Illegals, Ctd.

A reader writes:

I was duly amused by your posting on the Republican party’s discussion of "Satan’s influence on illegal immigrants." However, lost in a lot of the rhetoric is that, in my opinion anyway, there is a very serious problem brewing in the American Southwest. I live in a fairly expensive suburb of Los Angeles, so it’s only 25% hispanic(!), I’m no racist, and I would not mind this fact if not for the reality that many, many hispanics in this area are either here illegally, and/or do not speak english. And this is not just people who are day laborers. One time I was stopped for directions by someone driving an expensive looking SUV, with a UC Irvine sticker on the car. She herself was surprised to find that I could not speak Spanish, and as a result I unfortunately could not direct her to where she was going.

I’m not exactly sure what you call an area where a huge group of people are here illegally, and another huge group do not speak english, but it’s not a nation…

Now I realize historically, there have been times and regions in the US where a mass of immigrants would congregate, and perhaps be a bit slow in assimilating. But one thing that I think is new is the idea that somehow it’s chauvinist to think that everyone should speak the same language, or be legal citizens, or adopt American values. That last thing can mean many things, but I think the most important part of it is participating in the democratic process and following the country’s laws, both of which are obviously not something that many of these new arrivals are doing.

And then there is the fact that I would be tarred as a racist by many for even entertaining that there might be any problem relating to a group of people that does not have white skin. So, I can begin to see where some of these Republicans are coming from (I’m a Democrat).

Please keep me anonymous!

Quote for the Day

"Having disgracefully abdicated that responsibility back in September because they wanted to win the midterm elections, Democrats — now that they have won — can cleanse their historic sin only by committing themselves, not symbolically but in actuality, to the restoration of habeas corpus. Whether they are willing to do so will speak volumes about their true character and about whether their November victory will result in anything other than some televised hearings. If Democrats are too afraid even to take a stand against the Bush administration in defense of this centuries-old core American liberty, it is impossible to imagine any even minimally risky stands they are willing to take," – Glenn Greenwald, Salon.

One Dem Against The Hate Crimes Law

Here’s part of the explanation from Democratic Congressman Joe Donnelly from Indiana:

I took many factors into consideration before ultimately deciding to vote against H.R. 1592. Not least of those factors was the input I received from my constituents. All told, I received nearly five times as many calls, emails and letters from opponents of the bill as I did from its supporters.

Christianists were organized, fired up by their hatred of gay people principled defense of federalism. Donnelly’s subsequent argument is that he doesn’t think hate crimes laws can abolish hate. Too right. So why does he support them for every other victim category?