During the 2006 midterms Republicans avoided issues upon which the majority of Americans decided their votes in favor of ramping up the anti-immigration rhetoric. Not surprisingly, this strategy was an utter and objective failure, both in the short run (the GOP losing control over both chambers of Congress, a significant shift of Hispanic voters to the Democratic Party) and in the long run (alienating Hispanic voters could seriously damage the GOP's electability in the future, particularly in the Mountain West). Nevertheless, faced with the continued fervent opposition to the GOP's Iraq strategy, as well as the public's unhappiness with the results stemming from conservative economic policy, the Republicans apparently believe that their way to salvation in 2008 will come through speaking loudly about the issue of immigration. Jonathan Weisman has the story for The Washington Post.

Republicans, sensing a major vulnerability, have been hammering Democrats, forcing Congress to face the question of illegal immigration on every bill they can find, from agriculture spending and housing assistance to the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP).

[...]

The issue has shifted since concerns about illegal immigrants triggered angry calls for border fences and deportation two years ago. Now, voter anger appears to revolve around the belief that illegal immigrants are unfairly consuming government benefits, a fear that stems more from economic uncertainty than culture clashes, Democratic and Republican pollsters say.

Those concerns are not everywhere. But they are glaring in some of the white, working-class districts in Kansas, Indiana, North Carolina and New Hampshire that gave the Democrats control of the House last year. And they were on clear display in Lowell, Mass [where Democrat Nicki Tsongas won a special election last week in which Republican Jim Ogonowski focused on the issue of immigration, particularly Tsongas' support for a path to citizenship and for drivers licenses for undocumented residents].

Democrats on Capitol Hill may be getting a bit skittish over the issue of immigation as a result of the continual calls to their offices by a determined, yet clearly small minority of voters who are vehemently opposed to a path to citizenship or even legalization for those currently in the country unlawfully, but they shouldn't read nearly as much into the results of the special election in Massachusetts 5 as the Republicans, some in the press and even some Democratic pollsters suggest they should.

As I've noted before, Tsongas' victory was not nearly as underwhelming as many would have you believe. In fact, Tsongas' margin of victory was greater than that of Deval Patrick in the district, even though the 2006 Democratic gubernatorial nominee won statewide by a wide margin. What's more, Marc Ambinder writes that there are number of things to learn from the results out of Massachusetts 5 that have nothing whatsoever to do with immigration.

Jim Ogonowski was universally regarded as a better candidate that Nikki Tsongas; this war vet he ran to the left of many Democratic presidential candidates on the war; he benefited from grassroots Republican internet support; Tsongas was treated roughly by the press; -- talented Republicans who run campaigns that comport to the moods of their districts can be competitive against Democrats.

[...]

Backed by the national party, Tsongas defeated a popular Lowell councilwoman in the Democratic primary; shades of Tammy Duckworth: Tsongas drew the resentment of liberal activists whose candidate she defeated.

If the Democrats cave to the Republicans on the issue of immigration, they do so at their own risk. Attacking illegal immigration and illegal immigrants didn't save the Republican Party in 2006 and it's not going to in 2008, either -- that is unless the Democrats allow themselves to get psyched out by the GOP on the issue.

There's more...

Brought to you courtesy of Jill Tubman of Jack and Jill Politics and some soy mac and cheese with cherry tomatoes, veggie Canadian bacon and extra hot sauce. Mmmm. Hey, don't knock vegetarian soul food til you've tried it.

Mind Games in Maryland -- Puppy-cuddling, nausea-inducing Michael Steele continues to camouflage his Republican identity to voters. A new ad airing in Baltimore from the National Black Republican Association attempts to remind Maryland African-Americans (who comprise 30% of the state and are among the wealthiest in the U.S.) of their Republican roots. The Washington Post reports:

The ad identifies Martin Luther King Jr. as a Republican and pins the founding of the Ku Klux Klan on Democrats.

One woman says: "Democrats passed those black codes and Jim Crow laws. Democrats started the Ku Klux Klan."

"The Klan?" her friend replies. "White hoods and sheets?"

First woman: "Democrats fought all civil rights legislation from the 1860s to the 1960s. Democrats released those vicious dogs and fire hoses on blacks."

My own grandfather was a loyal Republican for many years only finally, reluctantly turning in the 1970s with disgust and sorrow from the party that freed his own father from slavery. (BTW, it's not uncommon for voting age blacks to be separated only by as few as 2,3 or 4 generations from slavery.) He recognized that things had changed and hopefully Steele's supporters and their bright idea born of desperation to win won't bamboozle anyone. (Thanks for the photo, SparklePony)

Good Fences Don't Always Make Good Neighbors -- Ridiculous Republican efforts to build a giant fence on the Arizona border to keep the Mexicans out have hit an unexpected snag in the form of the Tohono O'odham Indians who bring a different, somehow less racist, somewhat more pragmatic view on the matter.

Jews Don't Eat Pork Chops, but Felix Does?-- George "Macaca" Allen re-discovers his own minority heritage. It's a little awkward for everyone.

There's more...

I stumbled across a huge hispanic march centered around L.A. City Hall this morning. One neon orange sticker being widely distributed said:

Aqui Nos Quedamos

No Nos Vamos!

The instigation for this massive rally was either a piece of legislation or a proposition. I'm not sure which. It is signified by H.R. 4337 (approximation)

I don't have any more background about the issues, because I don't speak fluent spanish and I was more interested in the level of activity generated. There were men, women and children of all ages and was extremely well organized. There were surely one or two minor confrontations of some sort that the M$M will focus on to distract from the real issues surrounding the march.

By any measure it was a massive display of anger, pride and frustration with the way Mexican immigration has been politicized. The coverage by the media should be interesting.

There's more...