Skip to main content

The Immigration Speech--Becoming part of the problem

The Anchoress laid it on hard! I can totaly relate to her fatige with politics and the rhetoric and I agree with her. I was honestly surprised at how many conservatives discounted Bush and the speech even before he spoke. It's just not intelectually sound.
I cannot help but notice that a number of conservative bloggers - some of whom I have long-respected - have already decided that President Bush’s speech tonight will be insufficient to the task of undoing 30 years of neglect. They’ve heard a whisper here, an idea there, and decided that if he’s not going to do precisely what they want him to do - and only that - then he needn’t even be listened to. They’ve already pre-empted him.

Attention, my conservative friends - please pull back from the edge. Please take a moment to consider what has become of you: When you have reached the point that you will not even allow a man to make his speech and put his ideas out there - if you have already decided that nothing he says can be of value (or if you fear that too many might actually listen to the man and be persuaded) then you have become part of the problem.

If you cannot stop down-shouting long enough to take a breath and let a man speak, then you’ve moved beyond thoughtful analysis and constructive criticism. You have become the very sort of person you’ve said you despised - you’ve embraced the tactics of those you hate. What was it St. Paul said? “All that I hate I find I am become…”

If all you can do is scream loudly, work to drown out the president’s thoughts before he even expresses them and jumpstart the Caravan of Rage & Ultimate Defeat that you’ve been riding for a while, now…well, there is going to be a tragedy. The man has earned the right to be heard before you start stomping on him and tearing about in wild, reactionary frustration.

Maybe I need to take a break on the issue of immigration and it's politics, and start talking about other things that matter to me; like poverty, corruption, the family, marriage, and the Latino culture. Now there is a thought...


Popular posts from this blog

Hispanic Trending: Leave your name at the border

Most people miss the fact that Hispanics do not consist of a single ethnic group. Besides that, the heritage that each one of the many nationalities represented in our immigrant population is diverse in itself. As I read Manuel Muñoz's post on his assimilation experience, I can tell you mine was nothing like his. But I can relate to this paragraph. My niece's name is Katie Belle (Sierra). It's intriguing to watch "American" names begin to dominate among my nieces and nephews and second cousins, as well as with the children of my hometown friends. I am not surprised to meet 5-year-old Brandon or Kaitlyn. Hardly anyone questions the incongruity of matching these names with last names like Trujillo or Zepeda. The English-only way of life partly explains the quiet erasure of cultural difference that assimilation has attempted to accomplish. A name like Kaitlyn Zepeda doesn't completely obscure her ethnicity, but the half-step of her nam…

Communism: Good Money for the "El Viejo"

I guess Fidel Castro is doing ok. Forbes lists Castro as one of the richest in the world, right up there with the Queen of England. I bet he didn't like the attention. It was hard to figure it out, but it seems they managed to throw some numbers together.
In the past, we have relied on a percentage of Cuba's gross domestic product to estimate Fidel Castro's fortune. This year we have used more traditional valuation methods, comparing state-owned assets Castro is assumed to control with comparable publicly traded companies. A reasonable discount was then applied to compensate for the obvious disclosure issues.

RealClearPolitics: The Democrats Dither on Trade

The backtracking on free trade in South America has been among the frustrating news for me coming out of the beltway. Considering how the economic downturns in Latin America affect us through the increase in illegal immigration, I would think more Americans would be fighting for this one as loudly as they fought for the failed Immigration legislation. Democratic presidential candidates like to talk about "turning a page" in America's relations with the rest of the world. But what does that mean, in practical terms, on bread-and-butter issues such as trade? Are today's Democrats a party of open markets and economic development, or of market restrictions and job protection?The answer is that leading Democrats seem to want both -- they favor economic development overseas but not at the cost of U.S. jobs. That sounds like a coherent position until you begin to look carefully at the political choices in Latin America, a part of the world where …