9th Doctor: This station is designed to explode the minute it reaches capacity.
Rose: Didn’t anyone notice? Isn’t there someone in London checking this sort of stuff?
Margaret: We’re in Cardiff. London doesn’t care. The South Wales coast could fall into the sea and they wouldn’t notice.

Doctor Who Boomtown 2005

One of the most important things that is constantly ignored by people trying to spin event for their gain is context such as what is currently going one by people who are trying to paint Ted Cruz as supporting Illegal Immigration & gay marriage.

The best way to expose this canard is to put things in their proper context and the best way I can think of doing that is taking a page out of Bill James book and talk about baseball.

Namely Carl Yastrzemski in 1968.

For those not familiar with either Baseball in general or Carl Yastrzemski in particular he was a left fielder for the Boston Red Sox who played from 1961 till 1983. Carl played Left field replacing the immortal Ted Williams while playing the occasional game in center field right field and even third base. With the coming of Jim Rice and the DH era he became a regular 1B and occasional DH in addition to Left Field duties

He was a far superior fielder to Williams winning seven Gold gloves over 23 seasons and also leading the league in outfield assists seven times, but it was his bat that helped him to 18 all star games 3 batting titles 5 on base titles two slugging titles 3 doubles titles and in 1967 became the last player to win the triple crown Hitting .326 with 44 Home Runs and 121 Runs batted in leading in all three categories and getting the Boston Redsox to the world series for the first time in 21 years.

Yaz would retire in 1983 and be promptly voted into the baseball hall of fame along with Johnny Bench both in their first year of eligibility. Yaz snagged 94.6% the 17th highest number of ballots all time but behind Bench that year who got 96.4%.

So pretty much in the 115 years of modern baseball it’s safe to say he was one of the greatest players of all time considered by many in the top 5 left fielders behind Stan Musial, Williams, Ricky Henderson and Barry Bonds and without question in the top 10.

But for the purpose of this piece let’s focus on his 1968 season, which followed his career year.

At first glance it would seem to be a disappointment. Yaz batted .301 a full .025 point drop from his previous year. He hit 23 home runs just over half his total of the prior year, and drove in 74 runs, a far cry from the 121 of the year before.

However let’s take a closer look at these number via a few Topps baseball card backs First in RBI’s

yaz rbi 1969

As you can see Yaz’s RBI’s total was good enough to put him 8th in the league tied with rookie Reggie Jackson and just behind Brooks Robinson but not near his teammate Ken Harrelson who led the league

Well how about those 23 meager Home Runs?

yaz hr

Yet it turns out Yaz 23 Home Runs while 2nd on the Red Sox behind Ken Harrleson’s 35 was good enough for 7th in the league just behind two members of the World Series winning Detroit Tigers (Norm Cash and Bill Freeman) and behind league leader Frank Howard’s 44.

Finally let’s look at his batting avg. How did a .301 average look in 1968? Turns out pretty damn good

yaz avg1969 1

Yup he lead the league in fact not only was he was the only man in the American league to hit over over .300 that year but only one other player even managed to get to .290

yaz avg1969 2.

But the best way to judge how good those stats were are to look at the MVP voting for the year

yaz mvp 1969

Yaz’s numbers were good enough to get him 9th place in the MVP voting in the year of the pitcher. Denny McLain of the World Series Champion Detroit Tigers would win the MVP and two other pitchers would finish tied for 5th in the voting (Luis Tiant & Dave McNally) ahead of him. Yaz would be 6th among position players behind HR leader Frank Howard, RBI leader Ken Harrelson & three Detroit Tigers batters, all who had the advantage of not facing Tiger pitching that year. In fact Yaz would be 1st in a stat not yet invented wins over replacement a full 2 runs against #2 player Brooks Robinson.

So all in all, while at first glance Carl Yastrzemski’s 1968 numbers were not that impressive, particularly compared to the year before based on relative numbers that year IN CONTEXT, he was easily one of the 10 best players in the league.

Now let’s consider Ted Cruz in context on Immigration the favorite attack of the Marco Rubio team, the one that really matters, amnesty.

First remember the reason for this attack from Rubio fans is to cancel out his own problems on the issue, as was evident even as he made appearance in early 2014.

While he touched on one of the elephants in the room (that one being the statue of one next to his podium) he didn’t have a word to say about the other, his support for the Senate Amnesty bill that has been the chief cause of his freefall in NH presidential polls.

Nevertheless his speech was well received and it remains to be seen if with such a large field of excellent GOP candidates to choose from, he will be able to recover his former standing. That pretty much depends on what happens with amnesty in the house.

If the House fails to pass the Amnesty bill then I suspect he will be given a mulligan and be able to make his case.

If however the house passes a bill, and such a bill gets to the president’s desk then Republicans in NH and elsewhere are unlikely to forget, or forgive

This was the cause for the Rubio Regeneration and his decision to stand with Ted Cruz on other issues in 2013

Alas for Rubio McCain was right, he DID get the credit, or rather the blame and now in every pol he falls into the 2nd tier of GOP contenders for 2016.
The field we used for this poll is not exactly the same as April- Ayotte and Cruz replaced Susana Martinez and Rick Perry, who had received little support. But at any rate it’s clear Marco Rubio has fallen precipitously, from 25% then to his current 7% standing.

And that’s why he is sticking with Ted Cruz this time.

While some (OK me) figure Rubio is young and was played, he’s not taking any chances. As long as Ted Cruz continues to fight Marco Rubio stands at his side.

It’s an odd situation, the MSM avoids mentioning or attacking Rubio on the subject saying bluntly he needs to get himself right with the tea party, almost as if they were working under the assumption that he is faking it but more likely because they will need to convince him to vote with them again if amnesty passes the house.

And on the other end while Rubio stands with Cruz in the Senate he isn’t making appearances before conservative groups like the Tea Party. His absence from the DC rally two weeks ago was no accident. He knew if he took that stage the chorus of boos would have been the story.

 

But more importantly than the whys about Marco Rubio’s tactics, what were people saying at the time

 

But as Congress arrives at a key moment in its work to overhaul the nation’s immigration laws, the two stand at opposite ends of the debate on whether to allow the nation’s 11million unauthorized immigrants to become citizens. That divide mirrors the argument within the Republican Party over how to handle the immigration bill — and could end up propelling, or sinking, the two senators as they mull possible presidential runs in 2016.

 

That’s USA today in May of 2013 on Ted Cruz vs Marco rubio. They seem to think they weren’t on the same side, they’re not alone:

NBC Latino June 2013:

Cruz also spoke at Republican Congressman Steve King’s six hour anti-immigration reform press conference on Wednesday where he was greeted with cheers and claps as he maintained his hard stance against the bill. Congressman King was the legislator who introduced an amendment to repeal DACA and deport DREAMers.
In the Tea party rally, however, Senator Marco Rubio’s name wasn’t received so warmly at King’s rally. The once Tea-Party favorite faced a backlash from the crowd gathered in front of the Capitol. Audience members booed at any mention of Rubio’s name. Some attendees carried signs targeting the Florida Republican.

“Marco Rubio has not read his own bill” exclaimed Robert Rector, a researcher for the Heritage Foundation.

National Review notes Chuck Schumer didn’t think Cruz was for it:

Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.), who suggested that Cruz’s opposition to the bill had less to do with his desire for increased border security than with his opposition to a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants. (Cruz filed an amendment that would bar illegal immigrants from becoming citizens.) “I would like to point out the border security in the state of Texas is not some abstract concept,” Cruz said, before inviting Schumer and his other colleagues to come visit and see for themselves. “I believe Americans of goodwill, both Republicans and Democrats across this country want the U.S. government to get serious about securing the border.”

Let’s take a look at the vote concerning one Cruz amendment on immigration:

A Senate committee rejected an immigration-legislation amendment offered by Sen. Ted Cruz today that would have added significant security resources along the U.S.-Mexico border.

The amendment proposed tripling the number of Border Patrol agents stationed along the U.S.-Mexico border and quadrupling equipment, “including cameras, sensors, drones and helicopters,” within three years. And the 700 miles of border fence required by a 2006 law would need to be finished.

If the Department of Homeland Security failed to comply, 20 percent of its budget for the next year would be shifted as block grants to border states, giving state officials in Texas, Arizona, California and New Mexico more funds for their own border security efforts. And another penalty: a 20 percent salary cut for the Secretary of Homeland Security and all other political appointees at the department.

The amendment was voted down 13-5, with Sen. John Cornyn supporting his fellow Republican after a brief pause during the roll call.

US News and World Report:

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, a newly elected Republican with a penchant for making headlines, filed an amendment that would bar undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States from ever earning citizenship…Cruz isn’t the only one throwing potential poison pills into the mix.

Poison Pill?

The New Yorker:

The long-awaited immigration-reform bill written by the haplessly named Gang of Eight in the United States Senate got buried this week, not unexpectedly, by a great mudslide of amendments—more than three hundred, at last count…Many were malicious. Senator Ted Cruz, of Texas, proposed that anyone who had ever lived illegally in the U.S. be barred for life from U.S. citizenship. The primary purpose of this overhaul, of course, is to offer the eleven million people believed to be living here illegally the chance to become legal—to give those who qualify a “pathway to citizenship.”

Malicious? Doesn’t sound like support for the bill to me

Huffpo:

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), an almost certain “no” vote on the bill from the so-called gang of eight, filed an amendment on Tuesday to ban anyone who has been in the U.S. without status from becoming a citizen at any point…

Other Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee have also proposed measures that would fundamentally change the bill. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) filed a whopping 77 amendments, while Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) filed 49.

Cruz told conservative commentator Sean Hannity in April that he has “deep concerns” about allowing undocumented immigrants to eventually become citizens.

Jeff sessions filed 49 Amendments to the gang of 8 bill? does that means he supported it too?

Fox Latino:

Supporters of the bill, mainly of the part of it that would legalize millions of undocumented immigrants, kept a steady drumbeat in defense of the measure though emails, websites and social media.In a press release, America’s Voice, a leading national group that advocates for more lenient immigration laws, singled out Cruz’s anti-citizenship amendment as particularly worrisome.

“This would not only destroy the path to citizenship in the Senate bill—the popular heart of an immigration reform solution—but also turn its back on 100 years of precedent in immigration policy,” said the release.

Apparently America’s voice didn’t think Cruz was a supporter of the bill.

Did you remember that Ted Cruz launched a petition against the gang of eight bill? KFYO said at the time:

We will see who has more pull in the Senate right now. Marco Rubio or Ted Cruz. The immigration bill could still be strengthened though. Or Rubio could bail on the Gang of Eight and join with Ted Cruz. Interesting to watch.

Hmmm Cruz vs Rubio here, he also sent an open letter concerning it to congress with his objections which were not just over the amendment:

 

Let’s assume that Joe’s Burger Shack has 100 employees and that at Joe’s Burger Shack, with 100 employees, business is doing relatively well, people are eating more hamburgers, and Joe decides he wants to hire 5 more people. If Joe and Joe’s Burger Shack decide they want to hire five more people, if Joe chooses to hire five U.S. citizens or if he chooses to hire five legal permanent residents–five legal immigrants–Joe faces a penalty of $25,000 for doing so–$5,000 apiece right off his bottom line to the IRS. In contrast, if Joe decides instead to hire five RPIs, who came here illegally among those 11 million who are here illegally but granted RPI legalization under the Gang of 8 bill, Joe pays a penalty of zero dollars.
Let me ask a simple, commonsense question. In this instance, who is Joe, the small business owner, going to hire? This bill creates an enormous incentive to hire those here illegally, and at the same time it does it by creating a statutory penalty for hiring U.S. citizens and for hiring legal immigrants. That makes no sense.

 

And talked to Byron York about it who wrote this:

So Cruz’s amendments were designed to 1) eliminate the legalization-first, security-later structure of the Gang of Eight bill while still creating a way to legalize those now here illegally; 2) increase certain types of legal immigration; and 3) remove what might be called the moral hazard of rewarding those who came here illegally with citizenship and federal benefits. “In introducing amendments, what I endeavored to do was improve that bill so that it actually fixes the problem,” Cruz told me. “I think an overwhelming majority of Americans in both parties wants to see our broken immigration system fixed, wants to see the problem solved, the border secured, and our remaining a nation that welcomes and celebrates legal immigrants. Given that bipartisan agreement outside of Washington, my objective was not to kill immigration reform but to amend the Gang of Eight bill so that it actually solves the problem rather than making the problem worse.”

Each of Cruz’s amendments was entirely defensible, but also entirely impossible in today’s climate. The Gang of Eight bill is a painstakingly-crafted proposal which Democrats would abandon immediately if any of Cruz’s ideas were incorporated in it. Schumer and his allies have a long list of deal-killers, and it includes every single one of Ted Cruz’s ideas.

As Politico reported Cruz said:

“If the objective is to fix the problem, the Democrats have to be willing to compromise.”

They were not and Cruz talked to Rush Limbaugh about it at the time on his show:

RUSH: Yeah, but you don’t expect that hold up, do you? I mean, within a day or two, Senator Schumer’s gonna find a camera and talk about how discriminatory it is. “Here we’ve just granted these people status! We’ve just allowed them to come out of the shadows, and it’s just unconscionable now that we don’t let them vote,” and so a whole new amendment might be made to eliminate the 13 years. Is stuff like that possible, because I don’t blame people who have a cynical view like that.CRUZ: You’re absolutely right. That is certainly coming. It’s why I’ve introduced a number of amendments to try to fix this mess. One amendment that I’ve talked about today on the floor of the Senate is an amendment to put real teeth in border security — this bill has no teeth in border security — to triple the border patrol, to increase fourfold the helicopters, fixed-wing assets, technology on the border, to put in place a strong biometric exit-entry system.

RUSH: Those were all voted down?

CRUZ: They have been, and critically, the most important piece is to say, “Secure the border first, before any legalization.”

And there was also this welfare tidbit

CRUZ: Well, you know, if there’s one thing Washington knows how to do, it’s come up with bogus cost estimates. I mean, we all remember when Obamacare was passed and we were told it would save money, and we’ve now discovered that it’s gonna cost trillions, and it’s only getting worse. You know, the CBO figures just focus on the immediate, short-term impact and not the long-term impact, and they just focus on the federal level. So, for example, the proponents of the Gang of Eight say that no one who is here illegally will be eligible for welfare. In the Judiciary Committee, I submitted an amendment — a very simple sentiment, just a couple of sentences — that said, “No one who is here illegally shall be eligible for any means-tested welfare federal, state, or local.” Every Democrat on the committee and the Republican members of the Gang of Eight all voted against it.

RUSH: Yes! Exactly!

CRUZ: It was very clarifying. When they go and say, “There’s no welfare,” why do they vote against a provision that would make it clear?

and let’s remember what was at state here:

RUSH: We’re talking to Senator Ted Cruz from Texas about the Gang of Eight’s immigration bill. Senator Graham was on TV Sunday, basically said that we need to do this, just as you said, to get back in the good graces of the Hispanic community. And I think you’re right, the consultants are telling Republicans — you know, you can tell somebody anything. The fact they believe this is what’s frightening to me. Because where does this stop, Senator? If, for example, we gotta get back in the good graces of Hispanics, therefore we have to support amnesty and throw out what we believe, then what’s next for abortion? What’s next for gay marriage? What’s next for anything that we disagree with the Democrats on? Well, the gays don’t like you Republicans, and you’d better sign on to gay marriage or you’re never gonna get their support. I mean, it’s the same line of thinking and it has no end to it unless you play it all the way out and the Republican Party ceases to exist.

CRUZ: Rush, you’re exactly right. These same consultants advise on every one of those issues that Republicans give up our principles and become Democrats. You know, I’m always amused when the New York Times writes editorials trying to be helpful to Republicans and say, “This is the way Republicans can save themselves.” Look, the New York Times disagrees with us. They’re entitled to disagree with us, but it’s not like we should take their advice.

RUSH: Well, they don’t want to save us.

CRUZ: That’s exactly right. They want to destroy us.

Ted Cruz understood this in 2013 and still understands it today. Marco Rubio didn’t understand it then which is why he and his supporters are trying to rewrite history on Ted Cruz today. It’s just as nonsensical as claiming Carl Yastrzemski had a bad year in 1968 based on the stats.

Both claims are nonsense and the proof is just a google search away.

I’ll give the last words to Cruz himself

****************************************************************************
With one week to go I’m over $16,000 short of my goal for 2015.

While I’m no fan of re-writing Ted Cruz’s record I’d really like help rewriting the ending to this year for me so I would I ask you to please consider hitting DaTipJar.




Olimometer 2.52

That gets all the bills paid. Consider Subscribing 100 Subscribers at $20 a month will get the job done and then some.


Choose a Subscription level



Additionally our subscribers get our podcast emailed directly to them before it show up anywhere else.

I know you can get the MSM for nothing, but that’s pretty much what most of them are worth.

“We don’t need a lot of Jim DeMint disciples…As soon as they get here, we need to co-opt them.”

Fmr Sen Trent Lott

For weeks now we have been hearing the daily drumbeat from the GOP establishment either openly or clandestinely of the Dangers of Ted Cruz and his willingness to support the tea party base of the GOP. He and to a lesser extent Mike Lee have borne the brunt of attacks as they tell anyone who will listen what a disaster their moves on Obamacare will be for the GOP.

There are many ways to refute this argument but the best is to simply say one name. Marco Rubio.

Marco Rubio was not popular with the establishment in the GOP when he first came up. As Robert Stacy McCain pointed out  spared no expense to support Charlie Crist during the Florida Senate primary

“All they care about is getting their chairmanships back, and they don’t care how they get there,” said the operative. “They don’t want to spend any money, so they were looking for a self-funder.”

“They” are Republican senators, and what my friend was explaining was the otherwise inexplicable decision of the National Republican Senatorial Committee to endorse Charlie Crist in the Florida Senate race — 15 months before the primary!

The fortune spent on Crist proved poorly spent, not only did Crist run as an independent but Democrats rather than pushing their on candidate (Remember Kendrick Meeks?) supported Crist in defeat and he rewarded them by “evolving” into an Obama endorsing democrat.

Thus Marco Rubio became the candidate of the Tea Party and was their favorite, until he made a mistake.

It was a rookie mistake and given the reactions of the MSM and others in the establishment that treated him as the “golden boy” it was almost understandable.

There was speculation concerning Rubio as  a possible vp candidate and then when the president won re-election the speculation turned to 2016, he drew 600 in a November Iowa appearance...and then came the MSM and “immigration reform”.

For months the MSM,  hoping to give the re-elected Obama a victory,  said in no uncertain terms that the only way for the GOP to “save” itself or to make a candidate acceptable to “Hispanic” voters.  Leading establishment GOP figures, anxious to court favor with business interests, echoed the need to move on the subject totally ignoring the millions of members of the base who didn’t bother to show for two straight moderate candidates.

and Marco Rubio believed them

As his profile on the “gang of 8”  advanced Marco Rubio found himself doted on by the press, CNN & MSNBC were conservatives go to die suddenly had him on as a regular guest, liberal papers around the country praised him and when the base stated to object…

Marco Rubio leading the RINO Squish Amnesty Parade? After so many conservatives personally vouched for Marco’s bona fides as The Real Deal?

…they praised him even more!  They talked about his courage and principal and dismissed polls suggesting this was causing trouble., but then things started to happen

“Over the last three months, Marco Rubio’s name and face and voice have been so attached to the comprehensive immigration bill that it has virtually killed any enthusiasm among Republicans in Iowa for a Rubio presidential candidacy,” said GOP State Central Committee member Jamie Johnson. “Most Republicans here now see Rubio as the amnesty candidate.”

“Rubio seems to be so damaged it will be very difficult for him to recover here in Iowa,” said Rep. Steve King. “My perspective is that the immigration issue will sort Republican candidates.”

“Rubio has hurt himself immeasurably with his support of the current immigration bill,” said Sioux City conservative radio host Sam Clovis. “The rule of law still trumps all the feel-good aspects of the bill.”

That was only six months after the days he was drawing crowds in that same state.

However the establishment persuaded him to stay the course and when the Senate bill passed 68-32 with Rubio providing coverage for many other GOP senators.  John McCain said it wouldn’t cost him:

“I think it’s just foolish,” McCain, R-Ariz., told The Arizona Republic on Friday. “I’m not endorsing anyone, but I can tell you Marco Rubio is an articulate spokesperson for what conservatives believe in, in principle. And if we pass immigration reform, which is certainly not clear, he would get enormous credit for it.”

Alas for Rubio McCain was right, he DID get the credit, or rather the blame and now in every pol he falls into the 2nd tier of GOP contenders for 2016.

The field we used for this poll is not exactly the same as April- Ayotte and Cruz replaced Susana Martinez and Rick Perry, who had received little support. But at any rate it’s clear Marco Rubio has fallen precipitously, from 25% then to his current 7% standing.

And that’s why he is sticking with Ted Cruz this time.

While some (OK me) figure Rubio is young and was played, he’s not taking any chances.  As long as Ted Cruz continues to fight Marco Rubio stands at his side.

It’s an odd situation, the MSM avoids mentioning or attacking Rubio on the subject saying bluntly he needs to get himself right with the tea party, almost as if they were working under the assumption that he is faking it but more likely because they will need to convince him to vote with them again if amnesty passes the house.

And on the other end while Rubio stands with Cruz in the Senate he isn’t making appearances  before conservative groups like the Tea Party.  His absence from the DC rally two weeks ago was no accident.  He knew if he took that stage the chorus of boos would have been the story.

It will take a lot of effort and luck for Rubio to win back the good graces of the base.  If Ted Cruz succeeds with Rubio at his side that might do it.

The media insists there is no chance, and how foolish the GOP is for following him but any member or that GOP that people like Ted Cruz can’t count.

Actually senators CAN count, that’s why every member of the GOP who is running in 2014 is voting with Cruz, because they know all the laughter and all the insults that the MSM can muster won’t matter come primary day.

Just ask Marco Rubio.

******************************************************

Olimometer 2.52

we can count over here and we’re still 3 $20 tip jar hitters from a full paycheck this week, what will produce it, your hit of DaTipJar below.

.

BTW if you would like to support this blog without a big or even a small Tip Jar hit one thing you can do is support our advertisers like author J Trapani who has a new book out Victor the Monster Frankenstein an incredible new take on the Frankenstein Legend.

Frankenstien

50 people buying that e-book for $4 will make a huge difference come AD renewal time and you get an incredible read as well.

It’s a win-win!

One of the regular arguments that we’re constantly told is that if the GOP would only support the amnesty Immigration Bill it will solve our problems with Latinos or at least be the first step in solving said problems.

Here in Massachusetts we have a perfect test of this hypothesis.

Gabriel Gomez is the GOP candidate for the US senate, he has from day 1 made it no secret of his support for the gang of eight and has bluntly said he would be a GOP vote for said bill if elected.

He ran on this and won in a 3 way GOP primary not only winning but drawing over 50% of the vote.

His Opponent is Ed Markey a career pol who has voted in lockstep with his party 99% over a 36 year career. He is a hack with a 36 year record behind him he has spent all his time and effort attacking his opponent who has done nothing with his life but become a Navy Flyer, a Navy seal and a successful businessman.

Now given that Gomez is not only a supporter of the Gang of Eight Bill but a latino supporter of the gang of eight bill one might assume that he would resonate with voters in general and Latino voters in particular.

Markey, the Malden Democrat, leads Gomez by 56 to 36 percent among likely voters and a 53-32 percent advantage among all registered voters in the poll.The one bright spot for the ex-Navy SEAL is that his best night of polling came this Wednesday, after his final debate performance against Markey. He trailed in that night’s sample by 13 points, indicating Gomez gained steam from the televised showdown.

Now maybe this poll is off, after all Scott Brown was down big in polls before is win in 2010 but you would think that the numbers would look a bit better. And let me remind you of this

not everyone sees him as a Hispanic trailblazer. The Boston Spanish-language newspaper El Planeta ran a column wondering if Gomez is a “LINO” (Latino In Name Only).

It’s bad enough that La Planeta raised this question — and worse that its answer was “yes.”

Litmus tests for ethnicity serve no purpose besides dividing our community. They are pointless, unnecessary and borderline offensive. Yet as more Hispanic candidates join the political arena, these questions seem to be the new norm.

Litmus test for ethnicity the new Norm??

So let me get this straight, you have Gabriel Gomez who has a life full of achievement as a Navy Flyer, Navy Seal and businessman, who won a GOP primary with over 50% proclaiming loudly and publicly his support of the efforts of the gang of 8, and the reaction is to Question if he passes a litmus test for being Latino?

If this is how an actual Latino, a son of Columbian immigrants, a person to who English was the second language he learned what makes who supports the gang of 8 bill is treated can someone explain to me why anyone would assume Latinos will even give a hearing to the GOP if they support this bill?

When you come up with an answer I’d be delighted to hear it.

P.S. Although I strenuously oppose the Gang of Eight Amnesty Bill I will still vote for Gabriel Gomez in the general election for three reasons.

1. Ed Markey is a complete hack, Gomez is a far superior candidate on the issues.

2. Gabriel Gomez unlike others in the GOP has never pretended to be anything other than a supporter of the Gang of eight. He ran on what he is and took 50%+ He’s not telling me one thing and doing another. I can handle disagreement if it’s being done honestly.

3. The time for protesting against a party is not before a critical election that decides the future of your country or state, the time to do so is after such an election (see Barack Obama re-election of 2012)

************************************************

Olimometer 2.52

Sunday starts a new week and a new attempt to make paycheck and the mortgage.

The good news is of course a new week means I have a new chance to manage a paycheck and bail the month of June out.

The bad news is with the three previous week failures to may my paycheck even a successful week will mean I’m short of the mortgage by almost a 1/3

But first things first, let see if we can manage the full paycheck this week and then I’ll worry about the mortgage shortage.

.

You must choose, but choose wisely

Indiana Jones and the last Crusade 1989

One of the problems with trying to stop the Immigration Amnesty bill is so many monied interests would like to see it.

An influx of cheap labor that is not covered by Obamacare is something that would serve the purposes of many of the organization whose lobbyists are sitting on K street and the desire to please these potential sources of campaign funds is a very powerful incentive for sitting GOP senators to support it despite all the advantages it will give to the left and the National party whatever they say officially, really wants to please those people.

However there is one thing that you can do that will get attention.

The calls are good, the e-mails are find and the twitter noise is effective but there is one thing that a national party in general and the National Republican Senate Committee NRSC on twitter will understand.

Every single day you get mails, e-mail and fundraising requests for senate candidates for organizations and for groups from the party, every day they beg you for that $5, $10 or $100 to help stop this that or the other thing.

What would happen if there was a mass movement online to unsubscribe to those emails?

What would happen if those fundraising letters were returned empty or even better with a single penny which would have to be reported?

What would happen if it was made clear to the NRSC that if this senate Gang of Eight Passes it will be the end of your willingness send them those small contributions that funds these candidates and allow the consultants, staffers and friends the comfortable life they lead?

I suspect THAT would get their attention in a most effective way.

The I propose the #noamnesty NOT ONE RED CENT PLEDGE
Red cent

It goes as follows:

We the undersigned hereby inform the National Republican Senate Committee, the National Republican Congressional Committee and the GOP of the following.

We pledge that we will not contribute ONE RED CENT to the NRSC as long as this bill is alive in the senate.

We pledge that we will not contribute ONE RED CENT to any GOP candidate who supports this bill or PAC that funds such a senator and will do what we can to encourage or support primary challenges to the same.

If this bill passes the senate we pledge we will not contribute ONE RED CENT to the NRSC and that all mailing from the MRSC will be returned with words NOT ONE RED CENT written on the contribution form.

We pledge to unfollow on twitter and unsubscribe to their e-mails of the NRSC.

and finally we pledge to repeat this process with the NRCC if a passed senate bill passes the house.

Period!

These people live on your votes and your money, if you want them to hear you, make sure they know it will cost them both.

(BTW I’m not one for online petitions but if you want to agree with this pledge you can do so in a comment below, if you want to dissent you can do the same. and yes I get the irony that such a site was set up when the NRSC supported Charlie Crist against Marco Rubio, perhaps the Senator needs to be reminded of his own history)

**************************************

Olimometer 2.52

The goal of my weekly $305 paycheck to pay the mortgage remains unmet so to those who might consider hitting datipjar (or subscribing) I make the following pledge.

I pledge I’ll be willing to fight when the MSM is not and to never forget who the people are who make my living possible.

If that’s good enough for you consider hitting DaTipJar below to allow me to make this week’s paycheck

Consider a subscription if 52 of you are willing to subscribe at $20 each then DaTipJar will be reserved for special trips and disasters.




They all secretly believe that there is some pill you can take if you will tell them what it is.

Max Hastings & Simon Jenkins The Battle for the Falklands 1984

This tweet jumped out at me today

 

It linked to a following piece by Trevor Louden that started:

The Service Employees International Union is to mount a major campaign to punish Republicans opposed to the labor union’s militant ‘immigrants rights’ agenda.

What has gotten their dander up? The failure of the Senate Immigration bill to pass yet? Nope, something else…

The socialists are also incensed that on June 18, the Judiciary Committee, again along party lines, approved the so-called “Safe Act,” the federal equivalent of Arizona’s SB1070. Both the Arizona law and the Safe Act let local law enforcement stop, detain and deport people who don’t “look” as if they’re legal. Medina called the Safe Act “ideological and divisive.”

What? You mean to say that the SEIU and Democrats are going to campaign against the GOP and call them racist on an issue totally unrelated to the Gang of Eight bill?

That can’t be, we’ve been told by people like John McCain and Marco Rubio that passing Amnesty Immigration reform will mean Democrats and their paid allies in the Unions & Media will stop their constant BS about Republicans as the foes of Hispanics and free from these influences will embrace the GOP message of self-reliance and free markets.

And of course despite what the New York Times said today:

Mr. Obama’s political advisers say they are confident he will get the credit he deserves if the bill passes later this summer,

It doesn’t mean that the president will get all the credit with Hispanics activists and the media and none would go to congress.

The mindset that says to the GOP that this bill must be passed for the sake of the party’s future is the same one that claimed that once Israel pulled out of Gaza the Palestinians would see Israel’s good faith and if they didn’t, and if they continued to attempt to destroy the Jewish state the whole world would see the reality of the Jewish state and their devotion to peace and the vilification of the Jews in universities worldwide would cease.

That worked really well

There is a word for people who believe this immigration is the magic potion to make Democrat voters fall in love with us. One clue: it rhymes with “pucker”.

**********************************************

Olimometer 2.52

This immigration bill might be a suckers bet for the GOP but if you hit DaTipJar and get me to that $305 weekly paycheck you know what you’ll be getting.

News opinion and the best case for conservatism I can muster, with a spattering of Doctor Who and fun.

And you wont have to worry about a sudden “evolving” to liberalism.

If that’s not worth getting that last $172 to achieve this week’s paycheck I’d like to know what is?

.

On the day of the vote I want to see you in the front row. Keep your eye on the doorkeeper. If I don’t need your vote, Fishbait Miller will give you the sign and you’ll be free to vote your district.”…

…when Leo took his seat in the front row, he looked around and saw thirteen other guys that Sam had in his pocket in case he needed them. It wasn’t just Leo. The entire front row was sitting there and waiting for the nod from Fishbait Miller.

Tip O’Neill Man of the House 1988

Looking at the “Gang of Eight” bill I’m reminded of the last days of Obamacare.

Democrats had a vast majority in the house, more than enough votes to get Obamacare through but as citizens became angrier and angrier at what was coming members of congress understood that not only was the GOP going to give them absolutely no cover but voters were so upset at this bill that a Republican would win a senate election in Massachusetts for the first time since the Nixon years.

Democrats has stalled and stalled but when it became clear that the media was not going to convince any more members of the public and Scott Brown’s election meant nothing else was going to pass the senate she needed a fig leaf to give her some of her members cover.

Thus came the Stupak Amendment and the fig leaf he provided while proving disastrous to him and his followers was a Godsend to others as he said later:

“I had a number of members who thanked us after because they could vote no.”

But Stupak fig leaf would quickly wither. His seat and 62 others for democrats would not survive election day and even more shocking to the left the New GOP majority would remain even after the re-election of President Obama and the popularity of his bill remains so poor that the re-election machine of the president is still running ads to sell it.

Which brings us to Corker-Hoeven.

It’s axiomatic that if this was a good bill, a bill that would solve problems, a bill that would both secure the border AND take care of the problem of millions of illegal aliens, a bill that would make Hispanics happy with pols who passed it not only would the GOP be falling over itself to pass this bill with the democrats but there would be absolutely no chance that any Democrat running in the 21 states they are defending in 2014 would fall away.

The reality is the bill is over 1000 pages of trouble and for all the 70 vote talk each day the bill remains un-passed  voters hate it more and the Danger becomes that even with the 4 GOP members of the gang of 8 + Ayotte voting for it,  Harry Reid will still need every single Democrat to pass this bill, which means, that every Democrat becomes the 60th vote.

This is why Corker-Hoeven is so important, not for the GOP but for Harry Reid. Reid needs every GOP vote possible to allow him to give the senators in those 21 states who haven’t already announced retirement the ability to give a no vote that they can tout in their districts.

“The bill can’t pass as it’s currently written,” one GOP aide told Breitbart News. “They can’t get 60 votes as it’s currently written. The bill has to be amended with not only stronger border security measures but should also include verification that progress is being made on the border before the legalization process begins.”

“If Corker-Hoeven doesn’t pass, then the most likely scenario is that the bill can’t pass,” the source claimed.

Harry Reid has put himself in a box, with all the 70 vote talk if this bill fails it becomes his failure so even if he has to whip every democrat for their vote to get this bill passed he will, but what he really wants is the ability to give 4 to 5 democrats the ability to vote “no” and help preserve them for 2014.

If Corker Hoven passes and brings some republicans with it and the bill still only manages 60 or 62 votes nobody will remember how many democrats voted No, they will only talk about the number of republicans who voted yes, and like the Stupak Amendment if the bill actually becomes law the provision of that Amendment will be finessed until they become meaningless.

We’ve seen this picture before, but what is amazing to me this time is not that some kind of face saving cover is being provided for Harry Reid, what is amazing is that it’s the GOP is the party that is providing it.

Update:  Pay no attention to the people in Dirksen 201

*************************************************************

Olimometer 2.52

It’s Friday, we’ve finally broken the $100 mark but with two days to go unfortunately I find myself still $172 away from preventing my third straight failure to make a paycheck.

If only 9 of you kick in $20 that can be prevented and the odds of making this month’s mortgage will improve dramatically.

It’s all up to you.

.

Henry Gondorff: If they put you on the spot, we got to fold the con.

The Sting 1973

Word is out that Harry Reid is trying to push the so-called “immigration” bill faster.

“I’m just telling everybody that we’re going to either file cloture on this on Friday or Saturday or Sunday or Monday,” Reid said as the Senate opened its morning session. Filing for cloture means that a final vote would be held three days later. So if Reid filed for cloture on Monday, June 24, a final vote on the bill would be held on Thursday, June 27. The Senate’s July Fourth break starts the week after.

The reason for this is plain, the longer this process goes on and the more attention this bill gets the less popular it becomes to the general public.  Reid need to pass this bill before the public gets wise to the  border security con where even the “breakthrough” simply doesn’t solve:

even though it sets a trigger before immigrants can move to permanent legal status, it does not require security enhancements to be in place when most of the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States are granted an initial, six-year legal status. Under the Gang scenario, that would happen within months of the bill becoming law, long before the new security measures are required to be completed.

Only a fool would anyone actually think that legal status, once granted, will not be made permanent no matter what is said or promised before the bill is passed. That however is only one of the two cons being played, the second one is the concept is the idea that they need 70 votes to provide cover for the GOP in the house.

In fact Reid is looking for the GOP votes to provide cover in the senate for his OWN caucus.

Before the 2010 election the House and Senate without any GOP help passed Obamacare over the strong objections of the American people.  Promises that the bill would become more popular did not pan out and Democrats suffered horribly when election day came around.

In 2014 21 seats currently held by democrats are up for election and a full dozen of them from Alaska to West Virginia are seats that could go for the GOP.,

With Tea Party protesters again descending on the Capital and scandal shaking their foundation the last thing people like Al Franken in Minnesota who won only by the slimmest of margins, Mark Begich in Alaska whose vote for Obamacare has not been forgotten and Kay Hagan of North Carolina need is another unpopular bill to be used against them in a tough re-election campaign.

And if the bill remains in limbo or even worse wait till next year after the primary and election season begins, Democrat candidates for open seats might have to take a position on this bill, something Reid desperately wants to avoid.

Harry Reid doesn’t need those extra votes for the sake of the GOP, he needs them for the sake of a Democrat Senate in 2014.

Reid is playing two cons here, the Tea Party has recognized one, the GOP and the RSCC has no clue on the other…

…we hope.

*****************************

Olimometer 2.52

Unlike Harry Reid there is no con here. The weekly paycheck goes toward the monthly mortgage and your dollars that you pay me with specifically go to that goal.

11 of you kicking in $20 means this week’s paycheck is achieved and the chances of making the monthly goal increases tremendously.

Care to help hit DaTipJar below.

It was from such an unlikely beginning as an unwanted fungus accidentally growing on a sterile plate that Sir Alexander Flemming gave the world penicillin.  James Watt watched an ordinary household kettle boiling and conceived the potentially of steam power.  Would Albert Einstein ever have hit upon the theory of relativity if he hadn’t been clever? All these tremendous leaps forward have been taken in the dark. Would Rutherford ever have split the atom if he hadn’t tried? Could Marconi have invented the radio if he hadn’t by pure chance spent years working at the problem? Are these amazing breakthroughs ever achieved except by years and years of unremitting study? Of course not. What I said earlier about accidental discoveries must have been wrong.

Monty Python A book at Bedtime 1973

One of the things you tend to learn in business when you decide to go out on your own is the value of hard work.

When it comes right down to it there is no substitute to getting out there and doing what needs to be done, you can stall, you can it, no matter how many consultants you speak to, no matter how cool your apps no matter what kind of technology you use success at any endeavor involves the willingness to get involved and work at it.

A lot of people talk about luck but it’s a lot easier to be at the right place at the right time when you constantly show up.

It’s the same think with being a father it takes effort to raise good kids and part of that effort is to constantly remind and constantly teach the moment you stop teaching bad habits start.

And that brings us to the Immigration bill and conservatism.

Marco Rubio continues to push the illegal immigration bill with his aides in the belief it will make him clean with the  throwing out really interesting words while, Lindsey Graham declares without such a bill the GOP can’t win in 2016.  They are looking for that magic bullet to make republicans in general and Rubio in particular clean for 2016.

Some like Rush think it’s a question of money

What’s at play here is money.  If these elected Republicans are told by their donors that the money is gonna dry up if this amnesty thing doesn’t happen, what are they gonna do?

And if there’s a lot of it, if there’s a lot of corporation PAC money, corporate personal donation money coming from people who want amnesty, what’s gonna happen?

and while one should not discount the influence of big cash I think even more so they are looking for the easy way out.

I’ve argued over and over again that the argument for conservatism is an easy argument to make but what can be hard is to persevere in making that case.

You can’t simply say it once and go away, you have to go back, day after day, week after week, month after month and year after year and keep driving home the case for free markets, self-reliance and the advantage of freedom vs dependence.  Sometimes it takes a lot of years to sink in.  Consider this video that conservatives are going crazy over.

It’s a powerful statement, but take a look at Senator Guillory. He’s not a young man, it took a lot of years to finally make him see what liberalism is.

How many times do you think he heard the message of conservatism and rejected it before he finally saw it? What would have happened if the people who persuaded him decided it was too hard to keep making the case and instead choose to do something cosmetic?

Learning anything is hard, teaching anything is hard, it is repetition, it is training it is work, no matter how basic the message it has to be constantly reinforced, regularly made, through events, through speakers through people going directly to the communities making the case over and over again, never stopping.

Consider this passage from the book The Battle for the Falklands by Max Hastings and Simon Jenkins (the definite work on the subject)

An SAS officer remarked during the campaign on the problem that affects many Third world armies of concentrating on acquiring expensive technology rather than applying basic training and skills. On his own travels abroad, he said, he found again and again that his hosts disbelieved all that he told them about the achievements of the SAS being based on intensive, ceaseless meticulous training and preparation. “They all secretly believe that there is some pill you can take if you will tell them what it is.”

Lindsey Graham and Marco Rubio are apparently not up to it.   They’d rather have a shortcut, a big friendly button to make all their political problems go away.

If they think this 1000+ page bill is that magic pill then the education has to start with them.

****************************************

Olimometer 2.52

The great paycheck drought had a slight break as I noticed a tip jar hit I missed. We’ve actually reached the $27 dollar mark for the week.

That $305 paycheck is still almost $280 away but a single big day can change that.

Will this be the day? It’s your call, consider hitting DaTipJar below if you wish to move things forward.

Clara:  Please tell me there’s a button you can press to fix this!

11th Doctor: Oh  Yes, big friendly button

Clara:  You’re lying

11th Doctor:  Yep.

Clara:  To stop me freaking out?

11th Doctor:  Is it working?

Clara:  Not so much.

Doctor Who:  Journey to the Center of the TARDIS 2013

 

Marco Rubio may be making foolishly making the Lyndon Johnson gambit but much more dangerous is this attitude from Lindsey Graham concerning 2016: (emphasis mine)

The good news is we have a deep bench. And after eight years of President Obama’s economic policies, and quite frankly foreign policy, people are going to be looking around. But if we don’t pass immigration reform, if we don’t get it off the table in a reasonable, practical way, it doesn’t matter who you run in 2016. We’re in a demographic death spiral as a party and the only way we can get back in good graces with the Hispanic community in my view is pass comprehensive immigration reform. If you don’t do that, it really doesn’t matter who we run in my view.

A lot of Republicans apparently are nodding their heads without thinking what this actually says and what it means.

Conservatism is not a race, it’s not a tribe it’s a set of ideas.

Conservatives argue that small government is better for people than big government.

Conservatives argue that regulation kills jobs rather than creates them

Conservatives argue people can spend their money better than government can.

Conservatives argue that personal freedom and responsibility make a stronger society.

Conservatives argue that the constitution provides for freedom of religion, not freedom from religion

Conservatives argue life for the sanctity of life, born and unborn.

Conservatives argue for the basic right to defend yourself.

Conservatives argue that you and not the government are the best judge of how to raise your children

Put simply conservatism is all about personal freedom vs central control

I contend that conservatism is better for everyone.  It’s better for the rich, the poor, the middle class, better for people regardless of race, religion, or any other situation and moreover it’s an argument that’s easy to make.

But to Lindsey Graham that argument is wasted on Latinos,  there is no point in making the case, for arguing the virtues of conservatism or even pointing out the failures of the democrats and asking he basic question:  “Are you better off then you were four years or in 2016 eight years ago?” Latino’s apparently aren’t bright enough to understand that,  instead we just need to pass this bill and Latinos will just jump into the GOP fold.

In other words, Lindsey Graham thinks Latino voters are a bunch of suckers and moreover he is making this argument directly from the MSM/Liberal playbook.  He wants that big friendly button.

Life doesn’t work that way.

I’m sorry Lindsey the only suckers are the members of the GOP who believe this.  They are buying the MSM argument directly from the Liberal playbook and that argument is to shut up.

When I look at Marco Rubio and the immigration bill that he has been alternately ducking from and pushing I see Lyndon Johnson pre 1957.

Johnson was in a quandary. He wanted to be president but after seeing the failure of Richard Russell as a presidential candidate outside the south over civil rights Johnson (and to some degree Russell) decided he had to be “made clean” on the issue to allow him to run with a chance of winning.

Johnson has played a careful juggling act making a bill weak enough to prevent a full southern filibuster (in the end only Strom Thurmond would) thus allowing it to pass yet enough of a bill so the civil rights community would still accept it and more importantly (to Johnson) to get the credit for the bill as opposed to the GOP who had been pushing for such legislation unsuccessfully for years.

Marco Rubio is trying to play a similar game.

The left has successfully played the “illegal immigration” issue as a tribal issue, playing the game that any person who support enforcing immigration law as written hates and distrusts Latinos.

Never mind that if you are a low skilled voter more low skilled workers mean you’ll have a harder time getting a job.

Never mind that Latino’s hold other issues much higher than immigration.

And never mind that the Latino vote actually declined from 2008 to 2012 as a percentage of the vote

If you are not supporting a bill providing amnesty then you are obviously some kind of racist and the media will tear you apart for it and it looks like he’s not alone among the GOP to have bought into this:

it doesn’t matter who you run in 2016.  We’re in a demographic death spiral as a party and the only way we can get back in good graces with the Hispanic community in my view is pass comprehensive immigration reform.  If you don’t do that, it really doesn’t matter who we run in my view.

So it doesn’t matter how bad the economy is, it doesn’t matter how many Latinos were slaughtered thanks to fast and furious it doesn’t matter what you do, unless you have a bill that includes Amnesty there will be no chance of persuading Hispanics voters to support you.

Rubio is banking on this earning him credit with the MSM come 2016. Let me remind Marco Rubio of something that I mentioned back during the GOP primaries concerning Mitt Romney:

no matter who the GOP nominates the democrats will paint him as a “right wing extremest racist” So why nominate a person that is going to run off the conservative vote the GOP needs to win?

Seriously?

Senator Rubio do you really think that the press which is simply drooling over the chance to support Hillery Clinton is not going to be pounding you on a daily basis in 2016?

Do you really think the media will give you rather than Obama credit if this bill passes?

Do you Really think Democrats will not be running ad after ad on Latino radio stations hitting you and you won’t be getting the same “Latino in Name Only” treatment Gabriel Gomez is getting now?

And most incredible of all you actually think that the same conservatives who didn’t forgive Mitt Romney for his faults and stayed home after four years of Obama are going to forgive you and turn out in 2016 if this bill becomes law?

Senator Rubio, I like you, I really do, but if you actually believe this, then you’re too naive to be president, let alone the GOP nominee.

And Senator Rubio one more thing, it was Kennedy’s need for southern support that got Johnson on the ticket and an assassin’s bullet not his support for the Civil rights bill that got Lyndon Johnson to the White House.

***********************************

Olimometer 2.52

It’s Monday and after two failed weeks for the weekly paycheck Sunday got off to a poor start with only $2 in the till. On the bright side that was $2 more then the previous few days.

Is this site worth a full paycheck, it’s for the readers to decide. If you believe it is, then hit DaTipJar below. If fifteen of you choose to do so for $20 I can finally make a full paycheck this week.