Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
Not to mention Linda Chavez, who had a knockdown, drag-out quasi-interview with Laura Ingraham the other day.

It was surprising, because Chavez has seemed smart and reasonable in the past. But she pulled out all of the stops in her despicable column of 5/25, which cast most Shamnesty opponents as flat-out racists, or victims of racist propaganda.

Clearly Chavez has been assigned the ruthless hit-(wo)man’s job of casting racial accusations and insults by either her trade group cronies (see above list), or by the White House or RNC, or maybe by all of them. Because she has clearly gone off the deep end.

Among those who “just don’t like Mexicans” or any Latino are: “fewer than 10 percent of the general population... a fair number of Republican members of Congress, almost all influential conservative talk radio hosts, some cable news anchors — most prominently, Lou Dobbs — and a handful of public policy “experts” [and] fringe groups like the Minuteman Project.”

According to Chavez, all logical and reasonable concerns are but a thin veneer over our fundamental “xenophobia” (which she claims drives our “distaste” for 12 or 16 unrelated males living in a single family suburban home).

She concludes with a final repellent and wrongheaded cheapshot about Shamnesty and racism: “We’ve struggled long and hard as a nation to overcome our prejudices, enduring a Civil War and countless dead for the right to be judged by the content of our character not the color of our skin.”

Duh, sorry Linda. The Civil War was about states’ rights and the rule of law (specifically laws against secession from the Union). It was not until more than a year and a half into the war that emancipation became a goal (and emancipation was a good thing).

It is her misunderstanding of basic American history, and her blazingly transparent and aggressive personal racism, that causes Chavez to dismiss as lies and evasions our concerns about trashing the rule of law, the staggering unfairness of amnesty, and the complete laydown on national security.

3 posted on 06/03/2007 12:27:35 PM PDT by angkor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: angkor

You have to remember that Chavez was busted for having an illegal doing her housework and it cost her a Bush appointment in the first term. You don’t expect Linda to do her own house cleaning, do you?


5 posted on 06/03/2007 1:18:17 PM PDT by kittymyrib
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: angkor

VERY disappointed in Linda.

I’ve read several of her books and she always made a great deal of sense.

I was appalled by her column and her guilt-by-association application of racism to everyone with qualms about this amnesty plan.

Are there racists on the anti-amnesty side? Sure. Are there racists on the pro-amnesty side? Of course. Does either fact have any bearing whatsoever on whether the bill is a good idea? Of course not.

OTOH, I assume Linda is sincere in her opposition. Which just goes to show the extreme power of tribalism. What she views as an attack on her tribe must be definition be illegitimate.

Overall, her position just illustrates the insanity of any steps that will increase the “tribalization” of America. We desperately need a moratorium on immigration to allow assimilation to get a little bit ahead.


6 posted on 06/03/2007 1:47:01 PM PDT by Sherman Logan (Offendo ergo sum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson