Illegitimate?
I started a pretty good discussion below by taking issue with a guest editorial published in the Tribune. The guest editorial was written by Travis McAdam, research director for the Montana Human Rights Network.
What has interested me about this discussion is the fact that some of our friends on the left seem to view certain political positions as simply beyond the bounds of legitimacy. Instead of tackling the ideas head on, critics of the Constitution Party of Montana resort to innuendo, guilt by association, ad hominem attacks, and simple marginalization.
After reading that I would be “encouraging the growth of a fringe political party” by supporting Rick Jore’s proposed Constitutional Amendment, I decided to take a look at the positions of the two groups in more detail. I’ll try to do all of the issues on which I can find positions from both, so let’s start with immigration:
All people, regardless of citizenship or national origin, have a right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of themselves and their families.
All people, regardless of citizenship or national origin, have the right to life, liberty and security of person.
Please let our Senators know that Montanans understand that immigration is an American experience and that acceptance is an American value. Federal immigration policies should recognize the humanity of undocumented immigrants and refugees, recognize the vital role that they play in the U.S. economy, recognize the importance of family unification and finally, allow these undocumented members of our society to come out of the shadows and fully participate in their communities.
Or here:
Immigrants, whether documented, undocumented or irregularly documented, are people with jobs and families. They are taxpayers with growing roots in our communities. To refer to them only by their immigration status, such as “illegal aliens” or just “illegals,” is to minimize their humanity. Immigrants live here, work here, go to school here and pay a variety of taxes here (although they are unable to access most of the services they help to fund). They are our neighbors.
Montana has an opportunity to recognize a few important truths about human migration and international human rights. We can work to broaden our understanding of the reasons for which people migrate. We can work to broaden our understanding of our collective good fortune to live in a nation with political freedoms and economic opportunities. And finally we can work to create empathy for those who would risk so much in order to provide for their families.
* * *
Montanans should also consider how the immigrant experience today is vastly different from that of our ancestors. U.S. free-trade agreements have decimated the economic conditions of many communities and cultures world wide. Immigrants are not welcomed by the Statue of Liberty’s “Give me your tired and poor.”
In fact, immigrant communities live under laws that say they are less than human. They are often afraid for the security of their families. They are often the scapegoat for society’s problems. They often feel vulnerable and unsafe because of policies, institutions and attitudes that keep them on the margins of our society.
Then, on the other hand, we have the position of the Constitution Party of Montana:
We affirm the integrity of the international borders of the United States and the Constitutional authority and right of the federal government to guard and to protect those borders, including the regulation of the numbers and of the qualifications of immigrants into the country.
Each year some 972,000 legal immigrants and hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens enter the United States. These immigrants, including illegal aliens, have been made eligible for various kinds of public assistance including housing, education, Social Security, and legal services.
This unconstitutional drain on the federal Treasury is having a severe and adverse impact on our economy, increasing the cost of government at federal, state, and local levels, adding to the tax burden, and stressing the fabric of society. The mass importation of people with low standards of living threatens the wage structure of the American worker and the labor balance in our country.
We favor a moratorium on immigration to the United States, except in individual hardship cases or in other individual special circumstances, until the availability of all federal subsidies and assistance be discontinued.
We also insist that every individual group and/or private agency which requests the admission of an immigrant to the U.S., on whatever basis, be required to commit legally to provide housing and sustenance for such immigrants, bear full responsibility for the economic independence of the immigrants, and post appropriate bonds to seal such covenants.
The Constitution Party demands that the federal government restore immigration policies based on the practice that potential immigrants will be disqualified from admission to the U.S. if, on the grounds of health, criminality, morals, or financial dependence, they would impose an improper burden on the United States, any state, or any citizen of the United States.
We oppose the provision of welfare subsidies and other taxpayer-supported benefits to illegal aliens, and reject the practice of bestowing U.S. citizenship on children born to illegal alien parents while in this country.
We oppose any extension of amnesty to illegal aliens.
We oppose bilingual ballots. We insist that those who wish to take part in the electoral process and governance of this nation be required to read and comprehend basic English as a precondition of citizenship. We support English as the official language for all governmental business by the United States.
Fringe? You tell me.
All I can really say, though, is it sounds like two different political positions on a hotly contested issue.
So, which position should be silenced?
Ah yes. Nothin’ easier than to bash immigrants! Let’s get to the REALLY nutty stuff.
Larry, you’re a testament to why our public schools do such a disservice to our youth. As usual you argue something other than the point. Geeguy’s point was not about immigrants but, rather, the open debate of ideas. Is that nutty?
Larry, you’re making my point. While you might disagree with a statement like “[w]e oppose the provision of welfare subsidies and other taxpayer-supported benefits to illegal aliens,” I assert that such a position is not INHERENTLY unreasonable.
Are you suggesting to the contrary? In other words, if someone believes that only citizens of a particular country ought to benefit from the emoluments available to citizens of that country, is it your position that such a person is out on the fringe?
And can someone not make such an argument without your perceiving it as “bashing immigrants?” Sure, there’s an argument to be made that we ought to welcome anyone who makes it to our shores with all of the benefits of citizenship. Do you take the position, though, that anyone who opposes such an idea is guilty of bashing or attacking? If so, I would have to say that your position is anti-democratic in nature. Anyone who opposes…Larry’s point of view….is guilty of some heinous offense. I mean, come on, they aren’t suggesting that immigrants be summarily executed; they are saying that the benefits of citizenship should be reserved for citizens.
What if they said anyone who opposes their viewpoint, like you, is guilty of trying to destroy America?
What about other countries? Do you hold them to a similar standard? In other words, if opposing the extension of citizenship-type rights to non-citizens should be universal, aren’t you really then opposing the ideas of individual nation states and sovereignty?
Isn’t this worthy of discussion? Or is my mere disagreement with you sufficient to render me guilty of bashing immigrants?
Nope! Not at ALL! What I AM suggesting is that people who believe that ONLY white, male, “christains” derive their citizenship from god, and are thus the only TRUE citizens is REAL nutty. And the folks who claim that all other people who are NOT white, christian males derive their rights from the fouteenth amendment are SERIOUSLY nutty! Now, the only thing to discuss is whether or not jore and his pals BELIEVE this. My contention is that they do! Hence, MY logic says that these folks are fruitcakes! I guess the only way to find out is to ASK them just WHAT they believe, and whether or not they adhere to the beliefs of christian reconstrcutionism and dominionism. Which they do.
p.s. One final point. Sumtin’ REAL fishy bout these boys. What sort of “christian” folk BASH IMMIGRANTS?! Oops! Guess we know the answer to THAT one! Being a Chrsitain myself, I don’t find it very Chistlike to show such hostility to people in need. So, what gives with these guys? What OTHER Christian group so openly opposes people in need? They’ve got some splainin’ to do. I really do wish they’d come here and explain themselves.
I couldn’t have articulated my point any better myself.
YOUR WELCOME! You see, I know Dave B. thinks my style of debating doesn’t follow the Queensbeery Rules for verbal fisticuffs. But you see, for me it’s a street fight! Get in, throw your punches, and get out! Very, very effective debating technique. It’s kinda like when Surgar Ray Leonard fought Roberto Duran. The first time they fought, Leonard was so mad at Duran for his taunts, that he tried to go toe to toe, mano a mano with Duran. BIG mistake. Duran cleaned his clock. But the second fight, the SECOND fight, was a different story altogther. Leonard fought scientifically. He bobbed, he weaved, he ducked, he danced, and he wouldn’t hold still. And poor Duran, so disgusted that his opponent wouldn’t hold still and fight his style, threw up his hands in the air and shouted those words he made immortal, NO MAS! I use the Sugar Ray Leonard style of debate. Hope this helps.
p.s. Leonard got his title back that night!
LK said, “Leonard fought scientifically…I use the Sugar Ray Leonard style of debate.”
Has anyone ever seen a more distorted self image?
Not in my lifetime. What Larry tends to do is punch the bathing suit clad babe carrying the card with the round number on it because she represents the exploitation of women. I’ve never seen any boxer do that.
Time to weave, time to bob, time to duck, and TIME TO PUNCH! You see, Dave, you have your vaunted debating skills on your side. I HAVE THE TRUTH! And the truth is that the C party is KOOKY! But don’t take my word for it. ASK’EM! You see, that is what no newspaper will do. Why? Because the newspapers don’t even understand what they’re dealing with here. Look, GG was nice enough to go to their C site and find out that they like to bash immigrants. (my words, not theirs) But if he had scrolled a wee bit farther down, he’d find out that they ALSO claim to big followers of G-O-D! So, let’s do the math. Two and two. They are BIG BELIEVERS IN GOD who BASH THE MOST VULNERABLE among us. Hmmm. Makes me wonder what ELSE these nutjobs are up to! Well, what the are up to is a god that is their OWN creation! One that seems to like ignorant redneck white men who live in the north country and feel themselves to be superior to ALL them that ain’t like’em! Hence, what they are is ABSOLUTELY christian reconstrutionists and demionisnists, the two wackiest groups to EVER claim to be Christian! Now, allow me to reiterate. These two groups BOTH believe that WHITE CHRISTIAN MALES are the the ONLY ones god intended to govern the United States! And THAT alone would qualify them as REAL goofy for MOST thinking people. But it gets better. They ALSO believe that they get their rights from god, and everyone ELSE is a fourteenth amendment citizen! In other words, WHITE CHRISTIAN MALES are god’s chosen ones, and the rest are simply, well, fourteenth amendment citizens UNFIT to govern or vote! (women included) Now, I’m a pretty damn creative guy, but by GOD I don’ think that I could come up with goofier ideas on steriods! And yet, THESE are the guys that GG says we should hold up as a legitimate party! Well, education here is the key. And HONESTY! The newspapers are reluctant to tell the story on these guys, but I’m not. So, I must educate people. Time to duck, time to weave, and time to educate!
Strawman is what I see.
GG, in the immoral words of Redneck Hippie, “the truth makes pisspoor strawmen”!