VDARE: Latinos Will Back Anti-Immigrant GOP Because They Want to Be White

Steve Sailer, the extremist columnist for the White Nationalist group VDARE, for years has been urging the GOP to give up on outreach to people of color and instead focus on their white supporters. Sailer’s strategy has since been embraced by the likes of Pat BuchananBryan Fischer and Phyllis Schlafly, including her group Eagle Forum.

Sailer writes that eventually, becoming the “White Party” will help Republicans gain support among Latinos and Asians who would rather join the White-GOP than the Democratic “Black Party.”

Just like Rep. Louie Gohmert , Sailer claims that the key to winning Hispanic support is opposing immigration reform.

“If Americans whites started treating themselves with self-respect (e.g., don’t roll over for illegal aliens with fifth-grade educations), the Latinos would more or less fall in line as they tried to be white in an American where whiteness is no longer demonized,” Sailer explains. “Hispanic and Asian voters should be encouraged to understand the central American political reality: they only get to choose between being the junior partners in the White Party or junior partners in the Black Party.”

If Americans whites started treating themselves with self-respect (e.g., don’t roll over for illegal aliens with fifth-grade educations), the Latinos would more or less fall in line as they tried to be white in an American where whiteness is no longer demonized.

Sean Trende told Brookings that the GOP might get up to 20 percent of the black vote someday. To me, that seems both implausible and unwise. The natural sweep of American politics is from blacks on the Left to, say, Mormons on the conservative side. In 2012, for instance, Romney got 3 percent of the black vote and 86 percent of the Mormon vote. (Of course, that gap was exaggerated by the identities of the two candidates last November, but it’s still characteristic).

Instead, my suggestion: rather than devote immense effort to pursuing a tiny number of persuadable black voters, Republicans would be smarter to concede that the Democrats are the natural home of blacks … and that blacks, as historic Americans, deserve to have a major party defer to them!

Indeed, just as Republicans are constantly demonized as the “White Party,” they should praise the Democrats for being the natural "Black Party"—the rightful vehicle for African American political aspirations, since blacks are the moral core of the Democrats.



Hispanic and Asian voters should be encouraged to understand the central American political reality: they only get to choose between being the junior partners in the White Party or junior partners in the Black Party.

When that reality is made clear, white Democratic grandees like Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer might be very surprised by what happens to their Rainbow Coalition.

Beck: 'We're A Society That Has Literally Gone Insane'

Remember last month when Glenn Beck was so heavy-hearted over the state of the nation that he began citing the Book of Mormon as he solemnly warned his audience that the Last Days were rapidly approaching ... but then he went to Washington, DC to speak at a Tea Party rally and God showed up and miraculously rejuvenated Beck who suddenly understood everything and eagerly declared "I'm back!"

Well, judging by his remarks last night, there is no joy in Beckville any more as he is back to declaring that "we're at the Beginning of Days."

And you know what set Beck off this time?  This video, posted on his The Blaze website, of a woman throwing a tantrum because her husband wouldn't take her to the lake.

To Beck, this wasn't just a video of some woman having a meltdown but was actually another road sign highlighting everything that is wrong with this country, prompting him to declare that God had given us "sacred ground" upon which to build the United States and "we have defiled it, we have debased it, we have broken the covenant" as we continue to refuse to turn to God, for which we will suffer the consequences.

"We're a society that has literally gone insane," Beck said, warning that if we do not turn back to God "humanity doesn't survive":

Alabama Government Agency Prays Against Gay Marriage

The Alabama Public Service Commission kicked off a meeting on power rates last week with a prayer against gay marriage and reproductive rights. John Delwin Jordan, who was at the meeting to testify on behalf of the Prattville Tea Party, opened up the meeting in prayer after receiving a laudatory introduction by Twinkle Cavanaugh, the head of the PSC.

After asking attendees if they believed in the power of prayer, Jordan concluded his prayer by lamenting, “We’ve taken you out of our schools; we’ve taken you out of our prayers; we’ve murdered your children; we’ve said it’s OK to have same-sex marriage, God. We have sinned.”

Birmingham News columnist John Archibald writes that the sectarian, political prayer may have helped Cavanaugh frame the debate over the PSC’s pro-corporate bent:

She gets – and Alabama Power gets – exactly what they want. They want the issue lost in passionate belief, an ideological tussle designed to pit tree-huggers against coal miners, conservationists against those concerned with jobs, liberals against conservatives.



Which is the best reason to remember what these hearings are about.

They are about Alabama Power's rate structure. Period. It is a structure – though debated to near incomprehension at these hearings – that is high for residential customers and low for industry. It allows the company to write off an $8 million salary for CEO Charles McCrary as Operations and Maintenance, at a government-regulated monopoly.

It lets the company take a return on equity 30-40 percent higher than the national average, according to testimony today that was not disputed, and allows it to take hundreds of millions in higher profits that could be saved by ratepayers and pumped back into the economy.

Staver: SCOTUS DOMA Ruling Is Like Trying To Suspend The Law Of Gravity

On today's "Faith and Freedom Radio" broadcast, Mat Staver continued to directly compare the Supreme Court's recent ruling on the Defense of Marriage Act to the Dred Scott ruling and other egregious court decisions from the past, adding that the DOMA decision is like the court ruling that it was going to suspend the laws of gravity.

"There are certain natural laws," Staver declared, "the laws of gravity are certainly natural laws. The natural created order of men and women, husbands and wives, is part of the natural created order. You may want some other union but you cannot create marriage into something that it is incapable of being":

Setting The Record Straight: DC Circuit Court Nominee Nina Pillard Is A Fair and Unbiased Candidate

Today, the Senate Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing on the nomination of Cornelia “Nina” T.L. Pillard to the influential Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. Pillard is one of President Obama's three nominees to fill vacancies on the court, which is currently operating with nearly one-third of its seats empty.

Pillard is a fair-minded, nationally recognized law professor and experienced appellate lawyer with an extraordinary record of service. She has won historic Supreme Court victories:  she opened one of the last male-only public colleges to women, and protected the Family and Medical Leave Act. She has served two tours as a high-level government lawyer and is currently a distinguished and beloved professor at Georgetown University Law Center. Her expertise in appellate litigation led to her appointment as a co-director of Georgetown’s Supreme Court Institute, which assists lawyers from around the country in preparing for Supreme Court arguments, without regard to which side they represent. Her record demonstrates her superb character, judgment, and fundamental commitment to upholding the principles of our Constitution and laws.

Right-wing bloggers are already making nasty and untrue attacks on Professor Pillard, but here are the facts:

The National Review Online cited unnamed sources in a blog calling Professor Pillard a “complete ideologue.” In reality, Professor Pillard is a fair-minded, highly accomplished litigator with broad experience and an outstanding reputation for public service. She has litigated major constitutional cases brought or defended by Republican Administrations, and Supreme Court justices appointed by Republican presidents have often written the majority opinions agreeing with Professor Pillard’s legal arguments. And prominent officials in Republican-appointed officials are supporting her nomination.

FACT:  Because of Pillard’s unbiased approach to the law, which has earned her the respect of her colleagues, she was asked to chair an American Bar Association Reading Committee that evaluated Judge Samuel Alito’s qualifications to serve on the Supreme Court. Her committee’s evaluation led to the ABA rating Alito “well qualified."

  • The Reading Committee reviewed all of the legal writings of then-Judge Samuel Alito for purposes of evaluating his nomination to the Supreme Court. Armed with the review by Professor Pillard’s committee, the Standing Committee unanimously gave Judge Alito its highest rating of “Well Qualified.”   

FACT:  Pillard serves on the Executive Committee of the Board of Directors of the American Arbitration Association, the world’s largest alternative dispute resolution provider. 

  • At the American Arbitration Association, Pillard has worked with corporate general counsels and business leaders to advance the Association’s private arbitration services and mission.  Arbitration is a process favored by many businesses for resolving disputes without the cost and delay of litigation.

FACT:  Pillard has a long track record of fair and unbiased work, including litigating major constitutional cases brought or defended by Republican Administrations. And Supreme Court justices appointed by Republican presidents have often written the majority opinions agreeing with her legal arguments.   

  • Over the past 15 years, Professor Pillard has distinguished herself as a professor at Georgetown University Law Center, where she both teaches and serves as a Co-Director of the Supreme Court Institute, preparing lawyers for argument on a pro bono, first-come basis to all lawyers who seek assistance. Over the past term, the Supreme Court Institute prepared lawyers on one or both sides of every case heard by the Supreme Court. 
  • Professor Pillard argued the Supreme Court case Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs alongside DOJ officials in the George W. Bush administration. Together, their defense of the Family and Medical Leave Act successfully vindicated a state employee’s right to take unpaid leave to care for his ill wife. Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote the majority opinion, siding with Professor Pillard’s argument.
  • In United States v. Virginia, a case filed by the George H.W. Bush administration, Professor Pillard wrote the briefs that persuaded the Supreme Court to open the Virginia Military Institute to women, ending one of the last state college male-only admissions policies in the country.
  • In Ornelas v. United States, Professor Pillard argued that reasonable suspicion and probable cause – the defining standards for police searches and seizures – require independent review in appellate courts to clarify and control the legal rules, unify precedent, and afford law enforcement clear guidance as to when searches are appropriate.  In an opinion written by Chief Justice Rehnquist, the Supreme Court agreed with Professor Pillard’s legal arguments. 
  • In Behrens v. Pelletier, Professor Pillard won a critical victory ensuring that local, state, and federal government officials can defend themselves adequately when sued. In an opinion by Justice Scalia, the Supreme Court agreed with the position articulated by Professor Pillard.   

FACT: President George W. Bush’s Assistant Attorney General Viet Dinh signed a letter of support for Professor Pillard citing her unbiased approach to the law.

  • Professor Pillard “is exceptionally bright, a patient and unbiased listener, and a lawyer of great judgment and unquestioned integrity. We certainly do not agree on the merits of every issue, but Nina has always been fair, reasonable, and sensible in her judgments. She approaches faculty hiring, teaching and curriculum, and matters of faculty governance on their merits, without any ideological agenda--at times even against the tide of academic popularity to defend and respect different views and different types of people.

The Family Research Council has attacked Professor Pillard, claiming she has radical liberal ideas on abortion, motherhood and abstinence only education.

The FRC wrongly attributed a quote to Professor Pillard which was actually a quote belonging to former Chief Justice Rehnquist.

  •  FRC’s Email stated: “A mother of two, Nina wrote a 2011 paper, "Against the New Maternalism," which argues that by celebrating motherhood, society is creating a "self-fulfilling cycle of discrimination."
  •  In Professor Pillard’s Article, she is quoting the majority opinion in the Hibbs case, written by then-Chief Justice William Rehnquist: “Providing men with family leave, the Hibbs court reasoned, would help to change underlying gendered patterns of family care and thereby help to counteract “a self-fulfilling cycle of discrimination” – a cycle that “fostered employers’ stereotypical views about women’s [lack of] commitment to work and their [lesser] value as employees,” as well as “parallel stereotypes” of men’s overriding workplace commitment that routinely obstruct men’s equal access to family benefits that could encourage them to spend more time parenting. The radical implication of Hibbs is that we cannot end sex discrimination outside the home without changing our beliefs about women’s and men’s differential attachments to family care within it, and we cannot change those beliefs without actually shifting the allocation of care work within the family.” (Pillard, Against the New Maternalism, p. 231)
  • Additional reference to the original Rehnquist Quote: “But in a broadly worded opinion, Rehnquist said Tuesday that Congress and the courts could use stronger standards to fight sex discrimination. He detailed the long history of discriminatory leave policies and the rationale for the family leave law, which guarantees employees up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave to care for family members… Before the law, he wrote, leave policies were grounded in "stereotypes about women's domestic roles" and "parallel stereotypes presuming a lack of domestic responsibilities for men." Those "mutually reinforcing stereotypes," Rehnquist noted, created a "self- fulfilling cycle of discrimination" that forced women to maintain the role of primary family caregiver.” (Court bolsters family leave, Chicago Tribune, 05/03)

The Family Research Council wrongly accuses Professor Pillard of broadly claiming that abstinence only education is unconstitutional, saying, “Pillard is so fiercely opposed to abstinence education that she has said publicly she would declare it unconstitutional.”

  • Nina Pillard: “I do not here take a position on the abstinence message itself, beyond arguing that it must not be embedded with sexual stereotypes or discriminatorily applied to women and not men.” (Pillard, Our Other Reproductive Choices, p. 962)
  • Professor Pillard does not oppose abstinence-only education. Rather, she has written that sex education, whether it advocates abstinence or not, should treat boys and girls equally and avoid sex-role stereotypes, in the interest of promoting equal responsibility on the part of both boys and girls.

The FRC claimed that Professor Pillard has ‘extreme pro-abortion’ views when in fact Professor Pillard’s academic writing on abortion seeks ways to bridge the gap between abortion rights advocates and opponents by finding common ground for ways to reduce reliance on abortion.

  • “All of these visions of sex equality and reproductive rights are ones that can be shared by people whether they view themselves as pro-life or pro-choice. If society were willing to recognize the demands of equality in these three areas, there might well be less need for abortion. Filling out the reproductive rights agenda with measures that make abortion less necessary is one way to seek progress, notwithstanding legal and cultural conflict about abortion itself.”  (Pillard, Our Other Reproductive Choices, p. 990)
  • Professor Pillard’s academic writings show her openness to viewpoints raised by abortion rights opponents: Professor Pillard consulted respected anti-abortion advocate Helen Alvaré in writing her article ‘Other Reproductive Choices’ to ensure her work considered all sides of the public debate on women’s reproductive health. In fact, Professor Alvaré is listed in the article’s acknowledgements.
  • “Feminists for Life (FFL), a nonprofit organization declaring itself in favor of equality for women and against abortion, makes some claims that resonate with those of some pro-choice feminists, and which should be common ground in the reproductive rights battles.” (Pillard, Our Other Reproductive Choices, p. 981)
     

Right Wing Round-Up - 7/23/13

Right Wing Leftovers - 7/23/13

  • Oh good, Christine O'Donnell is thinking of making another run for the Senate.
  • Apparently, Rep. Peter King is now thinking of running for president solely because some reporter from Newsmax convinced him that it is a good idea.
  • Jennifer LeClair prays that Lady Gaga will start "going gaga over Jesus and used her celebrity for His glory, millions would stop buying immoral filth and start singing songs to God."
  • Michael Brown tells closeted and married gay men that "commitment to love your wife and your children trumps your sexual desires and romantic attractions, and to destroy your family for the sake of those desires is, indeed, 'the most selfish thing in the world.'"
  • Is any surprised that Ken Cuccinelli thinks that people ought to be prosecuted for adultery?
  • Finally, do you know what this country needs? "A Congress full of Rep. Gohmerts."

Bryan Fischer: Demon Hunter

On his radio program today, Bryan Fischer dedicated an entire segment to recounting some of the various run-ins he has had with demonic spirits and how he cleansed them from his home, cleansed his and other children who were being attacked by them, and even fought one off that grabbed him while he slept.

Inspired by a story in The Blaze today about the new horror film "The Conjuring" and the supposedly true story that inspired it, Fischer recounted how he once delivered a young girl from a demon that was tormenting her and ordering her to be disobedient to her parents under threat that the demon would otherwise kill them.

But it was not just others that Fischer rescued, as he also was once personally attacked by a spirit in the middle of the night.  Apparently, this spirit had been sent out to harm him by a coven of local witches and it grabbed him by the ankle as he slept and tried to pull him from his bed until he was able to rebuke it in the name of Jesus and drive it away:

DL Foster: 'Gay Activists and White American Slave Owners Are Two Sides of the Same Coin'

Today, another leader in the ex-gay movement has written a letter of apology for the “hurt and pain” caused by his work at Exodus International. That being said, DL Foster of Ex-Gay Pride Month is out with a new diatribe likening gay rights advocates to slave owners. After comparing himself to Harriet Tubman, this time Foster sees himself as a Frederick Douglass figure who was able to “escape the gay life plantation.”

“Gay activists and white American slave owners are two sides of the same coin, animated by the same spirit,” Foster writes. “Just like the delusional slave owners —depite [sic] their lies, imtimidation [sic], violence, ridicule and unjust laws— ultimately lost, homosexual activists will discover one day they too will lose the war.”

Reading more about Frederick Douglass and the hate he endured from the slave owners simply because he wanted his brothers and sisters to be free, reminded me of what a gay activist said recently about EXhomosexuals. “Ex-gays are as rare as the Dodo bird.”, quipped homosexual Wayne Besen who spends his waking hours attempting to do what slave owners did to Douglass, Tubman and other abolitionists. Besen uses the same strategy of the slave owners: paint the abolitionists as uneducated, unhinged loons fighting a losing battle. Ridicule became their oft used tool when outright intimidation failed to deter those bearing the message of freedom.



If you’ve noticed, gay activists religiously cite the American Psychological Association’s no change doctrine as irreversable [sic] proof that no homosexual can change. If they do, its theorized, such a person will be emotionally damaged even to the point of suicide. Or you will also hear this: “you can change your behavior, but you can’t change your orientation”. These ridiculous assertions have become the basis of passing unjust laws and prohibiting counselors from helping people who want to escape the gay life plantation. So why not just tell blacks gays that change is impossible so they can life a happy life as a slave?

As my friend explained to me, Douglass again proved that it was the slave owners who were fighting a losing battle. Douglass detailed his life as a slave with such finesse, that only a person who was once enslaved on the plantations of racist America could have written it.

Gay activists and white American slave owners are two sides of the same coin, animated by the same spirit. It reminds me of the many times homosexual activists have claimed that I was never gay to begin with. Unable to refute my broad knowledge of the homosexual lifestyle that I lived for 11 years, a Chicago lesbian angrily told me, “You were never a true gay, because true gays cannot change their orientation”. As ludicrous as it sounds, I recognized it as one of those tools they use when they run out of options against EXhomosexuals like myself who are forward and articulate emancipation messengers.



Just like the delusional slave owners —depite [sic] their lies, imtimidation [sic], violence, ridicule and unjust laws— ultimately lost, homosexual activists will discover one day they too will lose the war. Our Liberator has come and we are free.

Corsi: Gay Marriage Will Lead To Pedophilia And Hate Crimes Charges Against Pastors

Last week, the Eagle Forum hosted its annual Collegians Summit in Washington, DC at which several members of Congress spoke, as did WND's leading Birther and resident crackpot Jerome Corsi, who warned the students in attendance that gay marriage will lead to polygamy and pedophilia that will turn America into a modern-day version of pagan Rome.

Corsi went on to warn that once gay marriage is established as constitutional, then it will only be a matter of time before that religious leaders will be dragged out of their pulpits and charged with a hate crime for daring to preach against homosexuality:

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious