Monday, June 11, 2007

Why the Immigration Bill Failed

Carol Platt Liebau is spot on in her assessment. Here's just one reason:

The attitude of the bill's proponents was counterproductive. It's
quite possible that the immigration bill would still be alive and kicking had
its supporters treated opponents more respectfully. Republicans are used to
being accused of all kinds of bigotry by their Democratic counterparts, but it
was insulting (and infuriating) for Republicans who raised concerns about the
bill in good conscience to be characterized by a President of their own party as
lacking the will to "do what's right for America." Others, such as Republican
presidential hopeful John McCain and Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein,
repeatedly insinuated that those who opposed the bill did so from unworthy and
bigoted motives.

That's the one which sticks in my craw. We're supposed to be smart enough to elect "them" to represent us, then when we voice our opinion, our view is no longer relevant. We'll see who's the smart one come Election Day. Read on:

From the time when the legislation was first presented to the
American people, the public was treated to elevated disquisitions from some of
its negotiators, who praised themselves lavishly and let it be known that they
had basked in the perfumed and rarified air of bipartisanship.
Amid their
self-congratulation, they missed an important fact. Although Americans may
applaud the concept of bipartisanship, the truth is that they didn't send
representatives to Washington to engage in a "bipartisan process." Rather, they
elected them to pursue certain policies.

They now look on themselves as martyrs, against the "angry" netroots. That's why the President thinks he can continue to fight for this bad, bad bill.