Skip to main content

A movement commits political suicide

Well said:
May 1st came and went. What happens now?

I think that this movement has run out of gas. Why? It does not have public support. Better put, it has turned off a large majority of Americans.

Rasmussen's latest poll indicates that "24% of American voters have a favorable opinion of the people who have recently marched and protested for immigrant rights in major cities." At the same time, 67% oppose amnesty. (

What happens now?

The movement is stalled because it does not have public support.

Also, there appears to be an internal struggle between the leftist groups and centrist elements. Lou Dobbs reports today that:

"Just how significant is the impact of leftists within the illegal immigration movement? It is no accident that they chose May 1 as their day of demonstration and boycott. It is the worldwide day of commemorative demonstrations by various socialist, communist, and even anarchic organizations."

Mark Krikorian makes a similar point:

"Prominent among the organizers of the street actions have been CISPES, the ANSWER Coalition, and other communist organizations, with CAIR and its ilk joining in, Subcomandante Marcos sending Zapatistas to protest at our embassy in Mexico City--and even Mumia Abu-Jamal expressing his solidarity!" (

In short, this movement committed political suicide. Between now and election day, US politicians will emphasize border security and labor law enforcement. We will see more raids.

What about the "indocumentados"? They were terribly served by the leaders of movement.

They where used by those seeking power--isn't it always that way with the underclass.

Related Posts:
Immigration: Going back to what matters most--people.
Still Working Today...and I'll do some shopping tonight
Nuestro Himno: My Two Cents

Fox News -- Mexican born American citizen making anti-American...

Talking About Immigration


Popular posts from this blog

Communism: Good Money for the "El Viejo"

I guess Fidel Castro is doing ok. Forbes lists Castro as one of the richest in the world, right up there with the Queen of England. I bet he didn't like the attention. It was hard to figure it out, but it seems they managed to throw some numbers together.
In the past, we have relied on a percentage of Cuba's gross domestic product to estimate Fidel Castro's fortune. This year we have used more traditional valuation methods, comparing state-owned assets Castro is assumed to control with comparable publicly traded companies. A reasonable discount was then applied to compensate for the obvious disclosure issues.

Hispanic Trending: Leave your name at the border

Most people miss the fact that Hispanics do not consist of a single ethnic group. Besides that, the heritage that each one of the many nationalities represented in our immigrant population is diverse in itself. As I read Manuel Muñoz's post on his assimilation experience, I can tell you mine was nothing like his. But I can relate to this paragraph. My niece's name is Katie Belle (Sierra). It's intriguing to watch "American" names begin to dominate among my nieces and nephews and second cousins, as well as with the children of my hometown friends. I am not surprised to meet 5-year-old Brandon or Kaitlyn. Hardly anyone questions the incongruity of matching these names with last names like Trujillo or Zepeda. The English-only way of life partly explains the quiet erasure of cultural difference that assimilation has attempted to accomplish. A name like Kaitlyn Zepeda doesn't completely obscure her ethnicity, but the half-step of her nam…

RealClearPolitics: The Democrats Dither on Trade

The backtracking on free trade in South America has been among the frustrating news for me coming out of the beltway. Considering how the economic downturns in Latin America affect us through the increase in illegal immigration, I would think more Americans would be fighting for this one as loudly as they fought for the failed Immigration legislation. Democratic presidential candidates like to talk about "turning a page" in America's relations with the rest of the world. But what does that mean, in practical terms, on bread-and-butter issues such as trade? Are today's Democrats a party of open markets and economic development, or of market restrictions and job protection?The answer is that leading Democrats seem to want both -- they favor economic development overseas but not at the cost of U.S. jobs. That sounds like a coherent position until you begin to look carefully at the political choices in Latin America, a part of the world where …