 |
||||||||
|
12/22/2002 04:18:00 AM | Timothy More about Bush and immigration The article Jared linked to talked about an invasion by Mexican immigrants. Jared had said that Bush used such dehumanizing rhetoric in his campaign. I don't think the "enforcing borders" is quite the equivilant of Pat Buchanan-talk, though I understand it could used as a code for those who wanted to hear that message. Which brings up an interesting point: when Republican send coded racial messages, do they intend to fulfill their promises racists think they are hearing? Are the messages a way of saying, look, I really share your worldview, and that's what important? I just wanted to clarify what Bush is being charged with, rather than a blanket statement that his rhetoric is akin to the anti-Mexican article Jared linked to. I think the dispute now is in large part about whether 'more border control' is equivilant to 'invasion' rhetoric. We all can decide for ourselves. My basic point is that Bush's rhetoric and appeals are different from Pete Wilson's (isn't someone going to challenge me on this? heh). I think there is a divide between the two, though I can see the argument that's the divide is between bad, and really, really bad. (But isn't most politics these days? Sigh...) P.S. on Bob Jones, we agree his visit was a signal, not a statement with rhetoric. I don't think people interpreted that signal as the 'immigrants are coming, to the barricades.' Whether anti-immigration feelings is a logical extension of the racist signal it did send is irrelevant: I don't think Bush's advisors had an intention or a need to send that signal in South Carolina. And I think a lot of other things about Bob Jones would have popped into South Carolinians heads before they assumed this was a signal that aimed to dehumanize immigrants. I'm not saying no could have taken it that way, but I think at best, you could say that message was one small string of a very large ball of racist 'I'm a good Southern boy' yarn. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I think other issues of race far overshadow immigration in South Carolina. Maybe racism is some southern states is wrapped up with anti-immigration sentiment. But since Bush disavowed the visit after he had secured his crucial victory in S.C., could the signal have helped Bush in other states? perma link |
| 0 comments
0 Comments: |
Dartmouth The Free Press Alums for Social Change The Green Magazine The Dartmouth Dartmouth Observer Dartmouth Review Dartlog Inner Office The Little Green Blog Welton Chang's Blog Vox in Sox MN Publius (Matthew Martin) Netblitz Dartmouth Official News Other Blogs Ampersand Atrios Arts & Letters Altercation Body and Soul Blog For America Brad DeLong Brad Plumer CalPundit Campus Nonsense Clarksphere Crooked Timber Cursor Daily Kos Dean Nation Dan Drezner The Front Line Instapundit Interesting Times Is That Legal? Talking Points Memo Lady-Likely Lawrence Lessig Lean Left Left2Right Legal Theory Matthew Yglesias Ms. Musings MWO Nathan Newman New Republic's &c. Not Geniuses Ornicus Oxblog Pandagon Political State Report Political Theory Daily Review Queer Day Roger Ailes SCOTUS blog Talk Left TAPPED Tacitus This Modern World Tough Democrat Untelevised Volokh Conspiracy Washington Note X. & Overboard Magazines, Newspapers and Journals Boston Globe Ideas Boston Review Chronicle of Higher Education Common Dreams Dissent In These Times Mother Jones New York Review of Books New York Times Salon Slate The American Prospect The Nation The New Republic The Progressive Tikkun Tom Paine Village Voice Washington Monthly Capitol Hill Media ABC's The Note American Journalism Review Columbia Journalism Review CQ Daily Howler Donkey Rising The Hill Medianews National Journal NJ Hotline NJ Wake-up call NJ Early Bird NJ Weekly Political Wire Roll Call Spinsanity Search Search the DFP  |
|||||||
The opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of Dartmouth College or the Dartmouth Free Press.