Immigration: The New Gay Marriage

Looking at the dismal numbers preceding them into the midterm elections, the GOP has already begun its two-minute drill. The procedure goes something like this:

Find a political issue that has layer upon layer of moral, legal, and social subtleties. Strip off the layers that connect to anything remotely positive—justice, equality, empathy, charity…"live and let live." Leave only the skeleton—the hard, ugly part that even the leftest-leaning swing voters feel uncomfortable with. Drag that skeleton around in front of the electorate, drape it over their television and computer screens, cover their newspapers and magazines with it, crack its bones and amplify the sound over every radio wave. In short, make sure it appears everywhere the public might turn for information on the real issues—like the War in Iraq.

One can only imagine how many brilliant Republican minds are put to work identifying the precise issues that, when properly stripped, manipulated, and reclothed, will serve to appeal to the most venal sensibilities of the farthest-right base, while at the same time making the Democratic party look amoral, weak, or radical enough to pull thousands of almost-liberal swing voters into the fold. In ’04, it was gay rights, distilled to its most uncomfortable essence of allowing Jim and John the benefits of legalized, state approved marriage. Democrats were helpless to stand up for the civil rights of a perfectly legitimate group of American citizens without looking as if they were aiding an attack on our society’s most basic moral traditions. Game-winning touchdown, GOP.

For ’06, immigration appears to be the chosen theme. Even now, right-wing strategists are working on shrinking this hugely complicated issue down to "brown people who don’t speak English, streaming over our unprotected borders to steal our jobs, and perhaps blow up our office buildings while they’re at it." Ah…this will appeal to the wingnuts who whip up vigilante parties to patrol remote locations of our southern border; as well as to the latte-sipping suburban couple who feels vaguely resentful that the face behind the espresso machine is brown instead of white, and the voice that calls out when their order is up butchers their anglo name. The traditional party of the working man will be hard-pressed to stand up for an important segment of the labor force, without reinforcing every cliché the GOP has ever heaped upon it—weak on defense, soft on crime, proponents of a welfare state. Weak. Soft. Welfare. Just those words could spell doom for the Democrats.

The only variable, this time around, is the huge numbers that have taken to the streets to let their voices be heard on the immigration matter. The GOP, I think, underestimated the strength of the reaction of the people they are attempting to demonize. Indeed, they may well have underestimated the very size of that group. This is no small, somewhat disorganized mostly middle-class minority, like the gays, politely (relatively) trying to advance acceptance of their lifestyle through the legislative process. This is a big, fat hunk of bare-knuckled, hit-the-streets, yell-your-head-off Labor. Traditionally, my Republican friends, a formidable adversary; certainly, not as quickly silenced and marginalized as your 2004 target. The next few weeks should be interesting. Perhaps a goal-line stand for the left?

| +Save/Share | |