Immigration Defines GOP Battle

Washington Post: Candidates Have Fought To Prove They Are Toughest Against Illegal Immigrants

(Washingtonpost.com)  This story was written by Jonathan Weisman.

---

The imagery of the mailings is designed to pack a wallop: a Mexican flag fluttering above the Stars and Stripes, the Statue of Liberty presiding over a "Welcome Illegal Aliens" doormat, a Social Security card emblazoned with the name "Juan Doe," a U.S. passport proclaiming, "Only one candidate has a plan to STAMP out illegal immigration."

As Republican presidential candidates troll for votes, they have flooded mailboxes in Iowa and New Hampshire with such loaded images. Their campaigns have filled the airwaves, packed their Web sites and taunted their adversaries, proclaiming their concern over porous borders and accusing opponents of insufficient vigilance.

No issue has dominated the Republican presidential nomination fight the way illegal immigration has. Under consistent attack for inconsistent conservatism, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney has turned to the issue again and again to shore up his conservative credentials. Former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, running as the law-and-order candidate, has been forced onto the defensive by immigration policies in his city.

And just days after he delivered a passionate defense of the humanity of undocumented children in a Republican debate, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee presented one of the most punitive immigration platforms seen in this campaign season, rejecting legislation to provide the children of illegal immigrants a path to citizenship if they finish high school, attend two years of college or join the military.

Giuliani, Huckabee and Romney have all used illegal immigration to try to prove to voters that they are the toughest and most conservative candidates in the field. And they have used it with brutal consistency in an attempt to marginalize Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), whose vocal support for legislation to clamp down on border security while offering illegal immigrants a path to citizenship helped cost him his front-runner status.

Romney, despite facing criticism about some of his own immigration policies in Massachusetts and the fact that he was forced to dismiss a company that tended his lawn after it was revealed that it employed illegal immigrants, has attacked all of his rivals on the issue. A new CNN poll shows Romney with sizable advantages over the competition on the handling of illegal immigration, with a lead of 17 percentage points over Huckabee on the matter.

"You have a strong field, but their strengths and weaknesses cancel each other out. No one candidate is standing out as particularly stronger than the rest of the field or more conservative than the rest of the field," said Ken Mehlman, President Bush's former campaign manager, who spent years courting Latino voters for the Republican cause. "And in that dynamic, the desire is to stand up on every issue and say, 'I'm the strongest, and I'm the most conservative.'"

And nowhere is that more obvious than in the debate over immigration, he said.

The strategy poses a real risk. As the rhetoric and the policy proposals have grown increasingly strident, the eventual nominee's ability to win Latino support in swing states such as Colorado, Arizona, Nevada and New Mexico may be coming increasingly into question.

"For Republican primary politics, this may be the most significant issue. Clearly, there is a segment that is hotly anti-immigrant, and they're very engaged," said Cecilia Munoz, senior vice president for public policy at the National Council of La Raza, the nation's largest Latino political organization. "But I don't understand what these guys are going to say to my community when it's time to run" a general-election campaign.

---

Candidate Quiz
Test your knowledge of the 2008 presidential contenders.

---

But if Republicans can focus the debate on law-breaking, border security and the strain that illegal immigrants are placing on public services, the issue could also place a wedge between many Democrats and their eventual nominee.

Less than a year after Bush resumed his push to offer the nation's 12 million illegal immigrants a path to citizenship, most of his would-be GOP successors could not have moved further from his platform. Even McCain now embraces policies to clamp down on employers and to seal the border with fencing, unmanned aerial vehicles and beefed-up border patrols. Only when the border is certified as closed would he then consider what to do with the illegal immigrants already in the country.

Huckabee's "Secure America" plan twins a similar crackdown with a proposal to give all illegal immigrants 120 days to register with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and to leave the country. Those who register would face no penalty if they later applied to immigrate or visit. Those who do not "will be, when caught, barred from future reentry" for a decade, Huckabee's plan states.

[david1737]

Nobody cared about the issue of illegal immigration until Rove told them that they do.

Wake up and start thinking for yourselves America!

[david1737]

W''s approaching 10 trillion in debt, and the Repubs are complaining about Edwards'' $400 haircuts.

[david1737]

denn034

Reaganomics left America 3 trillion in debt.

[denn034]

I support Bush''s Guest Worker visa idea because, it steers illegals away from welfare. Immigration wouldn''t be an issue in the Republican primary if they hadn''t forsaken Reagan, a fact that this Reagan Republican doesn''t like. We need Reaganomics again!

[quetzal666]

the Last Mexican dictator was Porfirio diaz....
youre stuck in last century sir...

the PRI was not a dictatorship in the classic form but it was nonetheless a rigged system.
FOX stopped that system in its tracks but not before allot of effort and sweat from allot of historical figures,
and mainly because Mexicans would no longer allow it.
but dont sweat it....
Latinos overtook Whites as the majority in texas in 2006, even though whites still hold on to allot of the power i suspect that will soon be in a reversal role, Texas will someday be a Democratic State as soon as we undo all of the thievery engineered by the scumbag Delay......

[hwy71so]

I suppose infiltration would be the ONLY way to gain a foot hold. But, even that will fall as well. The American people still believe in liberty. Not a dictatorship like the Mexican government prefers.

[quetzal666]

maybe his parents are crossing the border right now???

[quetzal666]

Aztlan was is and will be so again...
what you are witnessing has been an aztec prophecie for centuries...
and soon 12 million new citizens will be executing their rights to vote.
the hispanic vote at some point in the future will be worth as much as an anglo vote by sheer numbers.
and i pray i live to see the day when a latino sits in the white house....

[hwy71so]

That''s okay Quet, some English still have a problem admitting the U.S. defeated them in that revolution.

[quetzal666]

there has been allot of progress since Vicente Fox...
you just dont want to see it.....
not all of mexico is villages anymore...
i see you are just speaking of something you know nothing about, change the channel not all of it is Faux News.......

[hwy71so]

Actually, Santa Anna was jealous of the generosity of his predecessor who''d originated the agreement with Austin and he tried to repossess the land. He imposed oppressive restraints on Austin and his colonists hoping to discourage them so they''d go back to the states. Such as the means of getting supplies; food, medicine, seed, and tools. Further, most of these new colonists could not afford slaves. Most of them put all they had into getting to the land the CADDO indians called Tejas. Meanwhile, the Spanish decendents were treated as royalty while the Mexican race (those of Spanish/Indian decent) was treated as bad as the colonists. Basically the same as it is today. Why would one even defend Santa Anna? He was a tyrant, an evil man that treated his own countrymen like goat dung (just like Vicente Fox). Incidentally, the states did not back the revolution. They warned against it. The Texans took to it of their own accord. It was 10 years before they joined the US.

[quetzal666]

Posted by peter776....
i agree with you on this last statement.
the problem i see is in the US intervening and downright complicity with them as long as US interests are left alone and unhindered, when those US interests are threatened Special Covert ops find their way into the society..
Operation Condor as an example.......

[prinzowhales]

The Republican Mainstream?--Scum! Vermin! Garbage! Liars! They had years to deal with the problem and failed to do so.

They did not even control the influx of braceros into the country. The policy of the US under the Demo-publican Regime has been one of de facto open borders, but now they want to make the problem of illegal immigration turn on the question of their children or legal hurdles for them to cross...NOT on controlling the border...they are trying to sell BS once more as a ''solution''..."virtual borders" etc.

The people who are responsible for this are the Oligarchs and their Demo-publican henchmen who, under the Moynihan-esque policy of "benign neglect" have left the borders open by design--and they should pay the cost with terrificly increased taxes and voter retribution.

The correct policy should be: close the borders; send the criminals back; let the others stay and begin the naturalization process...end the "anchor baby" strategem for residence...end the family eligibility which allows an endless stream of relatives to follow the new residents to the US.

[peter776-2009]

Mexico and other former Spanish colonies never required the formal institution of slavery: anyone with a brown skin was already a de facto slave, with no rights, and virtually no prospect of bettering themselves. This grand inheritance from Spain continues throughout Latin America today. For example, unemployment in Mexico is around 40%, illiteracy is around 60% and 50 families (ALL of them descended from Spanish ruling class stock) own over 90% of the country''s wealth. The laws mean nothing, and everything is run at the end of a gun barrel or with pay-offs. Unless you look to Africa, you would be hard-pressed to find more stark examples of class oppression and violence than are to be found throughout Latin American, where the wealthy latifundia continue to wield their death grip on everyone below them. Fairness, democracy and equality are alien concepts in most Latin American countries.

[quetzal666]

The debate over Texas was at the heart of the U.S.-Mexican dispute. Seeing the trend of U.S. settlers immigrating to Texas, Mexican president Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna attempted to bring U.S. immigration to a halt. He abolished slavery and enforced customs duties on the settlers as deterrence. In response, the settlers revolted.

[quetzal666]

At first, the settlers were content to live under Mexican rule, but several events helped to incline Texan minds toward independence:

In 1831, Mexico abolished slavery, following the lead of most western nations. This loss of unpaid labor, if actually enforced in Tejas, would have been a severe blow to the region''s emerging cotton economy. It also reminded many transplanted citizens of the tolerant official view of slavery held by the United States

[quetzal666]

Posted by Hwy71So.....
or so Texas History according to whites would lead you to believe......
yes dear old pappa austinsuch a noble fellow.....
he was a biggot....

[hwy71so]

You''ve got to be kidding right? After all the indians Mexico enslaved or slaughtered? Santa Anna gave Austin X amount of land to colonize under Mexican rule. Austin became a citizen and required, all those who would receive their portion of land to become citizens as well. Then Mexico began to raise their land taxes. They raised them so much that the corn and other crops just wouldn''t pay for them. So, to pay their taxes the new colonists had to subdivide their land. So, Austin went to Mexico City to petition relief. While Austin was in Mexico City, the new colonists moved against San Antone. Austin got back and stopped them encouraging them to give Mexico another chance. That chance came with Santa Anna sending troops to the region.

Slavery? Shoot, Mexico encouraged slavery which goes back even to Spain where the northern european regions were raided for slaves by the Spanish, especially from Ireland and Scotland. In fact, the Spanish are the ones that brought African slaves to the North American continent. And that goes back even to Columbus who sailed for Spain.

[quetzal666]

Many Texas slavers, such as David Crockett and James Bowie, found free reign in the Mexican territory of Texas. They were aided by the descendents of %u201Cwhite%u201D Canary Islanders who supported slavery. %u201CWhite%u201D descendents of the Canary Islanders, such as Juan Seguin and Antonio Navarro, supported the American slaver move into Texas. Texas independence is more about slavery than what historians and the Daughters of the Republic of Texas are willing to admit.
A review of Mexican history reveals that a %u201Cmixed race%u201D Mexican president abolished slavery in Mexico in 1829, which presented a problem for Texas slavers who had migrated to Texas, in part, to avoid the anti-slavery efforts taking place in the United States. According to the Mexico Connect Website, Vicente Guerrero fought against slavery in Texas and Mexico and was hated by the white Texans and the elite Spanish rulers of Mexico. For one thing was clear, the abolition of slavery in Mexico (Texas) forced the Anglo Texans to go to war with Mexico, for their %u201Cslave property%u201D and thus their economic prosperity was linked to the idea the Texas should be free from Mexico in order for it to later become admitted to the United States as a slave state.
...
http://www.saregister.com/historicaj16l.html

[quetzal666]

Its the same mentality that caused the revolt of Mexican citizens in Texas in the 1800s.....

,,,, im assuming you are talking about Texas Independance. as i recall in my history lessons the case against Mexico and for independance happened when Santa Anna Declared he wanted all Mexican Territory free of African Slaves and abolished slavery.
the whites took offence to that....
it is not a mentality, For years this government
helped the PRI and supported their corrupt gamesmanship, progress takes time, it is happening a little at a time, want to talk about wasted tax money, look at the sinking hole in Iraq..