Redskin Hail Mary Helps GOP’s Ed Gillespie Come Closer In VA Senate Race—But He Still Favors Amnesty
Print Friendly and PDF
Virginia’s Senate race has suddenly tightened as a recent poll from Christopher Newport University has Republican challenger Ed Gillespie—arguably the GOP Establishment’s worst pick in this cycle although it’s a hot competition—trailing Democratic incumbent Mark Warner by only (!) seven points. Another poll from a Republican-leaning firm has Gillespie only down by four. [Gillespie Closing the Gap, William Kristol, The Weekly Standard, October 31, 2014] Ironically, this may because Gillespie made a belated National Question noise—and it doesn’t matter anyway to immigration patriots, because long-time Treason Lobbyist Gillespie is a confirmed Amnestiac.

As former head of the RNC, a corporate lobbyist, and a Main Stream Media talking head, Gillespie has already done his best to destroy the Republican brand and transform the GOP into the political wing of the Cheap Labor lobby. Not surprisingly, Gillespie has trailed in double digits for much of this campaign. He’s only recovering now that he’s belatedly discovered anti-PC populism and is supporting the Washington Redskins name against PC attack

Perhaps as a result, the CNU poll gives Gillespie a 53%-43% lead among white voters. [Warner leads Gillespie, 51-44, as election nears; likely voters say attack ads have not swayed them, by Dr. Quentin Kidd, Christopher Newport University Judy Ford Watson Center for Public Policy, October 31, 2014] A week ago, Gillespie was below 50% with what argues is the key group.

But this feint towards appealing to white voters is simply another empty dog whistle from the K-Street millionaire. Gillespie’s own stated position on immigration is no different than Warner’s.

Gillespie always frames any discussion on immigration by telling us he is the “son of Irish immigrants,” seemingly unaware that no one cares about such Eurocentric Horatio Alger tales anymore. Gillespie claims that

I do not support Amnesty, and oppose granting citizenship to them, which would be unfair to those who have come here legally and played by the rules. And I don’t believe we should give one of the greatest privileges in the world—American citizenship—to those who are here by virtue of having broken our laws.

At the same time, I do not believe that our nation will implement the mass deportation of 10-12 million people, so we need to come to terms with those who are here illegally now. It would be in the interest of both American citizens and those here illegally to be able to come forward and, after a series of processes (i.e., criminal background checks, payment of back taxes, assimilation, demonstration of self-sufficiency), be issued new visas to be here legally.

My emphasis. Note the contradiction: “I do not support Amnesty”—but “we need to come to terms with those who are here illegally now.” There can’t be “mass deportation”—and they will be issued “new visas to be here legally.”

Of course, if we can’t deport anyone, “we” must “come to terms with” illegals, and illegals get to stay indefinitely, how is that not Amnesty?

The disgraceful truth: Gillespie supports the substance of Amnesty, just not the word. He enthusiastically defended Amnesty when he worked as a political consultant, but now that he is a candidate, he’s backing away from it. Three guesses what would happen if he were elected.

What about Warner? The incumbent Senator buries his position under the “Education” heading but is clear enough in his policy statement, “A Fair Shot For Everyone.”

Sen. Warner is a strong supporter of comprehensive immigration reform, including DREAM Act support for responsible young people brought to this country through no fault of their own. He knows that an education is vital to giving high achieving, talented young adults a fair shot at the American dream.
At his Senate website, Warner claims to support “ a comprehensive approach to immigration reform” and brags about supporting S. 744, “a proposal that would reform our immigration system, double border security, require the construction of 700 miles of fencing along the Southern border, and authorize the use of new radar and unmanned aerial drones to track illegal border crossings.”

Of course, the problem with a 700 mile fence is that the border with Mexico is almost 2,000 miles long. And Warner doesn’t mention goodies in the Gang of Eight bill like its new immigration “ombudsman” or the “limitations on dangerous deportation practices.”

Like Gillespie, Warner wants cheap labor. He actually says at his Senate website: “If we had the immigration policies in the 80s and 90s that we have now [sic—we do], we might never had had an Intel or a Google because these companies — just as 40% of all tech companies in Northern Virginia — have at least one of foreign-born founder.”

In fact, of course, the founders of these tech companies do not exactly come from the same demographic as most illegal immigrants.

Like all leftist Democrats, Warner supports the DREAM Act. But then so does Gillespie. He simply won’t admit it, dodging the question when he was asked about it during a debate. [Warner, Gillespie Clash in U.S. Senate Debate, by Victoria Ross, Reston Connection, October 16, 2014]

But what else can “coming to terms” with 12 million illegals mean? And furthermore, what difference does it make if Gillespie won’t challenge Barack Obama’s unilateral edict that the DREAM Act is already law? The fact that he can’t make a plain statement during a debate about his position tells us all we need to know.

Underscoring the point that Gillespie is ready to grant Amnesty, his embarrassingly named EG2 Agenda offers nothing to social or cultural conservatives. However it is “AVAILABLE INSPANISH, KOREAN, CHINESE, VIETNAMESE, AND TAGALOG.”

Tagalog? Why not Arabic, Farsi, Hindi and Urdu? After all, Gillespie offered best Ramadan wishes to the state’s Mohammedans.

What Gillespie offers is an entire career of putting corporations and consultant fees above constituents. The fact that his political success corresponds with his momentary mini-Culture War is an interesting guide for how the electorate feels about its Minority Occupation Government, but it tells us nothing about what Gillespie would actually do in office.

The political horserace in Virginia may mean something to Gillespie’s fellow consultants. But to immigration patriots, a Gillespie upset would change nothing.

Pádraic O'Bannon, [Email him] a writer and drinker like many of Celtic blood, thinks deep thoughts about politics, culture and religion.

Print Friendly and PDF