"It's quite possible that after this big ticket item of immigration is addressed, [the GOP] will realize they have to go through the whole broad range of issues that are of concern to Latinos," Sierra Club Legislative Director Melinda Pierce said.
Why stop at Amnesty? Apparently to win the Latino vote you also need to back the whole raft of leftist policies. Including Global Warming.
Much of the GOP's rebranding is focused on immigration reform to appeal to the Latino electorate but Sierra Club Legislative Director Melinda Pierce said Latinos also strongly support clean energy initiatives.
A Sierra Club and National Council of La Raza survey released in August indicated 77 percent of Latino voters say they global warming is already under way and another 15 percent said it will occur in the future.
"It's quite possible that after this big ticket item of immigration is addressed, [the GOP] will realize they have to go through the whole broad range of issues that are of concern to Latinos," Pierce said.
And by the time we're done with that range of issues, the Republicans will be the new moderate Democrats. And they'll still be evil racists.
Joining together the Sierra Club and La Raza is ironic considering that the Sierra Club originally opposed immigration for population reasons. The Sierra Club originally avoided controversy by putting a moratorium on any immigration position. And then the Sierra Club broke its own moratorium, first by opposing the border fence, and now by merging its own positions into the greater activism of the left.
This should surprise no one considering how the AFL-CIO is selling out its members by pushing amnesty while the NAACP endorses gay marriage. These various groups are exposing themselves as subservient to a larger leftist agenda, rather than the interests and wishes of their base.
But creating front groups targeting a specific demographic with "relevant" arguments is what the left does really well. And speaking of that, meet the Energy and Enterprise Initiative, a "conservative" organization offering "free market" solutions to Climate Changes.
And by free market solutions they mean a Carbon Tax. How is a Carbon Tax free market? Stop asking silly questions.
We believe that conservatives will ultimately come to embrace the power of their own ideas, which is, 'Gee, a price signal works, and it's powerful.'
It's not a Carbon Tax. It's a Price Signal. It's a Cost-Comparison. See now it's Free Market.
Here is how warped this argument gets.
1. Eliminate all tax breaks for fossil fuels, including home heating subsidies for the poor
2. Add the "real" cost of Global Warming and pollution to raise the price of fossil fuels through a Carbon Tax
3. Call for equivalent tax cuts elsewhere
That's your free market solution, which the totally free market Energy and Enterprise Initiative is pushing.
We're spending a lot of time on college campuses speaking to college Republicans, Federalist societies, and young evangelicals...
And so we want to help them to see there's a way that you can be conservative, not want to grow government, and actually be for social-issue accountability, which is a key component of what social-issue conservatives believe. You've got to be accountable. Behavior has consequences, so attach the cost to something so that the market can judge it.
These students are open to that message, and we hope these students will be ambassadors to their parents and grandparents. Those are the harder demographics for us. Their parents and grandparents are harder – especially the grandparents, who feel an attack on their way of life.
And who is funding this incredible "accountability" based carbon tax free market message?
Inglis' initiative is housed at George Mason University, which named the Rockefeller Family Fund and the Energy Foundation as backers of the project. Neither is a conservative organization.
He said the Rockefeller Family Fund, like him, opposed the House-passed climate bill. The Energy Foundation, which is linked to Hewlett-Packard Co., is also an appropriate partner, he said, "seeing as how the Hewletts and the Packards were all about free-enterprise innovation."
Clearly. That must be why they're funding all those "free-enterprise" groups.