Pat Buchanan recently wrote
"Indulging in their favorite pastime, cherry-picking evidence, the neocons claim that the losses in Arizona by Rep. J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, both hardliners, prove that Arizona and America reject a law-and-order approach to illegal immigration."
What I`m puzzled about is how did an H-1b supporter like Hayworth get a reputation for being a "hardliner"
on immigration. [VDARE.com note: I. E. With neocons, not with PJB, who invented "hardliner."]
isn`t as strict strict as Democrats like Byrd
and progressive caucus member DeFazio
Aside from his other baggage, I tend to think the deadly mistake Hayworth made was making a lot of noise on immigration without have a real plan-or a record to back his rhetoric up. Also, some folks seem to think that "nobody"
objects to H-1b visas, but that "nobody"
includes a lot of college educated white males-
-a traditional GOP constituency that has been defecting from the GOP in recent years.
Illegal immigration is a highly visible target—but for a lot of potential GOP voters, H-1b
is much more of a pocket book issue.
What kind of reaction can someone expect when they bring up the immigration issue and then vote for the very type of immigration that most directly affects the people they hope to support them? I think that is part of the real lesson of Hayworth`s defeat.