Si se puede, but probably shouldn't

I heard Obama say from his Texas HQ this evening, "si se puede." I wonder how wise it is to wield that slogan given its prominence in the pro-illegal-immigration marches of several summers ago.

Immigration is a sharp object

I just read this week's column from Ann Coulter, and she does a splendid job of skewering the "the anti-illegal-immigration backlash" myth. ("NYT: An Undocumented Newspaper"). Coulter's op/ed column was in response to this op/ed, er report from the New York Times about the issue. Immigration is a sharp object, and you know what your mother always told you about sharp objects . . .

A couple of things come to mind from reading the articles . . . first, I think that Coulter may be unadvisedly pooh-poohing the potential problems with a Republican candidate being strident on this particular issue. The Democratic Party--with the MSM in its corner and a willingness to demagogue this issue and already enjoying a majority of Hispanic support, has the ability to paint Republicans and Conservatives as nativist/bigoted/mean-spirited/hateful etc. etc. if we give them the paint, brushes and an empty canvas. The Democratic Party and its major candidates have a variety of vulnerabilities on this issue, too, but being able to exploit those weaknesses isn't a given.

Secondly, the bias of Michael Luo--the NYTimes reporter, is sad. Romney's comments that "he has no problem with 'legal' immigrants" (Luo's quotation marks) are somehow evidence that he is "recognizing the need to temper his comments."

Saying that Republican candidates have "railed against" certain pro-illegal immigration proposals, referring to Tom Tancredo as "the angriest on immigration" (emphasis added), and saying a Republican woman sensitive to the issue "hurled" a comment at Fred Thompson, and referring to the general GOP stance as "harsh" reflect the Liberal elitist view that folks who disagree with Liberal policies are emotional (with baaaad emotions!) rather than rational.

And the advocacy words that jump off of Luo's page are "many Democrats," "some polls," "Hispanic electorate could be turned off," all of which seem to indicate that Luo is marshaling his argument rather than reporting a story.

I think Coulter masterfully pounds the argument of the NYTimes and Luo, but it won't help us in the GOP to ignore the pitfalls of unself-awaredly arguing our positions on this issue.

More about Huckabee and Immigration

Marc Ambinder in his Atlantic.com blog posts about recent shots across Romney's bow on the issue of immigration. Marc Ambinder (November 14, 2007) - Huckabee Makes The First Move On Immigration:

"Kind of surprising: given how important the immigration issue to Mitt Romney's chances in Iowa, you'd think that he, and not challenger Mike Huckabee, would be the first to force a debate... and get personal."

It's an interesting read.

And it is significant to understand Huckabee's position on this issue . . . from an op/ed by Huckabee supporter Chuck Norris:

Gov. Mike did not offer blanket in-state tuition breaks to the children of illegal immigration. He tried to prevent penalties to high school students, even those whose parents brought them over illegally, who were aspiring to obtain challenging academic scholarships. He espoused that these competitive benefits were open to illegals too, "if they were willing to apply and become legal citizens."

Huckabee explained the drive behind his decision:

[My] position was and remains that you do not punish a child for the crime of the parent. If a child is in the back seat of a car when a father drives drunk, it's perfectly appropriate to put the father in the drunk tank, but you don't put the child in the drunk tank. If a child was brought here when he or she was 5 years old and has gone through our entire education system and has worked hard, learned and made straight As, and has qualified for an Academic Challenge Scholarship, which was a very specific program in the state, and that student has qualified to be able to earn that scholarship, I'd rather that student go to college and become a taxpayer, not simply take some low-end hourly wage job and ultimately be a tax-taker.

Here's a good post on the subject at MikeHuckabee2008 blog.

Whom Would Jesus Deport?

I started to write this post several months ago after a presentation at my church. The subject wasn't politics or immigration (it was on leading in an "externally focused" church), but the application to public policy seemed obvious to me: in sum, God is sympathetic to the "alien." Just do a search at bible.com for the term "alien" and you'll see what I mean (you probably need to use a version like the New American Standard Bible because "alien" is perceived as an archaic term these days).

As an aside, my church is unapologetically a "Bible" church--fundamentalist, Evangelical, "conservative," etc. so hearing this message definitely challenged my thinking on the subject. That being said, my church and its leadership are scrupulously a-political. For example, in our 8 years at the church the most political-ish statements I have heard from "the pulpit" are two references to the Biblical definition of marriage and perhaps two pro-life allusions. And that's the way I prefer it, because I don't want the Gospel to be obscured by political or any other messages.

But the point of this post is that I started to feel convicted about my attitude--my public stance on illegal immigration and the ways to address it. While Mike Huckabee has been accused of being "soft" on illegal immigration--actually, the wording is generally not as charitable as that, I have increasingly seen the wisdom in his views on the issue.

To be sure I am an American Exceptionalist, and I am seriously concerned about the erosion of American culture, American traditions and the "American" language--English. I believe America is great, and it isn't great because of fraud or exploitation or its natural resources or "dumb luck" (providence is another discussion) . . . it's because of our ideas and our ideals and our guiding principles, three things that can and are being readily undermined by illegal immigration in my opinion. And I am concerned about the burden of illegal immigration on our country's infrastructure (and am somewhat sympathetic to arguments about cheap labor's negative impact on some American workers), so I appreciate the economics of it all. But even if all these things are true, I don't get a pass from God when deliberating about how to address the problem. The reality is that this is very complicated issue with many ancillary challenges and with deep roots that can't readily be severed. Yes, they're breaking the law by coming to our country without permission and they're not assimilating as much as they ought to be and they breaking the law (oh, I said that one already), but I am pretty much convinced that God's word urges me to view them (the otherwise law-abiding aliens) more compassionately.

Incidentally, another aspect of this issue that jumped out at me several weeks ago was a news report about a convenience store robbery/murder that showed the video surveillance photos of two young Mexican-looking males who had been in the store at the time of the murder. They said these men were not suspects but were believed to have witnessed the murder (I know, I know, sometimes police say similar things about the real suspect in a crime--that wasn't the case here). The thought that crossed my mind was that if these guys are not here legally, they are probably scared to death to come forward about anything they may have seen that night. So for the first time I saw how it could hurt me and other non-illegal aliens for certain people to be driven underground by our immigration policies. But I digress . . .

I would say that this sentiment probably started with defending Dubya from invective rooted in his soft-ish immigration policy. Though I disagree with Bush on various issues, and I even disagreed with him on immigration, I perceive him to be sincere on the subject and I had to acknowledge his consistency (in his first run for President to now) on immigration. As a result, I felt like it was unfair to accuse him of crass motives or of betraying those who elected him.

Regarding Huckabee, perhaps the most frequent throw-away Conservative slam I hear is that he is "terrible on immigration" or something along those lines. His views on illegal immigration are articulated here. But what I've concluded is that in waging the political battle to "solve" the illegal immigration problems I mentioned above, it is important to avoid demonizing people who are here illegally and dealing with the issue. First of all we should keep them from coming into the country through strict border enforcement--this measure has national security implications, too. Next, we need to prosecute persons who willfully subvert our employment laws by employing illegals--such employers are knowingly flouting our laws and are sticking a finger in the eye of law-abiding fellow Americans. And lastly, we certainly should SLAM someone who is in our country illegally and commits a crime. Any measures aside from these seem draconian--or certainly seem easy to characterize as draconian, and don't really balance Christian compassion with wise public policy. Though I don't advocate imposing my religious principles on others, there's no doubt that my religious views (my worldview) should impact how I feel about a given public policy.

And I'll end by saying that so much of this (and politics) is about "tone." Some people will not believe you are resolute if you don't seem angry or outraged. (Indeed, probably the most poignant quote I've heard from Huckabee to date is, "I'm Conservative; I'm just not angry about it.") As a Christian I should not push buttons of voters just to get them riled up. I certainly should not appeal to the Flesh (or base nature) of voters to get them riled up. Illegal immigration is a complicated problem with no easy solution, and Huckabee seems willing to straddle the divide on the issue, resisting the temptation to demagogue or simplistically pander to voters about it.





Here are several Biblical references that have gnawed at me of late:

Lev. 19:34
The stranger who resides with you shall be to you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt; I am the LORD your God.

Deuteronomy 10:17-19
For the LORD your God is the God of gods and the Lord of lords, the great, the mighty, and the awesome God who does not show partiality nor take a bribe.

"He executes justice for the orphan and the widow, and shows His love for the alien by giving him food and clothing.

"So show your love for the alien, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt.

Malachi 3:5

"Then I will draw near to you for judgment; and I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers and against the adulterers and against those who swear falsely, and against those who oppress the wage earner in his wages, the widow and the orphan, and those who turn aside the alien and do not fear Me," says the LORD of hosts.

GOPres candidates and the Immigration bill

I think that the failed Immigration bill has real potential to provide real separation in the race for the '08 GOP nomination. Here's what the individual candidates are saying about the bill's demise. Article - News - Immigration in the campaign.

In particular, a recorded vote on an actual piece of legislation takes the issue to the next level of campaign significance, because candidates can no longer dodge and duck and spin their theoretical views on the issue--especially those who had to cast a vote on the bill.

I believe that in consequences to date for supporting this legislation will pale in comparison to the injury going forward. I believe the GOP base will seriously hold to account the campaigns of McCain and Brownback.

Why Trent Lott deserved to be thrown under the bus

Wes Comer (in a post about shrill attacks by "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" supporters against Conservatives) links to a quote from Trent Lott that disturbs me. wescomer.com » Blog Archive » Just Shut Up and Fall in Line:

The Republican whip, Trent Lott of Mississippi, who supports the bill, said: “Talk radio is running America. We have to deal with that problem.”

At some point, Mr. Lott said, Senate Republican leaders may try to rein in “younger guys who are huffing and puffing against the bill.”

Maybe he means that they need to do a better job of PR to combat opponents of this legislation on talk radio or something, but I doubt it.

Ingraham, Chavez and now the Blonde Bomber

I just came across this interesting audio from the Laura Ingraham show of an interview she did with Linda Chavez. chavez.mp3 (audio/mpeg Object). Based upon a stat that illegal immigration estimates appear to have decreased in the U.S. since 2001, Linda Chavez claims that "this [illegal immigration] is a manufactured crisis." I agree that some people demagogue this issue, and I am not as in knots about it as some, but this is a serious problem and it has come to a boil, regardless of the purported recent decline in illegal immigration. But there is no justification for the kind of rhetoric being used by some supporters of this most recent Immigration Reform proposal. As an aside, Chavez was almost Dubya's Labor Secretary, but she had an illegal immigration crisis of her own). Another aside, I wish Ingraham's show could be picked up in Middle Tennessee.

This story reminded me of Peggy Noonan's most recent op/ed taking Dubya to task for tearing the GOP asunder.

UPDATE: Ann Coulter's op/ed on this subject is splendid.

De-magnetizing Tennessee, somewhat . . .

Sen. Jack Johnson (R-Brentwood) is sponsoring legislation--SB 1870, (see here) that will make Tennessee less attractive to illegal immigrants. The bill cleared the Senate Commerce, Labor and Agriculture Committee on 4/3/07. The bill would require employers to use the Federal Employment Eligibility Verification Basic Pilot Program to ensure that new hires are eligible to legally work in the United States. The program is a web-based system that is operated by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

According to Sen. Johnson, we would be the first state in the nation to require employers to utilize (wink, wink, Sarah) the service. We'll see if the full Senate and the Democrat-controlled House will be interested in this common-sense legislation.

I say, lead the way, Tennessee.