Skip to comments.Immigration and the GOP Is it still the party of Reagan, or of Tom Tancredo?
Posted on 03/31/2006 3:41:14 AM PST by pageonetoo
As Congress battles over immigration, the consequences are likely to be far greater than the details of border walls or green cards. The most important political outcome may turn out to be the message that Republicans send about the kind of the party they are and hope to be.
To wit, do Republicans want to continue in the Reagan tradition of American optimism and faith in assimilation that sends a message of inclusiveness to all races? Or will they take another one of their historical detours into a cramped, exclusionary policy that tells millions of new immigrants, and especially Hispanics, that they belong somewhere else?...
...The immediate danger is that Republicans will ignore their longer-term interests by passing a punitive, and poll-driven, anti-immigration bill this election year. Any bill that merely harasses immigrants and employers, and stacks more cops on the border, may win cheers in the right-wing blogosphere. However, it will do nothing to address the economic incentives that will continue to exist for poor migrants to come to America to feed their families. And it will make permanent enemies of millions of Hispanics, without doing anything to draw illegals out of the shadows and help them assimilate into the mainstream of American culture and citizenship.
This is not Ronald Reagan's view of America as a "shining city on a hill." It is the chauvinist conservatism usually associated with the European right. How Republicans conduct and conclude their immigration debate will show the country which kind of "conservative" party they want to be.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
Uh it's 11 million, not 11 billion as you wrote above and how do you know they hate you personally, did you talk to all 11 "billion" of them?
The editorial writer and most of the posters here are at odds, but the real issue becomes one of politics. IF the GOP cannot make this into a law-and-order issue and becomes a more racial/polarizing issue, I agree with the WSJ- it will cost us big-time. The issue must be framed as one that is PRO immigration/anti-ILLEGAL immigration. The media will spin it thier way, regardless, so Bush and the GOP members need to to begin taking back the territory in the public arena - even if Bush needs to do so in Spanish.
Yes, we're all fired up about it. Yes, nobody wants to see some blanket amnesty program. But this has now become a real firebomb; a wrong move here will be a boon for the Dems, as all they are doing right now is watching us implode. We need to tread wisely.
And of a border doesn't exist if someone sneaks across it. Just like a stop sign isn't there when I run one. Correct?
I keep thinking about the claim that all Muslims evidently support terrorism as evidenced by the lack of world wide protest condemning terrorism being staged by Muslims.
If that holds true, then I must also reason that Americans support illegal aliens on our soil as evidenced by our inability to stage massive protests condemning illegal immigration.
Fox and Friends is just reporting that McCain is being hurt by his stance on aiding illegal immigrants.
Theodore Roosevelt had it right;
"In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."
Isn't it amazing that people "who come here to work" can take the time to protest while most "lazy fat americans" are too busy working to protest?
The fact is that most Americans fear their Gov't, with good reason I add that if they protest the King on this one their will be ramifications.
Hard to argue with that proposition.
The Journal is nothing if not consistent.
Ronald Reagan, 1911-2004
We learned of the death of Ronald Reagan yesterday in an unusual and touching way: at the seventh inning stretch at Yankee Stadium. The announcer asked everyone to stand up, and then told us of the passing of Reagan. A large photo of him was displayed at the billboard, and, after a moment of silence, a recording of Kate Smith singing "God Bless America" was played.
This is a sad day for America. While I wouldn't say that Reagan had the stature to be called a great man, I believe he had true greatness. And a mark of his greatness was, he saw things and possibilities that other people did not see, and he led the world toward those possibilities. Unlike his supposed intellectual superiors, who thought the best we could do was adjust to Soviet Communism in an ever darkening world, Reagan, to his everlasting credit, never accepted détente. Because of his grasp of truth and principle, he knew that Communism was evil and, for that reason, unsustainable. He saw that if the Communist system was resisted and challenged instead of coddled and compromised with, it would collapse from its own falsities. He saw this, and he made it happen. He discredited not only Communism, but statism itself, and so helped give the world a new birth of freedom--direct freedom from Communism for hundreds of millions of people, and, in the West, abandonment of the faith in the softer forms of socialism as well. He pursued his goals with staunch determination and unfailing good cheer, despite the hate and contempt of much of the world. He was thus an enduring example of true leadership as well as the most important political figure in the second half of the twentieth century. Perhaps he was a great man, after all.
In seeing that the ascendancy of leftism is not inevitable, in seeing that leftism, despite all appearances to the contrary, can be not only delayed or contained but turned back and defeated, Reagan offers the greatest model of hope to us today as we look at an America and a Western world that, under the control of a seemingly unstoppable liberalism, is rapidly committing moral and cultural suicide.
Reagan's greatest failure, and it was the flaw of his virtues, was his uncritical embrace of open immigration as the symbol and proof of America's worth. In upholding American freedom as contrasted with Soviet tyranny, he advanced the neoconservative project of changing America from a specific historical country into the incarnation and agent of a universal ideology--an ideology of radical freedom that now threatens the very existence of our culture, our nation, and our civilization. He was not a neoconservative per se, because, unlike the neoconservatives, he loved America as a nation and not just as a set of abstract principles. But he was a neoconservative in significant part, and we are paying the cost of that today. And so, as is so often the case in history, the good brings the bad, the bad brings the good.
I don't consider him a failure. He is a hero...
Those are excuses, and pretty weak ones at that.
We don't work 24-7.
We don't care enough to take action.
All the signs are in English.
Not bad for a bunch of people who "refuse" to learn the language.
This is first and foremost Mexico's problem--not ours. I don't recall Reagan saying to the corrupt Mexican gvernment, "You're off the hook. The American taxpayer will take care of your people so you don't have to."
People by are large view their actions as futile since no matter what we do, it gets overturned. Remember Prop 187?
Plus, most people also know that these disgusting politicians are going to do whatever they want anyway and just call us vigilantes and racists if we speak up.
"Or will they take another one of their historical detours into a cramped, exclusionary policy that tells millions of new immigrants, and especially Hispanics, that they belong somewhere else?..."
What a load of crap. This isn't about immigrants. It is about ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS. A huge difference. Maybe it doesn't bother the country club republicans who sit on the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal but it sure as hell bothers me that i'm having to fund schools, prison, and social services for people who aren't US citizens and who don't respect the laws of this country. They want people like me to continue to subsidize the cost of their cheap labor but i'm sick of it and i'm sick of a wave of immigrants who have no interest in becoming American and learning our customs and the English languague. I'm angry as hell about watching the American flag flown upside down and armies of young people waving Mexican flags in our streets.
Do try and be coherent.
Your reasoning is flawed. It is difficult to stage a protest, when you are working to feed your family. It is difficult to gather conservatives "en masse" for just about anything.
When sKerry was running against W, I went down to a rally by the Capital where the Swiftboat guys were presenting their anti-Kerry message. I was appalled at the lack of large crowds. But, W managed to overcome sKerry, I believe, largely, with their help.
Conservatives aren't normally considered to be rabble rousers. They vote, and spend political dollars. The Senators better remember that most, rather than a bunch of communists in the streets!
This face has been proudly displayed this week!
" I may not vote democrat ever, but not voting at all is a serious consideration, or maybe just voting at the local level and for my Congressman."
You aren't the only person thinking this. Their will be a price at the polls for Representives that sell America's interests down the river. Honestly I often times wish that we had a viable opposition party in this country. A moderate party that offered a reasonable alternative instead of the anti-american moonbat Dems. If the Republican party had to actually worry about losing races, I doubt you'd see them ignore and spit in the face of the base so often. They'd be a lot more responsive to us and a lot less responsive to the country club elites.
Many in the mob are here because Reagan, in one of the big mistakes of his presidency, grinned and said, "Come on in. I can't see what harm you can do."
"The WSJ speaks for people who can reap the profits of cheap labor but wall themselves off from the consequences that the rest of us have to bear. "
A very astute point.
Notice how all the skunks in Washington DC do this. Even GWBush has no shame in getting on TV and calling these illegal aliens, simply "immigrants". If they were legitimate (legal) immigrants we wouldn't be having this fight. The reason for these rotten bills is precisely because we have 12-22 million ILLEGAL ALIEN IMMIGRANTS! Not because we have 12-22 million "immigrants"
Both parties use this terminology with some laudable exceptions such as Tom Tancredo and few other Republican Congressman
False reasoning Luis. The majority of Americans who would like to see our laws enforced are too busy trying to earn a living and paying taxes to support those in the "entitlement" boat.
The trespassers seem to have a lot of free time on their hands. I guess they are not that worried about paying for health care, education, roads, police protection etc as they know the rest of us will pick up the slack.
Seems we have strict laws for Europeans and very lax laws for others who can touch down with dry feet.
If we don't want to label these 11 or so million as criminal trespassers then remove the laws from the books otherwise those of us who believe in a legal method to enter this country will only have disdain for criminal trespassers.
Paul, one cannot let FACTS get in the way of a temper tantrum rave!
According to you a border doesn't exist because someone illegally crossed it; and we've lost our sovereignty as a result. So my question is, if I run a stop sign, then does that mean it doesn't exist either? Oh and do you need me to stick to two syllable words from now on?
Try using English in Miami or southern CA. I saw more Mexican flags then signs in English.
The Wall Street Journal probably has racist managers who only hire legal Americans. I think it's time for them to step up to the plate in the name of tolerance and diversity, and hire some illegal Mexicans to write editorials at the rate of $3.00 an hour.
Fox played Reagan's speech last night. He granted 4 million illegals Amnesty, PROMISED to prosecute employers to the maximum extent of the law, promised to close the borders to further illegals, and stated he was PROUD to welcome 4 million new citizens the the melting pot that is America.
Funny, I didn't see anyone pressuring him. I was against what he did at the time.
You guys love to look at the past with rose-colored glasses!
Deport all illegals, secure our borders, and then we institute a very limited guest worker plan with NO strings towards citizenship.
There is one simple solution to the illegal immigration problem on our southern border:
"WSJ ... are the Rockefeller wing of the party"
I don't think so. They make fun of those guys all the time.
Since you live in Florida, are you un Cubano? If so, you are nothing more than a traitor, as long as you defer your allegiance to the (actually less than) United States of America.
If you wish to display the American flag on your homepage, it should be properly recognized, and placed foremost, especially on this site. We are Americans, and JimRob's stated purpose is to promote conservative pricliples in America.
Your first section on your homepage is in spanish. I guess you prefer not to speak Englih, as our official language. FReepers post in English.
The whole cost of immigrants question could be solved pretty quickly with a replacement of income taxes with a sales tax. This won't solve security issues or some other issues, but it would certainly solve the big financial burden question.
So, illegals don't work?
Then how are they taking jobs from Americans?
There's one excuse.
" It is difficult to gather conservatives "en masse" for just about anything."
We hit the streets "en masse" during the recounts in 2000, and in Miami we hit the streets in massive numbers during the Elian Gonzalez affair, so we do it when we care enough. For conservatives to claim that illegal immigration is destroying our nation, and then put up a bunch of excuses for why they don't take to the streets to make themselves heard, is sending a message that we don't care enough about the nation being destroyed to do anything other than bitch about it.
"This face has been proudly displayed this week!"
I've seen that face displayed by many...including many native-born Americans.
/All the signs are in English.
Not bad for a bunch of people who "refuse" to learn the language/
Only if the tax was placed on transfers south of the border! The financial burder would be enlarged even more, imho...
Do you understand freedom?
You apparently don't.
You believe freedom to be you telling me how to behave, what to do, and what language to say it in.
I pay my taxes, obey the laws, and carry out all my civic duties.
Past that point, what I do is none of your damned business.
Are these people traitors?
I see your State flag in your home page, but not our flag.
Are you ashamed of it?
The WSJ is as credible on immigration and border security as is Hillary Clinton, the Chamber of Commerce, or La Raza ("The Race").
Exactly. The reason they are living ten to a room is because they are sending back approximately $17 billion a year to Mexico, eclipsing the revenues of oil sales to the US and making illegal immigrants in the US the biggest source of foreign revenue. The more illegal immigrants in the US, the greater the benefit to Mexico. Fox has no incentive to stop the flow, but rather, a reason to increase the flood of illegal immigrants.
Soy el Freeper desde 1998, y tenduro a veces en Espanol...
Cubans took to the streets of Miami over the Elian affair. They had an axe to grind. Did you ever hear of the "silent majority"?
As for taking the jobs, it isn't just about filling positions. It is about lowering wages for those here legally. I drive into DC once a week, and pass by gathering sites set up by the local gumts, to aid the "day laborors". I see dozens, and sometimes hundreds, standing around waiting for the odd pickup truck to whisk them away to their $6-8 an hour jobs. A comparable "local" would get paid twice that.
They are hard workers, but they are also invaders. I have no problems with hispanic peoples (yo habla). I do have a problem with illegality. I have to play by the rules, or go to jail (or pay a fine).
I am a businessman. I pay top wages for the works performed. I am finding it increasingly difficult to compete with those who don't play by the rules! I have loyal workers, and low turnover. They all speak english, and don't take from my grandchildren's heritage. Why should I want to employ an invader? Money is only one part of life, and it is not the MOST important!
I have mostly Norwegian ancestry with Irish, German and Lebanese mixed in. I do not carry their flag and I do not speak their language. I actually have no ties to them emotionally or any other way. I see myself as an American and only an American. I am not Anglo as many "Latinos" have tried to label me., I am an American. I have my own culture and language and am quite different from Europeans, Africans,Asians and South Americans. Americans whose people came from Africa, Asia, Europe or South America, if they are really Americans and not in name only, would have no allegiance to the peoples or the lands of their ancestors except as it relates to the US's relations to them.Why would I, as an American with no ties to anyone but Americans, trust you or those like you to not side with "Latino" over American interest. The truth is I can't. The other truth is that Whites, blacks, Asians and legal immigrants of non Hispanic decent agree with me and not you. I also have a hunch you might throw a fit if these illegals were Russian, you know what? so would I.
WSJ just wants cheap labor for the companies, these are the Rockefeller wing of the party.
You nailed it.
We also took to the streets in massive numbers to stop the Democrats from stealing the election in 2000.
Out of one side of your mouth you claim that illegals march because they don't have jobs, and out of the other that they steal jobs from Americans...which is it?
Here's another thing we never discuss, the only reason that ten million plus illegal aliens are taking jobs from Americans, is because millions of Americans are giving them jobs.
There are TWO guilty parties here, and two people breaking the law...the person who enters the country illegally, and the person who hires him.
Punish the employers and see how fast the jobs dry up.