It would be impolitic to actually come out for Illegals. That's why phrases like "undocumentated workers," and "migrants" are often used.
Look, I know you ladies like the President. I do too. And I know you think he has the best of intentions regarding Illegals. I do too.
Unfortuanately, I believe his intentions, however well-meaning, are dead wrong.
I'm not going to persuade you this evening, but let me tell you why I think so.
President Bush has a long record of being wrong on Illegals, going back to 1994, when he took time out from his first gubernatorial campaign to join the more pubicized statements of Jack Kemp and William Bennett in condemning Prop #187. In doing so, he helped paint Republicans who are anti-Illegal as anti-immigrant. Many Californias remember what these three did, and we don't appreciate it.
Prior to 9/11, President Bush was in active negotiations with Vicente Fox to "normalize" over 3 million Mexican Illegals. He couldn't call it Amnesty because, even then, Americans wouldn't stand for it, most of you included. After 9/11, things went on the back burner, but the President made it clear he intended to press forward with Amnesties when he had a rider attatched to the Homeland Security bill that would have again extended Bill Clinton's Section 245(i) Amnesty.
The extension died in the Senate when it was killed by Robert Byrd, of all people. So the Homeland Security bill landed on Bush's desk without it. He said at the time that he regretted signing it without Section 245(i). There is no reason to believe he has changed his mind in this.
If 9/11 didn't wake Bush up on Illegals, how would the likes Robert Byrd?
The Administration has not issued one unambiguous statement indicating any seriousness on dealing with Illegals. Every scrap of progress made in the last year has been exclusively WoT-related.
The Republican National Committee offers issue questionairres that omit immigration as a topic of concern. It is the elephant in the room this election. The INS routinely lets Illegals go free in publicized cases, with no response from the White House.
All circumstances point to a calculated silence from the President on this matter, as he is aware of how unpopular his views truly are. That is the simplest and the best explanation for his words and deeds.
What of Vicente Fox's publicized "snub" of President Bush over a Texas execution of a Mexican national last August?
My cynical view is that Bush couldn't give Fox what he wanted on "normalization" of Mexican Illegals just prior to the election, and Fox couldn't afford to come home empty-handed. I believe the execution snub was a negotiated dodge to get both Bush and Fox off the hook.
We'll see the proof of this when they become good chums again after November. We all know how the Bush family has long political memories, and nurses grudges against those it perceives as disloyal. This snub by Fox would ordinarily make him persona non grata with the Bushes. That turns out not to be the case, as we saw yesterday. So the August snub wasn't a snub at all.
And the First Lady's comments yesterday, intended for Mexican consumption, are entirely consistent with this hypothesis.
I hope I'm wrong, and I'll be happy to eat massive crow if I am. But I'm afraid that I'm not, as we shall see.
