Consider yourselves warned. Should conservative and Republicans hold fast to strong stands on illegal immigration in the coming election year, and if they ultimately do well at the polls because of it, look for the Boston Globe to lament the tactic as a cynical "wedge issue," rather than a reaction to valid concerns from the electorate.
The Boston Globe editorial board may be sharpening their knives for the coming election season with a November 25 editorial, "A wedge issue for our times." The Globe laments that immigration is proving a "radioactive" issue and in one passage made an odd characterization of how Democratic New York Governor Eliot Spitzer's backpedaling on illegal immigrant drivers licenses "rescued" Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) from twisting in the wind over her contorted answer on the topic of licenses for illegals.
Writing a reaction yesterday afternoon, Jay Tea at Wizbang lashed out at the Globe:
The issue is not "immigration," or even "immigrants." It's ILLEGAL aliens -- or, if you prefer the politically correct term, "undocumented immigrants."
If you keep that in mind, then the Globe's story is fairly accurate. There are strong interests on both sides that come down on opposite sides of the illegal alien issue. And there arguments on both sides, as well.
I come down on the side of the unions and the social conservatives, against the bleeding-hearts and big business. To me, "illegal" pretty much sums it up.
These people come here seeking the blessings of America, and begin by spitting on our laws and violating our sovereignty. Further, they spit in the faces of those immigrants who do go through the entire convoluted process, who get in line and wait, who obey the laws. To the Globe, there is no difference between the two.
What's more, the Globe's definition of immigration reform as a wedge issue is disingenuous. Wedge issues typically are highly divisive and often break down on partisan lines. They are deployed to gin up your base vote.
Yet illegal immigration is a potent issue for some Democrats and many independents, according to recent polling. In other words, it's not purely a "right-wing" or conservative concern.
From PoliPundit earlier this month (emphasis mine):
Some extremely interesting numbers from a Democrat poll:
notice some surprising numbers from a poll conducted by Democracy Corps and Democratic pollsters/strategists Stan Greenberg, Al Quinlan, and James Carville:
They asked independents their top two reasons why America is on the wrong track from a list of seven.
“Bogged down and spending billions in Iraq” came in next to last at 23 percent; “Government failed on Katrina” came in last at 13 percent.
The tops for independents? “Borders left unprotected,” way ahead at 40 percent.
Illegal immigration could be the winning issue for Fred Thompson and the GOP. Especially given Hillary’s record of anti-American votes on the issue.
In fact, illegal immigration might be the only issue that can save the GOP in 2008.
—Ken Shepherd is Managing Editor of NewsBusters
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
If they slap the term
November 26, 2007 - 11:28 ET by Chris NormanIf they slap the term "wedge" on an issue, the MSM thinks they have already begun the process of dismissing that issue to the "angry white male" trash heap...
Wedge issue? Between who?
November 26, 2007 - 11:53 ET by robertjacobThe only wedge is the one the left feels in their shorts when they are losing ground on an issue.
Curtailing illegals and
November 26, 2007 - 12:02 ET by Dan The Man 2Curtailing illegals and unauthorize border crossings is of teh utmost importance to security. Just this morning there was a report of plans for smuggling 60 or so terrorists across the Mexican border by teh illegal drug trade smugglers; and the materials tehy need to make mayhem.
We need a wall and more border patrol with fewer restrictions on who they can shoot.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
Dittos Dan
November 26, 2007 - 12:16 ET by acumenOnce again the demedia is more interested in getting a dem in the white house in '08 than national security.
From the article you referenced:
Fort Huachuca, the nation's largest intelligence-training center, changed security measures in May after being warned that Islamist terrorists, with the aid of Mexican drug cartels, were planning an attack on the facility.
Fort officials changed security measures after sources warned that possibly 60 Afghan and Iraqi terrorists were to be smuggled into the U.S. through underground tunnels with high-powered weapons to attack the Arizona Army base, according to multiple confidential law enforcement documents obtained by The Washington Times.
Seems illegal immigration is more of a wedge issue between all Americans and al qaeda. But then we know who al qaeda is rooting for in '08.
You arent kidding
November 26, 2007 - 16:42 ET by well99I wonder how many in msm will cover it.Fox had it here.
http://www.foxnews.c...
Jay Tea (at Wizbang) hit
November 26, 2007 - 12:26 ET by motherbeltJay Tea hit the nail on the head:
So, the Boston Globe wants to help illegal aliens get drivers'
licenses, learn English, live and work without fear of arrest and
deportation, and eventually win citizenship. This leaves me with one
rather simple question for the Globe:
In your world, why the (expletive deleted) would anyone bother trying to come here legally?
He is also right about the carrot/stick approach.
The Globe's approach is all carrot, no stick.
Well, apparently it's a
November 26, 2007 - 12:57 ET by ConservativeRexWell, apparently it's a wedge issue if they say it is in Boston. But then again, they don't have any fear of an illegal moving into their job do they?
Then again, the editors at the Boston Globe are doing a job no other Red-Blooded American would want to do, like undermine our soldiers, use their editorial board for Anti-American screeds..things like that.
So maybe there is a connection after all.
Guess who's coming to din...........be a slave for kickbacks
November 26, 2007 - 13:41 ET by Lame CherryI relish these elitist Boston liberal snobs who "employ" border busters for doing all the little jobs they don't want from mowing lawn to diapering their pooper children...........telling the IRS they are paying them 12 bucks an hour, but only shelling out 4 and pocketing the rest.
Let us get the word CORRECT. Liberals are not talking about immigrants BUT PAID SLAVERY no different than history shows.
The Boston Globe literally is advocating slavery and it is time these Democrats get called for exactly what it is. The border busters know very well they are getting crap jobs and in "high paying construction jobs" they are not seeing the money but are getting scammed that way too.
I though could not disagree more Mr. Shepherd that immigration is the only issue which could save the GOP. There are countless issue which I blog on here daily attempting to get the GOP operators who lurk on this site to implement some ideas.
Economic development which I have outlined here is one issue the GOP will trounce the Democrats on IF only we had candidates who understood what was necessary to bloom this economy as Milton Friedman started with Ronald Reagan. Phase 2 is a must and in mailing people it is a bit difficult to get "leaders" attention on issues when they are not that intelligent to figure out what one is dealing with.
Annapolis for example is another issue. I will not go into details, but I know for a fact that the Administration was doing some issues I had contacted them on in other areas of the Middle East by what made the news.
I do not agree with Annapolis as it will lead to war in America will bomb Iran sometime next year over it as that is what Annapolis is all about.......not peace.
In that though I could not get the American Enterprise Institute convinced that a peace plan I developed was to be undertaken. Instead America got railroaded by Olmert and the Europeans and we have "Annapolis" just like Oslo.
It was interesting though in an advocacy I attempted with the Israeli state through and open forum that certain negotiators at Annapolis are now doing what was part of my plan of appeasing the Neo Syrian Philistines in immigration and resettlement of them from the West Bank. (A billion dollars in lives for these people resettled in poverty stricken Muslim lands where they will assimilate is cheaper than 10 billion in war munitions to the Judeans.)
Those things all trickle down as the comments of this site enter the exchange of political thinkers. There are though many foreign and domestic policies which the GOP could engage in and trounce the DNC.........the problem is that leverage must be gained to move the Rockefeller clique to sign on or every time they screw around like they did with Bush policy in blowing up Iraq to get revenge as Bush 43 took their oil money cow Saddam from them.
One has to implement policy with the Rockefeller blessing to make it a win win for them too as they will get something out of it as much as the American people do. It is disgusting, but it is the only way of doing it unless one arrests the entire buch which is not going to happen and would be a disaster for American finance and foreign policy exchange.
The GOP requires a leader like Ronald Reagan who has a grasp of issues like Fred Thompson, but like Reagan the GOP requires a Mike Deaver to deliver the message, a Milton Friedman to drive the economic message and a John Lehman to drive defense policy and status.
Lehman is alive and available for the next President. I certainly can serve my nation on policy although I have no interest of leaving my dusty wilderness for the spotlight and Jeri Thompson certainly knows how to run a Deaver picture event.
I would state that Pat Buchanan who I suggest Newsbusters interview for this site as his coming book is about as close as a blueprint strategy for America as one can get. I do not agree with Buchanans isolationist stance, but I also do not agree the "love thy Muslim" policy has brought any fruit like the poison mushroom policy of love thy communist Chinese.
All of my best to you Mr. Shepherd.
*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS