Christie has supported a “common sense” path to citizenship.

This kind of short-sightedness destroyed GOP Presidential candidate Mitt Romney (Mr. Self-Deportation). He lost by a much larger margin than had been anticipated due to an avalanche 71% Hispanic vote for Obama.

Everyone knows the arguments on both sides of the issue as shown by the polls. Nonetheless Ann Coulter’s vicious words single her out as a true fanatic, a true Know-Nothing xenophobe.

Peter Brimelow

Here from an officially labeled a “Hate Site” by the Southern Poverty law Center (SPLC), VDARE.com is Peter Brimelow’s opinion that Ann Coulter should run for President; this view is fueled by her vituperative anti-immigration/anti-immigrant CPAC rant:

Note especially her repeated assertion that she is now “a single-issue voter” against Amnesty—and also her informed critique of the Immigration Act of 1965, the root of all evil…Here’s the “presidential talk”: I say (in a purely personal capacity) Coulter for President! (She argues pundits shouldn’t run but could she be worse than Romney? McCain? Bush? Dole?

So writes a British immigrant to Canada and then to the US. As if he knows anything about American politics and government, LOL! He doesn’t know what “amnesty” is.

So why is there such hate in the opposition to immigration reform? They throw lies upon lies at us; make arguments based on myths and urban legends about jobs stolen by Mexicans and “high” crime rates. No mention that crime rates in California are at 40 year lows despite 2-3 million illegally present people in the state.

George Wallace Stands in School Doorway Blocking Blacks from Admission

When one listens to the Coulter-led campaign of lies/misinformation, one hears a constant stream of thought that many young people have little knowledge about.

I’m going to make race the basis of politics in this state, and I’m going to make it the basis of politics in this country…It is very appropriate then that from this cradle of the Confederacy, this very heart of the great Anglo-Saxon Southland, that today we sound the drum of freedom…Let us rise to the call of freedom-loving blood that is in us…In the name of the greatest people that have ever trod this earth, I draw the line in the dust and toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny. And I say, Segregation today! Segregation tomorrow! Segregation Forever!

Senator Jeff Sessions

So declared Alabama Governor George Wallace 50 years ago!

Substitute “Immigration” for “race” and “xenophobia” for “Segregation” and we have what Ann Coulter and Alabama’s Senator Jeff Sessions (et al) are expressing – peddling – today. Is anyone listening?

####

Raoul Contreras Lowery

Raoul Lowery Contreras (1941) was born in Mexico, raised in the USA. Former U.S. Marine, athlete, Dean’s List at San Diego State. Professional political consultant and California Republican Party official (1963-65)…Television news commentator, radio talk show host…published Op-Ed writer (1988 to present)…author of 12 books (as of 1-05-12). His books are available on Amazon.com.

Reposted from Cafe Con Leche Republicans with permission of author – original link

Lest we forget, at the nation’s founding there were also a large number of Africans and their families, almost all slaves. They, of course, were not citizens, nor were they able to be citizens even if free.

Jordi Farragut

In the mix, a Spaniard named Jordi Farragut (George Farragut) came to America, fought as an American Navy lieutenant in the Revolutionary War and fathered a boy named James, later to become David Farragut, the greatest naval hero of the American Civil War.

Admiral David Farragut

Between Lieutenant George Farragut’s naval service and Admiral David Farragut’s service almost a century later, the United States made war on Mexico. When it won, it absorbed territory larger than most countries, the territory we now call the states of California, Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, Colorado, Nevada, and parts of Kansas and Oklahoma.

With that annexation, Mexicans north of the Rio Grande River automatically became Americans. A dozen years later, these former Mexicans organized themselves into battalions of the Union Army to fight for America in the Civil War. Combined with Union militia from New Mexico Territory and what is now Colorado they trounced the Confederate invasion of New Mexico and sent the Confederates back to Texas on foot, without food, weapons or even shoes.

From 1848 on, then, Mexicans have been an integral part of the American community before, in fact, the Italians, many of the Irish, Germans, the Poles and Russians. Some didn’t come here as they were already here because the border literally crossed them. In fact, until the 1920s there was no border and Mexicans could come and go as they pleased and they did.

Then, in 1923-24, the raging predominate political climate in the country was anti-immigrant, anti-Catholic, anti-Jewish and, of course, Jim Crow “separate but equal” Black. Two distinct and powerful groups, the Ku Klux Klan with millions of members and an influential cabal of racial purity types known for their theories of eugenics (racial breeding), led the political climate.

Eugenicists hate Mexicans because Mexicans are a combination of white European and Amerindian blood. They hate anyone not of pure European white blood.

The Congress of the United States, including one woman and one Black, was heavily influenced by these two groups and the immigration door was slammed shut on Italian Catholics, Jewish Poles and Russians and myriad other Mediterranean types. Swarthy Europeans, Jews and Catholics, were the primary target of the Ku Klux Klan and its numerous allies.

Mexicans, however, were the number one targets of the eugenicists. Never in American history had Mexicans been denied free access to the United States until Congress made them instant illegal aliens in 1924. It even chartered the Border Patrol that year to “guard” the Mexican border.

Ex-Texas Rangers were hired, who, in the grand corrupt tradition of the Rangers rounded up Mexicans as they emerged from the Rio Grande and sold them to ranchers for .50 cents apiece. They also received federal paychecks to supplement their rancher finder’s fees.

For the next thirty years, Mexicans were treated like lice in Texas, Colorado, Arizona and California. In sunny California Mexicans were forced to attend segregated schools until 1947.

Segregated Mexican La Jolla School

In Texas, an all-white jury convicted a Mexican man named Hernandez of murder. He appealed his conviction because no Mexicans served on his jury despite their numerous numbers in his county s population.

Texas argued that it didn’t discriminate against Mexican defendants, that Mexicans could serve on juries. Mr. Hernandez showed the United States Supreme Court that, in fact, though there were plenty of Mexicans in the county, none had ever served as jurors in a criminal trial, ever.

Pedro Hernandez – Hernandez v. Texas

Mr. Hernandez made history when the Supreme Court threw out his conviction and ruled that Mexicans in Texas were to be defined forevermore as a “discrete class.” (Hernandez v. Texas, 1954) That means that Mexicans in the United States were a “group,” an ethnic group that had been officially discriminated against.

This was not the first time Texas had picked on Mexicans. After the American civil war, Texas refused to enforce civil rights laws backed up by the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments to the Constitution. It refused to treat Mexicans as U.S. citizens, even if born in the United States (14the Amendment).

In Texas v. White (1870), the Court threw out the Texas contention that Mexicans couldn’t be citizens. Texas believed that when they were so declared in 1848 by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo that ended the war with Mexico the immigration laws in 1848 prohibited anyone not “free and White” from becoming a citizen.

Thus, Texas reasoned Mexican could not be or become United States citizens.

The Court ruled that the Treaty had the force of the Constitution and that any treaty and the Constitution took precedence and supremacy over any congressional act. Thus, it ruled, Texas was wrong.

We find ourselves today in a situation that draws from the Texas experiences with the Supreme Court and with the flaming rage of the 1920s fired by the then powerful Ku Klux Klan and the cabal of people with a purely racial basis for ethnic hatred of Mexicans.

And, they are everywhere. Former President Jimmy Carter, a proud Georgia Democrat White Anglo Saxon Protestant (WASP), is quoted in an August, 1996 New York Daily News article saying:

I see nothing wrong with ethnic purity being maintained. – Jimmy Carter

He was elected President three months later and managed not to find a single Mexican American to serve in his government above the rank of Navy secretary.

The man who defeated him four years later, President Ronald Reagan then his successor President George H.W. Bush, Republicans both, managed to find two Mexican Americans to serve in their cabinets.

Look carefully at those screaming in opposition to the Senate s comprehensive immigration reform bill, to those opposing the President who supports it and to anyone who supports it outside the government. Look and listen to what they say, their words, and, the mass hysteria they manifest.

Ann Coulter – Nativist

Example, look at cute commentator Ann Coulter who offers the possibility that illegals from Mexico will get affirmative action entry into American colleges ahead of deserving American citizens. This while she and her kind complain that illegals from Mexico aren’t high school graduates. She and they want it both ways. So, she screams!

Opponents scream treason, they scream open-borders, they scream sovereignty they scream about Mexico They scream!

They scream when reasonable people look at them and see them for and call them what they are, racist.

David Duke KKK

A cosmic race, or as some are prone to say, LA RAZA, but certainly not Irish, English, German, French, other Northern European or like the descendents of African slaves. Mexicans are not like the screamers.

These people call themselves Minutemen, Immigration reformers/activists and patriots but they are properly called racist like their 1920s antecedents.

Unfortunately, members of the Congress of the United States are among their ranks.

Editor’s Note: Originally published June 6, 2006 and still relevant today! All opinion’s expressed are the author’s, and not necessarily those of Cafe Con Leche Republicans. Reposted with author’s permission – original link.

####

Raoul Contreras Lowery

Raoul Lowery Contreras (1941) was born in Mexico, raised in the USA. Former U.S. Marine, athlete, Dean’s List at San Diego State. Professional political consultant and California Republican Party official(1963-65)…Television news commentator, radio talk show host…published Op-Ed writer (1988 to present)…author of 12 books (as of 1-05-12). His books are available on Amazon.com.

Ann Coulter – Nativist

Ann Coulter has just insulted naturalized citizens with her absurd claim that President George H.W. Bush eliminated the naturalization test English requirement!

Naturalized citizens have every reason to feel proud to become naturalized citizens, after a lengthy process involving years of English, American history, and civics studies to prepare them for an interview and civics exam in English. Fully one third of native born adult citizens cannot pass the naturalization exam, but 97% of immigrants pass!

Naturalized citizens, especially those who arrived without much formal education, have every right to feel proud. I personally know a naturalized citizen of very humble origins who struggled with English and civic studies for many years. She felt such enormous pride when she became an American citizen that she had her naturalization certificate blown up and framed for display in a prominent place of honor in her living room!

Naturalization Test in English Has Been Law Since 1906

In 1906, Congress passed the Naturalization Act of 1906, stating:

That no alien shall hereafter be naturalized or admitted as a citizen of the United States who can not speak the English language: Provided, That this requirement shall not apply to aliens who are physically unable to comply therewith, if they are otherwise qualified to become citizens of the United States.

In 1950, the McCarran Internal Security Act strengthened the English requirement to require the ability to read, write, and speak English, and demonstrate a knowledge of history and form of government. The revised statute states:

Sec. 304. No person except as otherwise provided in this Act shall hereafter be naturalized as a citizen of the United States upon his own petition who cannot demonstrate -

1. an understanding of the English language, including an ability to read, write, and speak words in ordinary usage in the English language: Provided, That this requirement shall not apply to any person physically unable to comply therewith, if otherwise qualified to be naturalized, or to any person who, on the date of approval of this amendment, is over fifty years of age and has been legally residing in the United States for twenty years: Provided further, That the requirements of this section relating to ability to read and write shall be met if the applicant can read or write simple words and phrases to the end that a reasonable test of his literacy shall be made and that no extraordinary or unreasonable conditions shall be imposed upon the applicant; and
2. a knowledge and understanding of the fundamentals of the history, and the principles and form of government, of the United States.

Millions of immigrants have toiled through years of English studies, American history, and government to prepare them for an interview and civics test in English with an Immigration officer. During the administration of President George W. Bush, the naturalization test was made even more difficult, but 97% of immigrants still pass the exam. The same exam has been given to native born citizens, and fully 1/3 failed the same exam! Perhaps Ann Coulter would fail the naturalization test too!

Ann Coulter Insults Naturalized Citizens and Slams George H.W. Bush

Ann Coulter just diminished the accomplishments of naturalized citizens with another of her bald faced lies. In her most recent rant, Hispanicked GOP elite: They’ll respect us in the morning, Coulter showed contempt for President George H.W. Bush:

President George H.W. Bush created “diversity visas,” massively increased legal immigration and eliminated the English requirement on the naturalization test.

George H.W. Bush

Ann Coulter lies! The Immigration Act of 1990, signed by President George H.W. Bush, did not eliminate the English requirement.  The middle-aged  and especially the elderly have a difficult time mastering English. The 1950 law made an exception for those aged 50+ with 20 years of residency. The 1990 law merely added an exception for those who are 55+ with 15 years of residency. They still have to take the civics exam, but can take the exam with an interpreter. There is no exception to the civics exam unless one is 65+ and a 15+ year resident.

The vast majority of immigrants are still interviewed and take the civics exam in English. Exempting the elderly is consistent with the spirit of the 1906 law, which states “requirement shall not apply to aliens who are physically unable to comply”, but doesn’t exempt the middle aged or elderly. The mentally impaired and physically disabled are exempted, consistent with the spirit of the 1906 law.

Do Today’s Immigrants Refuse to Learn English?

Not surprisingly, Nativists like Coulter often claim today’s Hispanic immigrants refuse to learn English, but credible statistics by Pew Research shows just the opposite! I blogged about this in Do Today’s Immigrants Refuse to Learn English. From Pew Research

As telling, perhaps, is a look at how many people said teaching English to immigrant children is not important. Among Latinos, only 2% held this view compared to 27% of non-Latinos.

The truth of the matter is that virtually all immigrants, both today’s and those of many decades ago, believe learning English is important, but also struggle with mastery of English, particularly if they are older when they arrive or have less formal education. The fact that a mere 2% of Latinos don’t think teaching English to immigrant children speaks volumes.

Ann Coulter Misrepresented Immigration Levels Too!

Ann Coulter also misrepresents immigration levels, and like many of her Nativist pals often claims the U.S. is being overrun by immigrants. The 1990 immigration law increased immigrant visas from 500,000 to 700,000, but Coulter fails to mention the quota had not been changed for decades and had not kept up with population growth.

In 2010, 1,042,625 immigrants obtained permanent resident status, compared with U.S. population of 310,383,948, 0.336% as a percentage of population. That numbers sounds large, until we realize the U.S. ranks #22 of 34 OECD nations in immigration as a percentage of population, near the bottom! A few nations that accept more immigrants than the U.S. as a percentage of population:

• Tiny Luxembourg: 3.116% of population, nearly ten times the U.S. immigration level
• Switzerland, 1.751% (Switzerland is one of the world’s most affluent nations)
• Canada, 0.825% of population, 2-1/2 times the immigration levels of the U.S.
• The U.S. – a mere 0.336%, or if Ann Coulter’s Nativist pals get their way and slash legal immigration to 1956 levels, 0.104%!

If the U.S. slashed its immigrant quota to 1956 levels to satisfy the Nativist lobby, we would then rank #31 of 34 OECD nations, near the very bottom!

Conclusion – Ann Coulter Will You Please Stop Insulting Naturalized Citizens!

Ann Coulter is right about many issues, but when it comes to immigration she is clueless. Since Ann Coulter is often held out as a spokesperson for the conservative movement, her rhetoric is very alienating to New Americans, such as Hispanics and Asians. She further insults these demographics with insinuations they are natural Democrat voters.

Canada’s Conservative Party was able to increase their immigrant vote support from a 3:1 loss (like Mitt Romney) to parity, 1:1. George W. Bush also won 44% of the Hispanic vote in 2004, as compared to 21% in the 1996 presidential race, reinforcing that conservatives can win votes from immigrant dominant demographics.

Ann Coulter is woefully ignorant about all things Hispanic, and would do well to find new sources of information, as clearly she has been drinking the Nativist Kool-Aid from the Nativist (and liberal) lobby comprised of FAIR, CIS, and NumbersUSA.

####

Reposted from Cafe Con Leche Republicans – original link

Bob Quasius is the founder and president of Cafe Con Leche Republicans

The “facts” Ann Coulter cites are either blatantly untrue, or she cherry picks facts in isolation of other relevant factors, favorite tactics of her accomplices Charles Murray and Heather Mac Donald. Murray is also the author of the book “The Bell Curve”, which claims whites have higher IQs than minorities and will remain that way, which has attracted criticism from other researchers and others who claim Murray massaged his data, just as he massaged the statistics Ann Coulter now uses!

Lie #1 – Ann Coulter Claims Immigrants Don’t Assimilate

Through out her op-eds, Coulter emphasizes Nativist claims that immigrants, especially from third world nations, don’t assimilate, drop out of high school, become dependent upon welfare, commit crime, vote Democrat, etc. Nativists always bitterly complain about the 1965 immigration reforms, which eliminated blatantly racist per-country quotas dating from the 1920s that were intended to bar non-European immigration altogether, and severely restrict immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe.

Not surprisingly, eliminating the 1920s immigration quotas has allowed many more non-Europeans to immigrate legally to the U.S. This chart, from a scholarly paper, compares immigrants in 1980 and children of immigrants in 2005 to native born whites in: high school completion (HS+), college completion (BA+), high earning occupation, above poverty level, and lastly home ownership.

In every single category, Latinos show dramatic improvement from the first generation in 1980 to the second generation in 2005! Over 85% of the children of immigrants live above the poverty line, almost equal to white native-born Americans, hardly evidence of a permanent underclass that Ann Coulter and her fellow Nativists constantly whine about.

Lie #2 -Hispanics Don’t Work Harder

Ann Coulter wrote: “Hispanics actually work about the same as others, or, in the case of Hispanic women, less.” Charles Murray selected the 30-44 age group to make this claim, but the median age for Hispanics is 27. Raoul Lowery Contreras debunked that in his recent op-ed “According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), the 2012 Labor Participation Rates for men 20 and over are—Hispanics 81.7% and non-Hispanic Whites only 73.9%. Murray purposefully excludes a huge working cohort of the 18-29 age group to make Hispanics look bad.”

Lie #3 – “Hispanics are less likely to be married.”

47.8% of Hispanics are married versus 51.4% in general, a 3.6% difference. 56.2% of Hispanic immigrants are married , and 38.8% for native born Hispanics. What Murray and Ann Coulter don’t tell you is that Hispanics, especially native-born Hispanics, are much younger than our general population. The median age for Hispanics is 27, versus 42 for whites, 32 for blacks, and 35 for Asians. Hispanic couples are also more likely to marry after having an illegitimate child, and fewer Hispanics are divorced (8.9%) than for whites (12.2%), or blacks (12.9%).

Lie #4 – Hispanics are “less likely to go to church.”

According to Pew Research, 68% of Hispanics say religion is important in their lives (60% for whites), and 44% attend church weekly (40% for whites). Among evangelical Hispanics, the fastest growing religious grouping among Hispanics, the same statistics are 85% and 70%.

Lie #5 – Hispanics are “less likely to call themselves “conservative” than other Americans. “

According to Pew Research, 34% of the general population describe themselves as “conservative” versus 32% of Hispanics, but 35% of Hispanic immigrants describe themselves as “conservative.” Young adults usually are more liberal in their views, and since Hispanics are a young demographic with a median age of 27, we can expect Hispanics to trend conservative in their views. Technically she’s right about Hispanic self-identification as conservatives, but 2% is not significant. These small gaps in self-identification don’t explain the 50% or so margin of victory for Obama this election, as Ann Coulter would have us believe!

Lie #6 – “In 1980, Hispanics were only 2 percent of the population,…”

As Raoul Lowery Contreras pointed out, “According to the Census, 6.4% of the 1980 American population was Hispanic“, not 2%. Anybody who can Google can find that statistic in seconds. Another lie!

Lie #7 – “More than half of all babies born to Hispanic women today are illegitimate.”

Ann Coulter then adds insult to injury with her most egregious lies “More than half of all babies born to Hispanic women today are illegitimate. As Heather MacDonald has shown, the birthrate of Hispanic women is twice that of the rest of the population, and their unwed birthrate is one and a half times that of blacks. That’s a lot of government dependents coming down the pike.”

Unwed birthrates for all native born are 41.4%. According to Pew Research, Hispanic unwed birthrates are 45.1%, and the rate for blacks is 71.4%. Ann Coulter claimed the Hispanic unwed birthrate is over half, and the unwed birth rate for Hispanics is 1-1/2 times that of blacks. CDC says 53% preliminary data for 2011, somewhat higher than Pew’s stats based on 2009 data, but even 53% is barely half, and far less than CDC’s 72.5% unwed birthrate for blacks.

Nativists like to pick on Mexican immigrants, but their unwed birthrate of 36.3% is 5% less than native born Americans (41.4%).

Pew Research reports that 8.1% of Hispanic women gave birth in the past year, as compared to 6.5% overall, 5.9% for women, 7.0% for blacks, and 6.4% for Asians. Birth rates for Hispanics nowhere near twice as Ann Coulter claims. Another lie!

Ann Coulter would like you to think birthrates among Hispanics are due to their third world origin, but in truth the reason birthrates among Hispanics are higher is simply that Hispanics are much younger, and younger women are more fertile. This chart shows the population distribution by age, and clearly Hispanics, especially native born Hispanics, are a very young demographic.

Summary

Ann Coulter, with help from her accomplices Charles Murray and Heather Mac Donald, has libeled Latinos, the large majority of whom are immigrants or 1-2 generations removed. Republicans should receive many more votes from Latinos, but rhetoric from conservatives like Ann Coulter are alienating many Latinos from the Republican Party. Ann Coulter’s ignorance on Latinos and her insulting, inflammatory rhetoric, are a prime example why many conservative Latinos hold their nose and vote Democrat. President George W. Bush proved that Latinos will vote for GOP candidates with engagement and a positive message. This chart from Resurgent Republic proves the value of outreach, and also proves what happens after several years of shrill rhetoric about immigration and Hispanics.

Conclusion

The Republican Party needs to change course or we shall go the way of the Whig Party. Ann Coulter and other Navists who hold themselves out as Republicans even as they ignore the values of the Party of Lincoln, are a huge liability. We will continue to call out Ann Coulter and anyone else who trashes Hispanics or other New Americans in such a shameful manner.

####

Bob Quasius is the founder and president of Cafe Con Leche Republicans.   Original link

Marshall, MN – We demand an immediate apology for your latest anti-Latino and anti-immigrant rant titled “America Nears el Tipping Pointo.”

Also please stop referring to yourself as a conservative and an expert on liberals. Hatred of minorities and immigrants is not a conservative value, and you apparently get most of your facts about Latinos and immigration from organizations founded and led by population control liberals like John Tanton. Tanton founded or co-founded the Federation of Americans for Immigration Reform (FAIR), NumbersUSA, Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), US English, Pro English, etc. Although you’ve made a career as an ‘expert’ on liberals, apparently you’re not always able to recognize liberals like Tanton and Roy Beck, especially when they appeal to your ‘dark side’ on Latinos and immigrants.

If Abe Lincoln or Ronald Reagan could read your latest column, they would turn over in their graves. You obviously know nothing about the Latino vote, and your repeated and shrill rhetoric against Latinos are a major reason that so many conservative Latinos hold their nose and vote Democrat.

Reagan famously told Lionel Sosa “Latinos are Republican. They just don’t know it yet.” He’s right, and whenever Republicans have engaged in constructive outreach to Latinos, Latino support for the GOP has improved, while harsh rhetoric such as in recent years has depressed GOP support among Latinos. As Marco Rubio pointed out recently “It’s very hard to make the economic argument to people who think you want to deport their grandmother.”

Abraham Lincoln had issues with Nativists too. Fragments of the vehemently anti-immigrant “know nothing” party joined the Republican party when the “know nothing” party disintegrated. Instead of allowing himself to be bullied by Nativists, Lincoln reached out to German-Americans, a major group of New Americans of the era, who had voted Democrat because Whigs and Republicans had never bothered to ask them for their vote. Lincoln even bought a German language newspaper to help with outreach, and Lincoln’s two presidential campaigns were successful in large part due to outreach to German-Americans.

According to Pew Research, 62% of Latinos are ideologically conservative or moderate, and yet just 27% of Latinos voted for Mitt Romney. Before Mitt Romney softened his tone after the primaries, some polls found Mitt Romney’s Latino support among likely Hispanic voters in the 14% range.

In 2004, following years of sensible Latino engagement by forward thinking Republican leaders, George Bush won 40% of the Latino vote. If not for the shrill anti-immigrant and anti-Latino rhetoric from people like you, that trend would have continued and Mitt Romney would have won the election.

You conveniently never mention in your columns that the GOP was competitive in California until the harsh rhetoric surrounding proposition 187 caused Latinos to leave the GOP in droves. Since proposition 187, the GOP has not been competitive in statewide races. This phenomenon has followed the rhetoric and spread from California to the rest of the nation. The GOP is now often perceived by many Latinos as hostile to Latinos.

There’s a common thread in your rantings… you parrot talking points from John Tanton and his motley alliance of population control liberals and bigots. For example, in a 2001 memo to a supporter, Tanton bragged about hiring a lobbyist to manipulate Republicans:

“The goal is to change Republicans’ perception of immigration so that when they encounter the word “immigrant,” their reaction is “Democrat.”

“Our plan is to hire a lobbyist who will carry the following message to Republicans on Capitol Hill and to business leaders: Continued massive immigration will soon cost you political control of the White House and Congress, given the current, even division of the electorate, and the massive infusion of voters about to be made to the Democratic side. We are about to replay the Democratic hegemony of 1933-53, fueled back then by the massive immigration of 1890-1924.”

Apparently you’re not as adept in detecting liberals as you would have us believe!

The real reason why Republicans did so poorly among Latinos is due to manipulation by anti-immigrant groups, and shrill rhetoric by yourself and a small minority of Republican politicians which provides ample ammunition for liberals to frame the Republican Party as anti-Latino and anti-immigrant. The Republican Party is neither anti-Latino or anti-immigrant. In fact, a May 2011 poll by Pew Research found a majority of Republicans favor comprehensive immigration reform, including a 49%/49% split of “staunch conservatives.”

We won’t allow extremists like you to hijack this issue anymore! The future of the Republican Party depends upon dispelling the perception among many New Americans that the GOP is hostile on immigration.

####

About Us – Cafe Con Leche Republicans is a national organization of Republicans who welcome “New Americans”, defined as immigrants and family of recent immigrants. Our mission is to make America and the GOP, more welcoming to “New Immigrants” through political activism, “in-reach” and education within the Republican Party, and lobbying government to adopt more immigrant friendly policies. We also seek to bring more conservative and moderate “New Americans” to the Republican Party. These efforts will strengthen the GOP, and lead more Republicans to embrace welcoming policies for immigrants and their families. We have members nationwide, with chapters in Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Texas, Oklahoma, Arizona, and California. Our members and leadership are predominantly Hispanic, though we define ourselves by mission and guiding principles, not ethnicity, and we welcome all who share our goals. Our leadership is 100% Republican.

Ann Coulter has made a fortune writing and selling books excoriating liberals, also called progressives, for a range of offenses, often mocking liberals in the process.

Unfortunately, despite extensive research and writing on the subject of liberalism, Coulter is not always able to spot a liberal. In the blog Only One Candidate Is Right on The Two Most Important Issues posted December 28 on Townhall.com, Ann Coulter proved she can be hoodwinked by liberals. Coulter claims:

In the upcoming presidential election, two issues are more important than any others: repealing Obamacare and halting illegal immigration. If we fail at either one, the country will be changed permanently.

She’s right about ObamaCare, which would unquestionably lead to a complete government takeover of health care. However, Coulter then goes on a diatribe about illegal immigration:

But capitulate on illegal immigration, and the entire country will have the electorate of California. There will be no turning back.

and

Just as Americans ought to be able to learn the perils of a welfare state by looking at Greece, we ought to be able to learn the perils of illegal immigration by looking at California.

Massive legal and illegal immigration has already so changed the California electorate that no Republican can be elected statewide anymore. Not so long ago, this was a state that produced great Republican governors and senators like Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, S.I. Hayakawa and Pete Wilson.

A short history lesson of California for Ann Coulter is in order. The GOP used to be competitive in California. Then, incumbent Republican governor Pete Wilson, trailing far behind in the polls, jumped on the Proposition 187 anti-immigrant bandwagon to revive his lagging campaign and win reelection. Once elected, proposition 187 was quickly overturned by the courts, to no one’s surprise since immigration is a federal power. Wilson won reelection playing the race card, but once prop. 187 enthusiasm passed the GOP lost legions of conservative Hispanic voters who were appalled at proposition 187 and became Independents or Democrats. The Field Institute analysis of the 1994 California elections found:

An analysis of Republican Governor Pete Wilson’s 55% to 41% reelection victory over Democrat Kathleen Brown shows that Wilson ran strongest among these voter subgroups: those living in San Diego/Orange, the Inland Empire, and the North Coast/Sierra regions, Republicans, conservatives, white non-Hispanics (especially white men), older voters, those with incomes of $60,000 or more, Protestants, and supporters of Prop. 187, the illegal alien initiative.

and

Proposition 187, the illegal alien initiative, which passed statewide by a 59% to 41% margin, carried in all major regions of the state except the San Francisco Bay Area. Support for Prop. 187 was extremely high in the Inland Empire (+40 points), the North Coast/Sierras (+36 points), San Diego/Orange (+34 points) and the Central Valley (+32 points).

Proposition 187 was spearheaded by John Tanton and the Federation of Americans for Immigration Reform, and bankrolled with millions in financing from the Pioneer Fund, whose purpose is “to advance the scientific study of heredity and human differences“, in other words scientific racism. John Tanton’s own writings show he’s an ardent eugenics supporter, an environut, and population control enthusiast with deep ties to planned parenthood. Tanton’s resume shows he’s not conservative at all but an ardent liberal, the kind that Coulter regularly bashes in her books and columns!

Amazingly, Coulter relies on NumbersUSA, founded by uberliberals John Tanton and Roy Beck, for her source of information on immigration, grading of candidates, etc. Roy Beck is the current leader of NumbersUSA, who was previously publisher of The Social Contract, infamous for publishing racist books and publications such as The Camp of the Saints, among others. For decades Beck has warned of us of the dire consequences of overpopulation of the U.S. If we took his rantings seriously, the world would have starved to death several times over by now!

Tanton, Beck, and their allies have been manipulating both liberals and conservatives for decades. A great example is this “smoking gun” letter from John Tanton’s own papers, donated to the University of Michigan library, in which Tanton brags:

Roy Beck and I think we have come up with an idea that can actually move the battle lines on the immigration question in our favor. While we are working on other ideas to move Democrats, this one involves using the recently released census data to show Republican members of Congress, the Administration, and the party’s leadership how massive immigration imperils their political future. The goal is to change Republicans’ perception of immigration so that when they encounter the word “immigrant,” their reaction is “Democrat.”

and

Our plan is to hire a lobbyist who will carry the following message to Republicans on Capitol Hill and to business leaders: Continued massive immigration will soon cost you political control of the White House and Congress, given the current, even division of the electorate, and the massive infusion of voters about to be made to the Democratic side. We are about to replay the Democratic hegemony of 1933-53, fueled back then by the massive immigration of 1890-1924.

Contrary to Coulter’s assertions, there’s no reason why the GOP cannot be competitive among Hispanics. According to PEW Research:

Among Latino registered voters, 35% describe their political views as conservative, 32% describe them as moderate and 28% describe their political views as liberal.

67% of Hispanics are center-right ideologically, which is a complete disconnect from recent voting trends, which show Hispanics voting Democrat by nearly a two to one margin, yet President Bush was able to gain over 40% of the Hispanic vote! Note the trend:
Year Democrats Republicans Gap
1999 58 25 33
2002 56 25 31
2004 55 28 27
2006 49 28 21
2007 57 23 34
2008 67 31 36
2010 65 22 43

Each year, as Bush engaged Hispanics and made a serious effort to reform immigration, self-identified Hispanic voters increased. With the failure of immigration reform and harsh anti-immigrant rhetoric from some conservative Republicans, no doubt influenced by John Tanton and Roy Beck, starting in 2007 the trend quickly reversed. A recent poll by Latino Decisions shows GOP support among Latinos at 18%, with 31% of Latinos perceiving the GOP as hostile. 14% of Latinos support deportation of all unauthorized immigrants, so a support level of 18% for the GOP shows just how polarizing the immigration issue is to Latinos. If you’re Latino and don’t support a “deport them all” strategy, you’re unlikely to vote Republican!

Assuming Latinos invariably vote Democrat is a self-fulfilling prophecy, with many Republicans failing to make a serious outreach effort, and don’t pause to think how their rhetoric alienates Hispanic voters. However, Bush proved Hispanics can be wooed, a process started by Ronald Reagan, who quipped “Latinos are Republican. They just don’t know it yet.” No wonder John Tanton and Roy Beck have gone to such lengths to convince many Republicans that Latinos invariably vote Democrat!

Original