By RAUL REYES
Hispanic Link
Friday, July 06, 2007
From Cesar Chavez's 1960s boycotts to the immigrants rights movements of today, Si se puede has long been a stock phrase in Hispanic politics. While it translates as "Yes, we can," the real message has always been greater. Si se puede means we'll fight the good fight, we'll persevere, we'll never give up.
These three words are routinely invoked everywhere from high school assemblies to presidential campaigns. It's the Latino call to action.
Yet lately I'm wondering if the GOP has decided on a strategy of No se puede --No, we can't -- when it comes to Hispanic voters.
At the June 28-30 convention of the National Association of Latino Elected & Appointed Officials, Republicans opted out of the forum for presidential candidates. All of the GOPers except for Rep. Duncan Hunter of California sent their regrets to the nonpartisan group, and the forum was canceled. In contrast, all of the major Democratic hopefuls appeared at a separate forum at the event.
The GOP no-shows are surprising considering Florida is home to the USA's most conservative Hispanics. The state's three Hispanic House members are Republican, as is Sen. Mel Martinez, chairman of the Republican National Committee. Some state leaders did not even try to put a positive spin on the lack of interest from their candidates.
"Republicans have blown off the state of Florida," said Republican State Rep. Juan Zapata. "Turning their back on this event is kind of shameful."
Coming in the wake of the harsh rhetoric from conservatives who contributed to the collapse of the Senate's immigration proposal, does this mean that Republicans are giving up on Latinos?
If so, they have a lot to lose. Until recently, the GOP had been making inroads among the Hispanic electorate, which traditionally has leaned Democratic. George W. Bush made a concerted outreach to Latinos and in 2004 drew a record 40 percent of the Hispanic vote.
A new USA Today/Gallup poll shows those gains have eroded. By a three-to-one margin, Hispanics say they are Democrats or lean that way. Only 11 percent of Hispanics called themselves Republicans, down from 19 percent in 2005. Meanwhile, the number calling themselves Democrats rose from 33 percent to 42 percent.
Although Latinos are still underrepresented at the polls, our political influence is rising. Under the 2008 primary schedule, more than three-quarters of the Hispanic electorate will have a chance to vote for a presidential nominee before Feb. 5, giving us a historic chance to influence who will be the next occupant of the White House.
Florida's Jan. 29 primary offers nearly another million Latino voters an opportunity to weigh in early on presidential nominations.
Several states voting on Super-Duper Tuesday Feb. 5 -- Arizona, California, Colorado, New Jersey, New York, Illinois and New Mexico -- and March 4, when Texans chime in, have significant Latino populations.
I can understand why Tom Tancredo, who once derided Miami as "a Third World country," might not want to attend a gathering of influential Hispanics. Ditto for Fred Thompson, the potential candidate who recently linked Cuban immigrants to "suitcase bombers." Yet it's hard to see why John McCain, architect of the failed Senate proposal, would not make time for the Latino convention. And aren't Milt Romney and Rudolf Giuliani, both of whom have Spanish-language Web sites, interested in meeting the leaders of our community?
The Republicans damaged their standing among Latinos by allowing the tone of the immigration debate to become offensive to most Hispanics. So the Latino convention would have been a prime opportunity for them to demonstrate they are still committed to the nation's largest minority group. Instead, by snubbing the convention, the Republicans sent the misguided message that Latinos are not important to the GOP. In the future, even more Hispanics just might say Si se puede -- to Democratic candidates.
(Raul Reyes practices law in New York City. Reach him at rarplace(at)aol.com. For more stories visit scrippsnews.com)
Good for them
Nice to see A major political party finally just saying "no" to race pandering. I think the Republicans finally have realized that when it comes to racism and race pandering the Democrats are just way too far ahead of them. Better to take a different tact. These racist groups should simply be ignored. I would hope the Democrats come to the same conclusion but I doubt that will happen.
Hope that we will not
Hope that we will not discuss about rewarding 50-60 million people a real amnesty in the coming future by ignoring a cancer in early stage of about 12 million.
In 2005 Lou Dobbs was saying 7 to 10 Million illegal aliens, now he is saying 12 to 20 Million. if we can support & he work hard to stop the Congress from looking at this matter today, he can repeat the same story in 2009 with little changes i.e.- 20 to 30 Million (or 30 -40 )
By that time they can bring all their distant cousins and their families; most probably Congress will come up with a real AMNESTY plan similar to 1986 instead of this penalties and long waiting period and complex probation system and all.
All the illegal aliens need to thank the conservatives ( because many of us do not really know the term 'Conservatism' in it's real meaning ).
Don't worry . They would not
Don't worry . They would not have enforced any of the laws in the immigration bill , They already exist and they won't enforce them . yet .
Don't worry . They would not
Don't worry . They would not have enforced any of the laws in the immigration bill , They already exist and they won't enforce them . yet .
They should be ignored.
They should be ignored.
The article we would liek to see
Just imagine if someone wrote an article like this. What's the difference?
Democratic candidates ignore White leaders
editorials and opinion
By John Smith
Euro-American link
Friday, July 06, 2007
From bus boycotts in the 1960s to the White racialist movements of today, White Power has long been a stock phrase in White politics. While it is simple and direct the real message has always been greater. White power means we'll fight the good fight, we'll persevere, we'll never give up.
These two words are routinely invoked everywhere from high school assemblies to presidential campaigns. It's the White man's call to action.
Yet lately I'm wondering if the Democratic Party has decided on a strategy of No White power--No, we can't -- when it comes to White voters.
At the June 28-30 convention of the National Association of White Elected & Appointed Officials, Democrats opted out of the forum for presidential candidates. All of the Dems except for Sen. Mike Gravel of California sent their regrets to the nonpartisan group, and the forum was canceled. In contrast, all of the major Republican hopefuls appeared at a separate forum at the event.
The Dem no-shows are surprising considering Florida is home to the USA's most conservative Whites. The state's overwhelmingly White House members are Democrats, as is Sen. Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee. Some state leaders did not even try to put a positive spin on the lack of interest from their candidates.
"Democrats have blown off the state of Florida," said Democratic State Rep. William Jones. "Turning their back on this event is kind of shameful."
Coming in the wake of the harsh rhetoric from Democrats who contributed to the casue in support of the Senate's immigration proposal, does this mean that Democrats are giving up on Whites?
If so, they have a lot to lose. Until recently, the Democrats had been making inroads among the White electorate, which traditionally has leaned Republcian. Bill Clinton made a concerted outreach to Whites and in 2004 drew a record 35 percent of the White vote.
A new USA Today/Gallup poll shows those gains have eroded. By a three-to-one margin, Whites say they are Republicans or lean that way. Only 11 percent of Whites called themselves Democrats, down from 19 percent in 2005. Meanwhile, the number calling themselves Republicans rose from 55 percent to 70 percent.
Under the 2008 primary schedule, more than three-quarters of the White electorate will have a chance to vote for a presidential nominee before Feb. 5, giving us a historic chance to influence who will be the next occupant of the White House.
Florida's Jan. 29 primary offers nearly another million White voters an opportunity to weigh in early on presidential nominations.
Several states voting on Super-Duper Tuesday Feb. 5 -- Arizona, California, Colorado, New Jersey, New York, Illinois and New Mexico -- and March 4, when Texans chime in, have significant White populations.
I can understand why Carlos Gutierrez, who once derided Montana as "a White bread area," might not want to attend a gathering of influential Whites. Yet it's hard to see why Teddy Kennedy, architect of the failed Senate proposal, would not make time for the White convention. And aren't Barack Obama and John Edwards, both of whom have English language Web sites, interested in meeting the leaders of our White community?
The Democrats damaged their standing among Whites by supporting the tone of the immigration debate to become offensive to most Whites. So the White convention would have been a prime opportunity for them to demonstrate they are still committed to the nation's largest group. Instead, by snubbing the convention, the Democrats sent the misguided message that Whites are not important to the Democrats. In the future, even more Whites just might say "see ya!" -- to Democratic candidates.
Ignore the threats
Why should any party give credence to the implied threats in the "Si se puede" chant? These are the same people who left their own homeland because things were too tough.
Re: GOP candidates ignore Latino leaders
Illegal immigration helps the GOP. They would rather have 60 million illegals if it is in places such as Texas and Florida. These illegals cannot vote but are counted to the census, which means the people of these states get more electoral votes. There are nearly a million more US citizens in New York than in Texas but Texas has more electoral votes and if more illegals enter the US, GOP will be very happy...one more note..without illegals counted in the census and redistricting New York would have had six more electoral votes in 2000 and Al Gore would have been elected President..the status quo will make the GOP very happy and lock away the Presidency for decades to come.
The GOP will be deep sixed
The GOP will be deep sixed next year anyway!
Of the Senate seats up for election in 2008, 21 are held by Republicans and 12 by Democrats.
NOT EVEN THE EAR PIERCING HATRED THAT WE WILL INCREASINGLY HEAR FROM THE GOP BETWEEN NOW AND ELECTION DAY 2008 WILL SAVE THEM!
Hate has long been a staple of the GOP anyway...ever hear of Nixons "Southern Strategy"?
GOP HATE MONGERING HAS MORPHED INTO WAR MONGERING!
The GOP has no problem squandering 1 TRILLION (with a T) dollars on wars of CHOICE ...based on sham "evidence"...but tax $$$ for HEALTH CARE??
CAN'T HAVE THAT...right republicans?
In 18 months, America will have a newly elected democratic President who will enjoy an EXPANDED democratic Congressional majority...and then...America will get REAL "immigration reform"...without the GOP obstructionism!
Oh, but democrats voted against cloture on S 1639 you will say? 3/4 of democratic Senators voted for S 1639 cloture...while 3/4 of GOP Senators voted against it...
WE WILL NOT FORGET...JUST WAIT TIL 08!!!
We can swing Florida, among the largest electoral prizes of all, to the DEMOCRATS...
OBAMA!!! OBAMA!!! OBAMA!!!
GO BARACK GO!!!
Post new comment