Not only Newt Gingrich's opponents in the presidential campaign, but also commentators in the mainstream media who ought to know better, have jumped all over him for advocating "humane" treatment for (some) "illegal immigrants" (a phrase which should always be used with quotation marks, not because it is wrong in the technical legal sense, which it is not, but because its normal meaning includes any foreign born person who has a brown skin or speaks Spanish).
As soon as Gingrich uttered the words "humane" and "immigrants" in the same sentence, this was treated a a huge gaffe, on the order of Perry's memory lapse about which federal agency he would like to abolish, or Cain's equivocations about sexual harrassment accusations (now mostly forgotten by the media - after all, degrading behavior toward women is unforgivable, but suggesting that even one "illegal" should be allowed to remain with his or her family in the US instead of being electrocuted is even worse).
Therefore, it may say something important that Gingrich, who is coming over as the least bigoted toward Latino immigrants among the Republican candidates, has suddenly jumped to the top of the polls. Is it possible that Republican voters are actually less full of hate towards Latinos than the Fox News propagandists and the mainstream media pundits think?
Or might Republican voters, just as their Democratic and independent counterparts are doing, actually care more about how they can find jobs, pay their mortgages and put food on the table for their families than about how many Spanish-speaking families our politicians want to break up? Is Newt on to something? Are voters in both parties actually more interested in dealing with our economic problems than in promoting anti-immigrant hate? And if this is the case, is there not a lesson in this somewhere for Barack Obama and his fellow deportomaniacs in the White House?
Of course, this is not to say that Gingrich is yet ready to burn the bridges of bigotry behind him completely. Few, if any, public figures in America have been more vocal and consistent advocates of hatred against Muslims. Therefore, voters who cannot stomach the idea of having a president in the White House who really believes in diversity and tolerance will still have a lot to like about Newt Gingrich.
Of course the overwhelming majority of illegals are Mexicans (diversity, anyone?) and overwhelmingly the majority of Americans, white and black, oppose our country being swarmed, invaded, occupied, whatever, by hordes of Mexicans. We object to having to "press one for English". We are disturbed by having every sign and public notice printed in Spanish for the "benefit" of people who are mostly illiterate in that language anyway.
I daresay there would be more public support for immigration in general if there were more "diversity" (never thought I'd say that) in the nature of the immigrants and not such an almost total dominance by Mexicans.
As for Gingrich's position on Muslims...he is exactly right and they have no one but themselves to blame. They as a group are responsible for most of the violence that plagues the world everywhere they live, which would be fine if they confined it to their own miserable countries. But it is not enough that other countries have stupidly provided them asylum, the Muslims then turn against those very countries and start the violence all over again. There is not one country, not one society, where Muslims live in peace with members of other faiths and nationalities; they have clearly demonstrated that they are not to be trusted and any Western nation is folish to continue to admit them!
I have not the slightest animosity toward Mexicans or Muslims...IN their own countries. I am totally indifferent about what sort of government Iraqis or Libyans live under or whether or not girls in Afghanistan go to school. Their countries...their laws and customs! I have absolutely no interest in Mexican corruption and incompetence, in Mexico. But I do not want those customs brought into and established here and I certainly do not want my Government to force me to "respect" or adapt, to those laws and traditions.
Since the revised INA in 1965 this country has undergone totally unprecedented demographic upheavals, which are still on-going. At no time have those most affected by these changes ever been given an opportunity to express our opposition/support for those policies. Without exception they have all been imposed on us by small cabals in Washington and their hi-volume ethnic and legal supporters. Finally, after seeing our country disappear while we watch, the American people have begun to voice their opposition to all these changes...we don't like them and we're letting Washington (and others) hear of our anger and resistance. Personally, I hope someone is paying attention.