The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

$35,000 a Month, Plus Expenses

Posted on | February 14, 2011 | 23 Comments

That’s what Mexico paid Republican Haley Barbour to lobby on behalf of amnesty for illegals:

According to a State Department filing by Barbour’s former lobbying firm, The Embassy of Mexico decided to retain Barbour’s services on August 15, 2001, to work on, among other things, legislation that would provide a path to citizenship for foreigners living illegally in the United States—what opponents of immigration reform call “amnesty.”
“Haley Barbour and I will lead the BG&R team,” wrote Lanny Griffith, Barbour’s former business partner, in the filing. According to subsequent filings, Barbour’s work included “building support in the legislative branch for passage of a bill related to Section 245(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.” As part of that work, Barbour’s firm arranged meetings and briefings with “Senators, members of Congress and their staffs, as well as Executive Branch Officials in the White House, National Security Council, State Department, and Immigration & Naturalization Service.” Barbour’s firm charged Mexico $35,000 a month, plus expenses.

(Via Hot Air.) That will go over real good with GOP primary voters in Iowa, I’m sure.

Bookmark and Share
Category: Election 2012, Immigration

Comments

  • Quartermaster

    Don’t think it won’t get played loud and long either. Barbour is a scum bag that we are well rid of in DC.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1385852725 Richard Mcenroe

    Do NONE of these people ever sit there and think, “You know, one day this shit has GOT to come out somewhere?”

  • Fortcww

    Well, the Iowa statists that both parties prostitute themselves for are starving children.

    Dead kids aren’t as important to our politicians as Iowa child-starving farmers votes.

    That’s, partly, what the base problem is.

  • http://twitter.com/klejdys Klejdys aka Gamblor

    Damning. A shame, because Haley is an effective speaker and a pro-liberty governor. But this effectively ends any further national aspirations – for good reason.

  • http://thatmrgguy.wordpress.com/ Mike

    Consider that he isn’t even in the running if he indeed does decide to run. Didn’t he come in last place in the CPAC straw poll?

  • Pingback: Jump onto the Barbour train at your own risk « Olliander

  • Joe

    Ouch.

    Although on the bright side, that will buy a hell of a lot of Mexican food. Even if those Iowans are driving up the cost of corn.

  • Pingback: Take Haley Barbour Off That “Presidential” Wannabe List | UNCOVERAGE.net

  • http://twitter.com/isleofyouth PhilipJames

    What we are going to find as we go forward in the Republican primary process is that every one of the “men” is tainted by more than one of these corrupt practices or worse. And, standing tall, as she always has, will be Sarah Palin…. unbowed after over 2 years of relentless attacks and smears and digging for dirt like this.
    And, I think even someone like Bachmann has not had any of her dirty laundry out in public yet, at least not under the scrutiny a Presidential run would bring.
    Sarah Palin still is the best candidate to whip Obama’s ass.

  • Joe

    Who does Barbour think he is? Powerline?

  • http://theundergroundconservative.wordpress.com The Underground Conservative

    Don’t know, but that CPAC poll is irrelevant anyway. The Roasted Paulnut won it.

  • The Wondering Jew

    Yeah this is what I’m talking about. Small government, tax and spending cutting, pro-federalist, Pro-Life, Ron Paul is somehow cast as the great enemy of conservatism and a no-hoper while corrupt D.C. Lobbyist Haley Barbour, who has sold out our country’s sovereignty, and hasn’t shown any national following whatsoever, is a legitimate candidate for the White House who deserves serious media credibility. This is the mixed up intellectual world inhabited by too many in our RINO establishment.

    Barbour is toast. There are very few single-issue disqualifiers for me, but this is one of them.

  • Anonymous

    That will go over in Iowa like a lead balloon, at least in the western half of the state. I can not speak for the Harkin half though.

  • http://www.lisagraas.com Lisa Graas

    I dunno, I can’t really put my finger on it, but there’s always just been something haleybarbourish about Haley Barbour.

  • Anonymous

    Ron Paul’s foreign policy (or lack thereof) is simply a total non-starter in our modern interconnected world. When the Founders talked about avoiding foreign entanglements, the nearest foreign country was a month’s wilderness travel away.

  • Anonymous

    A year-and-a-half before the GOP’s 2008 national convention, the conventional wisdom was that you couldn’t get the GOP’s presidential nomination unless you’re an anti-American Know-Nothing wingnut on immigration.

    A year before the GOP’s 2008 national convention, Hugh Hewitt was taking bets on when the most prominent pro-American, moderate-on-immigration non-wingnut candidate for that nomination would be shutting down his campaign.

    Whatever happened to that guy?

  • mike

    “an anti-American Know-Nothing wingnut on immigration”

    Yeah because if you don’t want Mexico dictating America’s immigration policy you’re anti-American. Wait, what?

    What is government if words have no meaning?

  • Pingback: ‘We’ll Always Have CPAC’ : The Other McCain

  • http://thecampofthesaints.org Bob Belvedere

    Short answer: NO.

  • http://thecampofthesaints.org Bob Belvedere

    You felt that too?

  • Pingback: I’ll do it for half! « The TrogloPundit

  • Anonymous

    “because if you don’t want Mexico dictating America’s immigration policy you’re anti-American.”

    No, because if you don’t want THE CONSTITUTION dictating America’s immigration policy you’re anti-American.

    And THE CONSTITUTION dictates that Congress doesn’t have fuck-all to say about immigration. Regulating immigration is not an enumerated power.

    Not only is it not an enumerated power, but one specific instance of it is specifically reserved from Congress for 20 years, and amending that reservation out is prohibited.

    Not only is it not an enumerated power, but the anti-federalists brought it up and the federalists clearly INTENTIONALLY left it out.

    Not only did the federalists clearly intentionally leave it out, but Congress acknowledged, understood and abided by that omission for more than 80 years until an activist Supreme Court “discovered” (read: manufactured from whole cloth) a federal power to regulate
    immigration.

    A law repugnant to the Constitution is void. There’s no such thing as an illegal immigrant because there’s no federal power to make immigration illegal.

  • http://therepublicanmother.blogspot.com Republicanmother

    Haley Barbour is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.
    Just sayin’

Performance Optimization WordPress Plugins by W3 EDGE