Busy week ahead. Light posting. But here's one we're not surprised to read:
GOP Director of Hispanic Outreach Quits and Becomes Democrat
When Republicans appointed Pablo Pantoja to State Director of Florida Hispanic Outreach for the Republican National Committee, they hoped he would be able to bridge the sizable gap that only expanded during the 2012 elections, when the state’s 4.7 million Hispanic voters supported Barack Obama over Mitt Romney by a 20 percent margin.
But after months of inaction by Congressional Republicans on comprehensive immigration reform and stiff resistance by Republican-leaning groups like the Heritage Foundation, Pantoja has had enough; on Monday, he announced via email that he was leaving the party and registering as a Democrat:
Friend,
Yes, I have changed my political affiliation to the Democratic Party. It doesn’t take much to see the culture of intolerance surrounding the Republican Party today. I have wondered before about the seemingly harsh undertones about immigrants and others. Look no further; a well-known organization recently confirms the intolerance of that which seems different or strange to them.
Pantoja goes on to specifically cite last week’s revelation — that an author of Heritage’s false report on the cost of the Gang of Eight’s immigration bill wrote a dissertation in which he suggested that Hispanics are at a permanent disadvantage because they have lower IQs — as the final straw in his political evolution.
30 comments:
While this article is over two years old, the GOP seems in worse shape now then at that time with Hispanics.
I spend half my year in Mexico and I can tell you right now, Trumpmania and immigration are on the top of people's minds, no matter their income levels.
In multiple conversations, with people from around the country, here's what I've found.
Most Mexicans believe and support the idea that the US can, and should secure her border and that illegal immigration is a problem. Those are all GOP beliefs too.
Where they diverge is in how adults and friends discuss the issue. The name calling, demonizing, lies and bluster by US political leaders and their followers, primarily conservatives, is offensive and is not how people who want to sit down and work out a solution together, relate to one another.
It's good to weed out the RINOs.
This new political ad by Trump is about as slimy as it gets. Here's what Jeb Bush actually said:
JEB BUSH: There should be penalties for breaking the law. But, the way I look at this, and this is not, you know — I’m going to say this, and it will be on tape, and so be it. The way I look at this is someone who comes to our country because they couldn’t come legally, they come to our country because their family’s dad who loves their children was worried that their children didn’t have food on the table, and they wanted to make sure their family was intact. And they crossed the border because they had no other means to work to be able to provide for their family.
Yes, they broke the law, but it’s not a felony. It’s kind of — it’s a, it’s an act of love. It’s an act of commitment to your family. I honestly think that that is a different kind of crime that should be, there should be a price paid, but it shouldn’t be — it shouldn’t rile people up that people are actually coming to this country to provide for their families. And the idea that we’re not going to fix this but with with comprehensive reform ends up trapping these people, when they could make a great contribution for their own their families but also for us.
Lack of facts has never stopped Trump before, but this level of overt Republican racism has not been on display since the original Willie Horton ad in 1988.
Now look at the video and at how Trump took those words out of context and juxtaposed them with photos of arrested and/or convicted felons to make it look like Jeb Bush approves of murderers.
Beneath contempt. Lee Atwater would be proud of this sort of dirty politiking. It's a great insight into how little character Trump has and how devoid of class he is.
And which party has two Hispanic candidates? This same party has a very smart female and a very accomplished black candidate. Of course they also have a blowhard but he will blow out. It is the republicans who are anti Hispanic, anti black and anti female, they just have these groups in the race to show they care.
How many years has the political party in power said we need to do something about immigration. About the same number of years they have said we need tax reform. What scares the establishment is maybe Trump would do both if elected and that would really shake up the politically elite.
The Rump, continuing to sink to ever lower levels of dishonesty. A man with no class, no integrity, and apparently few if any principles. Other than making money and trashing those
who do have principles (read real American values).
Bill Richardson, Latino and former Democratic governor of New Mexico, whose mother was full Latina and father was half Latino was a candidate for the presidency in 2008.
The first woman to be nominated for vice president was a Democrat, Geraldine Ferraro.
The first African-American president is a Democrat.
After the Democrats led the way, the GOP followed.
To be fair, Ed Brooke, a liberal Massachusetts Republican, was the first African-American elected U.S. Senator since Reconstruction. In today's TGOP, Senator Brooke would be considered a RINO, because he worked with the Democrats in the Senate to, y'know, actually govern.
The Rump is certainly no Ed Brooke. I left the GOP hoping to reconsider. I now can say with almost certainty that ain't gonna happen.
But I'm not going partisan the other way either.
I can understand why some Tea Party people believe Trump is a Clinton "plant." When you see how often and how crazily he attacks the Hispanics it's not surprising to think someone one put him up to acting like a jackass to make the Hispanic voters hate him. You can't get elected president in the U.S.A. without a large chunk of the Hispanic votge. Trump is doing all in his power to make sure that doesn't happen. The video Shaw linked to is proof of how Trump is ruining it for the GOP.
The GOP was headed south before Trump grabbed the spotlight. Long before as a matter of fact. GOP candidates with any real credibility stand no chance in today's GOP. The Tea Party neo cons and evangelical fundies have taken it over. And yes, they've lost the hispanic and womens vote, that along blacks voting almost exclusively democratic the GOP is near dead with respect to winning the presidency anytime in the future.
The GOP wins congressional elections to gerrymandering. The phrase We the People has lost its historical meaning.
Skudrunner... Please explain how anyone who says Barack Obama is the first "almost black president" has any credibility?
At best, your statement is racially insensitive, at worst, a window into a truly racist soul.
Which is it? You've yet to respond, or offer any explanation...
David,
I did reply to your question or accusation. Born to a black father, white mother raised by a white family and took the name Barry until it was far more advantageous to change his name. If his mother was Jewish he would be Jewish but his mother was white therefore he is half white. No racial undertones at all in my response, yours on the other hand?????
skud -- "Trump would do both if elected" ( immigration and tax reform).
skud, Just how would Trump accomplish this, by decree, bluster, or good looks?
Good looks? Bluster?
Decree a definite possibility should he get elected. Trump will (would) make a good king.
Carson spiking in recent poll. Tied with the Rump.
Watching and listening to the bloviating clinking clown car that is the GOP field is entertaining if nothing else.
But, if one of the guys get elected potus we're screwed. Again.
"...took the name Barry until it was far more advantageous to change his name."
Skud, you're imposing your prejudiced opinion on why President Obama changed his name. You haven't a clue about why he used the name Barry instead of Barack when he was a young man--of course, if you've had a conversation with Mr. Obama and he actually told you he changed his name back to Barack for some sort of advantage, then please let us know about your personal cnversation with Mr. Obama.
It's curious, don't you think, skud, how going from Barack to Barry and then back to Barack apparently stirs up all sorts of suspicions in people like you.
Are those same suspicions present in you when anyone speaks of Piyush Jindal (Oops!) I mean "Bobby" Jindal's name change is discussed? Not only did Jindal change his original Indian name, but he also converted to Christianity, which of course one could observe would be to his advantage when pursuing a political career in the Bible Belt.
The other curious thing about your remark is that you dragged race into the conversation, as though the color of Mr. Obama's parents' skin have any bearing whatsoever on the content of his character.
I wonder. Do you question all your friends and acquaintances about the color of their parents' skin? You apparently judge people on that, or at the least, find it a curiosity in a human being. That leads me to wonder in what era you were born. Most Americans left that thinking behind them decades ago.
"Most Americans left that thinking behind decades ago."
Judging from some rightwing sites a significant number did not.
They can't do much about the presidency. They can try disenfranchising voters or (unlikely) having some rational positions. But Congress is a different story, Gerrymandering is alive and well.
Few could pronounce Piyush and he changed it because it suits his needs, much the same as Barry.
Howard, Few are pleased with Congress and that is why there is so much discontent in the presidential race. It seems the American public is looking for something different, like non-politicians because politicians have sure messed things up.
Skud... how would you describe my son? White dad, african american mom? Is he black? White, or a half, as you've described Pres Obama.
Truly offensive.
Here in liberal land, we take people as they describe themselves.
Conservatives, not so much.
Interesting point, Dave. Liberals say "This is who I am." Conservatives say "This is who you are."
Liberals define themselves. Conservatives define others.
Over generalizing methinks Jerry.
Dave,
American would be the correct choice but that doesn't work for liberals.
How about a Native American, totally discriminated race, with a Texan father, again American.
Why is it you must describe and define everyone as something they are not. Is this a racial statement? is it to degenerate one race therefore being racist? I have a number of friends who are Mexican father and white father, they refer to themselves as Mexican Americans not Mexican.
Now Carson is black so if you are opposed to him are you a racist?
"Now Carson is black so if you are opposed to him are you a racist?"
If you oppose him because he is black, then yes you are a racist.
Over generalizing? Well, I didn't say "all". It is certainly true in many instances.
Actually Skud, we take it as it is given...
You ever been told you can't rent an apartment because of skin color?
How bout told there's no food in the restaurant, asked for ID in a southern campground, told black women are better for fu#*ing then they are for marrying, simply because of the color of your skin?
My wife and son both will tell you they are American, first... but they will also say they are black. It is reality. No matter how American they try to be, they are never going to be American enough for some. Simply pointing that out, is not race baiting, or playing the race card, as some believe.
Regarding Carson, I'm with Graham on this one... he's a brilliant surgeon, but not qualified to be president.
David,
No I have not experienced outward discrimination but I doubt you have either.
As much as some like to live in the past some choose to move on and outward discrimination is illegal. We will not get rid of discrimination until we quit reliving the past.
As to qualifying to be president, all that matters in the last two elections is to have a good speech writer. Qualifications have little to do with it.
Jerry, There were more who supported obama because he was black than those opposed for that reason. I would guess the majority of of opposition came and comes from his lack of leadership and skills.
Skud -- "There were more who supported obama because he was black than those opposed for that reason. "
Got any proof of that opinion, or is it just a wildass (and some might say racist) guess?
Seriously Skud, really? If you think I've never experienced outright discrimination, your really not thinking.
Everyone of those examples are from my personal life, and yes, as a matter of fact, I've been denied a place to live because my wife is black. We've been denied food at a restaurant because my wife is black. I guess you could say I was still able eat there, just not her if you wanted to split hairs.
And no, they are not ancient history, as in last Thanksgiving, driving through Utah.
And therein lies the problem... many folks have no idea the depth of racism, and the sometimes subtle ways it can be applied to people.
Could we have brought a federal case on some of these? Sure. But why? It wasn't gonna make a lot of difference. It's like when my family entered a lobster house in Maine to eat a few years back. My son, and his grandparents were told as they were looking at the live lobsters in the tank, that the restaurant had no more lobsters and they should eat elsewhere.
They could have made a fuss, but to what end... so they left and ate elsewhere. They got the message.
As for your response to Jerry regarding the number of people that voted for Barack Obama because he's black, do you really think this stuff through? The Dem average with African American voters since 1976 has been 88%. in 2008, Obama received 95% for a bump of 10%, and in 2012, 93%, for a bump of 6%. Certainly he got more votes than the average DEM candidate over the years, but let's also remember that in two of those elections, a third candidate was pulling some votes too.
The standard tripe that Obama got the overwhelming number of black votes, because he is black, is false. he got the overwhelming number of black votes because black people perceive Dems to be more aligned and supportive of causes that community cares about.
Since you, and many other conservatives continue to push that narrative, false as it is, let me ask you this... Is it possible that Mitt Romney got the overwhelming support [62%] of white people simply because he is white? How can that logic be rue and applicable to the black community, but not the white community?
I think you're splitting hairs there Jerry, but I can't argue. You did say all.
Jerry,
It was an educated WAG and if you read my post I said more people voted for Obama because he was black than voted against him for the same reason. I did not say he got more of the black vote.
Did Romney get 62% of the white vote because he was white, possibly.
A majority of African-Americans voted for Bill Clinton, was that becuz he's white or a Democrat? African-Americans support the Democratic party by huge majority, so it makes sense that support would go to a Democrat running for the presidency, and it didn't hurt Obama any that he is also bi-racial, but in this country he had to identify as a black man. And let's not kid ourselves why. I'm sick of hearing the Rethuglicans say that black people stay in the Democratic party because their politicians promise them free stuff! Maybe you Rethuglicans need to look at what the party has done to the African-American community, starting with making it more difficult for them to vote! more difficult to register! fewer hours in which to vote! all of that sort of voter obstructionism brought to the black communties by Republicans in power in Republican controlled states.
When Obama was elected, it wasn't Democrats who passed around photos of his wife as a monkey, it wasn't Democrats who put up photos of the White House lawn covered in watermelons, it isn't liberal bloggers who constantly refer to Mrs. Obama as a gorilla, it isn't liberal bloggers who call Obama a Marxist, Commie, Vermin, Jihadist, Christ-hater, America-hater...even on idiot who fancies himself a poet called his mother a whore and his father, who was accepted into Harvard University, an African savage! He even made fun of the Obama's two girls! Calling them monkeys! And that maniac gets all huffy when racist assholes are attracted to him and his disgusting racist and anti-semitic blog. Crap attracts crap.
This skud character has been playing the same pity violin tune since Obama won TWICE by the largest majority since EISENHOWER! The American people, not just African-Americans, supporte3d him and his policies, but skud and others can't adjust their thinking to accept that fact.
And good for Obama for renaming that mountain in Alaska, it's what the people inl the state, Democrats and Republicans wanted. It didn't matter to the angry haters, they found fault with even that small gesture to states rights. Nothing Obama could ever do would please that bunch of unhappy trouble-makers.
Obama has come out of this looking great. Lame duck presidency? Bwahahahahaha! Quack!
Post a Comment