John Hawkins at RightWingNews.com credits Senator Jim DeMint [R. South Carolina] with stopping the immigration bill. But here’s why the Republicans who did vote in favor of amnesty did so, according to a source close to the Senate Republicans.

I also asked my source why he thought so many Republicans had been supporting such an incredibly unpopular bill. He gave three reasons:

First off, there was what he referred to as the “Rovian School of thought,” which says that passing this bill would capture the Hispanic vote for the GOP for decades to come.

Next up, there’s the “Chamber of Commerce” vote. He says these Republicans were heavily influenced by business groups that want cheap labor no matter what the cost is for the rest of the country.

Then there was the last group, the smallest group in his opinion, who were willing to sign onto a terrible bill just so they could say they were part of a big reform that had bipartisan support.The Inside Story Of How The Senate Immigration Bill Died - Right Wing News (Conservative News and Views)

This is Hewitt and Steyn talking about the cloture vote before it happens, with clips of Trent Lott. (You may be able to listen to it online here.) Part of the reason I insist on posting it here is that the transcriber wrote “debark last November,” for “debacle last November,” but they don’t have my experience interpreting unassimilated British accents. The “debacle last November” is what happened to the Republican Majority when George Bush got hold of it.

Hugh Hewitt: It is also a day that will go down in legislative infamy. It appears that we are only hours away before cloture is agreed to on the immigration bill, despite the obvious desires of the party. I based that on statements made by Trent Lott earlier today. To discuss those statements, the bill, and just generally what is going on in this country, Columnist To the World, Mark Steyn, joins me, www.steynonline.com. Mark, it appears as thought Senate Republicans are intent on taking the party over the cliff.

Mark Steyn: I think that’s true. I think in fact, people like Trent Lott are in large part responsible for the debacle last November, in that he embodies, both in his generally witless remarks, but also in the idea that he forms part of this permanent governing class, everything that he Republican base came to loathe about the Republican Congress. And speaking about republicanism in the small R sense now, I think what they’re trying to with this bill would, is actually an abomination in terms of small R republican government. This is simply not the way you citizen legislators pass responsible, wide-ranging, profoundly expensive and transformative legislation.Mark Steyn dissects Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott’s floor speech today on the immigration bill, Hugh Hewitt Show, June 7, 2006

But here are couple of other points that echo what we’ve been saying at VDARE.com:

Mark Steyn: But in this situation, you have a situation where both parties in a two-party system are at odds with the vast majority of the American public. And if bipartisanship means that the two parties agree to gang up on the citizenry of this country, then I’d rather have none of it.

Amen.

The bipartisanship gets really deep and steaming when Trent Lott starts thanking Senator Kennedy for “educating” him on this issue:

Trent Lott: Senator Kennedy, I appreciate the legislative leadership you have been providing. I know it is not easy, you know, and your own colleagues and those of us over here have been beating you up. I mean, your a nice poster child. Thank you very much for what you do. But I’ll tell you one thing I have learned the hard way. When it comes to legislating, when you are dealing with Senator Kennedy, you had better bring your lunch, because you are going to get educated, you are going to learn a lot, and you are going to get a result. Hopefully it is going to be a good one. Good luck, senator from Massachusetts. I yield the floor.

Teddy Kennedy: And the senator too. I thank my friend from Mississippi, and I commend him for a constructive and a positive attitude.

Of course, he wasn’t elected by the people in Mississippi to have a constructive and a positive attitude towards Ted Kennedy. You really should read, and/or listen to the whole thing.

Mickey Kaus:

Second, the bill did not fail after Dorgan’s “killer” amendment. It failed on an ordinary cloture vote, in which all parties had been clearly warned by Reid that failure would mean withdrawal of the bill. Yet it couldn’t even muster a majority, let alone 60 senators. Why did a bipartisan majority effectively vote to bury the bill? The Hill s Manu Raju offers an explanation that’s more sophisticated and plausible than Murray’s Disgruntled Saboteur theory:

That’s how the Senate works, no? It excels in providing opportunities for lawmakers to engineer stalemates that kill legislation a majority wants killed while diffusing responsibility for doing so (or allowing reporters to blame “disgruntled” loners). …

Failure was an option! - By Mickey Kaus - Slate Magazine

George Borjas:

Before pouring the champagne, the opposition needs to realize that the bill, though badly battered, is still not dead. The ideas and forces represented therein are like the villain from a bad horror movie that will not die even when a stake is driven through its heart (for some reason, the grand bargain reminds me of Samara from The Ring). The thirst for cheap labor continues unabated and that alone is enough to keep this issue alive.

Maybe now is a good time to look back and daydream: what could a more competent administration have proposed to get us out of our current mess?The Borjas Blog: Kill Bill

I hadn’t seen this, (it was published on Tuesday–these are the “Conservatives” who wanted to pass amnesty.

Conservatives: We must band together on immigration bill | Dallas Morning News

June 5, 2007

The choice we face on immigration isn’t between the Senate bill and perfection; it’s between the Senate bill and the unacceptable status quo.

This is the most far-reaching and thoughtful reform of our immigration system in four decades and one that will significantly enhance American competitiveness. As with any political compromise, improvements can be made. But the basic framework is one that conservatives should support. Indeed, for conservatives who opposed last year’s immigration bill, this package represents a step forward.

And more sickening excuses, along with the idea that amnesty would help gain control of the borders, that the fence would really be built, et cetera.

What’s fun with this kind of open letter is to go down the list of signers and make fun of them.

• Jack Kemp, who thinks that when George Washington said that the United States should be an asylum for the “virtuous and persecuted part of mankind,” he was talking about Mexican illegals.
• Linda Chavez
• Ken Mehlman who lost his job to a guy named Martinez.
• Jeb Bush, father of George P. Bush, whose mother told him ” We have to fight for our race.”
• Hector Barreto, chairman of The Latino Coalition, Bush administration hack, and holder of the Order Of The Aztec Eagle. [PDF]
• Max Boot, who wants to recruit an American Foreign Legion.
• Michael Gerson, “Mr. Compassionate Conservatism, ” last seen attacking “nativists” in the Washington Post for their “rage” and “national chauvinism,” (or patriotism, as it’s known outside the Beltway.)
• Some guy named Pancho.

Oh, and Tamar Jacoby signed it, too. That’s really reassuring.

First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win.”-Mahatma Gandhi

How sweet it is to have reached Gandhi’s final stage–winning.

In a delicious triumph, on Thursday the Senate defeated cloture twice–not once but twice!–to kill the horrible Amnesty/Immigration Surge bill S.1348.

For now. You can never rule immigration enthusiasts out.

But, assessing the damage and chaos around him, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said:

“We are finished with this for the time being.”

[Immigrant Bill, Short 15 Votes, Stalls in the Senate, By Carl Hulse and Robert Pear, New York Times, June 8, 2007]

Reid did allow for the possibility that the bill could be brought up later in the year. And other proponents like Senators Arlen Specter and Teddy Kennedy held out hope that they could revive the amnesty legislation.

But, S. 1348 is down and perhaps completely out. Down with it went all its hateful supporters including but not limited to, John McCain, Dianne Feinstein and Lindsey Graham. The list of names is much longer and they’re all, unfortunately, well known to you.

The pro-amnesty ethnic identity lobbyists–also familiar to you–are licking their wounds and wondering what happened to their well-laid plans.

What happened is that the voice of the American people and common sense prevailed. Look for more of the same in future.

And best of all, the weasel in the White House took it on the chops. Bush has been a bad actor and our worst enemy on immigration since he set foot into the Oval Office.

Studied closely, Gandhi’s words sum up the history immigration reform movement…immigration reform, that is, as defined by we the good guys.

The dogfight against the U.S. Senate from which we just emerged was, believe it or not, exactly where we needed to be.

No way could we prevail without first enduring a toe-to-toe battle with the evil forces lined up against us.

And we were poised for victory because we had all already overcome the obstacles to it identified by Gandhi

We have been ignored, ridiculed and fought against. We not only survived it all but we emerged healthier and better prepared to lock horns with our many enemies.

Look at the evolution of immigration reform.

About ten years ago, when I was the Media Director of Californians for Population Stabilization, a group of us brainstormed about how we could get illegal immigration and its consequences into the national press spotlight.

We recognized that an illegal alien tsunami was bearing down on California. The seeds for still more illegal immigration had already been sown. And it didn’t take a genius to project that the alien invasion would soon spread across the nation.

Even though we were eventually proven 100 percent correct, we were completely ignored.

But look at us now! We’re on the front page, above the fold every day. Each night, we’re the lead story on the network news. And get a load of this: immigration reform is, according to the New York Times, of more interest to the public than sex! Our friend Mickey Kaus made this startling but curiously comforting discovery last week.

Everyone in America–or so it seems–knows about illegal immigration. Most sympathize with our position.

God knows we’ve been ridiculed although quite unimaginatively. We’re routinely called nativists, racists, xenophobes, and much worse. Every four-letter word has been used to describe our dedication to our cause. We’ve been cussed out in both English and Spanish.

The net effect: water off a duck’s back. Actually encouraged by the dim-wittedness of our opponents, we’ve pressed on.

And have we been fought or what?

The most imposing heavyweight we’ve entered the ring with is none other than President Bush. In numerous speeches, Bush has either directly stated that opponents to his “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” bill are un-American or has strongly implied as much.

When the President of the United States calls us un-American, as Bush consistently has since 2001, because of our concerns about illegal immigration, that’s strong stuff. But let’s take comfort in my father’s advice regarding name calling: consider the source!

From the Democratic side, Senate Majority leader Harry Reid, once an amateur boxer, has also thrown some foul blows our way. The worst insult Reid leveled against us was when he called illegal aliens “undocumented Americans”.

As Americans, I’m sure you took great offense at that remark. I know I did. But again, what can you expect from an opportunist like Reid?

Hard to believe though it is, Reid not that long ago was on our side on immigration reform. Now, sadly, he has turned coat.

Our victory came as no surprise to me.

Worth noting is that the bad guys-our open borders adversaries-haven’t won a major immigration reform battle against us in years. We beat their pants off last year during the S. 2611 fuss.

What happened to the Dream Act and AgJobs? Neither went anywhere.

And do you remember 245i–the rolling amnesty by which people could enter the U.S. illegally, then, after paying a modest fine, be allowed to apply for a green card.

That thorn in our side was scuttled in 2002.

(For a complete run down of the amnesties turned back in recent years, see this link to NumbersUSA.Com.)

Sadly, we will have to fight again another day. As Kennedy said:

“The vote was obviously a big disappointment, but it makes no sense to fold our tent, and I certainly don’t intend to.”

To borrow a phrase from Tony Soprano, “this thing of ours” never goes away.

Of course, these have all been defensive battles. We still have to move onto the offensive–and eventually tackle the ultimate problem, legal immigration, hopefully with a moratorium.

But we’re certainly better positioned than ever. And momentum is on our side.

Winning them one at a time is energizing. And, after all the effort that we have expended, it feels so good!

“Fragile, bipartisan” is the phrase that keeps being applied to the Senate Sellout. See Google News for 39 uses of the phrase as of now, and see, for example this May 31, Patrick Cleburne story, where he quotes a Salt Lake City Tribune reporter using it, and this AP story about the failure of the cloture vote:

Immigration Bill in Limbo

Thursday June 7, 2007 By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS

Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - A fragile bipartisan compromise that would legalize millions of unlawful immigrants suffered a setback Thursday when it failed a test vote in the Senate, leaving its prospects uncertain.

Let me explain what those two adjectives mean: “fragile” means no-one really wants this bill, and both parties are afraid of being blamed for it.

Bipartisan means this:

“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.”

Believe me, voters don’t want bipartisanship. Bipartisanship amounts to a conspiracy of the politicians against the electorate, well over half of whom are against the Senate Sellout.

If voters wanted to be ruled by politicians who were loyal neither to their party nor their country, John McCain would have been President years ago.

Yesterday’s second and most crucial cloture vote in the Senate to ramrod through the Kennedy-Bush amnesty bill not only failed to get the required 60 votes, it lost outright, 45-50! It’s not quite dead, but it’s comatose.

GOP Senators voted 7-38 against cloture, Democrats 38-12 for. Republicans voting for cloture (i.e., for the bill) were Graham, Hagel, Lugar, Martinez, McCain, Specter, and Voinovich.

Last year, an even worse bill passed the Senate 62-36. And since then, the Democrats took control of the Senate. So, we are making sizable progress in mobilizing public opinion.

Thank God for the Internet and talk radio. Back on Monday, the Washington Post tried to sleaze the Kennedy-Bush bill through by running a wholly biased frontpage article in order to whip up a false sense of momentum:

Backers of Immigration Bill More Optimistic
Lawmakers Cite Sense of Urgency
By Jonathan Weisman Washington Post
June 4, 2007

After a week at home with their constituents, the Senate architects of a delicate immigration compromise are increasingly convinced that they will hold together this week to pass an overhaul of the nation’s immigration laws, with momentum building behind one unifying theme: Today’s immigration system is too broken to go unaddressed.

Funny how they didn’t cite any opponents of amnesty in the article agreeing with its contention … That the public was telling the Senate that this bill would make the system worse was not for Washington to hear.

The Washington Post is beside itself that the public shot down its plan to push through an enormous amnesty bill concocted in Senator Kennedy’s Red Bull-filled room without even holding hearings. Dan Balz, a Washington Post “reporter,” spins madly:

But to those far removed from the backrooms of Capitol Hill, what happened will fuel cynicism toward a political system that appears incapable of finding ways to resolve the nation’s big challenges.

If Washington cannot produce a solution to the glaring problem of immigration, they will ask, what hope is there for progress on health care, energy independence, or the financial challenges facing Medicare and Social Security? Iraq is another matter entirely.

Voters wanted an immigration deal, Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) acknowledged as he pulled the measure after 9 last night: “The problem was on the inside of this Senate chamber.”

Isn’t it about time that the Washington Post fire their pollsters and hire somebody (e.g., Scott Rasmussen) who won’t rig the questions to provide the answers the Establishment wants to hear?

The collective failure of the two parties already appears to have stimulated interest in a third-party candidate for president in 2008 whose main promise would be to make Washington work. It is far too early to assess the viability of such a candidate, but it is easy to imagine the immigration impasse finding its way into a television commercial if someone such as New York City Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg decides to run.

Is there a better example of the reality distortion field that surrounds Washington than this? The public just punched through the bubble and told the crowned heads of Washington that they can’t have their amnesty … and this insider thinks that’s a good omen for billionaire Bloomberg to run on a third party ticket on a pro-amnesty platform! Here’s a way Bloomberg can simultaneously save a billion dollars in campaign spending and avoid humiliation: don’t.

Now, having (apparently) dodged this bullet, we’ve got to actually accomplish something …

Vision Forum Ministries is hosting a big Jamestown celebration (yes, a celebration, not just a commemoration), in the Jamestown/Williamsburg/Yorktown triangle. It’s scheduled for June 11th-16th and is entitled “The Jamestown Quadricentennial- A Celebration of America’s Providential History - 1607-2007″ and it looks like quite a get-together.

The celebration includes history tours, boat and balloon rides, dramatic reenactments, colonial firearms demonstrations and speeches. You can read about it here.I’m unable to attend, glad that Vision Forum is celebrating Jamestown and making a real celebration out of it.