Posted on 11/19/2006 4:43:19 PM PST by Reagan Man
The idea is spreading that this months Republican electoral defeat somehow represented voter rejection of the enforcement-first approach to immigration championed by the House Republican leadership, and meant, instead, voter endorsement of the Bush-McCain-Kennedy approach that would amnesty (or legalize) the illegal aliens already here and double or triple future legal immigration.
This notion is so colossally wrong only a senator could believe it.
Kyl Won, DeWine Lost
Sen. Mel Martinez (R.-Fla.), that is. The presumptive general chairman of the Republican National Committee is peddling this ludicrous pro-amnesty spin, joined by a number of other politicians and journalists. Martinez told the Washington Times: I think we have to understand that the election did speak to one issue, and that was that its not about bashing people, its about presenting a hopeful face. Border security only, enforcement only, harshness only is not the message that I believe America wants to convey.
Even before the election, the pro-amnesty crowd was preparing a full-blown disinformation campaign. Immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes blamed the then-coming Republican defeat in part on Congress failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration. But imagine, Barnes wrote, if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a comprehensiveMr. Bushs wordimmigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. Theyd be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.
Newsweek columnist Fareed Zakaria was practically quivering in anticipation: The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNNs Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.
Angry band of xenophobes? Nativist diehards? Thats you and me, folks.
After Election Day, the name-calling continued. Tamar Jacoby of the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute used her entrée at the Weekly Standard to denounce far-right groups she said were motivated by xenophobia and engaging in demagoguery over this wedge issue. She sounded an awful lot like a Democrat complaining about, say, the defense of traditional marriage. The Wall Street Journal, of course, cackled at Immigration Losers and warned against following immigration controllers down the garden path of defeat.
The open-borders crowd scavenged for results they hoped would confirm their pre-packaged conclusions. A favorite was the defeat of two Republican immigration hawks running for the House in Arizona, incumbent Rep. J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, who was seeking liberal Republican Rep. Jim Kolbes seat. The problem with pointing to these results as proof of the publics support for the Bush-McCain-Kennedy comprehensive amnesty plan is that the very same voters overwhelmingly approved four good ballot measures related to immigration: denying bail to illegals, barring illegals from winning punitive damages in civil suits, prohibiting illegals from receiving certain state subsidies for education and day care, and declaring English the states official language. Clearly, the actual policy issue of immigration control remained hugely popular and, while Hayworths opponent endorsed a guest-worker program, he explicitly said on his campaign website, Secure Our Border and Stop Illegal Immigration, Hold employers accountable for whom they hire, and, I oppose amnesty and will not support it. Hardly a Bush echo.
Searching elsewhere for some ammunition, amnesty proponents pointed to the defeats in Colorado of Republican gubernatorial candidate Bob Beauprez and Republican House aspirant Rick ODonnell as proof that the public is with them. What they dont mention is that Colorado voters approved two tough initiatives: one to deny the tax deductibility of wages paid to illegals and another requiring the states attorney general to sue the federal government over non-enforcement of the immigration laws.
In the anti-Republican storm, both hawks and doves were affected. Immigration-control stalwarts such as Republican Rep. John Hostettler of Indiana were washed away, but so was Republican Senate amnesty co-sponsor Mike DeWine of Ohio. On the other hand, nationally known immigration hawks such as Republican Representatives Tom Tancredo of Colorado and Jim Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin enjoyed easy re-election, as did Republican Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, an immigration dove.
The pro-amnesty crowd has yet to explain why, if the public is with them, no candidates made a main part of their campaigns their support for legalizing illegal aliens and admitting millions of additional foreign workers. The only exception was Jim Pederson, the Democrat running against Republican Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona. Pederson not only championed the Presidents amnesty/guest-worker plan, but lauded the 1986 amnesty disaster as well. Unsurprisingly, he was defeated.
Some smarterwinningDemocrats actually had very tough immigration positions, explicitly endorsing an enforcement-first approach. For instance, Brad Ellsworth (who defeated Hostettler in Indiana) said: We need to tighten our borders, enforce the laws we have and punish employers who break them. Sen.-elect Claire McCaskill of Missouri expressed similar views, as did Sen.-elect Jon Tester of Montana and Jason Altmire, who was elected to the House from Pennsylvania.
Regardless of the facts, if the amnesty mandate myth takes root, the consequences could be dire. Were already seeing its effects, with President Bushs saying the day after the election that immigration is an area where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats. Martinezs selection as RNC chairman is particularly disturbing in this context, because he didnt just vote for the Senate amnesty, he actually wrote the final version. His Hagel-Martinez bill (S 2611) passed in May, despite the opposition of a majority of his fellow Republicans in the Senateand it was dismissed out of hand by virtually all House Republicans.
Preventing the acceptance of the open-border crowds fairy-tale version of the election is imperativeboth to stymie next years Bush/Democrat efforts to pass the amnesty and to preserving opportunities for future Congresses and Presidents to actually address this pressing issue in a constructive fashion.
That's good news if it turns out to be true. But I suspect the reason for backing off now has more to do with not wanting to give Bush the credit for an amnesty, they'd much rather prefer to wait until Hillary's in to pull off their scam.
The leftist press would believably paint it as akin to a holocaust, and whatever party wrote the laws would be in deep caca.
1. Half the problem are libertarians, neoconservatives, and the country clubbers using the same language and giving the left cover.
2. The left will scream about anything we do.
Bush wants amnesty, the Democrats are supporting welfare for illegals. We still lose!
Therefore, it ain't going to happen nationwide. Get over it, and spend your energy encuraging assimilation. This country was the melting pot of the world for centuries, and I'm amazed that conservatives have surrendered to the idea that assimilation is now impossible.
Assimilation did not just occur.
It happened because every other generation we restricted immigration. We also created an education system to promote assimilation.
Today we have an education system promoting ethnic seperatism and you want to increase the number of people comming in? Shall we be forced to allow in another 50 million in the next 25 years?
That is precisely the problem. I grew up in New York City, and the entire education system there, up until the 1970s, was directed at assimilation - and it worked. It wasn't painless and seamless, but people ended up with enough in common to understand each other and their kids had enough background to get ahead in the US.
I believe Bush's plan called for programs to encourage assimilation, but that's pretty useless at the federal level. I think folks should get out there and work on their local school boards. Threaten to cut off the money unless they stop the multi-cult trash and start teaching things like English, real American history, etc., to everyone, regardless of where they or their parents were born. I think you'd be surprised by how many immigrants would join you. They came here to get ahead, not be trapped in a Dem immigrant ghetto.
The 1960's radicals had a different perspective. For them everything was about race class and gender. Having no experience in actual poverty they had no respect for education as a tool for betterment. Rather pedagogy was ideology. Therefor they had no problem breaking things apart along racial lines and telling kids to be "authentically" ignorant. It was all about immediate radicallization.
This was Old Left vs New Left and in New York, Jew vs Black.
This was not somethings I hold as a role model.
Many were themselves first or second generation Jewish or Irish Americans for whom a proper education was the ticket out of a slum.
What's wrong with that? Isn't that what we want people to do? Get an education and get ahead?
What an excellent point! We could ask Dane why he's so FOR a guest worker program when President Bush pushes it and so AGAINST Pelosi doing the exact same thing, but, as you will see by the lack of response to your post, Dane doesn't answer questions....unless of course, it's with another question.
Exactly! That is why so many of us are so upset about Mexico over running America. It SHOULD be a melting pot, with a variety of immigrants as in the past (Africa, China, Europe). What the heck makes Mexico think they have a right to come here without following the same rules everyone else in the world follows? That is a question I've often asked of those supporting your side of the argument. I have yet to get an answer so why don't you tell me? Why should Mexico be allowed to just walk over the border when the rest of the decent world has millions of people who want to come here as well and are doing the right thing by coming legally? Or do you just believe in totally open immigration, no background checks and the entire world should send all their poor here? If it's good for Mexico then it should be good for the rest of the world as well?
And its a bold face lie.
But apparently not enought to reward Republicans who passed the law to build it.
That doesn't mean Americans support amnesty. They don't!
And the Republicans didn't give them amnesty. So how come the voters didn't re-elect them?
Were the people just too stupid to vote for what you claim they wanted? Or is this situation a bit more complex than you make it out to be?
When did I say I wanted 1986 all over again? You're assuming way too much.
People assume it's an easy thing to get illegals to go back to mexico, but an impossible thing to pursuade them to speak english. It's true that they won't assimilate without pursuasion, but instead of wasting your time trying to get the new Democratic Congress to pass draconian laws to send mexicans home (LOL, dream on), why aren't you spending your time at the local level getting mexicans into english class?
Yeah, they're laughing all the way to Congress. They like the status quo. More illegals every year, voting for more democrats.
Bush tried to normalize the situation and get it under control, but conservatives spit in his face and stayed home on election day.
The Dems have got to love it. They don't call Republicans the "stupid party" for nothing.
Amnesty? AMNESTY! What is it about *illegal* don't you understand? They must go now!
In this period, we would create a targeted guest worker program.
No. Enforcement now, and we'll talk about other things later. That's what J.D. was insisting on, and he's right.
Assimilation did not just occur. [/sarcasm] It happened because every other generation we restricted immigration.
There were virtually no limits on immigration 100 years ago. At the time there was a larger percentage of the population born abroad than now. We assimilated them because we 1) welcomed them to America. And 2) insisted they join the American culture and learn English.
Telling a whole class of people that they are not welcome forces them into ethnic ghettos where they will never assimilate. It's not an accident that immigrants *stopped* assimilating when we started seriously limiting immigration at the unions behest 75 years ago. You have it exactly backward.
Today we have an education system promoting ethnic seperatism
Yes. So why are you wasting time trying to keep illegals out (which won't happen), when you could be spending your time fighting the education establishment and getting rid of multiculturalism? Some educrats are beginning to get the picture. Help them see the light.
Shall we be forced to allow in another 50 million in the next 25 years?
You have (had) a choice. Let them in under a legal framework. Or let them in the way the Democrats prefer, as an underclass they can exploit. The "anti-illegal" conservatives stupidly blocked Bush from creating that legal framework when he had the chance, and now they're going to have to continue to live under the Democrats system of anarchy on the border, and disintegrating American culture. The Stupid Party strikes again.
I bet Dane remembers all the way back to last year, when there were 50 or 100 different proposals offered up. Since then conservatives have demigoged all those proposals into one word ... "amnesty", which is now an entirely meaningless word, because it can mean anything.
So maybe Dane believes as I do that there were good "amnesty" proposals, and bad "amnesty" proposals, and doesn't want the bad proposal Pelosi would surely offer over what the Republican Congress could have passed if it had any brains.
Truth has a way of doing that.
Mexico is not coming here. It's citizens are. They know they don't have a right to be here, which is why they hide in their barrios instead of assimilating in the greater American culture.
The major issues in the election go beyond just immigration. The #1 issue for Democrats and many Independents was the ongoing battle for Iraq. For conservatives the major issues were excessive spending, expansion of the welfare state bureaucracy and immigration. Basic competence in leadesrhip also played a key factor for conservatives. Not enough conservative Republicans were convinced the GOP would do anything about the issues that mattered to them. So they stayed home. The GOP simply didn't get a big enough turnout of voters to off set the growing opposition to Iraq. Conservatives cost the GOP control of Congress, and rightfully so.
There are Guest Worker programs running today. It appears noone wants to use them, it's more prosperous doing it ILLEGALLY.
That looks like a wonderful business model. Mexicans are paying a thousand or more dollars to coyotees to get them here illegally now. All you've got to do is put out your shingle in TJ and bring as many across with full papers as you can handle. You should be rich. I'll expect to see your name on the Forbes list of millionares soon.
I reckon you'll have a while to wait considering I don't help people cross the border ILLEGALLY. I can't quite figure out how you got here. Blackbird.
They're hardly hiding. They are marching in the streets. And Mexico's government is pushing their people here as evidenced by the comic book showing them how to come here illegally, public statements, their attempt to fight the fence through international law and meeting with our politicians. It's our country, not yours! Mexico will not allow anyone to come illegally through their southern border, has armed troops to prevent this, yet think they have a free pass to the US. It's funny, how can you say they are hiding? Marching by the hundreds of thousands in our very streets is hiding? You sound like a politician trying to convince people Mexico taking over is a good thing or a member of La Raza (a very racist organization).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.