November 30, 2010

One Loyalty

Newsweek has a long profile of Rep. Luis Gutierrez, whom I recently cited as a prime example of how racial gerrymandering creates extremist politicians:
“I have only one loyalty,” he says, “and that’s to the immigrant community."

38 comments:

The Anti-Gnostic said...

Well, the experiment in propositional nationhood was nice while it lasted. Now, it's back to tribalism faster than you can say 'blood is thicker than water.'

Anonymous said...

“I have only one loyalty,” he says, “and that’s to the immigrant community."

A mere 50 or 60 years ago, we could still hang people for this sort of treason.

The older I get, the more sympathy I have for an ostensible tyrant like Henry VIII.

Tough times call for tough measures.

Sgt. Joe Friday said...

Interesting that Gutierrez is so loyal to "immigrants," considering that he is Puerto Rican, and therefore technically not an immigrant. Maybe it would be more accurate to say that Gutierrez' loyalty is to Latinos.

As for the Puerto Rico thing, they may be U.S. citizens, but to say they're Americans - culturally speaking - is silly. They speak Spanish, they have their own music and literature, they field their own teams in the Olympics, their own contestants in beauty pageants and on and on. What we ought to have done was give them their independence when they wanted it years ago. But instead we're probably going to be stuck with them as a state, thanks to intellectual giants like Karl Rove and Newt Gingrich who think that's the way to get Mexicans in California to vote Republican.

Anonymous said...

I guess the purported "Israel Lobby" isn't quite as powerful as the "Immigrant Lobby" - their congressman being so confidently drunk on power to just come on out and admit their true position without much fear of electoral or vocational consequences - well beyond the stage of merely being accused of "dual-loyalty", and into straight-out admitted antagonistic and adversarial loyalty. So much for that whole oath to our Constitution.

Anonymous said...

So when do we whites go extremist politicians of our own, looking out for our interests?

europeasant said...

One of Rahm's peeps called. Asked if I would vote for Braun, Davis, Chico or Rahm if the elections were held tomorrow. I replied "non of the above". He chuckled and said that that was the first response of that type that he had heard and said that I have quite a sense of humor. I should have told him that my response was not in jest.

Anonymous said...

If he'd consider switching parties, he sounds like the type of guy the RNC might recruit to be its next chairman. You know, after our current "Hip Hop Republican" chairman resigns his position.

Ironic though that a Puerto Rican would be loyal to Mexican-American constituents. That's like Senator Schumer declaring his loyalty to his Italian coethnics in Staten Island.

Anonymous said...

Yet the media, who have this guy on tv often, don't even challenge his positions when he appears on their shows.

They disgust me as much as he does.

Darwin's Sh*tlist said...

I was intrigued by this:

The son of Puerto Rican parents, Gutierrez has long had a fiery streak.

So the guy is at least a second-generation American citizen, and his "one loyalty" is to "immigrants?" I'm guessing that it has less to do with citizenship status than with race.

And this gem from immigration happy-talk-monger Tamar Jacoby.

[But] there’s part of me that always gets a little worried about identity politics. Gee, Tamar, whooda thunkit?

That being said, I'm happy to have Gutierrez at the head of the amnesty movement. He's prissy, histrionic, and doesn't seem particularly bright. He doesn't have enough traditional masculinity to galvanize a lot of Hispanics (Steve's detailed how Mexican politics thrives on discussions of cajones). But, he's just enough of an irresponsible blowhard to turn off SWPLs, who have never taken Hispanic grievance as seriously as they do that of blacks.

Jerry said...

Has Newsweek been getting better lately? It's been running some surprisingly lucid articles. Anything to do with its having changed owners perhaps?

Anonymous said...

I do appreciate an honest man. But how does his loyalty express itself?

Is it's race loyalty with it's primary focus on the motherland as it is with Jewish-Americans?

Is it a loyalty to the scattered Hispanic or Puerto Rican diaspora?

Would he encourage his children to return home at puberty for a dose of race loyalty, or encourage them to join a Hispanic army upon reaching adulthood to fight for their tribe as the Jews encourage their children to make Aliyah and join the Jewish army?

Or is his loyalty essentially a loyalty to the Hispanic (Puerto Rican?) colonists in America and indifferent to what happens to the folks back home? In other words is his loyalty to those of his countrymen who have managed to escape their tribe and seek refuge among white people in a white land?

If his loyalty is to the latter, surely he must realize that there are only so many Mexican, Puerto Ricans and other Hispanics that white people can physically support before our country turns into the very sh!thole he and his fellow "immigrants" are desperately trying to escape.

none of the above said...

But effective set-asides in politics are very much like set-asides in government contracting. They're disastrous policies for the nation, but they also create powerful people who will fight to the death to maintain them.

Anonymous said...

A clear violation of his Oath of Office! Throw the bum out.

http://clerk.house.gov/member_info/memberfaq.html

3. Do Members take an Oath of Office when they enter the House of Representatives?

As required by Article 6 of the U.S. Constitution, Members of Congress shall be bound by oath or affirmation to support the Constitution. Representatives, delegates, and the resident commissioner all take the oath of office on the first day of the new Congress, immediately after the House has elected its Speaker. The Speaker of the House administers the oath of office as follows:

"I, (name of Member), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."

Representatives elected in special elections during the course of a Congress generally take the oath of office on the floor of the House Chamber when the Clerk of the House has received a formal notice of the new Member's election or appointment from State government authorities. On rare occasions, because of illness or other circumstances, a Member-elect has been authorized to take the oath of office at a place other than the House. In those circumstances, the Clerk of the House sees to the proper administration of the oath.

slumber_j said...

What a remarkable thing to say.

Kylie said...

"So when do we whites go[find?] extremist politicians of our own, looking out for our interests?"

Why should whites looking out for white interests, particularly in a majority-white country founded and funded by whites, be considered extremist?

Tiffany said...

that quote is a GREAT example of why gerrymandering is democracy incarnate. The USA needs MORE gerrymandering because it needs MORE democracy.

And once you get congress filled with politicians elected from gettymandered, NONdiverse districts, there will be more democracy because the electorate that elected that politician will be more united with more well-definded interests and will be better able to elect and hold accountable their politicians.

What I speak of here is REAL politics. Not the nonsense that passes for politics on most internet forums that attract Americans.

The other western nations already understand why gerrymandering is a good thing. Their entire nations are gerrymandered. That is why, in general, the elite have been less able to pull over the mass immmigration scam over there.

Tiffany said...

that quote is a GREAT example of why gerrymandering is democracy incarnate. The USA needs MORE gerrymandering because it needs MORE democracy.

And once you get congress filled with politicians elected from gettymandered, NONdiverse districts, there will be more democracy because the electorate that elected that politician will be more united with more well-definded interests and will be better able to elect and hold accountable their politicians.

What I speak of here is REAL politics. Not the nonsense that passes for politics on most internet forums that attract Americans.

The other western nations already understand why gerrymandering is a good thing. Their entire nations are gerrymandered. That is why, in general, the elite have been less able to pull over the mass immmigration scam over there.

Anonymous said...

This will be about as useful as the fact that La Raza means "the race." The media won't care.

Gutierrez is the king of the rotten buroughs. A typical Illinois house district had over 200,000 voters in the last election. One (#19) had over 240,000 voters, and all of them had at least 144,000 voters. All except for Gutierrez's district, that is, where barely than 73,000 voters showed up. Keep in mind that the average Illinois US House district now has over 680,000 residents; keep in mind, also, that Illinois had both a gubernatorial and senate race this year, so a non-competitive house race was no excuse. In his district, barely one resident in nine showed up at the polls on November 2. There might be a few districts in California with a smaller number of voters, but probably not.

The name of Gutierrez's opponent? Israel Vasquez.

Anonymous said...

someone needs to do a documentary on immigration starring luis guttierez and aunt zeituni

Anonymous said...

Do US congressmen have to swear an oath on first entering congress?
What is the wording of that oath?
Do they swear to uphold the nation and its constitution?

John Craig said...

Do you think Gutierrez is any different from any of the rest of them? He's just a little more honest, that's all.

Justthisguy said...

First thing the new Congress should do when it meets in January is expel that guy.

Dahinda said...

The district that Gutierrez represents was created to appease the hispanics in the Chicago area. It is made up of the hispanic buffer zones that surround the black neighborhoods on Chicago's West Side. If you look at a map, they strung together all of the Mexican and Puerto Rican neighborhoods in a goofy non-contiguous way, connecting them together by including in the district, rail yards and industrial areas in the suburbs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois's_4th_congressional_district

keypusher said...

It was very illuminating for me when Steve put up a map of his Congressional district. Gutierrez doesn't represent an area; he represents a race. That was the entire point of creating the district.

Tanstaafl said...

Though the two Chicago Democrats were once close, Gutierrez has spent much of the past two years badgering the president on the issue. “He was clear in his commitment to me,” says Gutierrez. And yet “everything has been enforcement, enforcement, enforcement”—more deportations of undocumented immigrants, more troops |on the border. “How,” asks Gutierrez, “is this different from what George W. Bush did?”

This is a histrionic and deluded inversion of reality. It is a tactic, an act - like when a monkey throws out its arms, spins around, bares its fangs, and screeches at another monkey trespassing on its territory. Except in this case it is used for tribal aggression rather than defense. It is aided and abetted by a media and academia which uniformly demonize White advocates, no matter how civil, while giving a pass to non-White advocates, no matter how crude.

riches said...

Well... "John Craig", Gutierrez might be a little different from the rest of them.
I seem to remember him being depicted in a painting wearing bra and garter belt, a la former Mayor Washington. Perhaps "Europeasant" remembers this?

Anonymous said...

Goog grief you right wingers are some scared little pansies.

Oh no! The brown and black people are coming! What will we do!

ben tillman said...

Great stuff from Tiffany.

Tanstaafl said...

Oh no! The brown and black people are coming! What will we do!

You've never heard of White flight? Or are you one of those anti-White creeps who pathologizes Whites for trying to escape what a dishonest and hostile elite forces upon us?

Anonymous said...

"Oh no! The brown and black people are coming! What will we do!"

In all fairness, whites only have their own ancestors to blame for this problem. Their ancestors voluntarily chose to bring themselves into contact with the Africans and the Native American Indians. Had they merely chosen to remain in Europe, none of the problems confronting whites today would exist to the same extent.

David said...

I have one loyalty, too.

Andy said...

Oh no! The brown and black people are coming! What will we do!

I can only imagine your high-pitched squeals of terror and outrage if a congressman had said his one loyalty was to Euro-Americans.

ATBOTL said...

I guess the purported "Israel Lobby" isn't quite as powerful as the "Immigrant Lobby"

------------------------------
"Purported?"

Are you suggesting the Israel lobby doesn't exist?

This sounds like the same guy that is always making these cute little comments scoffing at the idea that Jews promote their own interests or have any power.

Anonymous said...

“I have only one loyalty,” he says, “and that’s to the immigrant community."

A mere 50 or 60 years ago, we could still hang people for this sort of treason.

Guttierez, unlike the Rosenbergs, never gave nuclear secrets to his immigrant community. A slight difference, is it not?

asdfasdfasdf said...

He means Gimmie-grant community.

Anonymous said...

"that quote is a GREAT example of why gerrymandering is democracy incarnate."

No, gerrymandering is only about making some districts ideologically homogeneous, while tilting as many districts as possible in favor of the party that controls the redistricting process.

Take a state with 4 US House districts, where Republicans hold an 11-9 registration advantage but with a Democratic governor and a state legislature controlled by Democrats (perhaps due to past gerrymandering). The Democratic legislature makes one district 100% Republican, and makes the other 3 districts 60-40 Democrat. Democrats win 3 of 4 House seats in spite of being outnumbered.

Anonymous said...

Guttierez, unlike the Rosenbergs, never gave nuclear secrets to his immigrant community. A slight difference, is it not?

His community has an average IQ no higher than 80 - they wouldn't understand abacus secrets, much less slide-rule secrets.

Their nuclear bomb is in the equation:

SEMEN + OVA = NEW DEMOCRAT VOTERS

.

Anonymous said...

Rep. Luis Gutierrez is a creepy vile little man.I cringe everytime I hear his raspy racist voice.