I thought she was better than this....

I have always held Linda Chavez in high regard. But this kind, rational, and (until now) honest commentator, has fallen in my estimation by resorting to scurrilous argument in favor of the deeply flawed immigration "compromise."  Of course, she has plenty of company among the GOP elites, but somehow I expected better of Linda. Consider this sample form her latest column:
Some people just don't like Mexicans - or anyone else from south of the border. They think Latinos are freeloaders and welfare cheats who are too lazy to learn English. They think Latinos have too many babies, and that Latino kids will dumb down our schools. They think Latinos are dirty, diseased, indolent and more prone to criminal behavior. They think Latinos are just too different from us ever to become real Americans.

No amount of hard, empirical evidence to the contrary, and no amount of reasoned argument or appeals to decency and fairness, will convince this small group of Americans - fewer than 10 percent of the general population, at most - otherwise. Unfortunately, among this group is a fair number of Republican members of Congress, almost all influential conservative talk radio hosts, some cable news anchors - most prominently, Lou Dobbs - and a handful of public policy "experts" at organizations such as the Center for Immigration Studies, the Federation for American Immigration Reform, NumbersUSA, in addition to fringe groups like the Minuteman Project.

Stripped bare, this is what the current debate on immigration reform is all about. Fear of "the other" - of those who look or sound different, who come from poor countries with unfamiliar customs - has been at the heart of every immigration debate this country has ever had, from the infamous Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 to the floor of the U.S. Senate this week.
For the record, I think Lou Dobbs is a nutjob and/or a panderer. I have had Latino friends my entire adult life. There are some aspects of Mexican culture that are very congenial to me, and from which we can benefit. And I concede that there are indeed haters out there. But tarring all opponents of the bill with this broad brush is simply unconscionable, and unworthy of a figure like Linda Chavez.

Hatred and fear of the other is not what my opposition to the bill is about, nor is what I perceive most opponents are about. There are serious problems with the bill, and the devil is in the details. Having been burned before with immigration"reform" the public is rightly suspicious, particularly when Hugh Hewitt (Linda: is Hugh a redneck hater, too?) and other thoughtful people examining the bill have found tuckerd away in its hundreds of pages provisions that negate the fine-sounding language about border enforcement?

It is not that Latinos are too different from the rest of us, Linda. Get a grip. If you are looking for different, think about Somalis, Hmong, and Chinese immigrants, from cultures that are non-Christian, nonwhite, and non-Western. The issue with 12-20 million illegal immigrants whose homeland is next door, a bus ride away, and some of whom think they are the legitimate owners of the western third of the United States (see MeCHA), is willingness to and interest in assimilation. And sheer numbers. And rewarding the flouting of our laws.

Calling your opponent a "racist" because of a difference over policy is something the Left excels at, Linda. I am very disappointed in you for learning this tactic from them. If you want to call me a racist, then you join the likes of Al Sharpton. I hope you are comfortable with your new friends. By the way, a lot of them are not too fond of Latinos.

Hat tip: Andy Bryant
I have always held Linda Chavez in high regard. But this kind, rational, and (until now) honest commentator, has fallen in my estimation by resorting to scurrilous argument in favor of the deeply flawed immigration "compromise."  Of course, she has plenty of company among the GOP elites, but somehow I expected better of Linda. Consider this sample form her latest column:
Some people just don't like Mexicans - or anyone else from south of the border. They think Latinos are freeloaders and welfare cheats who are too lazy to learn English. They think Latinos have too many babies, and that Latino kids will dumb down our schools. They think Latinos are dirty, diseased, indolent and more prone to criminal behavior. They think Latinos are just too different from us ever to become real Americans.

No amount of hard, empirical evidence to the contrary, and no amount of reasoned argument or appeals to decency and fairness, will convince this small group of Americans - fewer than 10 percent of the general population, at most - otherwise. Unfortunately, among this group is a fair number of Republican members of Congress, almost all influential conservative talk radio hosts, some cable news anchors - most prominently, Lou Dobbs - and a handful of public policy "experts" at organizations such as the Center for Immigration Studies, the Federation for American Immigration Reform, NumbersUSA, in addition to fringe groups like the Minuteman Project.

Stripped bare, this is what the current debate on immigration reform is all about. Fear of "the other" - of those who look or sound different, who come from poor countries with unfamiliar customs - has been at the heart of every immigration debate this country has ever had, from the infamous Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 to the floor of the U.S. Senate this week.
For the record, I think Lou Dobbs is a nutjob and/or a panderer. I have had Latino friends my entire adult life. There are some aspects of Mexican culture that are very congenial to me, and from which we can benefit. And I concede that there are indeed haters out there. But tarring all opponents of the bill with this broad brush is simply unconscionable, and unworthy of a figure like Linda Chavez.

Hatred and fear of the other is not what my opposition to the bill is about, nor is what I perceive most opponents are about. There are serious problems with the bill, and the devil is in the details. Having been burned before with immigration"reform" the public is rightly suspicious, particularly when Hugh Hewitt (Linda: is Hugh a redneck hater, too?) and other thoughtful people examining the bill have found tuckerd away in its hundreds of pages provisions that negate the fine-sounding language about border enforcement?

It is not that Latinos are too different from the rest of us, Linda. Get a grip. If you are looking for different, think about Somalis, Hmong, and Chinese immigrants, from cultures that are non-Christian, nonwhite, and non-Western. The issue with 12-20 million illegal immigrants whose homeland is next door, a bus ride away, and some of whom think they are the legitimate owners of the western third of the United States (see MeCHA), is willingness to and interest in assimilation. And sheer numbers. And rewarding the flouting of our laws.

Calling your opponent a "racist" because of a difference over policy is something the Left excels at, Linda. I am very disappointed in you for learning this tactic from them. If you want to call me a racist, then you join the likes of Al Sharpton. I hope you are comfortable with your new friends. By the way, a lot of them are not too fond of Latinos.

Hat tip: Andy Bryant