Mitch, in discussing Barnes book, you quote a passage that says:
They
[paleoconservatives] recoil at Bush’s internationalism, particularly
his decision to invade Iraq, and his fondness for federal spending and
for immigrants.
This may be picky, but I don’t think it is
fair to say that paleoconservatives recoil at Bush’s fondness for
immigrants. He may have meant to say “illegal immigrants” but he
doesn’t. Advocates for illegal immigrants and especially
opponents of illegal immigration, which I assume Barnes is, need to be
precise. Many advocates (not all) purposely try to blur the
argument so that if you are against illegal immigration you are against
immigration, and probably are a racist. Opponents of
illegal immigration (paleoconservatives are just one group of
opponents) don’t need other opponents to say similar things either on
purpose or by accident.
Opponents of “illegal” immigration are probably just as fond of
“legal” immigration and immigrants as anyone else. Bush is having
problems on the immigration issue because he is seen as rewarding
“illegal” immigrants at the expense of our legal system, sensible
immigration policy, and the numerous individuals trying to get into
this country through legal means.
