Bill Richardson has announced his candidacy for the presidency.

And just so you don’t miss the point, he wants you to know his mother’s maiden name–it’s Lopez.

In Spanish-speaking countries, individuals have two official surnames, the father’s surname (apellido paterno) and the mother’s surname (apellido materno). (Here in Mexico, my official name is Allan Wall Dunlavy).

In Richardson’s case, it’s not just an interesting cultural/linguistic detail. The candidate is afraid that if people don’t know his apellido materno, they might not know he’s Hispanic. That’s what he said in California:

“California has a lot of Hispanic voters and they don’t know I’m Hispanic.”

And so, quoth Richardson Lopez:

“I am saying ‘It’s Bill Richardson Lopez and I am one of you and I would like you to consider me, not because I am Hispanic but because I have the best program for the country’ .”

[Call Me Lopez, Presidential Hopeful Says Mary Milliken, Reuters, May 22nd, 2007]

So, let me get this straight? Richardson Lopez says he’s not seeking votes based on the fact that he is Hispanic, and yet he goes out of of his way to remind us of the fact?

Richardson Lopez also had this to say,

“If I am able to make a dent in states like California, Texas and Florida with large Latino populations, I am going to be a factor in this race.”

Uh yes, it looks like Richardson Lopez is running on his Hispanic identity, doesn’t it?

Instapundit has this item:

May 22, 2007

CHRISTOPHER HITCHENS VISITS FINSBURY PARK, the neighborhood of his youth, and asks: “How did a nation move from cricket and fish-and-chips to burkas and shoe-bombers in a single generation?”

posted at 07:18 AM by Glenn Reynolds

Well, the answer is that this is a predictable effect of mass immigration, that it was “predictable and predicted” in the words of Sam Francis, and the man who predicted it was called Enoch Powell. Powell’s 1968 speech, beginning ” The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils. “, can be found here.

And Hitchens, who for years was a really dangerous leftist, despised Enoch Powell. But Powell was right.

This story from the Washington Post shows how out of touch the inside-the-Beltway politicians are with the public.

Immigration Compromise Faces New Opposition
Proposal Stays Alive, But Foes Lie in Wait

By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post
May 22, 2007

The Senate voted last night to move forward on an overhaul of immigration laws, but even proponents of the delicate compromise proposal conceded that the furor over the deal was surpassing their expectations and endangering the plan.

The 69 to 23 vote masked deep troubles from the right flank of the Senate, as well as from the left. Opponents of even conducting a debate on the measure included some unexpected voices, such as freshman Sens. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) and Bernard Sanders, an independent liberal from Vermont. Several conservatives — and some liberals — made it clear that they cast a vote to proceed only in order to fundamentally change the proposed legislation in the coming days

Bill Quick noticed this:

Hannity was telling some caller to his talker today that his contacts in Washington were “astounded” and “shocked” by the firestorm backlash they’re getting over the supposedly “done deal” immigration bill. Hannity said even Harry Kari Reed was suddenly feeling nervous.

I wondered: Could this possibly be true? And if it is, how unbelievably out of touch with America are those legislators for life who are purported to be “representing” us?

One of his commenters attributed it to

Isolation. With an 11-months-a-year Congress, they spend all their time in D.C. The whole time they’re there, they get their news from The New York Times, The Washington Post, and the four TV networks. And the only people they talk to are their staffers, other congress-critters, bureaucrats, and lobbyists.

Back before air conditioning, Congress used to take August (and most of July) off. Everybody went back to their districts, and had to live with (and answer to) their constituents for a month or so. Now they only get home for fund-raising, which by its nature limits their contacts to people who already agree with them.

And there’s another factor. Today nearly all Senators and many House members can be described as “very wealthy.” The high percentage of rich people (some very rich) is a significant change from 50 years ago. When “very wealthy” people return home, it’s to the country clubs and gated communities. Even in the red states, the circles Congresspeople move in tend to be internationalist and fuzzy-liberal. And the only “average citizens” they’re likely to encounter are the illegal aliens who do the lawn mowing.

Heres’s what Ted Kennedy said in the Washington Post story

“Our plan is a compromise. It involved give-and-take in the best traditions of the United States Senate. For each of us who crafted it, there are elements that we strongly support and elements we believe could be improved. No one believes this is a perfect bill,” said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (Mass.), the deal’s chief Democratic architect. “The world is watching to see how we respond to the current crisis. Let’s not disappoint them.”

In fact the tendency of (generally Republican) Senators to roll over for the other party in the name of collegiality isn’t one of the “best traditions of the United States Senate. “ It’s one of the worst. Not for the first time, it’s important to remember this story:

“IN AMERICA, WE have a two-party system,” a Republican congressional staffer is supposed to have told a visiting group of Russian legislators some years ago.

“There is the stupid party. And there is the evil party. I am proud to be a member of the stupid party.”

He added: “Periodically, the two parties get together and do something that is both stupid and evil. This is called—bipartisanship.”

The Washington Post’s Dana Milbank has a long history of mindlessly hating Sen. Jeff Sessions for paying close attention to the contents of immigration bills. In this year’s model, [On Behalf of the 'American People' , May 22, 2007] Milbank can’t think of anything substantive to say against Sessions, so he simply turns the Snark Level to eleven and produces a column that even Maureen Dowd would have been humiliated to have written.

One of the more annoying aspects of watching C-SPAN today was listening to one Senator after another bloviate about his immigrant ancestors. “What about your descendants?” I wanted to ask. “What impact will this bill have on them?”

Of course, that’s a stupid question. They’ll be all right, Jack. Grandpa was a U.S. Senator. No plebeian worries for them.