August 21, 2006

Confusing the issue

Josue has an interesting but sadly not-too-atypical bit about how Democrats blatantly try to play the xenophobia/racism/anti-immigrant card -- and how regular folks are, frankly, getting tired of it. He notes an LA Times story where idiot Representative Sheila Jackson-Lee

... sparked the biggest outburst when she displayed the decorations of an immigrant sailor she met on a Navy ship.

"This is the person being maligned today," she said.

Many in the crowd of about 100 people, including veterans, erupted in boos. "That's ridiculous!" one man yelled.

Indeed it is ridiculous. As Josue states, illegal immigrants are not permitted to serve in the US armed forces. And it is illegal immigrants that are the focus of so many people's scorn these days. Political and social liberals deliberately eliminate the very clear distinction between illegal and legal immigrants so that when your average joe gets miffed at illegal immigration, he is painted with the xenophobia, etc. brush. Jackson-Lee is but one who has done this. Locally and nationally it happens all the time.

Ryan at Jokers to the Right highlights a story I saw on local news last evening. The tone was surely that the town is "intolerant" (the lone moron in a pick-up truck that displayed the Confederate flag and the logo "The South Will Rise Again" played right into the media's hands) but they did show numerous people who clearly stated lines like "We don't care if they're here legally. We're concerned only about the people that are here illegally." Paul Smith Jr. has more thoughts.

It's bad enough that the federal government's lack of response to the growing illegal immigration problem has led to local governments doing what Riverside, NJ has done. It's a circular problem: The federal government does nothing, whereby local governments then take action. These local governments then get sued by "activists" whose main premise is that [illegal] immigration is the federal government's responsibility!

But just as people are getting fed up with political correctness regarding airline travel and "profiling" (or lack thereof), so too are they getting weary of the xenophobe/racist/anti-immigrant epithet merely because they want their elected leaders to actually DO something about illegal immigration.

Posted by Hube at August 21, 2006 12:16 PM | TrackBack

Comments  (We reserve the right to edit and/or delete any comments. If your comment is blocked or won't post, e-mail us and we'll post it for you.)

how Democrats blatantly try to play the xenophobia/racism/anti-immigrant card -- and how regular folks are, frankly, getting tired of it.

Hube: smart non-neanderthal conservatives like yourself, sure. I understand the distinction between legal and illegal immigration and agree that it can be blurred and shouldn't be.

But surely you can't sit there and pretend there aren't a crapload of bad feelings toward all immigrants from your less evolved conservative brethren. I see it quite regularly. The accusations aren't based on nothing.

I know from our previous discussions about bigotry that you live in a happy world where the Limbaugh listeners you know somehow aren't irrationally angry and don't have a "go back where you came from" attitude. But get out there and see what's going on. And heck, I live in freakin' Pittsburgh, hardly Texas or Alabama!

Posted by: dan at August 21, 2006 12:52 PM

Also, Hube:

I'm "tired" of hearing conservatives tell me that because I wanted our troops somewhere other than Iraq, that I'm emboldening the enemy. That I'm against America. And you want to complain about a party blatantly playing a "card" and people getting sick of it? How about the Republicans' best (only?) friend: The Fear Card. Let's remember your "getting tired" of cards being played as campaign season rolls around, and we get our next slew of "Vote for the Democrats, ride with bin Laden" ads from your party.

The only reason you don't mind that card is because it works and your side wins elections, right? :)

Posted by: dan at August 21, 2006 01:07 PM

dan: Back when mikem was commenting here regularly, he mentioned something about how you always say "But the other side [fill in the blank]." He was dead on the money.

But get this straight: I am not obligated to be balanced on this blog just as you are in no way balanced on yours (and with a lot more profanity at that). So please don't come in here constantly whining about "balance," and "Well, the other side's ..." when you just look like a laughable hypocrite, OK?

Lastly, how can say what you do about Iraq when I am against that goddamn war and have stated numerous times that opposition to it per se is in no way "unpatriotic"? Are you just getting that dig in to be your usual condescending self? And likewise, do you not deplore the rampant use of the race card at your blog because that frequently works in your party's favor, dan?

(God, don't you get tired of this schtick after a while?)

Posted by: Hube at August 21, 2006 01:22 PM

Yes, I point out a lack of balance, as it is what makes 99.99% of political blogging so utterly pointless and irrelevant. It's what deprives it of almost all credibility and it's why it isn't really the "new media" and will never usurp a mainstream press that at least tries (even FOX) to maintain some modicum of balance despite its various biases. I wish I could stop talking about politics entirely on my blog instead of just cutting back, but unfortunately my life isn't interesting enough to sustain an entirely politics-free blog! :)

But since that's neither here nor there, I'll try to avoid the "balance" comments.

And I don't believe I said "what youdo" about Iraq.

How about the substance of my first comment, which was actually on topic?

Posted by: dan at August 21, 2006 02:24 PM

Substance? Like, that there are people (in the conservative camp) who dislike ALL immigrants? Well, DUH. Of course. What's the point? You're never going excise all the morons. You say you "see it quite regularly" -- where? When? Geez, who do you hang out with? Where do you see it on the media ... and among politicians? It's easy to say "the accusations aren't based on nothing" when you use the few idiots as your basis. With that rationale, Reagan was on the money when he talked about "welfare queens" even though they comprised a distinct (though unsavory) minority. I liked Reagan, but that statement certainly played on a negative stereotype and was unsavory, to say the least.

Posted by: Hube at August 21, 2006 02:36 PM