John, I don’t want to mar Thanksgiving morning, but I can’t let that pass. I didn’t defend Trancredo’s comment — in fact, I said it would be reasonable to disagree with it. What I criticized was your hyperbolic description of it.
With due respect to you and Ed Morrissey, it is not a fringe position to fear that lots of serious people in this country would like to see a North American political integration that resembles Europe’s political integration. I cited the Council on Foreign Relations task force to demonstrate this point. Your comment about free trade suggests unfamiliarity with how far along this project is. In it, free trade is already taken as a given; what internationalists are talking about is common policy on a range of issues that transcends trade (e.g., immigration, economic development, energy and security). (It is probably worth noting, for example, that we already have a bilateral aerospace defense arrangement with Canada, known as NORAD.)
Personally, I don’t think President Bush shares the internationalist agenda — at least, not all of it. I also happen to believe, for what little that may be worth, that some of the agenda is desirable — a joint air defense arrangement with trusted allies, for example, is a good idea in the modern threat environment … as long as the allies don’t have a veto over security measures the president may believe are necessary to protect Americans. Nevertheless, it’s not unreasonable for people to look at Bush’s immigration policies and worry that he is insufficiently alert to the internationalist pressures (what John Fonte calls “transnational progressivism”) vigorously challenging the traditional understanding of sovereignty on many fronts.
With that, I wish you and everyone who stops at the Corner a very happy Thanksgiving.