DEMOCRATS TAKE ON THE ANTIS

Well, not all the Democrats. Hilary Clinton has backtracked and is now saying she opposes Governor Spitzer's driver's license plan - a plan that would improve public safety and also make it possible for all drivers to get insurance, something that is just as much a form of protection for American victims of accidents as for the drivers. Barack Obama, on the other hand, has come out in support of Governor Spitzer.

Of course, such laws would be unnecessary if we had a functioning immigration system where we had rigorous immigration enforcement coupled with a meaningful way to earn legalization for those here illegally and a workable visa system for employers wanting to bring workers in to the country in the future. Most of the antis lose interest after the first item and many of the pros forget about the first.

Governor Bill Richardson of New Mexico is publicly taking on Republican Tom Tancredo and is calling the Republican "an extremist." And he has voiced his support for a New Mexico law permitting unauthorized immigrants to get driver's licenses.

Despite the driver's license flap, Clinton and the rest of the Democrats have been consistent in supporting comprehensive immigration reform that includes rigorous enforcement, a path to legalization for unauthorized immigrants, a guest worker program and more numbers for family and employment-based immigrants. With the exception of Mayor Guiliani and Senator McCain, the GOP candidates have only been supporting more enforcement without the other needed reforms. And McCain recently announced he would no longer support a comprehensive approach due to pressure from the anti-immigrant wing of his party.

And the odds are that the GOP is going to be in quite a bind. Taking the anti-immigration position is necessary to get the party's nomination. But in the general election, they're likely to pay dearly. That's because most Americans rank immigration low on their priority list. Those that are anti-immigration were likely going to vote GOP. But Hispanics care greatly about immigration and the GOP had been making inroads in getting those votes. Now they are likely to be one of the groups that strongly support the Democrats. And the loss of those votes will likely make all the difference in the presidential race and in congressional races around the country.

Comments

[Jack]

'Most of the antis lose interest after the first item and many of the pros forget about the first.'

Well put. I see a lot of blame placed on the 'antis' (as you put it) for not being willing to deal on CIR. A reason for this unwillingness is they think the pro-CIR's are disingenuous about the enforcement part. To give on the irreversible amnesty in return for enforcement laws with no guarantee they will ever be executed is viewed as a sucker's bet. So they just play defense.

'Of course, such laws would be unnecessary if we had a functioning immigration system where we had rigorous immigration enforcement coupled with a meaningful way to earn legalization for those here illegally and a workable visa system for employers wanting to bring workers in to the country in the future.'

Glad to hear you aren't one of the enforcement is inherently inhumane folks but I repudiate the Bush dogma that enforcement, amnesty, and employment visa/guest worker are inextricably linked. Some 'antis' lose interest after enforcement because, of the three, enforcement is the only element essential to an anything less than unlimited immigration policy. Amnesty/earned legalization and employer visas are, for lack of a better word, nonessential. I don't say that to inflame but simply mean that they are options which our nation can consider separately and ultimately take or leave. We might choose to but we don't have to.

While there are some rational arguments in favor of amnesty, we certainly don't have to grant it like it's the only option available. We don't have to provide a 'pathway'. Nor do we have to have employer visas at all. We don't have to let business, especially those with no special loyalty to our country, decide the course of our nation, nor should we. I hear a lot of 'free trade' arguments. The case for free trade is based on Ricardo's law of comparative advantage, a theory which assumes labor immobility.

It is hard to defend the concept of having immigration law, any law really, but corruptly deciding not to enforce it. It wouldn't be a problem if we had a policy of totally unlimited immigration--in effect, no law to enforce. But if we have limited immigration then we need to enforce our law lest we create illegal immigration. That is what some 'pros' need to understand. If you truly want to prevent the humanitarian problems which accompany illegal immigration, you need to get on board with rigorous, but fair, enforcement. A lot of the things you don't like will go away as illegal immigration is deterred. From a humanitarian standpoint, deterrence beats the heck out of detention, deportation, etc. 'Law and order' folks win; bleeding hearts (not meant pejoratively) win. If some of the impeding 'pros' would get off their agenda of fighting any and all immigration law enforcement, perhaps the 'antis' would be open to more of what that side wants and not impede it in turn. I grant some will never budge but you don't need them all to get things moving a little.

[Dream Act guy]

Good NYT article on immigration:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/18/weekinreview/18luo.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=politics

'“Getting on the wrong side of a demographic trend, like the growing Hispanic electorate, can make a political party a minority party for a long time,” Mr. Rosenberg said. Hispanics accounted for 8 percent of voters last year.

Those calling for Republicans to moderate their language point to past losses, like Pat Buchanan’s runs for the presidency in 1992 and 1996, which were heavy on anti-immigrant talk. More recently, they said, J. D. Hayworth, a hard-line incumbent Republican representative in Arizona, lost his race in 2006, as did Randy Graf, a member of the border-enforcing Minuteman group, who also ran in Arizona.

“In the past it’s always been fool’s gold,” said Tamar Jacoby, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a conservative organization, who worked on behalf of the bipartisan immigration bill in the Senate.'

I think anti-immigration people are in denial. Immigration is a losing issue.

[JoeF]

"Santa Ana Ca here"

Yeah, that's the city I meant... I am living at the southern end of Santa Ana.

"And when this happens you can go back to your old job at the KKK."

You can continue your current job of being a coyote.

[Another voice]

"Unless 12 to 20 million illegals vote and rig the election, it could very well happen."

And when this happens you can go back to your old job at the KKK.

"No name, and thank you for saying that also. Now I am sure, everything will happen just like it should."

Unless 12 to 20 million illegals vote and rig the election, it could very well happen.

[Santa Ana]

"LOL. I live in SoCal, in a city that is largely Hispanic..."

Santa Ana Ca here ...

[Legal and waiting]

"Hope Mr. Obama wins the nomination and loses the general election."

No name, and thank you for saying that also. Now I am sure, everything will happen just like it should.

[JoeF]

"JoeF, you obviously don't know any Hispanics."

LOL. I live in SoCal, in a city that is largely Hispanic...

"No name, thank you for saying that! No, really, thank you. Your perception of reality is so convoluted, that it is a huge comfort that you think Obama is not getting the nomination - he must be pretty close to winning, then."

Hope Mr. Obama wins the nomination and loses the general election. I can only imagine what kind of agenda illegal immigrant senator Durbin would be pushing if junior senator from Illionois becomes president.

[L]

"assuming you are talking about Kucinich) He was "offended" at the term "illegal alien" and refused to answer the question until the term "undocumented" was used. He is a nut.

Kucinich said he was for the license. I think he would support a free house, nurse, personal teacher, and neighborhood peace officer also. The biggest expenditure would be on the "Department of Peace" that he wants to create. Have I called him a nut yet?"

I am talking about Mr. Obama , Kucinich is a nutjob when it comes to immigration. He is for handing out for citizenship to illegals but he will be totally opposed to a guest worker program. He will be for punishing employees who employ illegals but he will be opposed to punishing illegals who fake the identity of someone else.

Kusisnich on the left and Tancredo on the right both of them are nutjobs.

And what this "Department of Piece" will do?

Hope a single party will not control the whole government after next elections.

"I think he would support a free house, nurse, personal teacher, and neighborhood peace officer also"

And he would pay for all of the above services by rolling back tax cuts for top 2% rich people :)

[Another voice]

"(assuming you are talking about Kucinich)"

Why is what this guy says important he has no chance of winning the nomination so its really irrelevant what he says or not.

"Exactly if he is so much into speaking his mind why not say if he is for or against the license plan."

(assuming you are talking about Kucinich) He was "offended" at the term "illegal alien" and refused to answer the question until the term "undocumented" was used. He is a nut.

Kucinich said he was for the license. I think he would support a free house, nurse, personal teacher, and neighborhood peace officer also. The biggest expenditure would be on the "Department of Peace" that he wants to create. Have I called him a nut yet?

[L]

"Well after that debate, one thing is clear. Obama stumbled and didn't win on the issue of drivers licenses.

Obama's overall position on immigration seems rational - I just don't agree with him on licenses. But some of you guys are so far in left field that Kucinich is probably your guy.
"

Exactly if he is so much into speaking his mind why not say if he is for or against the license plan. He is one more demagogue among the bunch. He is no Bobby Kennedy.

[Another voice]

"we certainly need a republican president in terms for budget and defence"

Please that is just a political line during the elections. A strong president will full fill its duty in this areas if he is a democrat. The only difference is that the defense industry has deep pockets and once a republican is in power is time to go to war to re-pay the favors and make them lots of money even if the was is stupid like Iraq. And the last time the budget was balanced was when Bill Clinton was president and he is a democrat.

"but a democrat president in terms of immigration/healthcare."

Last Immigration reform was done by a republican Regan, Healthcare neither one of these parties will touch that with a 10 ft pole because it will require them to rise taxes.

I will say that Hillary may do something on Healthcare and Immigration democrats may do it depending on the congress composition and their chances for 2012.

"we certainly need a republican president in terms for budget and defence "

Yeah they've done such a great job with the budget. LOL.

These guys have taken us from a budget surplus to massive deficits. The fact that people still think they are conservatives and fiscally responsible is just hillareous to me.

[john]

i think in yesterday's show Hillary once again showed she is the leader.
Obama is a good guy, but i think he is not practical(rather immature) when he talks of international issues and even locals issues on healthcare and social security. we all know its all that not simple issues as he speaks (once again this reiterates politicians are liars). John edward is an honest guy, but frankly american president dont need to be most honest person.
If you think all these issues, I think Hillary is the leader. We all know she flip flops, but she address issues more maturely and certainly is a right end democrat(close to republican). we certainly need a republican president in terms for budget and defence but a democrat president in terms of immigration/healthcare.
I think Hillary is the better choice.

Well after that debate, one thing is clear. Obama stumbled and didn't win on the issue of drivers licenses.

Obama's overall position on immigration seems rational - I just don't agree with him on licenses. But some of you guys are so far in left field that Kucinich is probably your guy.

Seriously, you should all get Kucinich bumper stickers

[Dream Act guy]

JoeF, you obviously don't know any Hispanics. Immigration is one of the major issues Hispanics care about, and it will be a major factor in their vote. If you want to know what will happen to the Hispanic vote in 2008, all you need to do is to look at what happened in 2006.

Also, gay marriage is almost a spent issue. There's barely any life in it left especially compared to 2004.

[JoeF]

"Presidents hopefuls are usually way more flexible.. a couple of opinion polls is all it takes to change their mind."

That could describe Hillary ;-)
She first was for Spitzer's plan, and now is against it...
I hope the Dems don't elect Hillary. She would be the best help for the Republicans.
If Hispanics are going to vote for the Dems is not overly clear, though. In the last elections, things like the push for gay marriage drove a lot of them to the GOP. Most Hispanics are social conservatives, probably due to the catholic influence.

"Presidents hopefuls are usually way more flexible.. a couple of opinion polls is all it takes to change their mind."

That could describe Hillary ;-)
She first was for Spitzer's plan, and now is against it...
I hope the Dems don't elect Hillary. She would be the best help for the Republicans.
If Hispanics are going to vote for the Dems is not overly clear, though. In the last elections, things like the push for gay marriage drove a lot of them to the GOP. Most Hispanics are social conservatives, probably due to the catholic influence.

[hmm]

I hate to agree with Mr.Noname that this story hurts Obama's chances. Obama has shown that he is ready to fight for what he believes in, and Presidents hopefuls are usually way more flexible.. a couple of opinion polls is all it takes to change their mind.

[hmm]

I hate to agree with Mr.Noname that this story hurts Obama's chances. Obama has shown that he is ready to fight for what he believes in, and Presidents hopefuls are usually way more flexible.. a couple of opinion polls is all it takes to change their mind.

[Legal and waiting]

No name, thank you for saying that! No, really, thank you. Your perception of reality is so convoluted, that it is a huge comfort that you think Obama is not getting the nomination - he must be pretty close to winning, then.

Like Obama is going to win the nomination. LOL. It's between Edwards and Clinton. Obama probably just lost the primary if he supports Spitzer's position given the unpopularity of the issue.

[g]

"Go, Barak! I always liked you (well, being a hot guy may have helped his assessment). Republicans accepted the Univision invite? Oh, I think I will hang around in this country for another year - it is starting to get interesting ;-)"

I really hope Barak wins the nomination and love to see what kind of chances he will have winning the general election. Does it matter if Republicans have accepted the Univision nomination ... Not really they will repeat the same thing in that debate too ...

[Legal and waiting]

Go, Barak! I always liked you (well, being a hot guy may have helped his assessment). Republicans accepted the Univision invite? Oh, I think I will hang around in this country for another year - it is starting to get interesting ;-)

[Another voice]

Funny the republicans finally accepted Univision's(Spanish Language network) invitation to hold a debate in Miami, this after refusing to do it at the initial invitation. I wonder what are they going to say to hispanic potential voters after all that is on record today in the news media, specially when it comes to immigration. Also if we take the Tsongas victory and the recent VA experience that should make it intersting for these republicans when it comes to taking a position to win the nomination and then flip floping when it comes to the general election.