April 15, 2013

Kaus on Rubio's BS

The downside of Mickey Kaus as a blogger at the Daily Caller is that he doesn't Feed the Beast anywhere near as often as other bloggers, and unlike more successful bloggers, posts only on a fairly small number of subjects where he knows what he's talking about.

The upside of Mickey as a blogger is, well, stuff like this:
Marco Rubio was defensive and jargon-addled on ABCs This Week. He was slick and effective on NBC and  CNN and somewhere in between on FOX,  But he was selling BS on all four networks. Here are three examples: 
1. Rubio repeatedly said it would be “cheaper, faster and easier” for illegal immigrants to go back home, wait 10 years, and apply for a green card (under current law) than to go through the longer “alternative” green card path created by his amnesty bill. That’s absurd. If Rubio’s bill passes, how many illegal immigrants are going to go home and wait 10 years versus accepting the bill’s more-or-less immediate legalization and then waiting to get their green cards?  The answer is a number approaching zero. Why? Because under Rubio’s bill they will get to do the waiting while living and working legally in the United States. That’s certainly easier than “self-deporting” for ten years under current law. 
2. Similarly, Rubio argues that his bill won’t privilege illegals over those waiting in line abroad to get green cards, because it will take longer for illegals to get the green cards through his amnesty. But, again, the illegals–having been more or less instantly legalized–will get to do their waiting while having already achieved what the people waiting in line abroad can only dream of achieving: a legal life in the United States. Illegals FTW!

3. A controversy erupted late last week over the pro-amnesty “Gang of 8″s ambition to achieve a 90% apprehension rate of illegal border-crossers. Rubio’s camp–including his chief of staff, Cesar Conda–claimed this was a “trigger” that, if not met, would block the newly legalized illegals from proceeding down the road to green cards and citizenship. Democrats claimed it was just a goal that, if not met, wouldn’t block anyone. On Fox, Rubio basically admits the Democrats are right. 
WALLACE: You say it’s a trigger, the number, 90 percent apprehension rate has to be certified by the Department of Homeland Security before the 11 million illegals, a decade from now, can begin to apply for green cards. 
But the Democrats on your “Gang of 8″, including Dick Durbin, who will be on in the next segment, saying, no, it’s not a trigger. It’s just a goal that they have to be working towards. 
Now, is it a trigger that has to be met or is it a goal? 
RUBIO: Yes. Let me tell you why it’s a trigger because, basically, homeland security will have five years to meet that goal. If after five years, Homeland Security has not met that number, it will trigger the Border Commission who will then take over this issue for them. So, they’ll have five years to get it done. They have to create these two plans — a fence plan, there has to be a fence component to this, and a border security plan. 
And if at the five-year mark, they have not achieved that 90 percent or 100 percent, then they lose the issue to the Border Commission who has money set aside so they can finish the job and they can get to that number. 
In other words, all that’s triggered is a commission, not any holdup in the march to green cards (which means there will be little incentive to actually achieve the 90% goal). 
Bonus BS: Rubio press aide Alex Conant tweets that 
Without temporary worker program to fill US demand for low-skill labor, people will find way to come illegally despite new fence 
Really? Hasn’t Rubio been busy telling us that his plan would secure the border? Now his flack tells us people “will find a way to come illegally” despite it? Doesn’t this mean that those who can’t get into the guest worker program (maybe because it’s full, or because they don’t qualify) will be able to “find a way” in as well–so the elaborately negotiated limits on the number of guestworkers will be routinely violated and, in practice, meaningless? Doesn’t it also mean that those who are drawn by the prospect of the next amnesty (because, you know, ”we can’t deport them all!” and “Latino voters”) will “find a way” in too? 
How secure is this new Rubio border going to be? Seems like it’s secure when he wants it to be and insecure when he doesn’t. Maybe we should find out before we turn on the amnesty magnet! Just a thought.

18 comments:

Anonymous said...

Boston Marathon is now Benghazi Marathon.

Anonymous said...

Its an indication that some Republicans have bought into the idea that you cannot become President without a significantly better showing with Hispanics

ben tillman said...

Similarly, Rubio argues that his bill won’t privilege illegals over those waiting in line abroad to get green cards....

Is he willing to say that his bill won't privilege illegals over 200 million exiting citizens?

Almost all of the illegals are non-White, which means they qualify for oodles of privileges and immunities that White citizens don't get. Hell, even a lot of the White illegals are Hispanic and will qualify for affirmative action and preferences.

It's obscene.

ben tillman said...

Is he willing to say that his bill won't privilege illegals over 200 million exiting citizens?


"Existing", not "exiting". Jeez, that was a bad one.

Bob Arctor said...

"Its an indication that some Republicans have bought into the idea that you cannot become President without a significantly better showing with Hispanics,"

It's too bad then that this cheap pandering on amnesty isn't going to get them that better showing among Hispanics that they think they need. They're Catholic, vastly poorer and less educated than average, and far more urban than the general populace; even if you theoretically erase immigration off the radar screen completely they're still a natural 58-63% (at least) bloc for the Democrats just on economics and religion alone.

This whole thing is reminiscent of 2002 when the GOP seemed to believe that pandering to Jews on the Israeli-Palestinian question was going to magically win them over to the Republicans. Needless to say despite the massive effort expended on that attempt the whole thing came to absolutely nothing; the Jews are still a solid block for the Democrats.

When you have multiple, deep interlocking cultural and economic factors working against you, as the Republicans have with both Jews and Hispanics, you shouldn't expect much by openly pandering to them on this or that isolated single issue. This should be fairly simple to understand for the GOP "brain trust" but apparently it's not.

Matthew said...

Its an indication that some Republicans have bought into the idea that you cannot become President without a significantly better showing with Hispanics.

That's what they say. I suspect what they mean is that you cannot raise ample money for your presidential campaign without kowtowing to the cheap labor lobby. The cheap labor lobby keeps track of these things, and they'll do everything they can to stop you if you don't do their bidding.

This economy is quite likely headed for another recession. Consider that the last 3 presidents have won reelection. I'm not sure that's unprecedented, but it's still impressive in a depressing way.

Clinton beat GHWB during a recession, had a strong economy during his successful reelection bid, then left office during a recession. The White House changed hands.

GWB won during a recession, had a strong economy during his successful reelection bid, then left office during a recession. The White House changed hands.

Obama won during a recession, had a strong(er) economy during his reelection bid, and it's not unlikely that he'll leave office during a recession - or at least an economy still sputtering pitifully along.

1) Incumbent president's have a lot of power to steer things their way to get reelected.

2) Americans are getting shy about changing presidents, but when the incumbent leaves, they're willing or desirous to change parties.

There is no reason to think a Republican can't win again just because we lost a single election.

Cail Corishev said...

Here's a theory: Rubio and others like him see the future of politics in the USA as a spoils war between blacks and mestizos, with whites a powerless minority which exists only to provide the spoils. With the Democrats firmly positioned as the party of blacks, another party will have to emerge to represent mestizos -- either the GOP revamped as a fully liberal, tribal party, or a new party that replaces it.

Either way, he's positioning himself as a leader of this future party, which, with the help of the 11-20M beneficiaries of this amnesty, plus the next amnesty sure to come in another decade, will quickly surpass the black/Democrat party to become the ruling party of the USA.

Hey, it's a theory. At least it makes some logical sense, unlike the claim that these guys really think Mexican-Americans are suddenly going to start voting for today's GOP.

Noah172 said...

I know that we in the paleocon world love to kvetch about the Scots-Irish -- I do plenty of it, no apologies here -- but there are a tiny few in the realms of intellectual and political life whom we can respect (if not necessarily support everything that they say or do):

Paul Gottfried

Dan Stein

Mickey Kaus

Ron Unz

Philip Weiss

Some might throw in the late Larry Auster (not sure if I would).

Auntie Analogue said...


My dear Mr. ben tillman: if on this earth there was another place like the former, pre-race preference-corrupted, 90% White, genuinely United States for us to exit toward, I expect that most of us would be "exiting citizens."

Alden said...

WALLACE: ... Now, is it a trigger that has to be met or is it a goal?

RUBIO: Yes.


A shame Rubio didn't just stop right there. Could've saved us all some time.

Noah172 said...

Its an indication that some Republicans have bought into the idea that you cannot become President without a significantly better showing with Hispanics

It's more like: You cannot become President without going through the motions of "minority outreach" so that moderate white suburbanites don't see you as one of those nasty "racist" right-wingers.

blog reader said...

unlike more successful bloggers, posts only on a fairly small number of subjects where he knows what he's talking about.

Yeah, what an eccentric. By the way have you had any new HBD insights into bluegrass fingerpicking guitar styles or the logistics of major cruise lines? Surely can be tied to Finland's PISA scores in some strained fashion

Evil Sandmich said...

I'm half willing to bet that if we put illegals in charge of border enforcement it might actually improve since at least then someone who has already 'gotten theirs' would have a financial interest in locking up the border.

It could hardly be worse (90% is a 'goal' really? so they're admitting that it's much worse now).

Anonymous said...

Someone should photoshop Rubio as Fabio wooing a conservative looking at him in disgust.

Anonymous said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRfDE9bndfg

Rubio gives us good advice.

Anonymous said...

"We are not committing suicide, it's a revolutionary act."

Anonymous said...

The latest news is Rubio's mouth is unable to form the word "illegal". Every time he tries to utter the word "illegal" it comes out as "undocumented".

Mr. Anon said...

"..., and unlike more successful bloggers, (Kaus) posts only on a fairly small number of subjects where he knows what he's talking about."

And this man calls himself a pundit! A true pundit talks about anything - especially things he knows nothing about.