Who Stole My Wedge?

Sunday, September 10, 2006
Remember the immigration issue? The Pew guided, Soros funded issue that was to split the Republican Party and provide the impetus for massive retaliation from hordes of Hispanics who would register and flock to the polls in November to turn out those dastardly Republicans who dared support actual enforcement of existing laws while at the same time providing an excuse for the weak minded single issue Republicans to refuse to vote for representatives who didn't strongly support a shoot on sight order's imposition along the border?

The balance of the post can be read by clicking 'Click here to read more' below.

Where did it go? Why did a planned rally in LA draw so few people in LA last week that AP even counted journos and organizers in its guesstimate of crowd size? Perhaps the most amusing paragraph within the article was this:
An Associated Press review this week of voter registration figures from Chicago, Denver, Houston, Atlanta, Los Angeles and other major urban areas that saw large rallies showed no sign of a historic new voter boom that could sway elections.
There's no delusion quite like self-delusion.

Just another Emily Litella moment for the Democrats, I suppose. A bit like the "Republican Culture of Corruption" which has engendered the hoped for effect of a tight Senate race in Montana and the forced retirement of a Congressman in a safe district in Ohio but has also left Congressman William Jefferson (and possibly the Sanchez sisters) wondering whether they will get a sentence for receiving a bribe as stiff as Vernon Jackson received for offering one. Democratic Congressman Mollohan will retain his House seat but is unlikely to regain his seat on the House Ethics Committee - which is just as well, considering that the Department of Justice is casting a cold eye on some of his rather lucrative associations with 'foundations'. Perhaps the same officals at Justice are involved in the recently announced investigation of the newly minted and immediately tarnished Senator Menendez of New Jersey? Will he turn out to be as cheap a crook as Torricelli? Will Lautenberg have to be called upon to hold both of New Jersey's Senate seats due to the unavailability of any other New Jersey Democrat without similiar problems?

Why has the New York Times become so tepid in its support of nutrooter Ted Lamont and his bid to unseat Joe Lieberman? In fact, why is the entire Democratic establishment sprinting from association with the nutroots? I thought they were the wave of the [Democratic] future? Perhaps it has something to do with the apparent buyer remorse that the Soros/Bing/Lewis consortium seems to be suffering over their purchase of the Democratic Party.

You can't really blame them, how would you feel if you opened the poke and found ten skunks rather than the nice healthy young pig you thought you were buying?


terrye said...

I still hear a lot of paleos saying they won't vote.

Of course they could just be blowing off.

Rick Ballard said...

If it were deemed a success as a wedge issue the Dems would still be pushing it. Gasbags in blog comments won't be the determinant factor this year. In fact, I don't believe there is a determinant factor this year.

Skookumchuk said...

Notwithstanding the fact that many inner city Hispanics are subject to the same social pathologies as blacks (high out of wedlock births, gangs) there is also a healthy chunk - maybe a majority - who are social conservatives, patriotic, pro-military and often quite entrepreneurial, small business owners. They are natural Republicans.

Fresh Air said...

I think there's a link problem with the post...

Rick Ballard said...

FA - Did you click 'Read More'? It works for me.


I don't know about natural but I do know that Hispanics meld right in over the standard three generation immigrant pattern. The qualities you mention used to be common to a lot of Dems. Who are now Republicans or Independents.

terrye said...


I am not as concerned about the hispanics as I am the Buchanan wing of the party, they don't show any inclination of viewing anything and everything short of mass roundups as betrayal.

But they seem to have lost some steam since the Utah election. In truth I think Americans want to see border security and some kind of guest worker program, but they aren't ready to go too far either way.

Fresh Air said...


Sorry, I'm so accustomed to clicking boldface type that I neglected the "Read More" tag below.

Re the post: Once again, the Mediacrats are grasping at the tendrils of an unravelling shroud. Culture of corruption, Katrina, NSA spying, theocracy, immigration, Fitzmas--these are the supposed seeds of the Media's rebirth. None of it adds up. These are unrelated and largely trivial issues that, as you point out, have affected exactly two Congressional races.

As Jay Cost pointed out months ago, the only reason the pundits are predicting a Democrat takeover of the House is because they can't actually name the seats that will change hands. It's enough for them to offer vague projections based upon blah, blah, blah...which is identical to their method of critiqing the Bush administration.

Tradesports looks like a good bet at 40% odds.

Rick Ballard said...


There is another test on Tuesday down on the border in the AZ-08 primary. I don't think Tancredo's candidate will win.


I wish Tradesports had a bet on "Will '06 be the lowest turnout in US history?" The presse ancienne has succeeded in turning more people off from politics than I would have believed possible two years ago. I'm actually wondering if betting on Rep pickups in the House wouldn't be smarter than the hold bet.

Fresh Air said...


As Cost and others have noted, the main cause of takeovers is the perception that the governing party will lose and therefore induce senior members to retire rather than face minority status.

The trouble with this is that Congressional seats have become so skewed towards one party or the other that far fewer are in play each year. The Mediacrats have actually encouraged this through their deals with Republicans at the state level to keep their senior members entrenched and toss the juniors to the wolves of the "minority" district gerrymander.

This happened in Illinois in the last election, when Republicans picked up a seat in the delegation even though the legislature and governor's mansion are controlled by Mediacrats.

I'm not sure I'll predict any gains, since there have been a handful of retirements that would appear to favor the Media's candidate. But provided Republicans in California, Texas, Florida, Ohio and Missouri turn out, I don't think Ms. Pelosi will be wielding the walnut gavel anytime soon--except to preside over the meeting to elect her successor.

MeaninglessHotAir said...

Rick, this post was a pleasant surprise! ;-)

Skookumchuk said...


I don't know about natural but I do know that Hispanics meld right in over the standard three generation immigrant pattern. The qualities you mention used to be common to a lot of Dems. Who are now Republicans or Independents.

Yes. And there is also a sense among the Hispanics that I know of being used by the lefties and others with broad agendas. I don't know how prevalent that is, but it may be important.

Rick Ballard said...


I read a piece that I can't find right now about blacks in MO being fed up with the Dems and holding their noses and voting for Talent - apparently he has delivered and the Dems can't. The people interviewed were saying that they were tired of seeing Dem operatives for two months every two years and being ignored the rest of the time. Slow learners.

MHA - It's a pleasure to be back.

David Thomson said...

Once again, everyone must read Raymond Wolfinger's seminal work, "Who Votes?" The hard data studies were completed many decades ago indicating that there would be no massive voting increase. Moreover, this is an off year election! Only hard core disciplined voters will likely bother. This is another major reason why the Republicans should do OK. I still predict that they will hold onto both houses of Congress.

Syl said...

Well, is there any truth to some of the polling which indicates that among registered voters, the races are close, but among likely voters the Dems have quite an edge?

That would indicate the Reps aren't fired enough to cast a ballot but many Dems are.

I just don't feel as complacent about it as many of you.

Rick Ballard said...


It isn't actually complacency. I've spent a number of hours poring over district voting patterns and FA's absolutely true contention regarding the degree of efficiency involved in gerrymandering districts makes potential shifts an enormous uphill battle. I'll be writing about Iowa on Wednesday and clarify the details within the piece but the upshot is no change. Iowa is getting some spending from both parties but it's only because of the '08 caucuses.

There are a handful of districts actually in play - but just a handful.

Syl said...


Of course, I defer to you. And those polls were taken before the actual campaign season started anyway.

loner said...


I'll be writing about Iowa on Wednesday...

Wednesday then.