Not exactly a new trick but effective. Campaign rhetoric has established its own code. For example, anti-crime, anti-terrorism, family values and market solutions can be convenient euphemistic ways to appeal to certain voters without saying nasty things like white supremacy, business interests and Christian fundamentalism.

And, they should ignore the 10s of thousands of illegal aliens who've entered from terrorism-sponsoring countries.

And they entered illegally by crossing the Mexican-US border through the desert?  And I am guessing you think Mexico is a "terrorism sponsoring" country?  Should we view everone trying to sneak into this country illegally as terrorists who want to blow us up therefore justifying shooting them without warning and on sight?

Probably too subliminal to be effective, definitely too subliminal to be the basis of an oppo ad or talking point for Pederson.

I will have to respectfully disagree kth.  He is in plain view of border guards and is talking about terrorism.  I think it is a very overt attempt at linking illegal Mexican immigrants with terrorists...for every Arizona resident illegal immigration is a hot button issue.

For those of you who may not have read Asymmetric Language, I have provided an attention grabber so that you will at least consider reading DevilTower's essay:

-----------------------------------------------

Destroy the status quo
And the biggest thing we can do to win this fight is just exactly what you're doing right now -- make use of new media options.  If the Republicans have played the role of Al Qaeda when it comes to words, they're still marching with fixed bayonets when it comes to delivery mechanisms.

There's a reason why the right wing devotes so much time to attacking us poor bloggers.  It's because they are really, really scared of us.  They see that their carefully constructed control over paper, and radio, and television is in digital danger, and they haven't formulated an effective plan to deal with it.

At first they thought they could match the liberal blogs, because they made the assumption that cyberspace would make it easier to sell their lies.  However, the ability of bloggers to dig up the truth -- which is rarely Republican friendly -- has baffled them for the moment.  They're slinging the mud by the barrel-full, trying to make sure that "blog" becomes as vilified as "liberal."  Even so, they know they won't hold back this tide for long.

Everyone in the traditional media, not just the right wingers, is looking at the blogs with a feeling of unease.  Like a tidal wave approaching shore, we're barely a ripple at the moment, but everyone glancing this way can see that the water is running out of their bay.  Soon enough, they'll be looking up as the wave crests over their heads.

The Republicans are trying to buy time, hoping to devalue the Internet until they can get a good handle on how to control it (which is a big part of what was behind the fight against net neutrality).  Don't give them time.  Stay on top of this thing.  Make sure it remains vital.  Keep driving the wing nuts crazy.

And remember to laugh every time they tell you the blogs are worthless.

--------------------------------------------- 

this phenomenon is hardly a premeditated effort at "reconquista."

The Mexican government also refers to it as a "phenomonon", so you might want to consider using a less loaded word.

Obviously, only a small number of people would know whether the Mexican government or top levels of their society have an actual plan. One will note that all governments throughout the world have various plans, and some of those would probably be considered bad. Perhaps you aren't giving the elites of Mexico the credit they obviously deserve.

But, whether they have a plan or not, they are taking steps that are leading to co-dominion over parts of the U.S. There are millions of dual citizens, Mexico has programs to "reach out" to their citizens here, their consuls are very aggressive about pushing pro-Mexican policies even at the city council level, the Bush administration is allowing the FDIC to work with the MX consulate in Chicago to give home loans to illegal aliens, and both past presidents of Mexico have claimed part of our citizenry as part of the Mexican Nation.

And, at least two of the organizers of the illegal immigration marches have links to the Mexican government. One of those is a former consul general. One other organizer is an official with Mexico's PRD party. The possibility exists that the Mexican government used proxies to get their citizens in our country to take to the streets.

So, when you actually look into this you start to wonder whatever could be going on.

In fact, it seems that serious terrorists tend to minimize their presence by obtaining false documents and traveling into the country with visas, not by crossing desert and stream in the dead of the night.

Yes, we should base our entire response to terrorism on what they've usually done in the past instead of wondering what they might do when loopholes they've used in the past have been closed.

-- Illegal immigration introduction

...a clear effort by the Kyl campaign to link Mexican immigration with terrorism.

Or ir is an effort to show that keeping terrorists out of the country requires some measure of border control. The lack of which is something most in Arizona are well aware of.

The sons of the prophet are noble and bold,
and quite unaccustomed to fear.
But the bravest by far in the ranks of the Shah
was Abdul Abulbul Amir

Re: immigration

I'm not inclined to look for conspiracy and secret plans when confronting a straightforward phenomenon (I don't know how else to describe it and I think "issue" is too vague) such as immigration. I prefer to apply Occam's Razor first and then look for abberations.

Of course it would be in the best interest of the Mexican government to export its problems. I just don't see evidence of a deliberate policy of doing so (which would require the cooperation of business elements in the US to work, incidentally). It seems more likely to me that the Mexican government finds it convenient that sizable portions of its poor population are crossing the border. As for the immigration advocates themselves, the interest appears to be concern for the well-being of those who are immigrating illegally. This inlcudes things like easier access to government representation and home loans but does not represent a threat to me. And that's what it comes down to. I'm not clear what threat immigration represents, whether its economic, cultural or linguistic.

Re: terrorism

I'll make my point more clear. Building a 2000-mile wall won't prevent terrorism. The best benefit vis-a-vis terrorism would be preventing that one particular loophole. I don't find that a very productive way of dealing with terrorists. Dealing with terror requires information, good police work and eliminating the root causes. The other approach is to create a hyper-sensitive national security state and conduct an aggressive foreign policy. And we all know what that has achieved for us.

Kyl is a total wack job Republican. He has never done anything but what he is told by his big corporate donors.

If he had supported invading Mexico instead of Iraq, he might have made some sense. Give them opportunites and democracy down there south of the border, they won't come here. Plain enough.