Thread: Who deserves the Latino vote? NAVARRETTE

Who deserves the Latino vote?

By Ruben Navarrette Jr.

SAN DIEGO — In the movie How to Lose A Guy in 10 Days, Kate Hudson plays a young woman intent on proving that any man can be scared off. Case in point: her love interest, played by Matthew McConaughey. The result is an amusing look at how much punishment one can withstand before running away.

That's how it is with Latino voters this election year. Democrats and Republicans seem to be trying to outdo each other in terms of mistreating, neglecting and scapegoating America's largest minority. Both parties are eager to appeal to the mainstream, and they think one way to do it is to declare their independence from Latino voters — especially in the immigration debate.

This bipartisan chill is quite a change from where we were two years ago. During the 2008 election, Barack Obama and John McCain spoke to three national Latino organizations and promised, if elected, to make immigration reform a top priority.

These days, McCain has retreated from a comprehensive approach that includes a pathway to earned legal status for illegal immigrants. The Arizona senator, who is facing a tough re-election campaign, now prefers the "enforcement only" alternative he used to ridicule. McCain has called for the deployment to the Arizona-Mexico border of 3,000 National Guard troops and 3,000 border patrol agents. President Obama does him one better and actually decides to send 1,200 National Guard troops to the border.

That 'danged fence'

McCain also wants the Obama administration to finish building 700 miles of border fencing. In fact, he has a television ad that shows him talking with a county sheriff about violence on the Arizona-Mexico border. The solution is simple, says McCain, let's just "complete the danged fence."

The senator also supports Arizona's controversial new law that requires local and state law enforcement to determine the legal status of anyone who, during a lawful stop, is suspected of being an illegal immigrant. Critics rightly call the law a how-to manual for racial profiling, despite broad approval of the proposal in national public opinion polls.

An NBC News/Wall Street JournalSurvey last month showed that while all respondents back the Arizona law by almost 2-to-1, 70% of Hispanic voters oppose it, with eight in 10 saying they believe it's likely to lead to discrimination against legal immigrants.

See what else is out there. Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, told Fox News that he wondered whether the congressional district of Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz., hadn't already been "ceded" to Mexico given Grijalva's criticism of Arizona's law. Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., told a "Tea Party" rally in San Diego County that he backs the "deportation of natural-born American citizens that are the kids of illegal aliens," which would be unconstitutional. Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, asked why the U.S. could prevent "illegal grasshoppers" from Brazil but couldn't capture "thousands of people that cross the border every day on the southern border of the United States."

Republicans like to say that Latinos vote for Democrats because the Democratic Party offers giveaways. Actually, it's because Republicans give away the Latino vote with incendiary and insulting rhetoric.

There is one saving grace for Republicans. They're called Democrats, and they're also in the sights of Latino voters. After all, Democrats control Congress and the White House, yet immigration reform appears as elusive as ever.

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., promised to have a bill ready by Labor Day 2009. Now it looks like he might propose one as late as March 2011. All we've seen so far are "outlines" and "sketches." Yet this much is clear: Schumer's approach is heavy on enforcement and light on giving illegal immigrants a path to legal status.

Meanwhile, Obama piles up even more disappointments:

•The administration continued raiding work sites in search of illegal immigrants.

•The president dedicated a measly 38 words to immigration in his State of the Union address.

•Immigration and Customs Enforcement used quotas to ratchet up deportations. The goal: Deport more people in Obama's first year than the Bush administration did the year before. It met the goal.

•Obama dispassionately referred to the Arizona law as simply "misguided."

•The president threw cold water on the prospect of Congress overhauling immigration laws, suggesting that "there may not be an appetite" to fix the system this year.

Words. Just words.

But Obama also can't resist manipulating Latino voters, as again demonstrated on Cinco de Mayo when he told a Latino audience at the White House that — appetite or not — he wants to begin work on immigration legislation this year. Those are encouraging words. And Obama is good with words. But action, and inaction, speak louder. And what Obama's inaction on immigration reform is saying is that he really doesn't feel an urgency to deal with the issue — in spite of his promises.

Latinos have the right to be disillusioned by the failure of both parties to address the immigration issue. The choice they face in November is between the party that harassed them and the one that abandoned them. And that's no choice at all.

Ruben Navarrette Jr. is an editorial board member of the San Diego Union-Tribune and a syndicated columnist with the Washington Post Writers Group.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/fo ... 9_ST_N.htm

I would be more concerned about the "American" vote. If citizens are voting based on their ethnicity, I'm embarassed for them. If illegals are voting, based on their ethnicity, they need to be arrested and deported immediately.

Originally Posted by ReggieMay

I would be more concerned about the "American" vote. If citizens are voting based on their ethnicity, I'm embarassed for them. If illegals are voting, based on their ethnicity, they need to be arrested and deported immediately.

Exactly, ReggieMay!

I'm sick and tired of people like Navarrette playing racial politics in order to promte a racial agenda! These people are the ones creating the tension and balkanization of this country through their unrelenting promotion of their racial idology! Navarrette is nothing more than a la raza talking head, determined to continue further his racial agenda, under the guise of journalism.

Enough already...who cares about the hispanic vote! Navarrette seems to suggest (based upon the title of this article) the hispanic vote is somehow more worthy of consideration or important or of value, than any other vote in this country. Does Navarrette believe hispanics should vote based upon whoever promises the most goodies, like amnesty and the like? Sure sounds like it.

If some wrote an article with the title, Who Deserves the Caucasian Vote… what would the perception be I wonder?

Latinos have the right to be disillusioned by the failure of both parties to address the immigration issue.

Nobody cares about hispanic disillusionment! Take that disappointment and head back to your country of origin if illegal. Millions of Americans are disillusioned by a government that refuses to protect us from an invasion, by simply enforcing immigration laws!

Perhaps the title should read: do Latinos have the right to vote? I know that many in my hometown are illegal and still cast a ballot in order to influence our local government. Same question pertains to Hispanic Americans that vote for "their people" as the only qualifier. Of course, they have the right to vote - but are they discerning enough to know what's right for this country and what benefits Mexico instead?

If this is their mindset, to only vote for politicians who support their racist, seperatist agenda, then they need to be living and voting in Mexico!!

Navarrette lumps all Hispanics together, completely ignoring that some of them are second, third, and fourth generatiom Americans. If those folks are ambivalent about illegal immigration, it's because it's so obious that almost no one will say "Americans first in this magnificent country."