June 18, 2013

Kaus: Make a video against Schumer-Rubio

Mickey Kaus continues to be a font of better ideas than I can come up with on how to throw a wrench in the gears of what Establishment wants to do on immigration:
2. Make a video campaign ad! This helped in 2007. Then, as now, the idea was not to convince voters. The idea is to demonstrate to the undecided politicians the sort of devastating ads that might be used against them if they cave on immigration. It’s true that YouTube was newer and scarier back in 2007 than it is now. But the power of social networking is, arguably, more intimidating now than then.

If you are good at this sort of thing–I’m not, but plenty of you are–put together a 15, 30, or 60 second ad–post it on YouTube and “share” it on Facebook and Twitter. It’s the “sharing” that will sting. (Also share the link with me–Mickey@dailycaller.com. I’ll post links to the best ads in this blog.) 
It’s not as if there’s not a lot of ammunition for an effective negative spot: There is Schumer-Rubio’s phony enforcement provisions. The way it would legalize drunk drivers, spouse-beaters and child abusers. The way none of its provisions–to “learn English,” or pay “back taxes” –mean what they say they mean. The way it would drive down unskilled wages, discourage young people (especially minorities) from even entering the labor market, increase welfare payments, and threaten the jobs of even middle class skilled Americans with a huge wave of cheaper immigrant “guestworkers.”  (Of course, those American aren’t “star performers,’”so screw ‘em!) The way it would prevent the glory of the Clinton years–a tight labor market that raised everyone’s incomes–from ever happening again. 
A note on targets: It’s probably useful to distinguish two sorts of targets–senators who’ve more or less committed to the Gang of 8 bill and senators who are still on the fence. The first group (Sen. Kelly Ayotte would be a prime example) needs to be hammered, in large part to show those in the second group the fate that awaits them if they listen to the rich lobbyists pushing for amnesty. But you don’t want to hammer the second group yet–it might piss them off! After they’ve tried so hard to be ambiguous! They need to be pointedly persuaded. (“Senator Pryor, which will it be: American workers or California billionares?” Or something better than that. You get the idea.) 
Here is a rough list of senators in the two camps: 
Hammer-ready (Have indicated they’ll vote for Schumer-Rubio) 
Ayotte (who was spectacularly ignorant of the bill’s provisions)
Begich (already getting testy!)
Graham

Here's an interesting NYT article on how creative Chinese blackmailers Photoshop government officials' faces onto compromising photos. Sorry, that doesn't have anything to do with the topic at hand, so let me get back to Mickey's post:
Landrieu (do it for North Dakota!)
Murkowski 
Persuadable (Still on the fence)
Alexander
Chambliss
Coburn
Collins
Corker
Hagan
Heller
Hoeven
Isakson
Pryor

23 comments:

Qubit said...

Speaking of making the leaders look stupid

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/obama-xi-jinping-pooh-pictures-censored-chinese-authorities-article-1.1373636

Dave Pinsen said...

What's funny is that Univision has been sticking it to Republican members of the Gang of 8 for reason (I don't understand why, but I'll take schadenfreude where I can get it). For example, here they ding McCain for flip-flopping on the "danged fence", and here they ding Flake for the online sins of his 15 year old son.

Harry Baldwin said...

You could take the ad that Zuckerberg funded and put in subtitles pointing out all the lies in it. It's funny that they're still running it though half the tough-sounding claims it makes have already been jettisoned--like the "enforcement first" rhetoric. This led Jeff Sessions to jibe, "Marco, there’s somebody on the television pretending to be you, saying vote for the bill that you recently said shouldn’t pass in its current form."

Corn said...

Rubio's comments ("Some American workers just don't cut it") should be plastered all over YouTube and TV.

The Fat Silly Mexican Guy said...

"What's funny is that Univision has been sticking it to Republican members of the Gang of 8..."

When they start making fun of the Gang of Eight on Sabado Gigante, we've won!

Corn said...

"What's funny is that Univision has been sticking it to Republican members of the Gang of 8"

You mean that emerging Republican Hispanic majority isn't emerging?

I'm shocked, shocked I tell you!

sunbeam said...

I've got a general idea. Not really aimed at these particular senators, just politicians in general.

Get some streetwalker footage of some strip where people pick up hookers. You know old school 70's stuff.

Have a car that says Google, Facebook, or Exxon, maybe your lobbying group or political group of choice that you detest.

Have the car window roll down, and the driver ask how much, and what can you do for me.

Then photoshop politician's faces on the hookers.

I think someone ought to get some stock footage of a Vietnam war era hooker, and put Lindsay Graham's face on the body.

The windo rolls down and Mark Zuckerberg's face appears:

Ms. Lindsay: "Me lobby for you all night long! Double for Meet the Press. Triple if got to talk to Stephanopoulos." and do it in that huckleberry voice he has.

Only thing is most of your posters think so very small, and they all, Republican and Democrat, deserve this treatment so very much.

Heck I can see Angela Merkel in the Goldman car now saying: "I did not know it was so easy in your country. Vun Times!" in some German accented English.

Maybe Tony Blair reading the NY Times or Post: "Gods, they're illiterate!"

Zoink said...

The whole "pay back taxes" line the amnesty people use is good evidence of their general dishonesty.

There are many problems stemming from illegal immigration, but underpayment of taxes they owe is not one of them.

Mainly their income is far too low to owe substantial taxes. Moreover, they do pay sales taxes, probably at a higher rate than natives who can buy things online with credit cards to avoid sales tax.

Also, illegals who work on the books with fake identities pay social security taxes into invalid accounts, never to get benefits back, and also cannot make claims for EITC and child tax credits they qualify for, and cannot file for tax refunds.

"We'll make them pay back taxes" is a bit like saying "We'll make them stop committing securities fraud and trademark infringement!" Mitt Romney is someone who should pay back taxes for his contributions of tens of millions of dollars in partnership interests into an IRA that was limited to $5000 a year. The people coming in from Guatemala simply don't make enough money to have any substantial tax liability.

The Crying Indian said...

I still think the "Crying Indian" environmental shaming angle against mass immigration is potentially an effective wedge, especially against Congressclowns in SWPL districts. Mexicans driving around in stinky cars, dumping trash all over the place and tagging national parks could be an effective message.

Anonymous said...

As usual the 'jewish' Mickey has 10 times more useful ideas than the goyim. Usually, if you can get your typical gentile to stop thinking about Football or "How to make money while doing nothing" and think about *sigh* politics, he'll come up some dull, boneheaded idea. "Yeah, uh, tell the truth" he'll say, "Cause if they are hurting America, its just 'cause they're CON-FUSED"

Anonymous said...

The sheer number of immigrants that will come because of the bill: America 2050 with 500 million people. Cities that look like Blade Runner or Judge Dredd. Cacophony of languages. Dangerous schools, dangerous public transit, congested roadways.

Luke Lea said...

Hey, two of those are in my state (TN)! That would be Alexander and Corker. I know Corker personally (our daughters went to school together) and I have emphasized to him how many votes would swing his way if he got tough on immigration (I estimated 20 million off the top of my head). He asked me what I thought of guest workers. I said that category shouldn't even exist. He said, you're right.

Bob is essentially a moderate guy at heart but a very ambitious man (hence, in TN a Republican, even though he comes from a blue collar background). He's plenty smart and has incredible energy (20 hour days, that kind of thing). When he began his career as an elected official as mayor of Chattanooga he was a complete amateur, a typical spoiled CEO used to getting his way, but learned fast. I didn't think he would be a happy Senator -- all that committee work! -- but he obviously adapted. He toes the party line -- except when it counts.

I have hopes for that guy on this and other issues. Hope I'm not disappointed.

JSM said...

The Crying Indian said...
"I still think the "Crying Indian" environmental shaming angle against mass immigration is potentially an effective wedge, especially against Congressclowns in SWPL districts. Mexicans driving around in stinky cars, dumping trash all over the place and tagging national parks could be an effective message."

This is good. And, since the Apaches HATED the Aztecs, (Aztecs often made war on any that wandered far enough south and then used them for human sacrifice) isn't there some good way to maneuver SWPLs into scoring their moral superiority points feeling sorry for our OWN Indians, rather than Aztec-descended mestizos from Mexico?
(If such a switch in SWPL thinking could be engineered, it'd be a beneficial thing for us White Americans, who are in danger of being demographically swamped by fecund imminvaders, but are in no way similar danger from Crow and Shoshone breeding.)


Which begs the question: Steve, howcome is it that SWPLs DON'T bother themselves to make big public displays of feeling sorry for the American Indians on reservations? After all, the "wrong kind of White people" that SWPLs love to bash are plentiful in the mountain states where the Crows and Shoshones, et al, are. Whattathey? Raycist against Shoshones, or something?

There oughta be a good SWPL-shaming tactic in there somewhere.

pat said...

I'm taking your advice. I'm trying to develop the capability of producing short videos on political subjects. It's proving to be much harder than I first imagined.

I thought I would be a natural for this sort of thing. I had taken film in college and had been pretty good at it. But that had been silent, 16mm shot outdoors. With video there are a dozens of new areas to master including lights, editing software, compositing software, etc.

I've been working on this for about six months. If I had more money I would have gotten further but it takes a lot of time to research where you can economize.

So don't count on me just yet. I'm still many months from being ready to inflict myself on the YouTube audience.

BTW and off topic. It came to me in a flash yesterday when I heard Charles Krauthammer say that maybe one in a thousand employees might indulge in 'recreational eavesdropping'. Not so. When I worked briefly for the phone company I used to listen in to random phone conversations to amuse myself. That was Northern Virginia. But when I transferred to downtown Washington DC I could have tapped into the White House lines. I was too chicken but there they were behind a simple Plexiglas shield.

Just about everyone I knew also tapped in. Every frame man had a headset with alligator clips. Maybe the technology today makes this harder.

Albertosaurus

Anonymous said...

I made one:

http://goanimate.com/videos/0mhb6f3tcuV0

Please share as much as possible.

Anonymous said...

Chambliss is quitting after this term. He knows he is toast. Come hell or high water, he will vote for the bill.

3xmachina said...

Twenty minutes and iMovie got me this...
https://vimeo.com/68709408

It's about as low budget as they come, but, hey, maybe it will get juices flowing...

Alden said...

@ The Crying Indian

I like it but it'd have to be subtle to keep from tripping SWPL's exceedingly strong anti-racism reflexes. You'd have to throw in some trashy whites and blacks to keep from being overt about it, but keep the majority Mexican to still send the subliminal message. And we'd have to have a literal crying Indian at the end, because the ultimate victim needs to be a Person of Color to fully trigger SWPL sympathy.

One must stealthily slide under the perimeter defenses of the SWPL's blinkered mind.

Anonymous said...

In addition to covering amnesty from the cheap labor angle, I think more needs to be discussed about the "more taxpayers/consumers" angle.

ZeroHedge tackles this issue from a Japanese perspective: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-06-19/demographic-boom-dependency-bust

The issue in America is too many Boomers and not enough X-ers/Y-ers to support them.

I really think a substantial fraction of our elite believe that America is some kind of golden goose they can never kill, and the boomer entitlements need a bailout, and so why the hell not import a bunch of new taxpayers so those angry blue-hairs will stop calling my office?


Corn said...

"The sheer number of immigrants that will come because of the bill: America 2050 with 500 million people. Cities that look like Blade Runner or Judge Dredd. Cacophony of languages. Dangerous schools, dangerous public transit, congested roadways."

Yup. I've said it before and I'll say it again. We need to find a way to bring the hard core environmentalists over to our side.

Anonymous said...

@Harry Baldwin

I don't know what Sessions is thinking, being a United States Senator and prioritizing the interests of law-abiding citizens of the United States.

Cail Corishev said...

I really think a substantial fraction of our elite believe that America is some kind of golden goose they can never kill, and the boomer entitlements need a bailout, and so why the hell not import a bunch of new taxpayers so those angry blue-hairs will stop calling my office?

That pretty much sums it up. The only question is how much they really buy their own equalitarian claims and think workers/taxpayers are fungible so that more are guaranteed to be better; or do they know better but just hope to bump up total taxes enough to float things through another election or two?

Rohan Swee said...

pat: I'm taking your advice. I'm trying to develop the capability of producing short videos on political subjects. It's proving to be much harder than I first imagined.

I thought I would be a natural for this sort of thing. I had taken film in college and had been pretty good at it. But that had been silent, 16mm shot outdoors. With video there are a dozens of new areas to master including lights, editing software, compositing software, etc.

I've been working on this for about six months. If I had more money I would have gotten further but it takes a lot of time to research where you can economize.

So don't count on me just yet. I'm still many months from being ready to inflict myself on the YouTube audience.


While you were talking about your talents and resources and reminiscing about your youth, iStevers tossed up at least three anti-S.744 videos.