Babalu raises some excellent points about Anglo liberal hypocrisy (and, for that matter, Latino liberal hypocrisy) in the way that they’re praising language from an Anglo liberal that would have them up in arms if it had come from a conservative one. But I’d like to note something that Dana Millbank very carefully did not, when attacking Republican relationship towards Latinos: oddly enough, this supposedly hostile attitude does not seem to extend to the former not electing select members of the latter in statewide races.
Seriously, if you’re an ambitious Latino-American with an interest in politics, consider your practical options. The Democratic party has a model, which is much the same as the model that they have for African-American politicians: create racially gerrymandered seats in the various legislatures, find a suitably pliant candidate that will vote properly for twenty, thirty years… and that’s pretty much where it ends. The Republican party has a model, too: elect as conservative a candidate as possible in district and state-wide races, and never mind hist/her skin color or ethnicity*. I have to say, there seems to be more upward mobility in the latter party for the man or woman of talents…
*And we do that, too. Ask yourself how well a Democratic Marco Rubio would have done if he had dared challenge a then-popular Anglo Democratic governor for the Senate primary. Spoiler: badly.