I've argued that the GOP was Trumpist before Trump.
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2015/08/dont-blame-trumpism-on-trump.html
The GOP establishment is getting pretty nervous now. As Bruce Bartlett noted on twitter
https://twitter.com/BruceBartlett
Trump is forcing Krauthammer to actualy write a meaningful column.
-- Donald Trump, on immigration, Republican debate, Aug.
" Not on anyone's mind? For years, immigration has been the subject of near-constant, often bitter argument within the GOP. But it is true that Trump has brought the debate to a new place -- first, with his announcement speech, about whether Mexican migrants are really rapists, and now with a somewhat more nuanced plan."
"Much of it -- visa tracking, E-Verify, withholding funds from sanctuary cities -- predates Trump. Even building the Great Wall is not particularly new. (I, for one, have been advocating that in this space since 2006.) Dominating the discussion, however, are his two policy innovations: (a) abolition of birthright citizenship and (b) mass deportation."
http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_28675222/charles-krauthammer-trump-and-immigration-swamp
1. He's incorrect that a and b are new. This was already part of GOP boilerplate previous to Trump.
Rand Paul had a plan to a bill to get rid of BC and there were GOP legal groups arguing the same.
None of it is new. And Krauthammer himself cops to arguing for replicating the Great Wall of China.
So Kratuhammer hismelf has been in favor of a big, beautiful wall, so he himself a Trumpist.
"If you are born in the United States, you are an American citizen. So says the 14th Amendment. Barring some esoteric and radically new jurisprudence, abolition would require amending the Constitution. That would take years and great political effort -- and make the GOP anathema to Latino-Americans for a generation."
What about the Heritage Foundation who said the GOP doesn't need Latino votes? See this is what I mean by enabling. Krauthammer didn't complain when Heritage put out this white paper but now after the damage is done he's worried about the Latino vote.
As a matter of strategy Trump knows amending the Constitution would be a dead end-what he's suggesting is some new jurisprudence-but conservative groups have been at this for years. Why didn't Kratuhammer criticize it before Trump?
In religious terms you could say that the GOP has grieved the Holy Spirit for so long, they just don't hear its voice anymore.
Trump is their punishment. Nothing is going to save them from it now. Not Krauthammer's mealy-mouthed column.
Even Kratuhammer here speaking as the GOPs ego-in Freudian terms he's trying to bring the GOP id-Trump-and super ego-Reagan-into the reality principle-shows that his problem with ending BC is mostly tactical. He has a better way to reduce immigration.
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2015/08/dont-blame-trumpism-on-trump.html
The GOP establishment is getting pretty nervous now. As Bruce Bartlett noted on twitter
https://twitter.com/BruceBartlett
Trump is forcing Krauthammer to actualy write a meaningful column.
"This was not a subject that was on anybody's mind until I brought it up at my announcement."
" Not on anyone's mind? For years, immigration has been the subject of near-constant, often bitter argument within the GOP. But it is true that Trump has brought the debate to a new place -- first, with his announcement speech, about whether Mexican migrants are really rapists, and now with a somewhat more nuanced plan."
http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_28675222/charles-krauthammer-trump-and-immigration-swamp
1. He's incorrect that a and b are new. This was already part of GOP boilerplate previous to Trump.
Rand Paul had a plan to a bill to get rid of BC and there were GOP legal groups arguing the same.
None of it is new. And Krauthammer himself cops to arguing for replicating the Great Wall of China.
So Kratuhammer hismelf has been in favor of a big, beautiful wall, so he himself a Trumpist.
"If you are born in the United States, you are an American citizen. So says the 14th Amendment. Barring some esoteric and radically new jurisprudence, abolition would require amending the Constitution. That would take years and great political effort -- and make the GOP anathema to Latino-Americans for a generation."
What about the Heritage Foundation who said the GOP doesn't need Latino votes? See this is what I mean by enabling. Krauthammer didn't complain when Heritage put out this white paper but now after the damage is done he's worried about the Latino vote.
As a matter of strategy Trump knows amending the Constitution would be a dead end-what he's suggesting is some new jurisprudence-but conservative groups have been at this for years. Why didn't Kratuhammer criticize it before Trump?
In religious terms you could say that the GOP has grieved the Holy Spirit for so long, they just don't hear its voice anymore.
Trump is their punishment. Nothing is going to save them from it now. Not Krauthammer's mealy-mouthed column.
Even Kratuhammer here speaking as the GOPs ego-in Freudian terms he's trying to bring the GOP id-Trump-and super ego-Reagan-into the reality principle-shows that his problem with ending BC is mostly tactical. He has a better way to reduce immigration.
"And for what? Birthright citizenship is a symptom, not a cause. If you regain control of the border, the number of birthright babies fades to insignificance. The time and energy it would take to amend the Constitution are far more usefully deployed securing the border.
Moreover, the real issue is not the birthright babies themselves, but the chain migration that follows. It turns one baby into an imported village."
Chain migration, however, is not a constitutional right. It's a result of statutes and regulations. These can be readily changed. That should be the focus, not a quixotic constitutional battle."
So to recap:
1. Krauthammer is a Trumpist who just doesn't like Trump's tactics. He's made the issue way too high profile. In the past the GOP candidates could dodge the issue by being vague. "Before Donald Trump, Republican presidential candidates could deflect tough questions on immigration with vague promises to secure the border and oppose all “amnesty” for illegal immigrants."
Moreover, the real issue is not the birthright babies themselves, but the chain migration that follows. It turns one baby into an imported village."
Chain migration, however, is not a constitutional right. It's a result of statutes and regulations. These can be readily changed. That should be the focus, not a quixotic constitutional battle."
So to recap:
1. Krauthammer is a Trumpist who just doesn't like Trump's tactics. He's made the issue way too high profile. In the past the GOP candidates could dodge the issue by being vague. "Before Donald Trump, Republican presidential candidates could deflect tough questions on immigration with vague promises to secure the border and oppose all “amnesty” for illegal immigrants."
- See more at: http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2015/08/the-rachel-maddow-theory-of-jeb-bushs.html#sthash.E6gH6CVT.dpuf
2, He wants the wall as well and he's also taking about legal rights and changing regulations and statues. Basically he may not call this ending birthright citizenship but he's trying to end 'chain migration' which is the same thing Trump has in mind with birthright citizenship.
There is literally no daylight whatsoever between Trump and Krauthammer other than Trump has been so vocal about it and Krauthammer thinks that attacking 'chain migration' is more politically correct than attacking 'birthright citizenship.'
It's the same exact policies.
No comments:
Post a Comment