Politics

McCain's Test Against the Anti-Immigration Right

Getty Images

John McCain has a love-hate relationship with immigration reform. Or rather, he loves immigration reform but the conservative base hates it. That becomes apparent whenever he talks about it.

McCain and his conservative critics learned different lessons from the ill-fated attempt in 2007 to create a comprehensive immigration reform scheme. Conservative opponents of immigration reform interpreted the defeat of the Bush immigration plan as proof certain that opposition to legalization for illegal immigrants was a winning argument and that the public had embraced a border-security-only plan.

But McCain saw it differently. He survived a near-political death experience and then came back from the political grave to win the nomination of the G.O.P., a party supposedly dominated by anti-immigration reform conservatives. How did he do it? Not by renouncing his support for immigration reform, but by recognizing political realities. His formulation: border security first, but then comprehensive reform.

For months the argument was theoretical. Conservatives took pride in sinking comprehensive reform while McCain reveled in his reputation as a maverick who had defied his party and at least tried to construct a real solution to a knotty problem.

But now the fight has resurfaced. With each speech before a Hispanic group, the gap between McCain and his base becomes more apparent. No matter how often McCain promises that he has learned the lesson of achieving border security first, the conservative chorus rolls its eyes in disbelief. His talk about immigration reform is simply, as one activist put it, “a code word for amnesty.”

As for illegal immigrants already here, loud conservative voices either insist that they will never reward “law-breakers,” or they set the standard for border security and attrition of illegal immigrants already here so ridiculously high that it amounts to the same result: no legalized status for illegal immigrants.

McCain can talk all day about border security measures and employer verification but his critics aren’t listening. Anti-immigration reform conservatives accuse McCain of double talk and of planning an amnesty bonanza. They give him no points for having given it the college try with Ted Kennedy. Rather, it reminds them of all the things they don’t like about McCain – maverick, deal-maker, and compromiser.

Even his praise for Hispanics who served and sacrificed in the military brings groans from conservatives. Tom Tancredo went public with his outrage over McCain’s ad which celebrated the Hispanics whose names appear on the Vietnam memorial. And many conservative pundits grumbled as well. They take umbrage at the perceived insult that they can’t distinguish between legal immigrants who have served honorably and illegal immigrants. There simply is no winning for McCain with this crowd.

But McCain would be foolhardy to throw in the towel or to stop talking about this issue. After all, he won the Republican Florida primary on the strength of his support among Hispanic voters. He will need them and others in New Mexico and other western states to win in November.

Moreover, McCain has another reason for bringing up immigration which has nothing to do with Hispanics or even immigration itself. Both he and Barack Obama are trying to lay claim to independent voters who want less screaming and more problem-solving from their leaders. The very things -- immigration reform, global warming legislation, campaign finance reform and judicial nominations (i.e. the Gang of 14) -- which anger his conservative base potentially endear McCain to independents. They like politicians who know how to get things done.

That, in part, is why the McCain team was eager to pounce on Barack Obama’s recent attempts to bolster his own role in immigration reform, pointing to Obama’s votes on so-called poison pill amendments that killed the bill.

Even if his conservative critics would rather McCain forget about immigration reform and find other examples of political heresy to tout, McCain shows no sign of stopping. That may create some heartache for him in keeping conservatives in the tent and energized. But the alternative is worse: losing a powerful argument with independents and a vote-getting issue with Hispanics.

So McCain will have to grin and bear the screams from his base and resist the warnings, sometimes verging on threats, to pipe down. And he, of course, has the best evidence possible that his is the winning argument. He won the G.O.P. primary, didn’t he? He’ll need to keep that in mind and steal himself against the cries from the Right if he is to have a fighting chance in November.

  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Newsvine
  • Google
  • Yahoo
  • Technorati
  • Facebook
  • Stumble Upon
  • Netvibes
  • Windows Live

Comments
Post a comment

Anonymous (not verified) says:

We must remember the rabid base who voted against McCain during the GOP Primary and voted for hardcore anti-immigrant candidates like Tancredo and Hunter totaled 5% combined.

So McCain can chillax and keep working the independents and hispanic votes if he wants to get elected.

Straight Talk Hawk (not verified) says:

OVERHAUL AT ST. PAUL--DUMP MCAMNESTY NOW!!!

What's all this garbage about only the "conservative base" being against McAmnesty and his sellout to illegal aliens? Remember last summer when the purple-faced, foul-mouthed, raging McAmnesty and "his friend" Teddy were trying to force a vote on their amnesty bill without anyone being allowed to read it? Polls at the time showed that 90% of the American people opposed Slick Talk's behind-closed-doors sham, and 85% opposed the amnesty. Congress now has a 91% DISAPPROVAL rating, largely based on the devastation of our country by McAmnesty's illegal alien invasion in violation of Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution (ever read that document, McAmnesty?). Are you saying the conservative base is 85% to 90% of the country? McAmnesty is the one that is out of touch, and needs to be dumped in favor of a candidate in the real world with the 90%.

Anonymous (not verified) says:

I am tired of the rhetoric from both parties, its time to legalize these people that have been living in the dark for years. Our economy needs these people.. A day without these illegal would be like a day without power..I know that alot of anti-illegal advocates disagree with this statement but why don't you put yourself in the shoes of these people..First of all how many of you all would go out there in the field and pick fruits for may 7 bucks an hour in a 110 degree temperature, be realistic!!!!! We need to be realistic and stop hating on people that wants to better their life, and lets look back into your history and realize that Amercia is always and will be a country of immigrant, regardless... Most of you haters think that you own America, we all came from somewhere different from America, this is a land of opportunity and this why our forefathers and the illegals came here, you idiots. I want to see the day when white folks gonna go out in the fields and pick our fruits in the scorching sun hot, and let see what happens next!!!!!!!

geniousdrew (not verified) says:

It would only make sense for McCain to shift more towards comprehensive reform:

1. It is what he believes is right
2. Romney, Tancredo & Hunter proved that you aren't going to win an election on this.
3. Antis aren't really swing voters anyway and Hispanics are.

E Foster (not verified) says:

Yesterday, the pundits were theorizing on why Obama's lead over McCain has dropped from double digits to single digits in the last month. Their suggestions about FISA and Jesse miss the mark-it is more likely that his mandate for Americans to learn Spanish is what got him in trouble. He is still in the lead, and McCain has problems of his own with Americans who are concerned about illegal immigration, but Obama's camp should take a look at the things that have happened in the last month concerning their candidate and try out a more logical theory.

Peter Schaeffer (not verified) says:

So far all that McCain has accomplished is onside goal. Hispanics are going to vote from Obama by at least a two to one margin. Why? Because they know that McCain's "compassion" for them is just a code word for "cheap, easily exploited labor" and the rest of the his economic program amounts to "Robin Hood in Reverse".

At the same time vast numbers of non-Hispanic voters are turned off by McCain role as a mouthpiece for the greediest and sleaziest corporations in America (the ones that exploit illegals).

McCain has dug himself a hole over immigration and there is no way he can get out. Perhaps when he shows some "compassion" for legal immigrants and American citizens he might get somewhere.

Not a chance so far.

As for the polling significance of immigration, ask Chris Cannon (R-UT). He was crushed (60:40) because of his rabid support for illegals.

Marvin Sinclair (not verified) says:

So Anonymous,

I believe that the fieldworkers earn ten to twenty dollars an hour. They also make up a tiny percentage of the thirty million and up, of illegal aliens. American citizens, do more of the farm labor than legal and illegal citizens combined. From this we know that Americans do not feel themselves to be better than anyone else, when given the opportunity to work.

You accuse those who disagree with you, of being haters, but you are the one speaking hatefully. You are telling American citizens to shut up. Why do you hate America and American citizens so much? Please, for your own well being, stop being a hater.

M. L. Sinclair

Marvin Sinclair (not verified) says:

So Anonymous,

I believe that the fieldworkers earn ten to twenty dollars an hour. They also make up a tiny percentage of the thirty million and up, of illegal aliens. American citizens, do more of the farm labor than legal and illegal citizens combined. From this we know that Americans do not feel themselves to be better than anyone else, when given the opportunity to work.

You accuse those who disagree with you, of being haters, but you are the one speaking hatefully. You are telling American citizens to shut up. Why do you hate America and American citizens so much? Please, for your own well being, stop being a hater.

M. L. Sinclair

Peter Schaeffer (not verified) says:

Can we an end to this nonsense about how "the economy needs these people". Arizona and Oklahoma have cracked down on illegal immigration. In each case the corporate interests screamed chicken little. Guess what, the sky didn't fall. We have millions and millions of unemployed and under-employers workers who can and will take these jobs.

If all the illegals disappeared tomorrow, it would be like getting rid of a migraine headache. Wages would rise. Housing would be more affordable. Traffic congestion would fall. Schools and hospitals would instantly be better off. Crime would decline, drastically in some case.

America would move back towards the middle-class country it is supposed to be. Yes, the elite plutocracy would have to pay a bit more for their servants... Sorry, no
crocodile tears for the illegal alien exploiters.

Would anyone pick grapes for $7 a hour? No and that is a good thing. Employers would have to give American workers a raise... Something they haven't had in a long time. In some cases, the plantation plutocracy will have to mechanize. Once again a better solution than importing a new underclass.

At let's not waste time on the $7 lettuce nonsense either. Philip Martin, the foremost agricultural economist in the US, has show that the impact of higher wages on produce prices would be trivial.

Peter Schaeffer (not verified) says:

"But McCain would be foolhardy to throw in the towel or to stop talking about this issue. After all, he won the Republican Florida primary on the strength of his support among Hispanic voters. He will need them and others in New Mexico and other western states to win in November."

Actually no. The exit polling data shows that McCain lost far more votes over immigration than he gained.

"The very things -- immigration reform, global warming legislation, campaign finance reform and judicial nominations (i.e. the Gang of 14) -- which anger his conservative base potentially endear McCain to independents. They like politicians who know how to get things done."

Actually no. All of the polling data shows that political independents are just as hostile towards illegal immigration as Republicans. Indeed, Democrats (voters that is) are only slightly less hostile than Republicans. Huge majorities of Republicans, Democrats, and Independents opposed the McAmnesty bill. The public of all parties wants illegal immigration eliminated and legal immigration reduced.

So far the political class isn't listening.

Carl from Arizona (not verified) says:

You really need to be honest about McCain's real position.

First, he is for amnesty, and said so, with his remarks quoted in the Tucson Citizen.

Second, his "path to citizenship" mantra is a fraud as illegal entrants can stay in this country as long as they like under McCain-Kennedy while taking no steps on the so-called "path."

Third, McCain supports frauds like the "virtual fence," which was such a disaster (i.e. totally ineffective in stopping the influx of illegal entrants) that it had to be taken down. He opposes real border security.

Fourth, he opposes enforcement of existing laws against employing illegal aliens.

Fifth, he favors bringing more, and more, and more aliens into this country under so-called guest worker programs.

LAW ABIDING CITIZEN (not verified) says:

Those who advocate rewarding illegal behavior should be considered co-conspirators in the concerted effort by foreigners to invade and occupy this country for their personal benefit. Those who collude with these law breakers stand to benefit in some way all at the expense of the country in which they live. Many are even citizens but they're not responsible citizens. They advocate law breaking, reward those who steal other's identification, get government handouts, free medical care, free schooling. All paid for by law abiding tax payers. Something is wrong with this picture.

The big picture is so clear. This country was founded on the rule of law, if we abdicate that, we destroy this country. We're on that track as the government allows hordes of illiterate, ignorant, law breaking, third world inhabitants to move into our country drain the resources and establish mini third world havens in every corner of the country. Even forcing a change in our language.

If this trend isn't reversed this country will cease to exist as we know it. The quality of life will sink along the lines of the decreped countries these illegals left. So those bleeding heart liberals who stand by these law breakers will also suffer - mark my words.

Loose our language, loose our culture and loose our country. History is repeating itself.

Juan McAmnesty (not verified) says:

Amnesty for ALL illegal mexicans!

mike burnsAnonymous (not verified) says:

Nobody benefits from immigration except business owners. The Hispanic groups are engaged in a stealth campaign of ethnic cleansing to make America a Latino majority nation. They want unlimited immigration, so their race become dominant. Whites and blacks oppose that. Want to call me a racist, go ahead. the Hispanic groups are as racist as the Nazis.

By the way, who do you think picked fruit before all the illegals got here? i live in Bakersfield California, and I can tell you who. the white okies and Arkies who fled the dust bowl. And NOBODY benefits from "cheap labor" when we have to suppport the 5 or 6 kids of the "cheap immigrant labor". And don't tell me we don't because we do. Each kid costs over 10000 bucks a year in schools, plus food stamps, medi-cal, etc.

You sound like a Hispanic. If so, you are taking the side of your race. I am white, I take the side of my race. If I'm a bad guy, then so are you.

Brian in Texas (not verified) says:

McCain is a disgrace to America. How a military "hero" doesn't understand the basic concept of protecting it's borders is beyond me. What a jackass.

Oregon4Obama (not verified) says:

Bush has not supported any reform because he backs the companies that have exploited cheap labor.....

Its like the war, 15 BILLION DOLLARS are unaccounted for, but Mr. Bush has not and does not plan to look into these matters...

Since McCain has proven himself to be very much alike to that of Bush, Hispanics know that what they want will not be given to them by McCain

GeorgeNArizona (not verified) says:

As a registered Republican, I'm painfully aware that our Arizona Senator is on the side of Big Business that want's cheap labor. That's the true bottom line in all this. American Citizens be damned. Well that's my opinion about McCain; I'll be damned if I'm going to vote for him for President. When he loses this election as I'm sure he well may he should start looking for a job as I doubt he will win re-election as our senator. George

vervish (not verified) says:

It's sad how may of these comments talk about America being ruined by illegal immigrants. It smacks of the same racist mentality that was used against the Jews, Irish, Italians, etc. back in the 20's and the 30's (who, by the way were often here illegally). Ah, but then I shouldn't expect any of you to actually know anything about American history because you're too busy writing about how great this country used to be. Hey, let's be honest that this country has never been kind (initially, at least) to anyone who isn't white and speaks clear English. We thrive on assimilation (which is understandable) but we fail to see that assimilation takes time. No matter which ethnic group you hate the most, look at the 2nd or 3rd generation of immigrants who came here and you will see very little difference between the way those kids and "white" kids live their lives. They watch the same shows, wear the same clothes and guess what-they even speak the same language as the white kids. And somehow, amazingly they go from being "what's wrong with this country" to being productive American citizens. Hmm. funny how that happens, huh? Yes, I understand the need for the rule of law, but I also understand the need for a little common sense. These people have no lives to go back to, so they won't "self-deport" like certain people have predicted. Maybe a small percentage will, but certainly not the majority. And if our beef is really about spending our tax money on them, why don't we make them legal so we can tax them? In the end it's going to cost us much more to try and deport all of them. Again, I'm not saying what you want to hear but rather common sense (which is non-existent in many conversations today). If you mandate that illegal immigrants pay back taxes or a fine(whichever), learn English and take civics classes you are going to end up with a new generation of immigrant taxpayers who will assimilate faster than the current generation of immigrants. Trust me, I live in Southern California and I have seen how Asians have legally manipulated the immigration system to their advantage. It is amazingly that legal immigrants can function here without being able to speak a word of English. At least with McCain's reform illegal immigrants couldn't get away with that. So let's see: we would have taxpaying, English-speaking immigrants. What's left to be upset about? Oh yeah,"the rule of law". Ok people, ask yourselves this: is the law sacred in America? If so, how come we don't turn ourselves in every time we break a law? It's because we put different values on different laws. How many of our fine Senators and Representatives have broken some kind of law and not been actually punished for it? It's because there are different ways of applying/enforcing the law. So accept fines, back taxes, English and civics classes as a way of punishing them for their crime and maintaining the rule of law and you will be surprised to see how much these new immigrants will give to their new country in appreciation for what was given to them.

tomm john (not verified) says:

John McCain will not win the presidency promoting amnesty for illegals. Even Mitt Romney, who McCain desperately needs to win the election, is against amnesty. Let amnesty John straight talk that one.

Airborne9 (not verified) says:

If indeed McCain, for whom I a Viet-Nam veteran would like to vote is seen by me to be reneging on his promise of "scurity first," he'll lose my vote.

Contrary to what Senator Graham claims is the case of some of us, my opposition to illegal immigration isn't an expression of anti-Catholicism. I am a practicing Catholic and welcoming to those Hispanics who're my fellow Catholics, whether or no they've crossed the border legally. But there are limits to my toleration of the rapid cultural transformation of my country through massive non-assimilative immigration.

Peter Schaeffer (not verified) says:

It's nice to hear all of this assimilation nonsense. However, the truth is grim. After 4 generations Mexican immigrants lag far behind the rest of the population.

See "Samuel P. Huntington Comes Out Against Immigration From Mexico" (http://www.parapundit.com/archives/001952.html)

Update: One argument made by defenders of massive immigration from Mexico is that the initial immigrants may not be well educated but the successive generations of their children and grandchildren will eventually approach US norms. Well, no. The most stunning table in Huntington's article shows little improvement in education attainment across generations of Mexican immigrants.

Education of Mexican Americans by Generation (1989-90)

First Second Third Fourth All Americans *
No high school degree (%) 69.9 51.5 33.0 41.0 23.5
High school degree (%) 24.7 39.2 58.5 49.4 30.4
Post high school degree (%) 5.4 9.3 8.5 9.6 45.1
* Except Mexican Americans, 1990

Of course, California has a great many successful Asian immigrants. However, that's the point. Asian immigrants tend to be well-educated, law-abiding, prosperous, etc. Sadly, that is not true of the illegal alien population. One data point. The overall Hispanic dropout rate in California is around 50%. In LA, it is 60%. Worse, at least half (perhaps 60%) of the "graduates" score below-basic in reading and/or math on the NAEP tests.

These are disastrous numbers and they bode ill for our nation's future. So much so that the Christian Science Monitor wrote an article on the subject. See "Coming US challenge: a less literate workforce" (http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0206/p02s01-legn.html). A quote

"US workers may be significantly less literate in 2030 than they are today. The reason: Most baby boomers will be retiring and a large wave of less-educated immigrants will be moving into the workforce. This downward shift in reading and math skills suggests a huge challenge for educators and policymakers in the future, according to a new report from the Educational Testing Service (ETS). "

Peter Schaeffer (not verified) says:

There is a funny aspect to this that is not immediately apparent. This article was written by Jennifer Rubin. That would apparently be the same Jennifer Rubin who wrote a piece for The Weekly Standard titled "The Quotas That Won't Die Neither party has the nerve to take on the scandal of preferential set-asides in government contracts."

Perhaps she doesn't known that Hispanic leaders demand racial quotas and invariably get them. Perhaps she doesn't understand that numbers impact politics and the pressure for quotas will only grow.

Of course, that doesn't make any sense at all. In Jennifer Rubin's fantasy world we can have Amnesty, continued mass immigration, racial pandering galore, but somehow the government want act as a racial spoils system.

BullMoose777 (not verified) says:

Every time I start thinking I actually might vote for McCain, I get reminded that he supports amnesty, or something akin to it, and I move a little closer to voting for Bob Barr.

Burt (not verified) says:

One mistake a lot of people make is to spew rhetoric to further their favored agenda. Labeling anti-immigrant people racists does nothing to further the discussion, nor do blanket statements that are easy to poke holes in such as "illegal aliens are ruining this country." The economics of it is pretty straightforward. This country has a shortage of farm labor. The unemployment rate in America is five percent. If every illegal alien were deported, you could give a job to every citizen without one, and you'd still be short several million people. Not to mention that of the five percent that are unemployed, most are simply in transition between careers(layoffs), are disabled, or have criminal records or are unemployable for various other reasons. I've been unemployed several times before, but never for more than a month. How come some people can't get jobs for years? What we need as a nation is to let go of rhetoric and face up to truth. That isn't to say that amnesty is the answer, but neither is kicking them out.

Peter Schaeffer (not verified) says:

Burt,

This country has no shortage of farm labor. Check out the facts. Farm wages are going nowhere in spite of soaring farm prices. If there was really a labor shortage, farm wages would be rising quickly. Not happening.

In any case, only a few percent of the illegal population works in agriculture. They could be easily replaced by American citizens, legal immigrants, crop changes, and machines. See Philip Martin's articles on the subject. As starting point let me suggest

"Farm Labor Shortages: How Real? What Response?" (http://www.cis.org/articles/2007/back907.html). A useful quote

"For several years stories in the media have reported a farm labor shortage. This study examines this question and finds little evidence to support this conclusion. First, fruit and vegetable production is actually rising. Second, wages for farm workers have not risen dramatically. Third, household expenditure on fresh fruits and vegetables has remain relatively constant, averaging about $1 a day for the past decade.

Among the findings:

Production of fruits and vegetables has been increasing. In particular, plantings of very-labor intensive crops such as cherries and strawberries have grown by more than 20 percent in just five years.

The average farm worker makes $9.06 an hour, compared to $16.75 for non-farm production workers.

Real wages for farm workers increased one-half of one percent (.5 percent) a year on average between 2000 and 2006. If there were a shortage, wages would be rising much more rapidly.

Farm worker earnings have risen more slowly in California and Florida (the states with the most fruit and vegetable production) than in the United States as a whole.

The average household spends only about $1 a day on fresh fruits and vegetables.

Labor costs comprise only 6 percent of the price consumers pay for fresh produce. Thus, if farm wages were allowed to rise 40 percent, and if all the costs were passed on to consumers, the cost to the average household would be only about $8 a year.

Mechanization could offset higher labor costs. After the “Bracero” Mexican guestworker program ended in the mid-1960s, farm worker wages rose 40 percent, but consumer prices rose relatively little because the mechanization of some crops dramatically increased productivity.

Labor-saving mechanization can be difficult for one farmer, since packers and processors are usually set up to deal either with hand-picked or machine-picked crops, but not both. Government has a key role to play in facilitating mechanization."

Don't be fooled by the alleged 5.5% unemployment rate. If you include workers who are underemployed or have just given up looking for work, the rate is much higher (perhaps 10%). See "$1.6 Trillion in Losses and Counting" (http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2008/07/16_trillion_in_losses_a...). A quote

"Unemployment held steady at 5.5%, but that masks an underlying and growing problem. There has been a huge increase in the number of people working "part-time for economic reasons" and a large number of people who are discouraged and not looking for a job but would like one. These two categories are not counted as unemployed. If you add them into the equation, the unemployment or underemployment number goes to 10.3%! (per Greg Weldon)"

With 10% unemployment, we don't need (or want) illegals. Will wages go up if the illegals are removed? Yes, and that is a good thing. America's workers could use a raise.

Note that LFP (Labor Force Participation) has been falling for years and has plunged for young workers. America is choking on too many immigrants, illegal and legal.

R. E. Lee (not verified) says:

Slalin and Hitler could get things done. We don't need leaders who can get things done. We need leaders who stand for the right things, and one of those is respect for and enforcement of the law. Principle matters, not expediency.

Peter Schaeffer (not verified) says:

Dean Baker of The American Prospect commented on "cheap labor" recently. His words are worth noting. I quote

"The Shortage of Low-Paid Journalists

There are not enough well-qualified journalists willing to work for $8 an hour. We know this because there are very few (if any) experienced journalists working for this wage. The New York Times and other newspapers deal with this shortage by paying journalists considerably more than $8 an hour.

By contrast, the NYT tells us that many employers want to relax laws penalizing them for hiring undocumented workers because "they grappled, even in an economic downturn, with shortages of low-wage labor."

In a market economy, the response to shortages is higher prices, or in this case higher wages. While it is understandable that employers do not want to pay higher wages, just like most of us do not want to pay higher gas prices, that is the way a market works. If they cannot afford to pay higher wages, then in a market economy, they go out of business, just as tens of millions of inefficient businesses have gone out of business as the economy has grown over the last century.

It would be helpful if the NYT would apply some basic economics to its discussion of this economic issue."

The real question should be

"Why is this country burdened with a plutocracy of the left and right that think that cheap labor is their birthright?"

Justine Arons (not verified) says:

You have no idea what your taking about. There is a farm working visa program in place. No crop will rot in the field. We do not need to support Mexico.
There #1 import is the American dollar. These people need to change their govenment and not LOOT ours. We are not haters but law abiding citizens. My forefathers came here legally.
Harvard Professor George Borjas has reported that illegal aliens displaced American workers at a cost in excess of $133 billion dollars in 2005. So for many Americans who can't find work now you know where your job went.

Nashville (not verified) says:

I'm pretty sure it's all about race, amigos. Never use the law to hide behind unjust policy & prejudice. Change the law. It's patriotic.

Post a comment

The content of this field is kept private
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><br> <p> <i> <b> <embed> <img> <blockquote> <span> <strikethrough> <u>
  • Use <!--pagebreak--> to create page breaks.

More information about formatting options

By checking this box you are giving permission for Observer staff to contact you to obtain contact information and permissions required for publication.