#Opportunity? RNC ‘growth and opportunity’ plan equals more pandering, offers Democrat Lite; Updated


As Twitchy reported this morning, Ari Fleischer previewed the report on “growth and opportunity” via Twitter this morning. The RNC report has now been unveiled fully.

People are reading. And they don’t like it. Opportunity for what? A panderpalooza? The plan proposes direct “dialogue” with the NAACP and La Raza, among others. It praises “comprehensive immigration reform,” so forward to amnesty!


Apparently so.

Some argue for the need for outreach. Clearly, we do want to grow the party.

Reaching out is one thing. But this is not the way to do it. We must reach out with solid principles and sound ideas. Not pandering and trying to turn the party into Democrat Lite under the absurd belief that turning ourselves into identity politics embracers and promoters will win elections.

Precisely. The absurdity, it scorches.

Ding, ding, ding, we have a winner!

Look, if the plan is premised upon putting aside principles and what is right in order to pander for votes, any votes gained (doubtful there would be any gains at all) would be a Pyrrhic victory at best. Like Sarah Palin said at CPAC, we don’t need to rebrand a party, we need to rebuild the country. For all Americans, not little boxed-up identity groups.

Apparently, the RNC is not heeding those words.

Update: Guess who likes it?

  • http://twitter.com/CDChambers62 Chris Chambers

    This report should go straight in the trash. Why the hell would I vote for a fake Democrat over a real Democrat (if I were to ever vote for a Democrat in the first place)? Isn’t this the very reason Republicans lost the last two elections? (Don’t get me wrong. I think Mitt Romney is a good man, just not a true Conservative. I really don’t know what to think about John McCain anymore. :( )

    • Gallatin

      Just stunning. Why doesn’t everyone involved with this report just get across the aisle and save us a lot of problems in next year’s elections.

  • Guest

    So, the theory behind the pandering is that if the GOP offers Amnesty without welfare, and the Democrats offer Amnesty with welfare…. Hispanics will flock to the GOP.


  • Guest

    From Amnesty to Gay Marriage, the GOP seems intent on implementing every recommendation proposed to them by the people who want them to lose.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002109532283 Jillane Kent

    Unlike the hapless dinosaurs, it appears that the GOP is not waiting for an asteroid to herald their extinction.

  • Maxx

    I don’t believe in amnesty but I do believe deporting 16M is an idea only slightly less doable than jetting off to Pluto. Bush had eight years to deal with illegal immigration and his father had four years. Clinton had eight and Obama will eventually have a near decade. Nearly every politician in Washington for the past 30 years has stuck their head in the sand over this issue for fear of losing Hispanic votes and now, all of a sudden it’s a “problem.” A “Zero tolerance policy” would have been great BEFORE 16M were allowed to cross but now that they’re here, what now?

    While this is a nation problem it’s politically, definitely a conservative one because the current old guard of Republicans have sat idly by and allowed the left to take an issue they were equally responsible for (illegal immigration) and turn it into a “the right hates Hispanics” narrative that cost us dearly in 2012.

    I wrote over the weekend that in lieu of this ridiculous notion that we can locate 16M illegals and toss them on yellow buses and shuttle them back across the border, we should find a way to deal with this in ways that actually make sense.

    1. Fine HEAVILY business’ that continue to employ illegals.

    2. Establish a mandatory civil or military service commitment for children of illegals and for any illegal who is fit to serve. Following a five-year commitment, a path to citizenship shall be established for those children of illegals born in the United States (getting in line behind those who are already legally being processed) while for those who were of legal age when crossing our border illegally…following military or civil service, they should be allowed to work and pay taxes here in the USA but NO CITIZENSHIP. I just don’t feel we should reward law breakers who were of legal age when they jumped the border but a child born here….I don’t feel we should place them in the same category as an adult border crosser.

    For those who cannot serve for whatever reason decided by the military, then civil service or community service. Five years. Following that, depending on origin of birth, a path to citizenship or a document which allows them to work and live here, paying taxes and contributing to their community.

    3. AUTOMATIC deportation if convicted of a felony (for both categories of people above).

    4. Provide for more border guards and logistics for the borders.

    For those that disagree with the above, I’d be curious what suggestions you have that address this and what can actually be seen to completion. We probably all agree that amnesty should not be an option but beyond that, where do we go from here bearing in mind that true amnesty does not come with any caveats or conditions such as those illustrated above and I know of no conservative who believes in true amnesty.

    I’ve spent a bit of time reading various conservative opinions on illegal immigration and I notice a trend. They all are against it…and rightly so…but few seem to want to address what to do with the 16M that have been allowed to stay due to the ambivalence of BOTH parties.

    • http://www.facebook.com/joseph.a.white.16 Joseph A White

      All a bunch of BS. I heard it all before when Reagan last approved amnesty. We were going to secure our borders and follow the laws, but we have failed miserably. Either we open the damned borders and forget about our sovereignty, or we begin RIGHT NOW to enforce our immigration laws. Round ’em up and send them home. It may take years to accomplish it, but so what??

      • Kevin Krom

        Eh. To be honest, I’m kind of ambivalent on an amnesty, or any other plan on what to do about the illegals already here. None of that matters one whit until the border is secured. You could have a 100% fool-proof plan that everyone on all sides thought was fair, and it would last only as long as it took for the next invader to waltz in.

        • Hiraghm

          Our border will never be secure enough until we start spanking employers for hiring illegals.

    • Hiraghm

      No, no amnesty.

      The Nazis during WWII managed to round up and murder 18-21 million people (6 million of whom were Jews), while keeping most of the folks back home unaware.

      I don’t see how it would be so difficult to openly round up and deport 16 million people 70 years later.

      My suggestion, because my preferred solution is too outrageous to voice w/o getting lynched, is very, very simple.

      Yes, Fine employers heavily. Jail time, too.

      But, simply remove illegal alien invaders from the protection of law.

      If an illegal is robbed, assaulted, raped, murdered… not being under the jurisdiction of the U.S. (being here w/o status), they would have no legal recourse or police protection.

      They would quickly become the preferred targets of criminals of all stripes.

      Not being able to work here, being subject to crime, most all of them would self-deport. And probably take their anchor babies with them.

      As for anchor babies… okay, they’re U.S. citizens. So they can stay, put in foster care; the illegal invaders still leave. Or the parents can renounce the child’s U.S. citizenship and take it with them.

  • http://pinterest.com/j0s1395/ Josephine (D)

    To the person suggesting suggesting the GOP support gay marriage in order to get young voters: I’m a young person and I’m against gay marriage. But a lot of others my age don’t realize how important the traditional family is to society’s survival, probably because a fair amount of their parents don’t set the best example for them.

    To the GOP establishment: you cannot have multiple views in a party. You can have differing views on how to carry out your policy, but you cannot say you support one policy then turn around and throw your weight behind someone who agrees with the other side on that issue.

    If this keeps up, I’m registering with the Constitution Party when I turn 18.

    • Squirrel!

      I’m a registered Independent but have been looking into the Constitution Party and considering changing my affiliation. Let’s do it! I think everyone should at least consider a change.

    • http://twitter.com/jimni27 Jimni27

      ” probably because a fair amount of their parents don’t set the best example for them.” This statement is so wrong on so many levels I don’t even know where to begin. It has nothing to do with how you are raised. I’ll start there.

      ETA- misunderstood original post- but still disagree, respectfully.

      • https://twitter.com/davidjkramer DavidKramer

        Do tell, let us hear the vast wisdom of Jimni27.

        • http://twitter.com/jimni27 Jimni27

          I sent Josephine another reply because I misunderstood her original one.

      • J. Cox

        She is actually spot on…but do tell us how its the village that raises the children…look to Chicago for inspiration.

        • http://twitter.com/jimni27 Jimni27

          Actually I read Josephine’s statement wrong.

          • J. Cox

            Fair enough

    • V the K

      “Gay Marriage” is just a shiny squirrel the ruling class uses to distract low information voters from the pending economic and fiscal catastrophe.

      Maybe the “nutjobs” who said homosexuality was the downfall of civilizations were right; just not in the way that they thought; maybe it’s not a direct cause, just a symptom of a frivolous and decadent culture.

      • Hiraghm


    • $23629333

      Josephine, since you are a “young person,”* I’m going to recommend very seriously that you move to one of the reddest states. The bluest states are sinking into red ink. There, you’ll pay increasingly onerous taxes for fewer and inferior services. The sooner you arrive in one of the reddest states, the sooner you can establish yourself. Regardless of what the future holds for America, you’ll be better off in the reddest parts of the country.

      (* which I wish was still true of me)

    • http://www.facebook.com/joseph.a.white.16 Joseph A White

      What a refreshing post, Josephine. Having followed your posts for some time now, I always figured you were a bit older than you are. Kudos for having a good, solid, conservative head on those young shoulders of yours. We desperately need more young people to see the truth that is conservative thought.

    • http://twitter.com/jimni27 Jimni27

      I didn’t want to delete my post below because I wanted to say that I misunderstood your post. I thought you were saying people were gay because of how they were brought up. I still disagree though. You have every right to have your views, but I think teaching kids tolerance for others is setting a great example.

      • Hiraghm

        “tolerance for others”. There is a difference between *tolerance* and *acceptance*.

        • http://twitter.com/jimni27 Jimni27

          A VERY fine line. If you don’t even support civil unions for gays, you are intolerant AND non accepting. I don’t know which Josephine is because she didn’t clarify. I can totally understand a person’s religious belief, btw, and in no way think the church has to change it’s stance.But marriage equality for gays is quickly becoming the norm, and people are going to have to accept that someday if they want to or not.

          • John_Frank

            If someone is devoutly religious, and believes in accordance with his or her faith that marriage is only between a man and a woman, because those religious views do not mesh with those who believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman that makes the believer what?

            Do we call that person a bigot and homophobic, while we figuratively burn him or her at the stake, as we saw happen with Chick-fil-A last summer, because of the President’s religious views? That is very intolerant.

            As to whether people accept same sex marriage, if it goes against someones faith, why does an individual have an obligation to accept something that infringes upon his or her religious views?

            This is the problem that religious people (and frankly many others) have with same sex activists who demand acceptance.

            For example Christians are very tolerant and Christianity preaches forgiveness.

            However, there is a difference between tolerating something and accepting something. When people start demanding acceptance of a view which infringes upon another persons religious beliefs, were does that lead?

          • http://twitter.com/jimni27 Jimni27

            I meant that you would have to accept that the majority has spoken and someday it WILL be the law. Because it will. I have no doubts about that. There is a new poll out saying that even the majority of Christians now accept it- it’s a pretty extensive poll : http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/03/poll-tracks-dramatic-rise-in-support-for-gay-marriage/

          • John_Frank

            Tell us, how do we square passing a law which infringes on religious freedom.

            Just because the majority says so?

            It does not work that way.

            Go back and read the bill of rights.

            Last time I checked, we have minority rights, and we have a Constitution which sets out some guiding principles that we must follow and protects these minority rights.

          • shimauma

            actually, no one *has* to accept anything as normal that ISN’T normal. Just because perverse lifestyle choice commitments have become a tre’chic trend does not make them acceptable. there are many cultures that engaged(and still do) in cannibalism. Does that make it acceptable????

        • Scott Anderson

          They’re not looking for tolerance. They are looking for an endorsement.

    • Scott Anderson

      Gabriel Malor has gay marriage tunnel vision. He’s not a bad guy otherwise.

    • shimauma

      Great critical thinking Josephine. Happy to see some young people have been raised up righteously.

  • https://twitter.com/davidjkramer DavidKramer

    Alright folks, I use to make fun of the Paulians……….but wasn’t one of their problems is that the GOP is just the same as the Dems? Peaceful non compliance is looking more and more like the only solution.

  • https://twitter.com/davidjkramer DavidKramer

    So, this was Obama’s plan to destroy the GOP, let the GOP do it themselves…………..brilliant!

  • http://twitter.com/arljim78 exceller

    Republicans are leaders in terms of governorships and state legislative bodies. Is it because they are reaching out better, or because they have better messaging? or is it more to do with strong, effective management of state resources?

  • $23629333

    Roy Orbison is here to sing a little ditty in honor of the RINO-rotten Republican Party:

    “It’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s OVERRRR!”

  • louisiana_mom

    That’s it! I’m done! I’ve been a Republican for 30 years (since my 18th birthday). I drove myself to the voter’s registrar’s office and against my parents’ wishes became a Republican (I almost got kicked out of their house over it). But I’m done! If I wanted someone who voted like a Democrat, I would vote for the friggin’ Democrat!

  • camnpat

    Barf-tastic job brilliant minds of the GOP. You just ensured losing elections until someone in your party figures out it is policy and the conviction you stand by your principles that draws voters to a party.

    Your problem is that you are so concerned with “winning” that you don’t know what you stand for. When half of your party stands on principle and the other half sides with the left in attacking the principled half for not bending over backward to “look nice”, you are not representing anybody. Stop listening to what the press wants you to do and start listening to the people who are affiliated with you, but didn’t care to vote for you recently.. Why do you think people don’t care about your party, yet individual
    members of Congress, Governors, and others have seen tremendous success
    and support recently?

  • http://extremesplash.wordpress.com/ Ben Bollman

    I have yet to figure out how giving illegals amnesty and making them pay taxes will gain us votes when Democrats are already giving them freebies tax-free.

  • KBDaBear

    f the RNC had written a report for the Red Sox , it would have concluded “Do things to make Yankees fans love you”

  • stillinthe60s

    The Gut Our Principles Party continues to prove it is no longer interested in Conservative’s support. It’s only interested in winning the media’s.

  • Guest

    Just what we need, a further shift toward oligarchy….good grief!

  • James Atkins

    Perhaps if the RNC put forth an actual conservative candidate, votes would come…

  • Karl H

    So basically the GOP plan is to keep the nation on the road to hell, but slow it down to 65mph instead of 90mph? Since I believe the nation has two directions to go. 1) slam on the brakes hard and suffer a lot of bruising when we hit that dash board but turn the car around and proceed safely in the opposite direction from hell. or 2) drive straight to hell and watch this nation burn just to see what rises out of the ashes.

    If both Parties are offering the road to hell why not just pick the faster trip so we can get this over with? The new motto for the GOP should be “vote Democrat, we do”.

  • shimauma

    We conservatives have been SAYING this!!! you want to put libturd mentality in your camp then you are going to LOSE conservatives.

  • Not On This Watch

    If only I had a vote of no confidence in the party..but it is if I am spitting in the wind.

  • Not On This Watch

    Why did the RNC release this report thru the National Press Club? And who paid for it?