| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| VDH on the Messy Politics of Illegal Immigration |
| 2008-01-18 |
| With the war in Iraq politically on the backburner, illegal immigration is heating up as a campaign issue. The public wants action, and the candidates are scrambling to react. Sen. Hillary Clinton's sure nomination was first questioned when she flubbed an easy debate question about driver's licenses for illegal aliens. Sen. John McCain's recovery took off when he backed away from his support of immigration reform that did not first ensure the closure of the border. Former Mayor Rudy Giuliani is no longer for "sanctuary cities" that shield illegal aliens from arrest. Like former Gov. Mike Huckabee, he's now a born-again opponent of illegal immigration. Former Gov. Mitt Romney assures us that some illegal aliens can be deported within 90 days after he's elected. Sen. Barack Obama may talk of "change," but his relative fuzziness about illegal immigration can't last forever, and at some point he will have to offer more specific proposals. Some time ago, supporters of open borders lost the debate. The majority of Americans want them closed — now! They ignore the tired slurs like "anti-immigrant," "racist," "protectionist" and "nativist." And noisy May Day parades with Mexican flags and heated rhetoric from the National Council of La Raza ("The Race") only turn more people off. It doesn't do any good, either, for a Mexico City functionary to cry about how mean we are to want a secure border with Mexico. Most Americans also tuned that out long ago. They know instead that Mexico cares mostly about sending north those it won't or can't feed and house — so it can skim off from them billions in remittances once they arrive in the United States. Mexico City, of course, could reform the country's laws and economy whenever it wants. But it changes only enough to draw in tourists or Americans looking to buy vacation homes, not to better the lives of millions of its mestizo poor in the heartland. The spin masters may think illegal immigration is an issue that pits conservative Republicans against liberal Democrats. But it doesn't always. Nowadays, worry about illegal immigration is just as likely to mean that African-Americans are terrified of racist alien gangs in Los Angeles. Asian-Americans are frustrated that their relatives with college degrees wait years to emigrate legally, while thousands without high-school diplomas to the south simply break the law to enter the United States. And many Mexican-Americans are probably tired of being expected to defend the indefensible of foreign nationals breaking immigration laws simply because they may share an ethnic heritage with illegal aliens. To the extent Democratic candidates ignore illegal immigration, or demonize those who worry over hundreds of thousands of new illegal aliens each year, or talk of guest workers and amnesty before they mention closing the borders, it is a losing issue that could alienate millions of voters. Democratic candidates can't really claim that redneck racists are rushing to the border to clash with poor campesinos just crossing to better their lives, because many poor Democrats also resent how illegal labor drives down their own wages. It is mostly the American poor and middle class who worry about the sudden influx of thousands who don't speak English and often need public assistance. But the Republican candidates have to watch it, too. If blanket amnesty is a losing issue, so also is mass deportation — the practicality and morality of which are rarely considered by those rightly calling for an end to illegal immigration. Busing every illegal alien back to Mexico right now might resemble the past messy partition of India and Pakistan, and reopen the issue in a way that Democrats can legitimately exploit. What then might an astute candidate advocate? Close the border now through fencing, more agents, employer sanctions, enforcement of the law and verifiable identification. Restore faith in the melting pot by insisting that new legal arrivals learn English and the customs and protocols of the United States. Explain to the Mexican and Central American governments that using the United States to avoid addressing internal problems — while making easy dollars off the backs of their own expatriate laborers — is over. Finally, deport aliens who have broken the law, are not working or have just arrived. Some illegal aliens will not like the new atmosphere of tough enforcement and will voluntarily go back home. Others may have criminal records or no history of employment and should leave as well. But many millions of law-abiding, employed illegal aliens of long residence will wish to stay. We should allow these to remain in the United States while they apply for citizenship — if they are willing to learn promptly our language and customs. Republican candidates must risk angering their base by ruling out mass deportation. Democrats should support closing the border tightly and quickly — and not cave in to open-borders pressure groups. Making these tough choices now is what most voters want. The candidates of both parties in the next few months will either adjust accordingly or lose elections. |
| Posted by:Bobby |
| #15 Many illegals will self-deport if Real ID is implemented and they can't work or get benefits. There is also a new law proposed by a Republican congressman to allow employers to fire them if their English isn't up to par to do the job without penalizing employers with additional unemployment taxes for doing so. And if they required deported families to take their anchor babies with them, giving social services and health care to citizens only, they would have no incentive to come here. |
| Posted by: Danielle 2008-01-18 17:11 |
| #14 I disagree Depotguy. I'm in favor of the silly notion. We could deport millions. Probably not 10-12 million in one yr but incrementally over time as infrastructure in ICE and other agencies develop along w/other means at coercing self-deportation. It would be messy, and all the pc rhetoric from the leftards about "brown-shirts" sweeping up hard working illegals and their anchor babies in the dead of night would be nauseating to those of us who see the big picure of what national sovereingty really means - but it can be done. Many in our country & especially the political pukes in congress lack the will - pure and simple. The left wants the future shamnesty illegal vote based on future handouts from our tax $$$ and the big-biz rinos want the cheap non-union labor. There is nothing immoral about re-patriating illegal aliens to their country of origin - that's what were supposed to do according to our own damn laws. Our politicos are playing both sides of the fence (no pun intended). I don't trust McCain on this issue one bit. He has enough of a questionable voting record on other non-immigration issuse as it is. |
| Posted by: Broadhead6 2008-01-18 16:05 |
| #13 Come to California, lotp. Visit our schools and our hospital emergency rooms. Have lunch at a Jack in the Box or McDonalds. Even in the nicest restaurants you find that all of the busboys and kitchen help are from Mexico. The maids in your hotel will be from Mexico. Drive by a construction site and listen to the ranchero music. This is not hyperbole. These are things that I see every day. In my first job as a teenager I was a busboy but white boys need not apply these days. My wife's first job as a college student was as a maid in a hotel but white girls need not apply these days. Even in the nicest neighborhoods, check out all the guys with leaf blowers. When I was a kid we mowed our own lawns and swept our own driveways. Not anymore. American boys on bicycles used to deliver the newspapers. These days it's a guy named Jose in a pickup truck. Do NOT tell my I'm a racist either. I went to school with Mexican-Americans. I was friends with them. I hung out with them. Now I work with them every day. But they are US citizens. The people I'm talking about are not. The people I'm talking about are citizens of Mexico who broke the law to get here. They are not interested in assimilating. They do not respect our culture. They will not learn English. Bit by bit we are losing this country with a so called conservative at the helm. I will ask again: What good does it do to win the WOT if we forfeit our sovereignty to Mexico? Then go to Costco, WalMart, or even Macys or Nordstroms and try to find a pair of shoes or a shirt that isn't made in China. Hell, they're even selling surfboards that were made in China at Costco. It's an abomination. The Chicoms don't need our military secrets because they already have our money. As for Iran and Pakistan, I don't see Bush doing much about them either. There may be things going on behinds the scenes of which I am not aware but the overall outcome doesn't seem to be in our favor these days. Yeah, Kennedy was wrong when he called Iraq a quagmire. The real quagmire is Afghanistan. There is an old saying about fighting an insurgency like we have in Afghanistan: "If you're not winning, you're losing." We are not winning. If we were the insurgency would have ended years ago. We will never win unless we take it to Pakistan. Obama has said that he would do that. Fred Thompson might. I wish he would get the chance but I'm losing hope. I have no idea what McCain would do and I wouldn't believe him if he told us. |
| Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305 2008-01-18 14:03 |
| #12 Just like the Kennedys. I'd rather suffer through four years with Obama in the White House. Maybe after that this country will be ready for a true conservative and a true patriot. If we haven't totally dismantled our military, enabled nuclear Iran, set up the Taliban in power in Pakistan (openly) and given away any remaining military technologies to China by then. |
| Posted by: lotp 2008-01-18 12:38 |
| #11 Tell me about, Woozle. I live it every day and you are exactly right. If Republicans nominate McCain they deserve to lose the White House. I will NOT, under any circumstances, vote for McCain. You can talk about security and the WOT all you want. I don't feel secure with that border wide open and right now that's what it is. What good does it do to win the WOT if we're sold out to China, overrun by Mexicans and spending all our money on oil? McCain doesn't understand the WOT anyway. He was one of the first to jump on board when Clinton bombed the Serbians who have been fighting the WOT for centuries. I don't trust McCain. I don't believe a word he says because I've been watching him long enough and his actions speak louder than his words. He has sold his soul to people who do not have my best interests at heart. Just like the Bushes. Just like the Clintons. Just like the Kennedys. I'd rather suffer through four years with Obama in the White House. Maybe after that this country will be ready for a true conservative and a true patriot. |
| Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305 2008-01-18 12:04 |
| #10 This is the only way the Pubs can capture WH. And only Fred and Tancredo and Hunter have been solid on this issue. Romney and Huckleberry are only spouting what they hear as they travel around. However, they don't mean it. McCain still insists he's correct on the open borders issue. Why do Arizonans allow 2 US Senators to directly contradict their will ? Throw them out. Arizona, like California, is in dire straits due to illegal invasion. Their hospitals are going broke and closing. Schools are being over run. Nevada schools are being over run. If you want to see what happens after 30 years of taxpayers supporting illegals, look at California. Has over $40 billion in bonded borrowing. Runs $14 billion debt each year in operating costs. LA county in 80's had something like 86 emergency rooms available. It has 28 now. Hospitals can't operate by giving away services for free continually. Schools constantly are short of funds(supposedly), with LAUSD completely disfunctional and some districts run so badly that the state has had to come in and take over. |
| Posted by: Woozle Elmeter 2907 2008-01-18 10:28 |
| #9 “Republican candidates must risk angering their base by ruling out mass deportation.” Exactly which viable candidate is advocating “mass deportation”? Answer: None. Even Tancredo repeatedly denounced this silly false choice scenario. Furthermore, the assertion that the Republican “base” is in favor of such a notion is, in itself, an obvious straw-man argument. Morality aside, the practicality aspect of bulk extradition renders it impossible. However, if you want to isolate the real amnesty provisions in any future legislation it will be how those convicted of identity theft or document forgery will be treated. |
| Posted by: DepotGuy 2008-01-18 10:26 |
| #8 We, the people of the United States, are our own last, best hopes. The candidates are just appealing for our support. |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2008-01-18 10:09 |
| #7 Fred is the last, best hope. |
| Posted by: Excalibur 2008-01-18 09:52 |
| #6 Well, at least David Limbaugh is supporting Fred. |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2008-01-18 09:17 |
| #5 No kidding Spook. Thompson is almost invisible and only a win in SC will force the press to say something about him. I fear the Republican party will be the RINO party for the next election cycle. |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2008-01-18 09:13 |
| #4 Why didn't VDH mention Fred? The positions VDH puts there at the end are EXACTLY what THompson proposed back in APRIL of last year. Dammit! Thompson still appears to be invisdible to media. Our one best hope for true conservatives, and even the conservative press ignores him. This is so furstratiing - I see a disaster for conservatives looming, I know how to prevent it but noboby is listening. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2008-01-18 08:42 |
| #3 Sorry for the dupes. "Preview" & "Submit Query" sent me in the outer reaches of the internet. |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2008-01-18 07:33 |
| #2 McCain "backed away from his support of immigration reform that did not first ensure the closure of the border"? I couldn't find it in this video news article, filmed on 14 Jan 2008. He was equivocal at best. His audience was far clearer. |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2008-01-18 07:32 |
| #1 McCain "backed away from his support of immigration reform that did not first ensure the closure of the border"? I couldn't find it in this news article, filmed on 14 Jan 2008: |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2008-01-18 07:28 |