So with an unusually open GOP Presidential Nomination cycle getting under way, the aspirants will be experimenting with issues which will motivate and excite the Grassroots, right? Like a sensible Immigration policy?
Totally and utterly wrong. As we have noted in the case of Mitch Daniels back-stabbing of an Arizona-style initiative in Indiana and Haley Barbour's flaunting of his open borders allegiance, quite the reverse is happening. So much so that rank and file political journalists (who tend to think that elections matter) are getting puzzled. The latest expression of this is Newt Gingrich's 2012 immigration dance By Kendra Marr Politico 4/22/11
Gingrich's moderate positions could spell big trouble for him in the early-voting states, strategists say.
Of the top Republican prospects for 2012, Gingrich leads in Latino outreach.
He recently attended a Texas conference on strengthening Latino and Jewish dialogue, and regularly publishes op-eds in Spanish. On a Tax Day conference call with tea party activists earlier this month, Gingrich called on Republicans to fight the "anti-Hispanic" label.
The immigration-reduction group NumbersUSA...has given his immigration agenda a D- grade - the worst of its ranking of the GOP presidential contenders. "In last several months, he's kind of gone back to being bad - as bad as he was when he was in Congress" said the group's executive director Roy Beck.
Politico did not supply a link to NumbersUSA's invaluable Presidential Hopeful ranking, so we will. It is not a pretty sight.
Brenda Walker discussed a similar puzzled essay on Gingrich's behavior at the webzine The Hill in March.
Lionel Sosa, who has consulted seven Republican presidential campaigns on Hispanic issues, praised Gingrich for being "...upfront on immigration....He is far and away the most attractive Republican candidate for Latinos" Sosa said. "He is thoughtful. He has looked into the issue. He understands it, and he feels there is a way to solve the problem."
(Sosa, predictably, was earlier outraged about Gingrich showing a little sense during the Sotomayor nomination.)
Unfortunately, it is clear what is happening here. Matthew Richer identified part of it last year for us in Newt Gingrich: The Aspiring Americano President, which is a thorough evaluation of Gingrich's Treason Lobby credentials.
Helen Krieble, heiress to the Loctite fortune…has had an enormous influence on Gingrich, and will help to shape immigration policy if Gingrich is elected president. Gingrich specifically credits Helen Krieble's influence in his book Real Change , where he also calls for tripling the number of H1B Visas allotted per year...that would amount to as many as 450,000 H1B worker visas annually.
How is any of this possibly going to benefit American workers? Answer: Gingrich doesn't care. He cares about major donors, like Krieble.
I would add another element. As I suggested in Democrat Asks: "Where Did Our White Voters Go?"
The 2012 election is liable to be the most racially polarized in American history. President Obama has made this inevitable. I believe this explains the widely reported pessimism and defeatism amongst prospective GOP nominees. It is not that they don't think Obama can be defeated. It is that they know the hatred and rage such a victory will generate in the MSM and the Inside-the-Beltway establishment will make the next President's life very stressful. Think Watergate!
As Gingrich, Daniels and Barbour see it, the GOP grassroots are just a tedious detail. The key constituencies are the cheap-labor plutocrats, and the gate-keepers in the MSM. The latter in particular are going to be very suspicious of a GOP 2012 winner. Demonstrating subservience to the Treason Lobby on immigration is the domestic policy equivalent of these constant servile trips to Israel.
They may be right. After all, who else got McCain nominated?