Nuance Escapes Both Supporters and Foes of Illegal Immigration
Recently, I wrote a column for PJ Media explaining why President Obama is hemorrhaging Latino support as America’s largest minority — like many other segments of society — figures out that it has been hustled by a president whose words don’t match his actions.
But I happened to toss in a few lines in which I accused Republicans of behaving “despicably” and throwing a “piñata party” by demonizing Latinos in the immigration debate.
Apparently, that’s the only part of the piece that some people read. That includes the conservative radio talk show host who, blood boiling, booked me on his show to try to rough me up.
So far, none of this is very surprising. It’s just another day at the office. When I’m not busy fighting with defensive left-wingers in denial about Obama’s deceptive and inadequate handling of the immigration issue, I’m mixing it up with defensive right-wingers in denial about how horribly the Republican Party has handled the issue.
The surprise came from the fact that the radio host itching for a fight was my old friend, Larry Elder of KABC. I’ve known Larry for 18 years. In fact, we were once co-workers. He was the 9pm to midnight host at KABC, and I was the co-host (with Tavis Smiley) of a show at the same hour on sister station KMPC. The studios were just a few feet away from each other. And sometimes, after work, the three of us would meet up for early breakfast at a 24-hour diner near the station.
I like Larry. And I respect him. More than that, I identify with him. Here’s why: I would guess that, as a black conservative, he’s been called an Uncle Tom about as often as I’ve called the Latino equivalent — a “Tio Taco.” And in both those cases, the attacks on us have come from both members of our own tribes and — as an added treat — presumptuous white liberals who treat minorities like a ventriloquist treats his dummy. The critics think they have us all figured out, and prefer to marginalize us by treating us like ideological stick figures. No complexity. No nuance. No gray area. No thoughtfulness. They see conservatives of color as cartoon figures, because it makes it easier to dismiss what we have to say. And they’d rather dismiss it than hear it.
So, given all that, I was surprised and disappointed that, during our hour-long interview, Larry tried to do to me what countless people have tried to do to him over the last two decade – reduce me to a one-dimensional caricature: The Mexican-American columnist who supports illegal immigration from Mexico so he can bring in his relatives for Sunday dinner.
“Apparently, that’s the only part of the piece that some people read.”
Since you conflate “Latino” and “illegal immigrant” whenever a republican says the latter words, why should we read anything else? There are hummingbird feathers with more weight than your opinion!
Larry Elders didn’t reduce you to anything. You ARE a one-dimensional racialist tool for la Raza. You only see things through the lens of how it impacts “your tribe” (funny, my tribe is my nation while yours is your race. I guess that makes me a nationalist, and you a racist). Sounds like he had you pegged as the weasel you are.
“refusing to admit that the U.S. economy needs illegal immigrants because Americans have raised at least three generations of young people who won’t do the jobs that illegal immigrants do, etc.”
Ruben, that statement is demonstrably false. In Crider Georgia illegals had replaced the African-American workforce at the local poultry processing plant. Wages plummeted. The argument was that nobody could be found that would do the work. When ICE raided the plant and deported the illegals, surprise! all the open jobs were filled again by the local African-American community and wages for the same jobs that were being taken by the illegals rose by $3 to $4 per hour.
Ruben, you need to take that dog home, because it just won’t hunt anymore.
Precisely. Quit insulting non-Hispanic Americans by implying they are lazy or “too good for some jobs”, and I expect people will take you much more seriously.
In addition to this, when unscrupulous employers hire illegal laborers to do these jobs, they have ultimate power over them; who will defend them? This has led to slavery, slave wages, and unbearable working conditions for some of these people. We have labor laws for many very good reasons.
I’ve seen Dirty Jobs with Mike Rowe, I would like someone to name me a job that American’s won’t do, because I have a really hard time imagining any. What liberals mean is that there’s jobs Americans won’t do for peanuts. Which is true with any job; who the hell would be a doctor for 9$ an hour or a truck driver for 15$ a day? When wages get lowered to an idiotic level of course people are gonna opt out of the workforce; to expect them to work for basically free is counterproductive.
“refusing to admit that the U.S. economy needs illegal immigrants because Americans have raised at least three generations of young people who won’t do the jobs that illegal immigrants do, etc.”
You are doing EXACTLY what you accuse the left and the right of doing …..repeating lies. Yes, it is a difficult problem, but you too, are adding to the problem by repeating this falsehood-created by the political class to further their agenda.
Anyone, citizen or not, breaking the laws of a Sovereign Nation needs to pay the price. The solution is EASY, enforce the law.
And thus, Mr. Navarette deftly reduces his detractors to one-dimensional cartoon caricatures while accusing them of doing it to him. Brilliant, and sadly typical of his columns.
Very few conservatives I know think border enforcement is the only answer to illegal immigration– they just think it’s THE FIRST THING THAT SHOULD BE DONE!!! Fix the leak in the plumbing before you start mopping the floor is the metaphor I hear most often.
And I don’t know what the Republican establishment thinks about employers that hire illegal immigrants, but again, most of the conservatives I know think that if they KNOWINGLY hire an illegal immigrant, they should face jail time and a large fine. Take away the honey, and the flies stay away– another folksy metaphor.
As for what we should do about immigration policy as a country? Well, most people, left and right, fall down on that one because we (in the royal sense) don’t know what we want immigration to do. Personally, I would like a sane guest-worker program that licenses and tracks migrant farm and construction workers, with the costs borne by both us and the Mexican government.
they just think it’s THE FIRST THING THAT SHOULD BE DONE!!!
That’s not the first thing that should be done. The first thing that should be done is to make it clear that all who apply for social services will have their immigration status scrutinized and be prosecuted if they should be found here illegally.
Fixing the border is the second thing that should be done.
I want a 10 year freeze on ALL immigration – just so we can sort out who is here and why (i.e. school; work; refugee; etc).
If you read our national history on that, that’s precisely what we used to do: have periods of intense immigration, followed by several decades assimilation-time. Johnson’s Great Society (yeah, everything is working great, isn’t it?!) changed that. Ever since, immigration has never ceased or been reduced.
The critics think they have us all figured out, and prefer to marginalize us by treating us like ideological stick figures.
How is this any different than how you treat conservatives who think that maybe an open border isn’t really such a great idea, especially when those who want it insist on dangling carrots of free food, free medicine and free education to those who ignore the law?
Ruben. You seem to be projecting a bit much as well as doing your share of muddying the waters.
the issue is simple. VERY SIMPLE. The individual has the legal right to be in the country or not. ANYTHING else is propaganda.
“Nuance Escapes Both Supporters and Foes of Illegal Immigration”
Navarette is obviously a supporter of illegal “immigration”. But can anyone imagine him writing about “nuance” if it were millions and millions of blue eyed northern Europeans storming our border rather than his own compadres? Of course it is unimaginable.
This begs the question; exactly why does Navarette support the invasion of millions of his own raza, when we all suspect he’d be staunchly against the arrival of millions of white illegals?
Navarette supports the invasion of millions of fellow Hispanics in order to form a purpose-built race-based power structure to subvert his perception of a “white America”. Navarette is a loud advocate for breaking laws on the basis of race to benefit his race over other races. With one set of laws for his racial peers, the subversion of this nation and it’s laws is guaranteed, reducing America in the process into a sewer. He has learned well from his black buddies, who despite having a president installed in the White House, still demand spoils from the nation which supposedly represses them because it remains irredeemably racist.
In my book, Navarette’s poisonous attitudes don’t make him a “Tio Taco”, a term which I have NEVER seen once in any of the commentary at PJM, or a nuanced intellectual, but a rank and subversive racist and a traitor.
Never heard tio taco in s. texas, either.
The acceptable slur is “coconut”
Flog this dead horse without me. I didn’t and won’t read any more of this nonsense.
I don’t know why this guy isn’t prohibido at PJM
just for being mindbendingly repetitive.
Hey Ruben, I have one question for you and all of the other advocates of “Comprehensive Immigration Reform”:
What is wrong, specifically and in detail, with current immigration law?
I’ve never seen anyone answer this question.
…maybe Ruben would be happier if the USA just adopted the Mexican immigration laws.
Yeah, recognizing nuance is a problem. For example, Sec. of Defense Gates and the Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs see no evidence that high Pakistani government officials knew bin Laden was hanging out at their version of West Point. And the new upgraded intelligence el hefe, formerly the role of the CIA director, sees no evidence that the Muslim Brotherhood is a sectarian organization that still promotes violence to achieve political/religious goals. And if Americans won’t do certain jobs at the current levels of remuneration, then maybe those jobs are just not economically viable? Yeah, nuance is a bitch, hey Ruben?
Mr. Navarrette complains that readers did not understand his recent Panamas Media article explaining his views on Latin American immigration to the United States and why Latinos are upset about the failure to enact immigration reform. He notes that President Obama is insincere (there does not seem to be much dispute about his insincerity here) in his politically motivated and lukewarm efforts to push immigration reform, that Latinos take deportations seriously and that
He complains that this must have been the only part of his article any of those commenting on it read.
In another, more recent article, he observes that
Elsewhere in that article, he notes that “In the nation as a whole, Latinos have outnumbered African-Americans since 2003 — seven years faster than demographers predicted.” Hence, although Latinos constitute the largest and most rapidly growing minority group in the United States, deportations of those illegally present should apparently moderate, the Republicans should put aside their “boneheaded” opinions, stop behaving “despicably” and stop having piñata parties on the backs of Latinos. Leaving aside the dubious value of calling all of those who disagree despicable boneheads, illegal immigration is a big problem. Mr. Navarrette suggests no “solutions,” beyond immigration reform, apparently not to make legal or illegal immigration more difficult and not to increase the numbers of deportations of those present illegally. There is no discussion of the increase in Latino gang criminal activity in the United States, close to and far from her borders. There appears to be no recognition of the legitimate perception that giving illegal immigrants the fruits of their illegal conduct diminishes law abiding conduct.
There is much rotten in Latin American culture, where corruption is endemic; adherence to laws is not a big concern and illegal activity flourishes. As noted here,
While Mr. Navarrette complains of a lack of nuance in the debate over (illegal) immigration, his own attempt at analysis is grossly deficient in nuance, full of venom for those who do not agree with him and fails to address any of the reasons why illegal immigration and other illegal activities are or are not pernicious. If, as Mr. Navarrete claims, he “support[s] deporting illegal immigrants, raiding workplaces, and beefing up the ranks of the Border Patrol,” his evident frustration is understandable. Perhaps further explanation of how and why he would like to see those things happen would be more useful than disparaging as despicable boneheads those who disagree with him.
this is not about immigration
this is about illegal immigration and the topic is not all that complex; enforce the law; secure the southern border; deport all illegal immigrants who have a criminal record
etc. etc.
it is a process that needs a step by step approach not some grand encompassing scheme called “comprehensive immigration reform”
by the way, i’m sure larry elder would describe himself a libertarian not a conservative
How nice of Navarrette to label people who oppose his views as “boneheaded,” while criticizing them for daring to have their own.
Navarrette says we are always “pitching simple solutions to a complicated problem.” No, the problem is not complicated. The problem is easily defined: Existing laws are not being enforced and the border fence is inadequate. the solution is as simple as doing a better job of protecting the border while enforcing those existing laws.
There is absolutely no need for “comprehensive immigration legislation,” a.k.a. amnesty for illegals. Build the fences, station troops along those fences, and deport anyone who is in the United States illegally who is caught breaking any additional laws. Period. That is not difficult. If we can build Hoover Dam we can build a fence. If we can patrol the Korean border we can control the U.S. border.
Why must we “do something” about the 20 million illegals already in the country? We do not have to deport them (if they do not commit additional crimes). Nor must we give them a “pathway to citizenship.” We do not have to “do.” anything. If the immigrants who have been in the United States illegally for the last few years (or decades) are still not citizens as they turn old and gray, who cares? If they chose to be illegals living in the shadows at age 20 they can stay in those shadows until age 80. It was their decision to cross the border illegally, not mine. If they never become citizens, what difference does it make? It only means they cannot vote for the Democrat-Socialists.
Oh… now I know why Navarrette wants amnesty!
Isn’t Navarrette capable of writing about anything other than race and amnesty? Methinks he doth protest too much. (I suspect he is still embarrassed because his mother is an illegal immigrant and he is trying to help her sleep better.)
Ruben, you want nuance? Really, really, really…desire nuance?
Ok, I’m game. Let’s start with you.
1)Do you see this world of ours as only defensive left-wingers and defensive right-wingers?
2)Can someone disagree with you without being labeled as one or the other of the above group? Or are you simply right in everything you say and do…and nobody else might have a better idea or solution?
3)You say you “tossed in” a few words about Republican being “despicable”…and got a reaction, as if “that’s the only thing they read”. Yet you describe a full discussion over a wide range of issues as being “roughed up”. Is it gravy only for the goose or only for the gander with you?
4)You say you are for deportation of border crashers. Immigration is a process, not a thing…I hope you would agree. Where on these pages did you show any empathy for a nation that is the target of open warfare against its citizens by global terrorists, the infiltration of drug-running gangs, gunning down of our citizens and the horrific economic pressures that are bankrupting our states, our federal treasury and taxing us to death? Did I miss that empathy and nuance when you were calling Obama’s openly stated, Spanish-speaking, “enemies”….despicable? I may have missed all that “nuance” in your constant name-calling and “roughing up” Republicans specifically and conservatives in general.
5)You say that you don’t like being treat like Jerry Mahoney to Obama and the far left’s Winchell. You don’t like playing Charlie McCarthy to Pelosi and Reid and Frank’s, Edgar Bergen.
But you can’t go a half sentence before you smash the “other side” as unworthy, “despicable” and racist.
Because you hate both sides of the American political spectrum with differing levels of rage and disdain…there is not much for you to root for in American politics. Neither side is rolling over and scratching your tummy enough for your liking on the issue of 13 million border crashers, gang infestation, drug running, gun running, identity theft, and a crush on law enforcement and health services.
Don’t like the above paragraph describing you? Does it “rough you up” a bit too much. Sorry for the lack of nuance. At least I didn’t call you despicable.
Even “legal” Mexicans don’t want the “Mexican Plague” of illegals. A Latina friend of mine refuses to hire anyone with an obvious ‘ethnically Latin” sounding name and she jokingly calls herself a ‘racist’ even though she’s ethnically Mexican. The illegals are lowering the self-esteem of the legal Mexicans who are now so filled with disgust towards illegals that they are loathe to even associate with them at all.
Oh how the worm turns…
Your writings puzzle me. You’re good with words yet your capacity for writing is marred by a misguided perspective. I keep reading your columns hoping to understand better why concern about the color of your skin trumps allegiance to the laws of the country. The only thing I can make out so far is that this is less about race relations and more about you sustaining a sense of moral arrogance. What I read is that it is you who is thoughtful, nuanced, complex and compassionate, while you are surrounded by others that are unaware of their own pathology – being either simplistic in their thinking or in frank denial about their own issues. There is the frustration of being made a caricature, and yet you succeed in doing this to others. I suspect that this type of forum allows you the opportunity to feel like Don Quixote and that fantasy is sustained by the devaluation of others that refuse to see things your way. I fear that comments like this one will only be considered to enhance a sense of victimhood instead of an opportunity to take a hard look at yourself.
RN, No pontifications on the racist Mexican government walling off their southern border?
As the man said, nuance escapes the folks here who imagine that their simplistic (albeit fantastically expensive) solutions will take care of it all in a heartbeat. Every one of them ought to read Angelo Codevilla’s latest article in the Claremont Review: http://www.claremont.org/publications/crb/id.1793/article_detail.asp
quit reading when the author compared the drug cartels to spartans
NO! Not to Spartans! The dastard! You probably stopped reading just in time. With any luck, your brain will be completely unaffected by any ideas.
Thank you for your opinion, insightful, deliberated, and objective…for all the wrong reasons. See, we LEGAL aliens did what your ILLEGAL constituents didn’t do (or refuse to do), FILE THEIR I-130 (or I-129) in their country of origin. Yessir, that means leaving their shadowy living in the USA, returning to their countries of origin and doing it THE RIGHT WAY. Stop saying its a Republican vs. Democrat issue, Obama’s promise, “Dream Act” or some other cockamamy reason. Do the HONEST thing. File for LEGAL RESIDENT STATUS in their country of origin: get an attorney, pay filing fees, apply with USCIS, wait for NVC visa number, interview, and then wait for consular authorization to travel. Yes, costs about $5 to $10k, but they can LEGALLY get a social security card, authorized to WORK LEGALLY (instead of sucking off government teats). That’s honest, sir! And they’ll learn to speak English! They’ll have to take the test, too!!! Your solution, f–k that, cabron!
Soy mexicano, piche cabron no voy hacer nadie que me preguntam. That’s your solution!!! WElcome to corupcion, tipo mexicano!!! Que bueno!!!
Native-born Americans who have never had to work with the (former) INS don’t understand how utterly defunct/dysfunctional the system is. It is just not possible for a person from say a European country to legally access the United States, unless there is a powerful sponsor. I know this on a personal basis as I went through this process myself. Bush’s anti-terror measures have if anything made the system even worse, if that were possible. The system is broken, and I do not think it can be fixed, mainly due to stupidity. It seems Americans have done too many drugs, they are so stupid they are doing nothing about Pharaoh Hussein destroying their nation and the nation’s relationships day by day pounding the USA into the ground. A terrible shame for Americans…
CONTROLLED immigration should be based solely upon national security considerations in the math and sciences and economic skilled and non skilled labor demands….PERIOD! A job slot is open and an employer want to hire and sponsor you…welcome aboard for the duration of that job and possible citizenship.
Citizenship process for individuals and familes should be even more controlled! It should be based on substantial employment history and other criteria…NO exceptions!
Time for some much needed house cleaning in America!
T.T.Thomas is right on. Again, this writer is making claims (I support workplace enforcement…& deportation…) that don’t square with what PJ Media readers have been subjected to with his posts for years now.
The issue has always been about rule of law and then the ‘nuances’ of policy that considers what is best for America.
Where was Ruben five years ago when Cali Rep Zoe Lofgren was trying to label Kris Kobach and Russell Pearce as racists – citing Southern Poverty Law Center as the definative authority on the subject – when she was house chair on immigration policy in ’06? I don’t recall any peep about nuance then.
Besides both working together to draft SB1070 – the Arizona bill that has done more to advance the immigration debate in this country beyond the posturing in congress – while each survived the name calling to go on to further their political careers – again – something Ruben said could never happen; Kobach was a busy consultant helping states like Ok & Ga (among others) present similar legislation before being elected as Secretary of State in Missouri – and Pearce is arguably the most powerful elected rep now in Arizona as the Senate President.
Ruben on the other hand has lost his once pricy gig to appear on TV (I haven’t seen you there for years big fella)- having to settle for less lucrative radio spots – which he then USES SPACE HERE to whine about seeking sympathy because the host was gruff?
Who do you think your fooling Ruben?
You’ve always pushed the Center for American Progress position open borders line, skating around why border security is national security, among other issues. Likewise, you have always supported the 9th circ way-left decisions on everything from SB1070 to in-state tuition to pre-emption to you name it.
Your views are openly racialist; Immigration as Latino-centric first and foremost. Insisting we all should be hostage to geographay and your ethnic chavanism. Where exactly is your ‘nuance’ in that?
There is nothing either libertarian – such as – immigration SHOULD be about high-skilled workers the world over (who, besides entering our universities as a welcome path also should be available to companies who want them – but NOT IN THE HB1 PIGEONHOLE WHERE THEY COME INDENTURED FOR YEARS WITH OR WITHOUT THE PROMISE OF POSSIBLE CITIZENSHIP – but as free high-skilled workers like they are in Canada – free to change employers and more importantly start companies that hire others – SOMETHING BILL GATES AND THE SILICON VALLEY SET DONT LIKE AT ALL!.
Neither is there anything conservative in the views you express here.
It is always the same tripe. Latino this latino that; Latino’s deserve this latino’s deserve that. Every election cycle has the same dull disproven drum beat. The LATINO SLEEPING GIANT IS ABOUT TO AWAKEN. Yet – even in 2008 with Obama where was the coat-tails? Biggest election output for Dems ever – and what do you have to show for it. Why is it that the Hispanic caucus is more republican? Why is it that we have the Governors?
Outside of the failing state of California – this issue bing a major reason why it is a failing state – where is the Hispanic clout? Why is the leviathan always failing to show?
I mean why did Ruben think he was being invited to speak on Larry’s show? To comiserate on Obama’s upcoming speech on the Middle East? For his expertise on price inflation in commodities? How reading Milton Freidman changed his life?
Obama and his idiot advisors can continue to go off chasing a news cycle sound bite with antagonistic ‘moat’s & alligators’ to their hearts desire. Its music to most like Ruben in California and it’s music to a much smaller demographic in Texasm or his chicagoland roots.
It doesnt’ change a thing.
There isn’t any desire for comprehensive ‘reform’ that turns the southwest into another destination for a low skilled welfare demanding hoard like the latino infestation Victor David Hanson has written extensively about. Where illegals are squatting through the worst economy since the depression via a social safety net they have no constitutional right to while creating an undergound cash economy no different than the one they fled in their own country.
Alowing the massive border crashing that ensued during FULL EMPLOYMENT TEN YEARS AGO was a huge mistake. Now with massive unemployment and underemployment Ruben and his ilk demand (not suggests) America double down on stupid.
There is no Debate Ruben. America has long since made up its mind. Get legal or get out.
It is Ruben “The Sandwich” Navarrette who is the caricaturist. Anyone who opposes his amnesty is a racist. The most simple radical left-wing Demoncrat response to any controversy.
It is time for PJ to put down this sandwich and send him back to La Raza and Politico where he belongs.
Nuance is over rated. Blunt truth trumps nuance. Since most illegal aliens in the United States are Mexican then most of the deportees should be Mexican. I don’t think Mexico is a race, it is a nationality. So you can stick you cries of racism into that dark place you keep your thought process.
It is comforting to know that Mr. Navarrette supports the deporting of illegal “immigrants”. I make the assumption then that he supports the rest of the United States citizens that not only expect illegal border cross-ers to be deported, but also expect the Federal Government to stop any more of them from entering. If not he might clarify just what he supports about border enforcement and what he does not, since it would make discussion easier.
However it is clear from his writing that he is thinking of immigration to the United States as a parochial Hispanic problem and not as an ecumenical opportunity that the United States makes to the people of the world, so some can come here in numbers that allow and encourage them to assimilate so they can make good not as a hyphen but as an American.
There are too many examples of successful Americans who were, or whose forebears were immigrants or former slaves, that the assimilation example should be followed by all. There is no need for nuance or complication of the equation. As immigrant Balint Vazyoni wrote, the miracle of America is not its diversity, but that so many diverse people developed into a common American identity.
A very simple answer to the mexican (not the entire illegal issue, but mexico) illegal alien problem is to annex Mexico. Do away with the corrupt government and replace it with out slightly less corrupt one, sick our military onto the cartels, and make all mexicans (newly american as they seem to desire) taxpayers. They get to move north or not as they desire, and americans can flock to the new coasts and improve the mexican economy.
make it a territory like guam or puerto rico
hahaha
give all illegals territorial status
what would mexico say about all of this?
That might cause the USA to become the third world country, as it would insure the election of Demorats for the next century– or until they just cancel elections, whichever comes first.
We have enough uneducated, government-assistance-needing voters as it is. And we have all the criminals we need, too.
Navarrette tries to confuse and dodge, but it is a very simple matter of law.
The American people want the law enforced, but our ruling class refuses. There are all manner of twisted teary-eyed arguments about the issue, but not enforcement of the law.
Those who are here illegally do not deserve all of this “on the one hand, on the other hand” discussion. Nor do the employers of those who are here illegally.
Just enforce the law, and we can move on to the other problems. We have had enough nuance.
“… the often offensive way in which many Republicans instinctively approach the immigration debate. They always make the same mistakes: pitching simple solutions to a complicated problem; framing the debate as a battle between “us” and “them”; pandering to racism and nativism to rev up the GOP base; assuming illegal immigration can be stopped with border enforcement alone; giving employers of illegal immigrants a pass; making the debate about changing demographics and the cultural landscape..”
You know I follow this issue quite a bit and I don’t hear much of any of this coming from “the right”. This is just another example of the straw man technique that Obama and the Liberal left employ ad naseum and that seems to be the mainstay of Mr. Navarrette’s debating technique. (the Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person’s actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position).
“… the US economy needs illegal immigrants…”; and you are not in favor of illegal immigration?!Did the truth accidentally slip out, Sr. Mentirero, or are you really against what the US needs?
Here is a clue: we need nothing illegal. And your unthinking admission of support for illegal immigration is on a par with Liarbama’s admissions that he is a moslem. In column after column you try to justify/rationalize that which is illegal, ie, illegal immigration. Your denial, above, should shame and embarrass you, because you contradict yourself.
But I do have a question for you.
How can you stand to be in the same room with yourself?
Mr Navarette,
You state: “As anyone who has read — really read and understood — some of the hundreds of columns I’ve written about immigration over the last 20 years could tell you, my position on the issue is a lot more nuanced than that.”
Sir, when I began reading your editorials in the San Diego Union-Tribune fifteen years ago, I would agree that your position on immigration – and most other items – were indeed nuanced (if a bit to the right which I preferred since the U-T was/is a left-leaning paper). About ten years ago it seemed that your style was changing: you used the term “Tio Taco” or what some today might call, a la Marco Rubio, a “coconut” in outlook. Unfortunately, by my interpretation, almost everything you write today could, with only minor editing, appear in LaRaza.
On the whole, your writing went from post/non partisan, skilled op/ed writer to Racialist Hack in fifteen years.