Eric Cantor throws some juicy red meat at Virginia's hungry beasts

Eric Cantor throws some juicy red meat at Virginia's hungry beasts

by digby

Just in case you mistakenly thought Eric Cantor was an honest broker on immigration, this should finally put that idea to rest:


That's what passes for "nuance" in Republican circles.
This isn't the first effort by Cantor's campaign to throw some red meat to the GOP base in the lead-up to his primary, where he faces economics professor Dave Brat. Last week, Cantor's campaign sent a mailer that also struck a harsh tone on immigration.

Back in Washington, Cantor's office has pushed back on the notion that he is against immigration reform. As examples, aides have cited his continued support for policies that would grant legal status to undocumented immigrants who enlist in the military, as well as legislation that would grant citizenship to kids brought to the country illegally.
Virginia has a strange obsession with "illegal immigration."  I wrote a lot about it at one time, based on some articles in The New Republic and the LA Times when they looked into the so-called Minuteman movement a decade or so ago as it was forming in Virginia.  The TNR piece had this:
Bill explains that he "slid into the Minutemen" because he was disturbed by the way his neighborhood was changing, and the other Minutemen standing with him nod in agreement. "Dormitory-style homes" have popped up on their streets, Bill says, and the residents come and go at strange hours. Their neighbors' children are intimidated and no longer like to play outside, in part because "we've got about 17 cars coming and going from our neighbors' houses." Matt, another Minuteman who lives in nearby Manassas, claims that the police have busted prostitution rings operating out of nearby properties. Bill doesn't want his name printed, he tells me, because he worries about retaliation from the local Hispanic gang, MS-13. Pointing to the cluster of day-laborers across the street, he explains to me that the Herndon 7-11 is "a social gathering place, too." Taplin has publicly objected to a regulated day-laborer site set to open in Herndon on December 19--proposed in order to combat the trespassing, litter, and nuisance complaints that have arisen in conjunction with the informal 7-11 site--because he worries that even a regulated locale wouldn't change "their behaviors." Even on the coldest mornings, more than 50 workers often convene at the 7-11, and Bill judges that sometimes only 10 or 20 get hired. "When," he asks me, "is it ever a good thing for 40 men to hang out together?" 
These anxieties may be overblown, in some cases borderline racist; but they are not, unfortunately, outside the mainstream. In Mount Pleasant, the predominantly Hispanic, rapidly gentrifying Washington neighborhood where I live, complaints have begun to surface about the groups of men that congregate on stoops or outside of convenience stores at night. Those who have complained call it loitering, but one Hispanic resident told the Post that when the men gather outdoors, "[t]hey're having coffee; they talk about issues. ... It's part of our community." For the neighborhood's Hispanic population, this practice is a cultural tradition; for its newer batch of hip, ostensibly liberal urbanites, it is disturbing, and too closely resembles something American law designates a crime. 
These are people who would never admit they share anything in common with the Herndon Minutemen. But like it or not, the Minutemen are acting on anxieties many Americans share--anxieties about the challenge of enforcing the law in towns that are swelling in size due to immigration; anxieties about the challenge of integrating and accommodating an immigrant culture. Border states like California have been grappling with these issues for years, in court battles about day-laborer sites and debates over concepts like bilingual education. Often in these conflicts those who have presented cultural, as opposed to legal, objections to uncontrolled immigration are condemned as xenophobic or racist. But as my Mount Pleasant neighbors have shown, it can be tricky to disentangle legal from cultural discomfort.
Right. "Cultural discomfort" aka xenophobia. It's actually fairly easy to disentangle it from discrimination, which is illegal. Gathering in groups in your neighborhood to shoot the shit isn't.

Mother Jones published a piece back in 2007 on the same issue, this time about a group which was using local ordinances to keep what they were sure were illegal immigrants from being allowed to rent housing or otherwise live in their town:
Back at the Help Save Manassas booth, volunteers wearing T-shirts emblazoned with "What part of illegal don't you understand?" displayed photographs of garbage-strewn houses and yards. One showed a tent next to an overturned wading pool propped up by a stick—overflow, Letiecq claimed, from a house full of illegals. An elderly woman in a Democratic Party T-shirt confronted a stocky ex-Marine named Steve, asking, "How do you know that the people living in these houses are illegal? Poor people would live like that, too." 
"Ma'am, they're illegal. They are," Steve said. "You're in denial.
I don't know if Cantor represents these people but he obviously represents some who think like them or he wouldn't be dogged with this issue in his campaign. (Then there's always the possibility that he also hates immigrants so much that he feels the need to lie about what the president and Harry Reid have proposed in order to ensure.  We should never discount that possibility...)

For a person who lives in a place called California in a town called Santa Monica where Spanish names  for places and streets are as common as English, this "cultural discomfort" thing strikes me as really odd. But then I'm sure Eric Cantor's voters feel "cultural discomfort" with anyone who isn't exactly like them --- including me. Which is their privilege.  They just don't get to legislate against people on that basis in America.  

.