Those of you who live in this fantasy that anti-immigrant is politically popular need to get out more. I've been out knocking on doors for local candidates for the GOP primary. I knock on every door, R, D, registered, not registered, citizen, not citizen. I ask open-ended questions ... what are your top issues.

Only 2 out of 150 have been anti-immigrant. They didn't use the word illegal, so I won't. Overwhelmingly corruption and wasteful spending are the #1 issue in this new middle class subdivision. Guns, Life/Choice are also major issues. When my candidate (Chris Lauzen) is compared to his high profile opponent (Jim Oberweis), the #1 reason given for explicitly opposing Oberweis by over 25 people is his high profile anti (illegal) immigrant image.

Several of the voters looked at my Lauzen literature and said they couldn't support him because he is too anti-illegal in his literature. That is true. He is not as open borders as I am. I am supporting him because he is the best on corruption and wasteful spending, which are my personal priorities also.

So far, in talking to over 150 voters, zero are supporting Oberweis. About 50% are supporting Lauzen, currently our St Senator and high profile anti-corruptin, cut spending, low taxes, pro-life, pro-gun.

About 40% are undecided. About 10% are pro-Burns, the 3d candidate in the race. Overwhelmingly that 10% is pro-Burns because he is more pro-choice than Lauzen and Oberweis. I suspect that the undecided will have the lower turnout rate and those who do turn out will vote based on non-issues such as Lauzens high profile in the youth soccer leagues.

I haven't recently knocked on doors in the other 29 suburban and downstate precincts in 13 other towns where I have knocked in the past 9 years. But I'll bet it is the same story in every single precinct.

In short, the anti-illegal vote will be about the size of the Pat Buchanan vote. Among other reason, it is just pitched in too mean-spirited of a tone of voice. For example talkshow voices Michael Savage, Laura Ingrahm and Bill Cunningham sound more mean-spirited than Sean Hannity, who lacks the humor of a Rush Limbaugh, who sounds relatively less mean-spirited.

Irene
I've said my loyalty is first to God, then the Bible and teachings found in it, then to the concepts in the Declaration of Independence and Constitution, somewhere below that is loyalty to my used car dealer. Somewhere below that is loyalty to a political party or politician.

I consider loyalty to the Dec of Independence and Constitution to be patriotic and love of country. If you want to see it otherwise, that is your privilege. It isn't what keeps me awake at night.

And BTW sometimes I'm flawed and don't match up 100% to God or the teachings of the Bible.

re: " If his goal was to drive away Republicans "

Here in Chicago exurbia a GOP primary for Congress pits
Oberweiss with ant-immigrant/anti-Hispanic image against;

Lauzen, of low tax and anti-corruption image (even tho he is the most anti-illegal vote in the legislature) and

Burns, whose image is high taxes, big pork barrel.

In collecting signatures for Lauzen I pitched low taxes and anti-corruption. I avoided his anti-immigration position. Lauzen has a solid 25%. 10% of my GOP neighbors opposed Lauzen because he is pro-life. No other negative was mentioned on him. They will vote for Burns.

About 25% voiced negatives on Oberweis with equal numbers opposing his position on immigration and his prior gaffes on pro-life, often the same people as pro-lifers are pro-immigration. The homeowners next door and many in their fundamentalist churches are illegals.

Here, in this rapidly growing exurbia of houses $350,000 to $500,000 the anti-immigration image of the GOP definitely hurts the GOP.... especially the conservatives. Of course, that should be placed in perspective. The corruption image of the GOP hurts much more than the anti-immigrant image.

If Lauzen keeps the issues in the campaign taxes and anti-corruption, he wins. If Burns baits Lauzen into anti-immigrant rhetoric, votes shift to Burns and he wins.

Did Noah go to Mt Ararat on a tourist visa or what?

When Abraham went west from Ur, did he have immigration papers?
When Joseph went to Egypt did he have a passport?

When Jesuw went to Egpyt, what kind of (Roman) permission did he have?

When the Apostles scattered to the all parts of the known/Roman world, what did they have beyond a good story?

When Columbus landed on that Carribean island what did he have?

When my anscestors landed on the PA side of the Delaware river with nothing but a Bible, was that their visa?

When my grandparents haul my mom and aunts back and forth from ND to Saskatchewan to MT to Alberta to WA to British Columbia with no regard for which country which kid was born in.....

Was all of this contrary to God's teachings?