Attention, Fourth District GOP
By Mitch Berg
It’s pretty much a given that nobody appreciates this country like someone who left his/her old life to come here. As a fourth-generation American, the grandson of people who were born here, I am deeply thankful for what we have in this nation – but not nearly so much as those who come here, sometimes leaving or risking all, do.
Indeed, there is nothing that warms the heart, shivers the spine and quivers the lip quite like seeing a swearing-in ceremony, where dozens, hundreds or thousands of newly-naturalized citizens take the Pledge of Allegiance, and take up permanent residence in the Shining City on the Hill.
And as a cherry on the sundae? They’re turning into Republicans:
Previously, new citizens could be relied upon to vote Democratic by a ratio of up to 10 to one. But in San Diego this week there were indications that this could be changing.
“I’ve had several people here, Hispanic people, say ‘No, I’m a Republican’,” said Bill De Risa, a Democratic worker eagerly registering voters outside Golden Hall.
His colleague Mary Kennedy said that one woman had told her she wanted to be a Republican because of immigration policy.
“She felt the Democrats were too soft. She wanted higher fences. It’s a very polarising issue.”
The high fence – and wide, brightly-lit gate – draw comments:
“For a long time, immigration was OK,” said Sara Wright, 49, a seamstress from Mexico who arrived in the US legally in 1986.
“But now, no more. A lot of really bad people come from Mexico and commit crimes.
“People are coming in and having two, three, four babies and going on welfare. Some are making money here and spending it back in Mexico.
“That’s not right. They should go back to Mexico and get a permit.”
Mrs Wright, whose American-born husband Ed served in the US Navy, was one of 1,591 people from 89 countries who became citizens at a ceremony in San Diego’s Golden Hall on Tuesday.
Immigration: Keep it safe, available and legal.
December 4th, 2007 at 7:13 am
“many legal immigrants anxious to uphold the laws of their adopted country are moving towards the more hard-line immigration stance of Republicans.”
“sizeable numbers of America’s newly-minted potential voters said that illegal immigrants should be penalised rather than given an easy route to citizenship as most Democrats advocate.”
“I’ve had several people here, Hispanic people, say ‘No, I’m a Republican’,” said Bill De Risa, a Democratic worker eagerly registering voters outside Golden Hall.
“His colleague Mary Kennedy said that one woman had told her she wanted to be a Republican because of immigration policy.”
Wow, “many,” “sizable numbers,” “several,” “one.” Numbers don’t lie!
How is it that you right wingers believe nothing you read in the press, unless it supports your preexisting prejudices, in which case you’re completely credulous?
December 4th, 2007 at 7:28 am
How is it you left wingers feel comfortable generalizing in the cause of decrying generalization?
December 4th, 2007 at 7:44 am
Well-founded conclusions and unsupported generalizations are different things, Kermite. Angryclown limits himself to the former; wingnuts seem to prefer to traffic in the latter.
December 4th, 2007 at 8:32 am
Well-founded conclusions, in AssClown’s case, mean that his tin-foil hat vibrated.
Here’s another bit of bad news for AC & Co. The overwhelming majority of Mexican immigrants are comitted, practising Catholics.
December 4th, 2007 at 10:00 am
How is it that you right wingers believe nothing you read in the press,
Untrue. “Trust but verify”. Or in the case of most MSM, “verify, THEN trust”.
unless it supports your preexisting prejudices, in which case you’re completely credulous?
Noting a comment in the London Times = “credulous”?
December 4th, 2007 at 10:29 am
Funny, looks like the Telegraph to me. In any case, it’s pretty weak, don’t you think? No numbers (except that immigrants traditionally vote Dem by a 10 to 1 margin). Just a couple anecdotes about immigrants who want to pull the ladder up after them once they’re safely sworn in.
Speaking of weak – typical sad effort by Swiftee. Dude, if this is the best you can do, consider shutting your pie hole. Less embarassing all around.
December 4th, 2007 at 10:32 am
“consider shutting your pie hole”
If only you’d take your own advice to heart. . .
December 4th, 2007 at 10:55 am
Funny, looks like the Telegraph to me.
Friggin limeys. “Toymes”, “Teh-uh-grawf”, “Play grawnd pe-aw-no in the pah-lah”. We fought a revolution so we wouldn’t HAVE to keep all of the detritus of Fleet Street straight.
In any case, it’s pretty weak, don’t you think?
As an article? Maybe.
OTOH, some of us have been observing for years that Latinos that’ve been in the US more than two generations are very likely to vote GOP, and that once you get past entitlement programs (and, in the case of the H’mong in Saint Paul, loyalty to the DFL congressman who brought ’em here), many of them SHOULD be natural GOP constituencies.
Which, on the off-chance (hahahaha) you didn’t notice, is something over which I routinely castigate my district GOP.
Alternate answer: “Twenty bucks, same as in town”.
December 4th, 2007 at 1:32 pm
angryclown said:
“Well-founded conclusions and unsupported generalizations…Angryclown limits himself to the former…”
You are a funny guy, angryclown. 🙂
December 4th, 2007 at 2:01 pm
“”SHOULD be natural GOP constituencies.””
Although a completely different post, the reason here is the hateful gut wrenching ideological backstabbing that goes in on the GOP is enough to scare anyone way from the party. You want to have ‘natural constituencies’, then start treating everyone like human beings regardless of their ideological background.
Of course you will deny that, cause you don’t see it, because you are a part of it.
GW Bush blew it for the GOP with his Rovian divide wedge issue politics.
December 4th, 2007 at 4:20 pm
“the hateful gut wrenching ideological backstabbing”
and this doesn’t happen on the other side? Get real.
December 4th, 2007 at 4:42 pm
“and this doesn’t happen on the other side? Get real.”
To each other, maybe, but not to the constituency. I don’t expect you to get it, because if you are part of it you can’t see it. It is refreshing being on the outside looking in.
December 4th, 2007 at 5:01 pm
How about an example so that I can figure out what you’re talking about?
You’re not talking about the attempted MOB coup are you? (you do realize that wasn’t real don’t you)
December 5th, 2007 at 12:11 am
not to the constituency.
Huh?
Ask gay DFLers about Wellstone’s support of the Defense of Marriage Act! Ask Black DFLers about how the DFL has stood up for school choice! Ask outstate DFLers about how their interests hve been seen to!
DFLers should all get a tub of KY Jelly at caucuses to make their party leadership’s policy more tolerable.