La Raza Warns Republicans: No White House Without Amnesty

Republicans are still celebrating their dominance in the midterm elections, but La Raza President Janet Murguia was quick to throw a wet blanket over the festivities. She jumped back into the press last week, warning the GOP that they would not be able to take the White House without supporting amnesty for illegal aliens.

“If they continue on this trajectory,” Murguia said, “Republicans will have elected their last president for the foreseeable future. Latino voter priorities must be reflected in Republican policy priorities.”

Yes, but…what about the rest of us? You know, the dominant majority of Americans who oppose amnesty for illegals? What about our priorities?

Murguia also had strong words for Democrats. She warned them to “not take our community for granted” while imploring Obama to “act boldly to bring relief to the millions facing deportation and family separation.”

The debate rages on, but it’s certainly discouraging to know that many establishment Republicans are taking her warnings seriously. While true conservatives like Ted Cruz are steadily banging the drum against amnesty, so-called moderates like John Boehner seem all too willing to concede this one to Democrats. Obama has promised that he will deliver an executive action on immigration before the end of the year, but he’s been somewhat silent since the election. One wonders if he didn’t have hopes for a different outcome, though it’s hard to imagine how he could have foreseen a Democrat House. Then again, he’s been on the golf course for most of the year.

The Voters Spoke

It’s hard to take seriously Murguia’s threats coming so soon after an election that was at least partially a rejection of Obama’s immigration plans. Certainly, there were many other factors in play – the economy chief among them – but there’s no question that amnesty was one of them. Republican candidates spent a lot of money on TV ads surrounding immigration. Scott Brown came very close to closing the gap between he and Jeanne Shaheen when he started attacking her on immigration. And Oregon’s Measure 88 – an amendment that would grant driver’s licenses to illegal aliens – was defeated in a landslide.

While Murguia claims that a changing electoral demographic will spell doom for anti-amnesty Republicans, she fails to consider how passing amnesty would play for non-Hispanics. Is it possible that Democrats would lose support amongst voters who think they’re out to lunch on this one? Is it possible that Republicans could see their base stay home – or even switch sides – if they betrayed the public trust in such a way? Of course those things are possible. Certainly as possible as an election where pro-amnesty Hispanics determine the next president.

Either way, the political ramifications should be secondary, if not irrelevant altogether. Republicans were voted into office by Americans sick of Obama’s lawless disregard for the will of the people. They owe it to those same Americans to represent the interests of the country. If standing firm on amnesty means paving the way for President Hillary Clinton, so be it. What does it matter if Republicans are in charge if they’re just going to act like Democrats anyway?

About admin