Paul J. Cella's diatribe at Redstate is nothing short of an open declaration of war on those who support the comprehensive immigration bill. To put it simply, based on cherry-picked portions of a Rasmussen poll, those of us who support the comprehensive immigration bill are anti-American.
To put it bluntly, this is one of the most vicious lies I have ever had the distinct displeasure to read. But worse than the lies, the labeling of myself and others as traitors, the posting of pictures covered with a bulls-eye, is the silence. Part of me knows that there are those who oppose the present bill but who also know that the proponents - particularly President Bush, Senator Jon Kyl, and even John McCain - are honorable people doing what they feel is best for America.
Yet when a Michelle Malkin or Tom Tancredo accuses them of selling out America, or promoting amnesty, they are silent. They do not offer the slightest reproof to those who call these people traitors, Quislings, or agents of Mexico. They go along with claims of amnesty that have as much truth to them as Bill Clinton's claims of Republican Medicare cuts had in 1995.
Say what you will about George W. Bush and Karl Rove - they managed to pull off three election wins against the odds. In 2000, when there was peace and prosperity, they beat back Bill Clinton's vice president by a very slim margin due to a dirty trick on the part of a Democratic operative. In 2002, when one would think that cries of a stolen election would lead to Democratic gains, they re-took the Senate after the treachery of Jim Jeffords, and also gained in the House. In 2004, despite millions from George Soros, a media that discarded many pretenses of objectivity, and a massive in-kind campaign donation from Michael Moore, Bush and Rove won again.
Bush was straight with the base. He told them he was not an orthodox conservative. And when he won his elections, he tried to carry out what he promised. For being a man of his word, he has been attacked by conservatives. The same ones who were told where he stood on issues in 1999 and again in 2004. Now they act betrayed.
No, those who were betrayed were Republicans who thought that conservatives had at least been willing to give President Bush a free hand to accomplish his objectives. Boy, was I mistaken. A certain clique of conservatives with disproportionate influence among talk show hosts and other conservative media instead tried to hijack the GOP. When they failed to do so - and indeed, even found themselves losing primaries and unable to salvage a general election, they have now resorted to what can only be described as blackmail.
The Republican Party, if it is to be seen as capable of showing resolve in the face of threats from North Korea and Iran, cannot give in to a very loud and vocal minority. Repeated polls, including the one from Rasmussen, show wide support (60+%) in favor of the elements of the Senate compromise. Furthermore, it is the right thing to do.
If anything, people taking a stand for what believe in against all odds, including the venom and spite from their own base, is perhaps one of the most American things of all. It goes back to Thomas Jefferson writing the Declaration of Independence - and stating radical notions such as the self-evident truths that all men are created equal, and had undeniable rights including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness . It is George Washington crossing the Delaware to rally his country. It is Edmund G. Ross standing up to his supporters in voting to acquit Andrew Johnson of charges stemming from the unconstitutional Tenure in Office Act. It is Martin Luther King organizing the Montgomery Bus Boycott. It is Ronald Reagan and his push to win the Cold War. It is George W. Bush standing firm for what he believes in against attacks from all sides.
No, Mr. Cella, President Bush is not acting in an anti-American manner. Nor are any of us who support comprehensive immigration reform. We're just as American, just as patriotic, and just as principled as you. Furthermore, rather than give in to your bullying and hysteria, I intend to stand and fight for legislation that I think is good for the country. Furthermore, I demand that you not only state the nature of the "usurpation" that you allege is coming. I demand to know why you view supporters of this legislation as traitors. I demand that you state just what exactly you define at patriotism.
And if you cannot do so, then I demand you retract your scurrilous charges that those of us who back this immigration bill are traitors and acting in an anti-American manner. I did not wish for things to reach this level. But at this point, rhetoric like that employed by Polipundit, Paul J Cella, Michelle Malkin, and others leaves me the choice of either fighting this fight on the uncivil level that they have chosen to take it, with no rhetorical holds are barred, or acquiescence to tactics and notions that I believe to be immoral, unethical, and in direct opposition to the principles this nation was founded on (as found in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution).
Good men chose to fight and stand for what they believe in. I shall do so as well. Really, there is no choice. After all, I'm an American. If Paul J Cella wishes for civil war amongst conservatives, then he shall have his fill.