- Some Republicans have decided that affirmative action
is here to stay, so the best we can do is to contain it. That means limiting
affirmative action to blacks and American Indians. (Actually, many Republicans
have long felt that way, but some are actually talking containment.)
-
- Containment is surrender. This ain´t the Cold War;
this is the war for the Constitution. It´s also a low-intensity (increasingly,
high-intensity) race war. But the containment strategy is worse than a
straightforward surrender. For while GOP operatives intend all along to
surrender for what they think is a fair price, they seek to deceive Republican
voters into thinking that the operatives will resist the expansion of affirmative
action.
-
- In her betrayal of precedent and the Constitution alike,
Justice Sandra Day O´Connor enshrined the notion of "diversity"
in constitutional precedent. (But then, Pres. Bush argued for "diversity"
before Justice O´Connor did.) Under diversity plus the now common
perversions of the 14th Amendment (the rights of some groups to privileged
treatment before the law), you cannot limit affirmative action to blacks
and American Indians. So, either you do the right thing, and fight affirmative
action every step of the way, or you make those less wealthy and well-connected
than you, bend over and take it.
-
- Indeed, as an astute correspondent observed, "Politically
speaking, it isn't remotely likely that the Bush administration would get
behind an effort to limit AA to blacks and American Indians. The group
Bush and Rove are trying to court - and also use to prove their non-racist
credentials to politically moderate suburban whites who might otherwise
be influenced by their PC liberal neighbors - is Hispanics, and they would
not benefit from such a containment policy."
-
- (Note, too, that the well-to-do "conservative"
whites courted by the GOP, whose operatives apparently think - to paraphrase
Steve Sailer - that some groups´ votes count more than others - want
to maintain an endless supply of illegal immigrant nannies, housekeepers,
cooks, gardeners and employees for their businesses, all of whom they can
pay less and abuse more than American workers - the same status quo sought
by the well-to-do, "progressive" whites the Democrats are courting.
Meanwhile, the white American working and middle classes are going broke,
paying for illegal immigration.)
-
- If we go back to circa 1970, we see that containment
was one of the original rationalizations for affirmative action - 'It´s
just for blacks.´ (And then, "blacks" meant American-born
blacks, not West Indian, Caribbean, South American or African-born, immigrant
blacks.) Similarly, over the past few years, I have heard talk of "outreach"
as some sort of "substitute" for affirmative action. That´s
another rehabilitated, 1970 rationalization for apartheid, without even
changing the term. There can be no outreach, because the very act of reaching
out to blacks would itself constitute a racial preference, but more importantly,
it would give cover for the same old apartheid system. It was ruses like
"outreach," "remedial education," etc. that got the
ball rolling in the first place. (A few years ago, Liddy Dole screwed up
and got it right, in responding to critics of affirmative action, "But
what about outreach?" For her, the two were synonymous.) I would appreciate
it, if folks bandying about terms like "containment," "outreach,"
etc., would just come out of the closet, and admit that they support affirmative
action. That way, they cause less mischief.
-
- But they won´t come out. I think such folks are
GOP dead-enders, who will do anything to ensure that the nation does NOT
confront racial and ethnic apartheid, as long as they think this will help
George W. Bush get re-elected in 2004, and thereby help them feather their
own personal nests. Remember, party propagandists talk in terms of principles,
but think in terms of dollars and cents; the rest of us pay the tab. The
technical term party insiders would use to describe those paying for their
cozy little set-up is "losers."
-
- Republican operatives have also decided that illegal
immigration is here to stay, so the best we can do is to legalize, er,
I mean, contain it. Following lead lemming Karl Rove, the dead-enders still
fantasize that they can win over Hispanics, even though as Steve Sailer
and Sam Francis have repeatedly pointed out, no evidence supports such
fevered dreams. The President has just unveiled his new amnesty program
for 9 million-13 million illegal immigrants, not counting their kin (all
of whom - illegals and kin - will immediately be privileged over native-born,
white citizens), and the tens of millions of new illegals the amnesty will
inspire to invade America. And in the age of the "matricula consular,"
new "relations" can be manufactured and sold at will.
-
- We are already hearing the equivalent of "containment"
talk surrounding this newest amnesty, similar to the talk that was used
to sell the 1986 amnesty. Then it was "secure borders," "stiffer
sanctions for employers hiring illegals," blah blah blah. Now it's
"stricter entry controls, including increased use of technology at
the border," "steps toward better enforcement of current visa
restrictions and reporting requirements," blah blah blah. The mixture
of irrelevance - because illegals sidestep official entry points - and
contempt for citizens' intelligence, has Rove's fingerprints all over it.
-
- And I'm not even getting into the countless illegal stealth
amnesties that have been smuggled in behind the back of the American people
since 1986. Why prosecute wars overseas to defend America, if you are willing
to surrender to Vicente the Conqueror, and every other nickel-and-dime-store,
banana republic leader, on your own shores?
-
- The dead-enders desperately want to suppress a national
debate on such controversial questions. They are content to blindly follow
the Bush brothers, who have outdone the Democrats in their support of affirmative
action. (The Democrats only knew how to support affirmative action variously
through criminal conduct and rationalizations that even the leftwing federal
bench found increasingly incredible. Conversely, in Texas and Florida,
the supposedly far-right Bushes developed methods of stealth affirmative
action that were acceptable to the federal bench.) And so, the GOP is heading
lemming-like off the cliff, with millions of amnestied Hispanics due to
join Hispanic citizens, in voting 2-1 Democrat, and disgusted whites staying
home from the polls, or voting for a Sovereignty Party or suchlike.
-
- GOP dead-enders are saying, in effect, 'To hell with
the Constitution, and to hell with the equal protection of the laws for
whites who cannot afford pricey attorneys, cannot afford to either move
out of school districts being destroyed by blacks and immigrants or send
their kids to snobby private schools, or get their kids into overpriced,
private universities (OPUs), in spite of radical affirmative action (diversity).
And guess what? Millions of whites will say, "To hell with the GOP!"
And good riddance to the privileged cowards and opportunists who live off
the party. They are no better - and ultimately no different - than the
well-to-do lefties who cheer on a gang of blacks mugging a lone white.
-
- So George W. Bush will win in 2004 and in 2008, people
will be talking about GOP "midgets." In the meantime, if any
Republican approaches you with talk of "containment" - grab your
wallet.
-
- http://toogoodreports.com/column/general/stix/20031229.htm
|
