With apologies to the Doors:
FactCheck dot Org investigates Guiliani’s flip-flops:
In a Nov. 29 article we faulted former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani for saying flatly that New York “was not a sanctuary city” for illegal aliens. We pointed out that the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service listed the city among 32 that followed “sanctuary policies” and placed it under the heading of “sanctuary cities.” Giuliani campaign officials later complained to us that the CRS was mistaken and said we should have dug more deeply and reported the CRSâ€™ error. They characterized the CRS list as one intended to include only cities that do not allow local law enforcement to cooperate with federal authorities, and they said New York didnâ€™t belong on such a list.
We took up their challenge, digging into the specific policies of cities on CRS’ list, including those that openly call themselves “sanctuary” cities, and comparing those policies to Giulianiâ€™s. We found the following:
- The policy ordered by Giuliani as it relates to law enforcement differs only in minor respects from those of cities, including San Francisco and Cambridge, Mass., that openly called themselves “sanctuary” cities or places of “refuge.” New York police could turn over the names of illegal aliens to federal immigration authorities if â€œsuspectedâ€ of a crime, while San Francisco required that a suspected criminal also be booked on felony charges and in custody, for example.
- Immigration experts we consulted said New Yorkâ€™s policy differed but little from others that CRS put under the heading of â€œsanctuaryâ€ cities. â€œIf you commit a crime â€¦ well then, in virtually all of these localities and states, youâ€™re no longer protected or insulated,â€ said Marshall Fitz of the American Immigration Lawyers Association.
- We also found that New York appears on another list â€“ this one prepared by the National Immigration Law Center â€“ of 70 jurisdictions that had policies â€œlimiting local enforcement of federal immigration law.
I believe that the current furor over immigration has more to do bigotry than with morality or legality.
I believe that the pandering of many of the candidates for the Republican nomination to the anti-immigrant wing of the party is pandering to racism. But, then, that’s the Southern Strategy.
As much as I find many of John McCain’s positions distasteful, I must honor him for not piling on the bigotry train.
Putting aside my belief, formed over 57 years of observing the political landscape, that any Democrat is better than every Republican, I believe that a Guiliani presidency would be as much a catastrophe as the Bush presidency has been.
Of course, that goes for a Huckabee presidency or a McCain presidency or almost any other Republican presidency.
It also might go for a Romney presidency, as soon as Romney decides what he believes.