George Bush's approval ratings are at their lowest point and not, as sane people might imagine, solely because of Iraq. While the vast majority of the public think that his ego-driven war is a disaster with body bags, the thirty percent of the country who think there is no sacrifice too big for someone else to make in the war against brown people are unmoved and unmoveable. They're just a little disappointed it's not happening here.
Every time immigration is in the headlines, Bush's poll numbers go into the tank because it starts to cut into the base. I mentioned this when the supplemental won approval because i think there are also lessons to be learned here for Democrats — the wingnuts aren't blaming Democrats for the immigration bill any more than vociferous liberals are blaming Republians for the toothless supplemental.
As Tom Schaller writes in Salon:
Immigration is especially perilous for the GOP because it is what might be called a "double-edged" wedge issue. It not only pits the party's base against a large and quickly growing pool of potential new Republicans — 41 million Hispanics — but also pits two key parts of the existing base against each other. The Wall Street wing of the GOP, which finances the party, wants to keep open the spigot of pliant and cheap Spanish-speaking labor. It finds itself opposed by much of the Main Street wing, which provides millions of crucial primary and general election votes and would like to build a fence along the Mexican border as high as Lou Dobbs' ratings or the pitch of Pat Buchanan's voice. And it's simply impossible for any political party to win if it has to choose between money and votes.
This is especially interesting because, as Schaller notes, what we are watching play out with Bush and the base is Karl Rove's worst nightmare:
Why have Republicans found themselves on the point of this wedge? Because in the two decades since the last major immigration measure, the makeup of the national Republican Party and the demography of the country have both changed dramatically. In 1986, radio talkers like Limbaugh could not harness the power of millions of devoted daily listeners to bring national Republican political figures to heel, and the Hispanic vote share was negligible. Twenty years later, Limbaugh is the most popular talk radio host in America, and there are millions of Spanish-speaking immigrants living alongside Rush's listeners in the kinds of red states where Spanish was rarely heard before. At the same time, the Latino vote has grown to 10 million. The GOP is now forced to choose between its reliable base of close-the-border, English-only cultural whites and the rapidly growing bloc of swing-voting Hispanics.
The demographic winds explain why Karl Rove has been obsessed with corralling the Hispanic vote since he was the little-known sidekick of a would-be Texas governor. He made George Bush a uniquely successful candidate among Latino voters in both state and federal elections by embracing Hispanic culture and avoiding any whiff of anti-immigrant rhetoric. After Bush won a startling 40 percent of the Hispanic votes in 2004, double the GOP total from a decade earlier, the Democrats rightly panicked. The conventional wisdom among pollsters like Republican Matt Dowd — a former Democrat who admits he was attracted to Bush precisely because of the then-Texas governor's views about Hispanic assimilation — was that if Republicans could reach 40 percent of the Hispanic vote, they would be unbeatable, but if they sank below 30 percent, they would be in a world of electoral trouble. Sure enough, after many 2006 Republican congressional candidates ran nasty, anti-immigrant ads — some juxtaposing the faces of Hispanic immigrants with Islamic terrorists — the GOP share of the Hispanic vote collapsed to 29 percent in the midterm cycle. "The Republicans have to choose if they want to be a 21st-century party, and right now they are making decisions like they're a 20th-century party," says the New Democrat Network's Rosenberg. His organization took many of those attack ads and rebroadcast them on Univision to remind Hispanics which of the two parties had their best interests in mind.
Rush won't shut his fat mouth because he knows it's a fabulous way to get the lizard brains frothing. Meanwhile Lou Dobbs may think "illegal aliens" is a technical term, but millions of Hispanic voters understand what Laura Flanders is saying when she patiently tries to explain that it's dehumanizing. They know that the Minutemen are something other than the honest upstanding patriots Dobbs disingenuously paints them to be and what he is doing when he does not take credit for the fact that he's playing to an audience comprised largely (though by no means solely) of those whose sentiments are grounded in xenophobia and bigotry. Both progressives and wingnuts hate the guest worker program in the new bill but Bush and the Blue Dogs had to offer that up as a sop to the Wall Street wing to get their support. The clash of interests it provoked guaranteed a media cacaphony that once again started Bush's poll numbers doing the Coreolis Cha-Cha.
Despite the fact most sane people realize things are going badly in Iraq, McCain and Romney feel perfectly safe pounding their chests this morning with a bunch of bellicose nonsense about Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama voting to "endanger our troops" because they know that most rational Americans think they're nuts but they need to solidify the base in order to catapult themselves into the White House. There's no danger for them in being as loony as they wanna be because there is no price.
On the other hand, McCain's position on immigration makes him look like Ted Kennedy to the base, and no amount of claptrap about the precious little fetuses is going to make up for that:
[T}he corporate wing's squishiness on immigration is already creating enormous problems for the GOP in the next election. Among the party's 2008 presidential front-runners, John McCain has borne the brunt of the backlash, since he is the hated reform bill's chief GOP cheerleader in the Senate and was the coauthor of its 2005 forerunner. On the conservative blog Red State, Hunter Baker wondered if McCain's immigration stance has effectively neutralized any advantage he might otherwise have been able to establish over Giuliani and Romney on abortion and other social issues. Perhaps showing the stress, during a contentious mark-up meeting on the reform bill,McCain said "fuck you" to fellow Republican Sen. John Cornyn and called Cornyn's objections to the legislation "chickenshit." On a conference call with a group of conservative bloggers, McCain then accused rival Mitt Romney of flip-flopping on immigration: "Maybe I should wait a couple weeks and see if [Romney's position] changes. Maybe he can get out his small varmint gun and drive those Guatemalans off his yard."
(Okay I admit it the Romney crack made me laugh.)
Schaller concludes:
Only marginal candidates like Duncan Hunter, Ron Paul, and Tom Tancredo, who has made it his signature issue, had sided explicitly with the populist base prior to the recent unpleasantness. Now Giuliani is dancing away from his own overtly pro-immigrant past, and the ever-elastic Romney has positioned himself as McCain's worst enemy on immigration. Sam Brownback, who cosponsored John McCain's original reform bill, decided in April to renounce Satan and recast himself as a nativist.
No matter what the 2008 candidates say or do, however, and regardless of how they fare in the primaries or the general election, the party's elite seems to know what it wants for the long term. The nation's Hispanic population continues to grow at more than 3 percent per year. The party's power players have decided that it is better to act now rather than later, even if Main Street rebels, because later the consequences can only be more dire. Their actions, including their support for the immigration reform bill, will either pull the GOP back from the brink, or push the party over it.
Many of us held our noses and voted for Democrats whose social positions we didn't agree with in 2006 because we knew that in the majority they'd be able to keep bills on choice, for instance, from coming to the floor in the way they had when the GOP used them to embarrass and fracture the party when it had a chokehold on congress. If the Democratic party leadership wants to use its power to fragment the GOP there do seem to be better ways than ducking for cover and hoping Iraq blows up in George Bush's face, even as they risk sitting down in a minefield themselves.
Related posts:





Spotlight








Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

is that like a wedgie??
“Fitzgerald again points to Cheney…..”
(Froomkin)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..01024.html
zed?
Not even close.
yellowdogD @ 2
have you noticed there is no “zero” comment any more and everyone still says “zed” ??
Investigate
De-escalate
or lose in 2008
Zed??
Sparkles the Iguana @ 2
More “clouds” gathering for what we hope will be a storm. We need some fresh air!
Jane,
FWIW, even at his resignation, Nixon was still polling 24% approval.
The Redubyacans are caught in the same trap with Hispanics that they are with Blacks. In order to appease the mouth breathers, they have to propose and champion bills that are sure to be anathema to the minority communities. If they even attempt to mollify the minority (or soon to be majorities in some states), the base will all but crucify them. I think the term dog and the lamp post is pertinent here…
Did you say you ordered “mushroom clouds” with with your Rice?
“vociferous liberals” Hmmm. ;0)
KKKKarl having nightmares is a nice mental image for me.
Really good post Jane!
Coreolis Cha-Cha
touche
No, I hadn’t noticed the no zed, as it’s been so long since I’ve been anywhere near the beginning of a post.
Back on topic: Lou Dobbs is obtuse IMO. Jeff Skilling and Ken Lay were actually convicted of crimes. Using Dobbs’ reasoning, they should be called illegal CEOs. A person who is here without documentation is an undocumented person. How difficult is that to comprehend?
kathleen @ 6
Inverstigate, incarcerate, or lose in ‘08.
Two separate points, Bush’s personal rankings and the Republican brand name.
Bush connects to the archtype of every bad boss who blames subordinates and refuses to acknowledge his mistakes, and every insufferable opinionated know-it-all in-law who won’t shut up who has invaded a weekend family barbeque.
His personal numbers deserve to be even lower. Because he and Rove commanded such lock-step loyalty from Congress, we can only hope they destroy the Republican brand on their way out in 2008.
Minor quibble — the Main Street wing of GOP was kicked to the curb a long time ago, by the wing nuts and Xtian extremists.
Other than misidentifying the polarities in the GOP base, Schaller is spot on.
There are some new names for Main Street Republicans — they are called Independents, and Democrats.
blueheron @ 5
Ahem,
I had the first post on the last thread and there is indeed , still a zero post.
OT, but it seems I have combat experience.
The same amount Rudy has, at any rate…I was also on the ground in NYC on 9/11.
Gary Leupp
on cheney wants to do Iran.
http://www.counterpunch.org/leupp05262007.html
The last sentence of this post is to the point. And I like it. But then I am a vociferous left wing radical.
Kathleen—
Do you remember talking with me at the trial, out in the hall? I’m the one who wasn’t Jane :)
The only thing that is going to save this country from destruction by the lizard brains is more immigration. A monotheist exclusion act might also be useful.
This is what I don’t get. The bill that is being fought about now, just seems to be another case of The Decider kicking the can down the road. Nothing really changes from what happened twenty years ago. Just like we are dealing with the results of a crappy bill back then, in 10 years we’ll be dealing with the results of a crappy bill today.
Great post, Jane. The Achilles Heel of the Republicans is that the corporations who fund them and the red state rednecks who vote for them are NATURAL BORN ENEMIES. Since Reagan, the Republicans have pulled off the incredible feat of getting people to vote against their own pocketbooks. Issues like homosexuality and abortion worked because the corporations didn’t have a vested interest, but immigration is the dealbreaker.
Let the games begin.
I knew when this issue appeared a couple of months before the midterms, that it was the bright shiny object to distract from Iraq. Just like so many of the Right’s bright ideas, it didn’t quite work out like they planned.
BANG!
by no means the crux of Jane’s post – but imagine yourself as someone relying on the MSM to give you that kind of clarity
goddamn I loves me some Hamsher
If the *actual* votes mattered that would be fine, but all they have to do is create the illusion of having the votes. I have begun more and more to doubt that fundies *did* elect GWB. I suspect it was the machines that did it, the fundies were just used to explain it away. For instance
This from an article by Steve Rosenfeld and Bob Fitrakis, rest of the article at FreePress.org, more still in their book “What Happened in Ohio: A Documentary Record of Theft and Fraud in the 2004 Election” (The New Press, 2006). Amazon has it, pls click through the FDL link in the upper left panel to put a few cents in the FDL kitty.
The short-term solution was to disenfranchise the disillusioned hispanics and blacks through the justice department purge. It might have worked long enough to re-establish a modern form of Jim Crow had the Dems not won the Novewmber Congressional elections. Rove tried to thread the needle and missed.
My guess is that the Blue Dogs and Wall Street Repugs will attempt to form an alliance to freeze out us ‘populists’. That’s what the Beltway wants, and there is a reasonable chance they will get it. They will throw the Fundies under the bus, because they don’t have any place to go unless someone runs a third party campaign on the Right.
Immigration bill aside, Latinos who vote for Publicans are voting against their own interests. They are voting for those who will exploit them both economically and as scapegoats for disenfranchised whites.
obsessed @ 26
Good point! I agree.
when i first read tom’s analysis, it was around the time congress decided to go ahead and fund bush’s occupation…. and reading this line made me immediately wonder if, for some dems in congress, the $120 billion going to the money donating people was more important than ending the war for the voting people…
don’t have an answer – but that’s a lot of money.
Raw Story: Send neocons Wolfowitz, Perle to Iraq, says GOP lawmaker
I (and my wife as well) am in the curious position of being left-of-center Democrats who are very much in favor of tough immigration enforcement and secure border enforcement.
For us it has absolutely nothing to do with either the “fear of brown people” or “we need a nanny to pick our strawberries” side of the GOP split.
For us it has to do more with: what’s the point of calling anything a “country” without border enforcement and just the general dismay at the over-crowding which occurs as people come here by hook-or-by-crook (from anywhere) seeking opportunity.
I’m curious to see who else here may share those feelings. It’s very disconcerting to sit and listen to Buchanan’s shrillness and agree with at least some of the points he makes. If you listen long enough you’ll eventually run up against his latent racism, but still it’s kinda weird.
Knut Wicksell @ 30
good analysis. but it means they will do their best to thow us under the bus too…
OT.. http://blogs.abcnews.com/thebl…..witz_.html
“I would like to suggest…that maybe we give Paul Wolfowitz a new job and send him over [to Iraq] as mayor,” said Rep. Walter Jones, R-N.C., “since the neocons got us in over there.”
I am starting to smell the “We were stabbed in the back”(by the Jews) coming from the fundie/wacko’s. The other recent comment from the same type of people was “Evolution theory is a plot by the Jews to destroy christianity”.
Brilliant column, Jane. Please continue your fantastic work here. You are an inspiration to many.
selise @ 33
I think you’ve got something there, selise!
I work with new immigrants and refugees and I find it interesting that the repubs almost never address the issue of LEGAL immigration. To them, all new immigrants are illegal.
OT but relevant to busy USA Fitzgerald:
Sparkles the Iguana @ 2
Nice. Also, note that Think Progress just posted a tie between Black and David Frum, –the latter thinks that disclosing financial ties can get so “pedantic”, see here for story.
(at least I think I recall that Fitzgerald is also the one going after corruption in the Conrad Black case?)
‘pologies if this duplicates anything.
Sort of on topic: Does anyone even remember Reagan’s 1986 amnesty bill? I was 15 at the time, and I don’t remember anything about it. Does anyone else remember it being a big deal? I don’t recall it being referred to as “the Great Betrayal”, or anything along those lines.
Frank Probst @ 42
I was only 26, but I remember a whole lot of howling going on about it.
I think that may have a lot to do with the current back stabbing going on in Bizzaro world.
edited by older than he thought author.
It is good to see demographics brought up in the article cited. A simple rule of thumb is never bet against demographics. It is why I can’t help but seeing the current immigration bill as irrelevant whether it passes or fails. As long as there are few jobs and opportunities south of the border and as long as there are jobs and opportunities north of it, immigration (whether it is called illegal or not) will continue.
Beyond this, a convoluted bill, a President with a 28% JAR, sharp division within and between parties, and a real lack of any serious debate about what we want the job structure in this country to look like or how to bolster Mexican and Latin American economies, all of these leave me not expecting anything useful to come from the current “debate”.
song
to
self
&
other
self
bush
admin.
most
corrupt
ever
other
well
duh
sleep
don’t
weep
firepups
wake,
act,
attack.
Bustednuckles @ 43
We’re all very nearly the same age. But I have no memory of any of that. Not very politically aware in those days.
Many of the Latino groups that supported Sleazy Gonzales are having “buyers remorse” according to Rawstory.
That is one of the devious things that Rove and Bush have done is used minorities at the point of the spear to disenfranchise and hobble minority rights.
When the plot is exposed Bush and Rove and their useful dupes say “see the evil Democrats are attacking…women, Blacks, Latinos….etc.” as they hold up their hand-picked lackey.
There is something extremely repelling about those that become Kapos against their own.
-GSD
David Frum. Another target for the Avenging Sparrow’s shit list.
-GSD
GSD @ 47
Interesting in that the crimes and negartive traits of Bush appointees actually have nothing to do with their race or gender.
TB,
I’m not sure what you mean?
-GSD
The Bugman will fix it.
God has spoken to me,” DeLay said. “I listen to God, and what I’ve heard is that I’m supposed to devote myself to rebuilding the conservative base of the Republican party, and I think we shouldn’t be underestimated.”
Praise the Lord and pass the DDT.
-GSD
I agree with -ck- @ 18. We need to be careful in our terms. Schaller refers to Main Street and Wall Street as the main categories of republicans. The Wall Street Rs are the rich corporatists. The Main Street Rs are the guys my dad hung with at the country club in Indiana, small businessmen who identify with the Main Street Rs, but whose values are decent, main stream American values.
Blue dogs are democrats who are fiscally conservative. They are to be distinguished from corporatist democrats of the DLC variety. My congressman, Jim Cooper, is a real Blue Dog. He is tough on fiscal issues, to the point that he wrote the foreword to the Financial Report of the United States Government link. This is an effort to state the financial position and results of operations of the U.S. government in GAAP terms. It is a truly interesting book for wonks. Jim also provided the 218th vote for the now vetoed Iraq supplemental, a very difficult vote for him.
Let’s reserve the term Main Street Republican for the Republicans I grew up with, and the term Blue Dogs for people like Cooper. We can identify the other republicans as the Jerry Falwell (rest his soul) wing, and the other democrats as the DLC wing.
Tim @ 35
Most of them come in legally. The problem is that they like it so much here, they don’t leave when the visa expires. (And if you hate overcrowding, don’t live in an urban area.)
Tim @ 35
You mean the “country” we swiped from the Mexicans?
EPU’d: Thanks so much for bringing up the whole ‘Rick’ thing again. Video and everything… I don’t need to see Ilsa like that. We’ve moved on.
WE criticize the Bushies because of their actions, their policies, their sneakiness, their lies. NOT because of their ethnicity.
But the noise machines ignore the crimes and only focus on the fact that we criticized a minority.
GSD @ 48
The flying fickle finger of fate having sh*t moves on.
With apologies to Omar Khayyam.
If that wasn’t so sad I’d laugh.
The little town I moved into 15 years ago has TRIPLED its population since then.
Limited space to run to, but I’m lookin’.
TexBetsy @ 57
Of course. The Democrats and the left generally attack on the merits or lack thereof. Whereas the Republican attacks on Hillary or Obama or Barney Frank or Rosie etc. are based on what they are.
We know that truth has a liberal bias.
-GSD
Why yes, that’s the very one I mean but I’m not going down that rabbit hole w/ you in hopes of a discussion.
Who would have thought that a strategy of having a candidate pretending to speak spanish and pretending to be christian would begin to break down?
GSD @ 47
Major Spanish language newspapers like La Opinin in Los Angeles and El Diario/La Prensa in New York have written front page editorials calling for Gonzales to resign.
Tim @ 61
LOL And I concure with you, Tim (upthread) BTW
May there be many more Andrew Card moments for these sycophantic Bush-bots.
They deserve nothing less.
-GSD
TexBetsy @ 40
And they’re all Hispanic. What it really boils down to of course is that they don’t want ‘those people’ here at all (except as needed to cut their lawns). They could reduce the number of ‘illegals’ by creating more legal paths for would be immigrants faced with decades-long waiting lists.
Why Bush won’t fire Gonzales: http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..e=05272007
Stephen Parrish, CPA @ 34
For what it is worth, Jones, has spoken out about Smirk and the disaster going on over in Iraq. He’s one of those guys that while he wouldn’t make a very good Democrat, he probably thinks the Republican party(as defined by Rove and Bush) have left him.
kathleen @ 8
He mentions MArcy on page 2.
Um, yeah. You see, there’s this little occupied country in the Pacific that was squatted on, its monarchy forced into permanent house arrest. I suspect some of the people there feel the same way about immigration — but the roles are flipped. Maybe you’ve heard of it; they used to call it the sovereign nation of Hawai’i.
Ditto the Native American nations. I think your bullsh*t about wanting to protect this country from overcrowding is merely a thinly veiled Repug talking point. If you really believed your bullsh*t, you’d be all for vacating any occupied nation in which the U.S. has inserted itself.
I was (and AM) one of the angriest at the Dems voting for the supplemental and co-sponsoring the upcoming “Summer of Death”. That said, now that my blood pressure has had some time to go back down, I’m planning to fight like hell for more Democrats…not because they’ll do much good. But the Republicans WILL do much evil.
And stopping THAT is important.
O/T, but just in case it hasn’t already been posted, per Froomkin:
My question: Does Fitzy have enough of a case to nail Crashcart as the guy behind Libby’s obstruction of justice?
Rush the egomaninac needs this like he does the little pill he takes to the Dominican Republic with him.
Phoenix Woman @ 72
Probably not. At this point, if Libby flips, the right-wingers will all start screeching that you just can’t take the word of a convicted perjurer.
I’m going there tomorrow for my youngest son’s high school graduation. Same rabbit hole, different flavor. You have no idea who you’re “talking to”.
the “varmint gun” comment was funny, consarnit!
Tim @ 75
And apparently neither do you.
Must be cut from the same apologist ka’ama aina cloth as my father.
GSD @ 47
Exhibit A is the egregious Clarence Thomas, the lightweight neocon ideologue planted in the Supreme Court to replace the late Thurgood Marshall.
New Ian Welsh upstairs.
VictorLaszlo @ 56
:~)
Rayne, I have no idea what “side” of this issue you’re arguing but your acidity is unnecessary.
This is a very un FDL comments section today w/ a nasty vibe devoid of constructive engagement. I’ve got errands.
Aloha
Frank Probst @ 74
Yeah, but considering that Libby’s defense — which the jury damned near bought — was a fancy $6 million variant on “I was only following orders”, I gotta wonder.
Tim @ 75
Who? Now I’m curious. Immigration is a complicated issue, and there are differing opinions represented on this forum.
Cindy Sheehan on Randi Rhodes now. She’s on her way home, calling from the airport.
Best wishes, Cindy. Thank you for everything.
Okay Christy, Jane, all the rest of you and add Cindy sheehan to that list. What do we do. I’m serious. I refuse not to vote. Too many people have died so that I may cast a ballot. But I swear to God, that I will go to my polling place and write in my own name or Kermit the Frog, or something rather than let the Democrats do nothing about this mess, in the name of money and big oil. Listen to that Ms. Pelosi. I’m not the only one. I think MoveOn.org (of which I’m not a member….yet) is saying the same thing.
If anyone’s interested here’s an anti-Bush thread and comments at a small Conservative site — they’re furious over Bush’s immigration policy.
http://polipundit.com/wp-comme…..1#comments
Does it strike anyone else that the repugs are, but their actions, getting us to focus on reproductive rights, immigration, Iraq, and (while I don’t thing these things are unimportant) distracting us from the issue that they are sending out jobs overseas at an alarming rate, fighting to make our food and drugs unafordable, and unsafe, cutting Social Security and Medicare, and setting the country up for an event that will allow King George to make himself king for real? If they don’t have a riot, they will start one. If they don’t have a cause to declare martial law and trash civil rights, they’ll create them. I lived through the 60s and I watched em try to do it. Nothing like watching a California Highway Patrolman with his badge off and his name taped over, breaking windows on downtown Shattuck ave in Berkley. It was an education, especially as I had just returned from Vietnam and traded my uniform for a pear of jeans and a sign. They were the terrorists, just as BushCo are the terrorists today.
Tim @ 35 and later
I don’t know who you are, but you’re a relative stranger here and Rayne isn’t. Your comment @ 35 is asking for an argument.
You say that a country needs border controls. You might want to read up on their history. Before the Civil War, there were few controls. They came about as a way to keep out ‘undesirables’ from places like southern and eastern Europe: you know, Catholics and Jews. Asians were only supposed to be cheap male labor; otherwise they weren’t allowed at all. You might also want to read up on the ‘Know-Nothings’ of the 1840s and 1850s. They were big anti-Catholics, especially the Irish.
‘Give me your tired, you poor …’
Tim @ 81
Immigrants, legal and illegal, are already here, in the tens of millions. Point to the complaints about population density due directly to immigration — because I’m not seeing it. Nor am I seeing a sustained suppression of American culture, as there was of Hawaiian and Native American culture. Your argument against immigration was and is a thinly veiled apology for racism, particularly since you brought nothing but a complaint and no suggestions for remedy. Where do you stand on the use of concentration camps to round up these encroaching overcrowders? Not relevant to you, apparently.
Aloha my backside; I fail to see that spirit in your comments. Perhaps you need to review the Hawai`i Revised Statutes, section 5-7.5.
Jane, “coreolis cha cha” was a brilliant turn of phrase. You are truly a gifted writer.
Great post, Jane, as yours always are. One wonders why the Hispanics voted 40% for Bush in 2004. It couldn’t have been that pigeon Spanish he spoke a few times. Maybe it was having Gonzalez as his lawyer.
On the substance of this issue, btw, I think that labor has a legitimate concern with massive immigration driving wages down. If those immigrants were immediately brought under the purview of federal labor protections (minimum wage, etc.), Wall Street would lose the incentive to want them here and the nativist bloc would align with the big money bloc again. If the status quo is left in place the downward pressure on wages remains. It’s just not a simple issue.
In the end, though, I think it’s a moral issue. Nativism plays to the ugliest, meanest aspects of the American character. If people want to come here, we should welcome them as best we can and figure out the economics as best we can again. When this country loses its welcoming spirit, it ceases to be truly American.
Bustednuckles @ 19
well, I looked and there is a “1″ by your post, just like I had the first post to this great analysis, and there is a “1″ by my name. There used to be a zero and it stayed a zero. How did it get changed??
chris @ 92
Amen.
blueheron @ 93
I think it’s a zero until you enter your comment and hit enter.
spurious @ 94
Agreed. With the exception of indigenous peoples, all Americans are the heirs of immigrants and should respect the engine that immigration (in all forms) was for this country’s rise. I think of Emma Lazarus’ poem, The New Colossus everytime we discuss immigration:
Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame,
“Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she
With silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”
She didn’t greet the moneyed, educated, legal few; she greeted them all, our parents, grandparents, many forebears.
One other point I almost forgot. The massive influx of Mexican immigration got rolling after NAFTA pitted small Mexican family farms against our American ag megacorporations.
Guess who won that competition. And guess who couldn’t afford to stay in Mexico anymore as a result.
If we really want Mexicans to stay in Mexico, we shouldn’t implement policies that make the Mexican way of life impossible to sustain. Just sayin’.
BTW, thanks, Bill, for that one. In case you were wondering why I couldn’t vote for you in ‘96, that’s pretty much it.
yellowdogD @ 15
A person that came into the country without going through proper immigration procedures is breaking the law, hence illegal immigrant.
Go ahead call me a mouth breather because I worked as a skilled laborer for years only to lose my job because I wouldn’t work for subsistence pay like most illegals will.
I’ve voted Democrat my whole life but between their love of illegal votes and their spineless attitude on the Mess-in-Potamia I’m going Independent.
I don’t think I will be alone.
chris @ 97
Thanks for reminding me, I was mistaken, I did vote independent in ‘96 because of NAFTA.
Immigration – the GOP’s Wedgie Issue
P J Evans @ 88
That’s interesting, sounds very much like sentiments expressed over at freeperville.
Stay in line or like a nail sticking up we’ll pound you down because we, are….democratic?
chris @ 92
That is the crux of it. I firmly believe that the immigration system is broken and needs to be regulated, but the racist appeal that is being made on the right is untenable and is already becoming something quite dangerous.
Stagger Lee @ 101
That’s not what P J was saying. Tim was bucking for a shootout making an inflammatory comment without taking any solid position.
You, on the other hand, in spite of your hostility towards us, actually offered a concrete reason in NAFTA for your position.
I agree, NAFTA was a failure because it failed to set terms for a fair market, not just a free market.
But our democratic government as it is currently configured — allowing corporations to have far greater political speech and access than citizens — does not encourage full, detailed modeling of outcomes from legislation. You can blame Clinton, but he was only one man. There was a Republican majority at the time, and they did what they could to railroad NAFTA through, to hell with the unintended consequences. Were the folks screaming about immigration now screaming about it then, or were they rah-rah for the free market?
The problem I have with the issue of immigration is that virtually all proposals to date do not deal with the root cause. Immigration, legal and illegal, is a global problem that has universal roots; the British, Germans, French, Nordic countries, all of them have similar challenges and yet there has been no coordinated effort to discuss this problem. People do not want to leave their families and homelands without good reason; what is that reason? Why aren’t we addressing it?
And why aren’t we finding a way to solve the problem so that it is win-win? Many illegal immigrants do not want to stay here permanently, but they want to work here for now and are willing to pay taxes to do so. How do we turn these potential revenue streams into universal healthcare, making American workers more competitive? Where’s the discussion on this possibility??
that’s actually the irony of the statement and I wasn’t asking for an argument, I was asking for a discussion of views I expressed which you and Chris provided. Everything else is a distraction from what as Jane says, is a broken system.
I’m a left-wing racist. Perfect.
Tim @ 104
That’s the absurdly amusing part about racism.
It doesn’t confine itself to a party or political ideology.
Rayne @ 103
[regarding NAFTA]
No there wasn’t. NAFTA was ratified in 1993.
That is utter bullshit. I expressed some feelings and asked if anyone else had similar thoughts. I hadn’t even arrived at a solid position. Then it was “flame-on” without any solutions either.
Christ on a cracker….
chris @ 106
My bad. I must be confusing with CAFTA, which was getting hyped pre-Bush admin by Republicans. I’d still like to know where these anti-immigration people were on the issue of NAFTA and CAFTA. Funny how we didn’t hear a lot of discussion about the future problems these would bring.
There’s nothing amusing about racism. Are you calling me a racist ? That could cover the absurdity.
Overcrowding?
I’m still waiting for a citation.
as for your flippant comment about the notion of “country”, provided with no discussion about the nature of sovereignty: there are more people of Irish descent in this country than there are in Ireland. Does that make this the United States of Ireland?
Rayne @ 108
I’m not sure, except for Pat Buchanan, whose anti-NAFTA rhetoric is pretty well known.
Tim @ 35
You guys don’t sound like left-of-centre Dems to me.
dipper @ 91
Castro?
cynic @ 87
Yes, it’s called whack-a-mole.
I can’t tell you the extent to which this concerns me.
Ah, the classic GOP traffic accident at Wall & Main. May the working class finally realize they’ll never ever get the right of way to the Rolls Royces of the aristocracy.
Both the Iraq war and the latest immigration bill are going to be the biggest setback for Bush and his party in the upcoming election…
European Breakdown Cover
Now I’m hostile, pointing out that you may be a little factional around here is hostile? Are you and every one you know victims…poor baby.
I’m off to find the liberal blog that doesn’t want the country invaded and turned into a third world nation. See Ya