Showing posts with label Democrats. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Democrats. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 18, 2008

Nativist Republican Candidate Jim Oberweis Loses in Safe Republican Seat













On March 8, 2007 something extraordinary happened in Illinois. Republican candidate and avowed nativist, Jim Oberweis lost a safe Republican (Ill-14th) seat to Democrat Bill Foster. The seat had been the domain of Republicans for 20 years, and has been occupied for most of those by the former Republican majority leader J. Dennis Hastert. In fact, Oberweis had the strong backing of Hastert as well as that of John McCain, who campaigned for him. The loss stunned the Republican Party – Karl Rove compared it to voter backlash following Watergate. What is most heartening for the pro-immigrant community is that Jim Oberweis was an avowed nativist. “Illegal immigration” was not merely a part of Oberweis’ platform, illegal immigration was Oberweis’ platform. Illinois blogger, archpundit, succinctly described Oberweis’ status:

What’s most interesting about the Illinois-14 race is that hardcore immigration opponents lost again and with one of their standout candidates….

Oberweis staked out the hardcore send back 12 million people immediately and no exceptions kind of policy and not only embraced the position, but embraced fairly radical anti-immigrant activist organizations.

Most amazing is that John McCain, long a reasonable voice on the immigration debate embraced Oberweis as McCain’s flip flop to the dark side of several issues continues.

Oberweis is a Board of Director for NumbersUSA which is one of the leading right wing anti-immigration groups.

He’s spoken at Illinois Minutemen meetings such as this one on May 6, 2006 mntmn017.wav
(http://archpundit.com/blog/2008/03/10/oberweis-extreme-immigration-record/_) Oberweis' campaign in 2004 campaign was notable for a television commercial where he flew in a helicopter over Chicago's Soldier Field, and claimed enough illegal immigrants came into America in a week (10,000 a day) to fill that facility. The stadium seats 61,500 people. Almost, no other candidate is more closely identified with an anti-immigrant platform than Oberweis. His loss, in what is a very Republican district, indicates that the politics of hate don’t sell well even in Republican suburbs.

Needless to say, the nativist websites have been apoplectic over this loss. Michelle Malkin has written numerous screeds calling Oberweis’ critics and commentators “delusional.” The hate-group V-Dare has decried the fact that Oberweis lost despite the strong backing of the powerful retiring incumbent, J. Dennis Hastert. (Ill-14th)

As we have stated in previous posts, undiluted anti-immigrant rants will not carry the day as a wedge issue. This should put the Republican Party (and stray Democrats) on notice that the anti-immigrant wave has crested. Reasonable immigration policies may carry the day following the November election. All those who believe in a humanitarian policy towards immigrants can take heart in Oberweis’ loss.


If you liked this post, don't forget to subscribe to my RSS feeds. Or you can
get my posts delivered to your inbox directly, by subscribing to my feeds by email.

Monday, March 17, 2008

McCain: Republicans Need to Abandon Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric

In a prior posting, “Immigration: The Myth of the Third Rail of Politics,” I noted that the conventional wisdom which holds “that any serious political candidate dare not articulate a pro-immigrant platform lest they get burned by the charged rail of American politics,” no longer holds true. (posting on March 3, 2008). A March 17, 2008 interview with Republican presidential candidate, John McCain, on NPR’s Morning Edition firmly underlines this point. (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=88382489) Senator McCain, along with Senator Edward Kennedy introduced, The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007, or, in its full name, the Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of 2007 (S. 1348) (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=16719). The legislation went down in flames but the fact that McCain was and is so closely identified with comprehensive immigration reform did not stop him from gaining the Republican Presidential nomination and recent polls give no indication that this issue will hurt him in the general election.

In the NPR interview McCain makes the observation that the Republican Party lost Dennis Hastert’s congressional seat to Democratic rival, Bill Foster. Hastert's district was considered a safe Republican seat and should have been an easy win for the Republican candidate, Jim Oberweis. McCain notes that Oberweis ran on an aggressive anti-immigrant platform and that this likely contributed to his loss. While the loss of this seat to Democrats has shocked the Republican establishment, it is once again worth noting that candidates for office need not be afraid from articulating a pro-immigrant position. Polls consistently show that most Americans are not in league with nativist activists like Michelle Malkin or Lou Dobbs.

The Wall Street Journal (no friend of Democrats or immigrants) noted as follows:

Republicans such as Mr. Oberweis remain convinced that illegal immigration is a winning issue. And if the electorate were comprised mostly of Internet screechers and cable news anchors, they might be right. But the fact that Mr. McCain, the Presidential candidate most closely associated with immigration tolerance, has outlasted Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee and other immigration hardliners, should be an indication that other issues are foremost in the minds of even GOP voters.

Saturday’s result showed once again that a hard line on illegal immigration doesn’t win elections. The longer Republicans pretend that it does the more elections they will lose.

Speaking of screeching web hate-mongers, Michelle Malkin tried bravely to spin this as anything but a loss for the nativist crowd. But the reality is that, despite so-much nativist chatter on the web and the cable networks, anti-immigrant hate-mongering will not carry the day as a wedge issue. As I have previously noted, this does not mean that anti-immigrant talk does not resonate with a portion of the electorate but that politicians who spew extreme positions will get burned. Conversely, pro-immigrant candidates need not fear that this issue will bring them down.


If you liked this post, don't forget to subscribe to my RSS feeds. Or you can
get my posts delivered to your inbox directly, by subscribing to my feeds by email.

Friday, February 8, 2008

A Window into a Community

Both of my parents are from Mexico and they are both evangelical Christians. My father was an early convert to Protestantism having been raised by an Evangelical pastor in Mexico. As a young man he immigrated to this country and worked at a factory in Nebraska. He absorbed the blue-collar pro-union politics of his co-workers. He remains a blue-collar Democrat to this day voting Democrat no matter how powerful and unremitting the exhortations of his evangelical pastor on behalf of Republicans.

My mother has contributed mightily to the coffers of Pat Robertson, Jimmy Swaggart and Jerry Falwell. While living at home, I read the right-wing missives of these heralds of god. My mother is a hard-core, right-wing evangelical voter. She will vote the party ticket as laid down by Pat Robertson and his ilk. Given the extreme polarity between my father’s views and those of my mother, they rarely talk politics. The intolerance is entirely on the part of my mother who refuses to countenance political debate of any kind – especially with the left-wing views to which my father subscribes.

The only time a political discussion opens up in our family is when I visit my parents. My father and I naturally grouse about the lousy political state of things. We carry this on until my mother joins us and I egg him on to needle her. She shushes my father up and unless I change the direction of the discussion she leaves us alone in the kitchen to drink our coffee and share our views.

My dad reads the local English-language newspaper and watches the local and national news on the English language stations. My mother does not read newspapers but she might watch some of the local news. They both watch Spanish-language television which is ubiquitous in the border area where they reside. Few of their political views are influenced by Spanish language television especially given its constant glitter shows and sensationalistic news coverage. The only other source of political news for either of my parents is the evangelical church that they attend and the numerous flyers sent to them by evangelical organizations such as The 700 Club.

Norquist says. "Oddly enough, people resent the idea that you might throw their mother out of the country."

My sister retired from the U.S. Air Force and currently works for Lockheed-Martin. Her political views might be described best as moderately left-of-center. Her religious views are more in line with those of my parents. Her children speak three languages.

My political views are considerably more nuanced than those of my parents or of my sister. Spanish is my first language and I attended the first few years of grade school in Mexico. Eventually, I made my way to an elite Eastern school and today my views are influenced by the New York Times, Harpers, and The New Yorker as well as by a number of political blogs and other websites.

We have extended family in Mexico. My uncles visit the U.S. at least once a year. We have big barbeques and check out all the second-hand stores for goods that are prohibitively expensive in Mexico.

I have family members who are in this country working without legal documents. They pay taxes, shop at American stores and abide by the laws of this country. Were it not for their undocumented status they would be considered model citizens. Should they be stopped or apprehended by agents of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement, (ICE) they would be summarily deported.

It should be pretty clear that as an informed citizen and given my experiences, I would not be particularly enthusiastic about the Republican Party’s nativist anti-immigrant policies. Republican strategist Grover Norquist, a top ally of Karl Rove, believes that the "vicious" rhetoric by GOP candidates could prompt Hispanics to flee "in droves" to the Democrats. "Talking about a strong border is one thing," Norquist says. "It's when you get into enforcing the law — which means deport — that you lose people's votes. Oddly enough, people resent the idea that you might throw their mother out of the country." I could not have put it better myself.

So what does this have to do with the price of tortillas? Namely, that the Republican apparatchiks have been using the anti-immigrant issue as their wedge issue of choice – kind of like the gay marriage issue of 2008. Unfortunately, it is not yielding returns for them. Any redneck who hates Mexicans is not going to put a Hillary or Obama bumper sticker on his pickup and if he votes he will likely vote R despite the nativist rhetoric. There are, however, like the Iraq war, unintended consequences. The nativist rancor has given the racist right cover to push their agenda of hate. As well, the Latino community has more reasons to say adieu to the Republican Party.

The last point is not without consequence. In the last two presidential elections, George Bush was able to make real inroads into the Hispanic vote. In one election he got fully 40% of the Latino vote. No Republican would dream of getting 40% of the African-American vote. At one point, the Latino community was actually in play between the Dems and the Reps. Not so today. If my experience is illustrative of any dynamic, it is that while we – the Latino community -- are not focused on one issue we are quite aware who is behind the current climate of hate. And we are not going to forget. Nor will my evangelical mother.


If you liked this post, don't forget to subscribe to my RSS feeds. Or you can
get my posts delivered to your inbox directly, by subscribing to my feeds by email.