Ann Coulter Can Do Math…

unlike GOP amnesty an immigration supporters.

We keep hearing insistent claims that if Republicans don’t pass amnesty yesterday it will be the end of the party.

Can I see the math on that? I can see why bringing in 30 million new Democratic voters would be good for the Democrats, but how does it help Republicans? Maybe conservatives shouldn’t blindly trust the calculations of the guy who graduated fifth from the bottom of his class at the U.S. Naval Academy.

If I were a Democrat, I would have tried to sneak this bill past Republicans by proposing amnesty only after reaching some easily rigged benchmarks. But, apparently, Chuck Schumer knows elected Republicans better than I do.

Step One: Everyone’s amnestied. Step Two: After they’re amnestied, they can bring in all their relatives.

If Hispanics voted 50.1 percent for Democrats, amnesty would be a bad deal for Republicans. But, in fact, they vote 70 percent to 80 percent for Democrats. How did it become an urgent priority for Republicans to bring in 30 million new voters, 80 percent of whom will vote Democratic?

Democrats want 30 million new voters and they will say anything to get there:

Read more…

delicious | digg | reddit | facebook | technorati | stumbleupon | chatintamil

15 thoughts on “Ann Coulter Can Do Math…

  1. thaddeus

    On the amnesty issue, Coulter has been the best commentator on any version of the Right.

  2. SoCal Patriot

    It is precisely because of this sort of innumeracy on the part of the GOP establishment,that I believe if Ludwig van Beethoven were alive today,and he was selected to compose a sonata illustrating the hopeless Hispandering so beloved by Karl Rove & Co.,he would no doubt title his composition “Variations on a Theme of Stupid”.

    Dumb,dumb,dumb…Dumb!!!

  3. countenance

    Three people who were in my doghouse but have really comported themselves well in the immigration debate and are thus out of my doghouse: Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck, Mark Levin.

    Who went from not in my doghouse to in my doghouse? Rand Paul.

    Just about everyone else is acting as expected.

  4. Weaver

    Rand is such a sellout, lol.

    Ann Coulter is always strong on immigration, that I’ve seen. Why was she in your doghouse? I don’t follow any of these people.

  5. RedPhillips Post author

    Weaver, Coulter is a pretty typical interventionist on foreign policy. Levin is HORRIBLE on foreign policy and Ron Paul (and the South, Lincoln, the WBTS, nullification and that whole group of issues that orbits around Paul.)

  6. Sempronius

    Coulter’s entire motivation for stopping the invasion seems to be to save the Rep party.
    This is a perverted and grotesque order of priorities.

    Redster, Coulter isn’t an interventionist. She would NEVER intervene in, say, N. Ireland or the West Bank. She’s something else, but since I’m such a well behaved guy I wont say what.

  7. Sempronius

    P.S. Can anybody identify PJB’s big oversight in his latest travesty over at MORDOR MAGAZINE?

  8. RedPhillips Post author

    Semp, saving the Republican Party is socially acceptable code for preserving a White majority.

  9. Weaver

    Sempronius,

    Buchanan has written books on white demographics and displacement, dispossession. He can’t have every piece as such. People would not read him. He’s gone about as far as possible revealing Jewish aggressions, further and he’d be a pariah.

    Buchanan guards against painting NS Germany as the ultimate evil here:

    In World War II, Korea and Vietnam, we conscripted millions of men and sent hundreds of thousands to their deaths fighting against Italians, Germans, Japanese, Koreans and Vietnamese.

    That’s a pretty good swerve.

    He directly mentions discrimination against whites, or at least white males, here:

    on which no white male may bid.

    He hits the faux-Jefferson myth and encourages elitism (by which I mean good leaders not the pseudo-right IQ-overlord type) here:

    and spoke of a “natural aristocracy” that Providence had wisely provided to govern us

    Head-in-the-sand whites will read this article. For some, these points will be new.

    I’d rather a more ethnic approach, with smaller wealth gaps and no democracy etc; but that’s an ideal, a nation-state ideal. Buchanan is targeting the only political hope whites have, which is that whites will embrace an ideology of a free system in which they can maintain economic power, as opposed to a system where they’re plundered.

    That article is masterful. His writing is better each time I read him. I’m convinced he must have a filing cabinet with various quotes, points on each topic. He’s so organised. It’s all at the ready. What right-wing joker will replace Buchanan when he passes? Someone will have to man-up.

    With all due respect, Buchanan is a professional – a good one. Buchanan’s lessers are always criticising him. I find that article impressive.

  10. Weaver

    I think Buchanan fills a certain role masterfully.

    Everyone has a role to fill. Winning happens when all the cogs are moving.

  11. thaddeus

    I agree. Pat Buchanan has done as much as any writer can to break The Synagogue’s lies about WWII and to show Americans an honest perspective about that conflict, and about so much else.

    He’s pushed it as far as anyone can without being resigned to the nonentity status of actual White Nationalists.

    He’s the finest voice for traditionalism we have, in terms of the nexus between truthfulness and mainstream exposure.

  12. Sempronius

    Weaver,

    The oversight I was referring to was the gross INEQUALITY in wealth and income in the US. It’s greater than any civilized nation and historically at it’s highest.

  13. Weaver

    Whites are stuck defending that inequality. They can encourage equality via trade and immigration policy but not taxes. Equality = wealth redistribution from whites to non, as things stand now.

    Correct me if I’m mistaken.

    I’m all for going after the wealth of the billionaires :)

  14. mikeg

    “The Synagogue’s lies about WWII…” Now that’s rich! Please tell me, did 6 million Jews, 5 million others just wander off never to heard from again? Hitler was sooo sympathetic to them, he would never hurt a fly. It was those awful Jews that hurt themselves. He was just righting a wrong! You make me sick.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>