Bad Links?
Other glitches?
Notify Webmaster

Letter to the Editor

Seabaugh’s views distorted

A flyer mailed by the Susan Ebersbach campaign last week attacked her opponent, State Sen. Mitch Seabaugh, for his support of amendments to Senate Resolution 827. In an analysis of the Ebersbach campaign’s rhetoric, I find it guilty of binary thinking, a common flaw in political debate.

Accusing Seabaugh of “voting with the liberals,” the flyer explains that SR 827 originally established a committee to study the effects (read: negative impact) of illegal immigration on Georgiaís economy. Instead, the flyer goes on, the liberals transformed the committee into one studying the benefits (read: positive impact) of illegal immigration. The flyer blasts Seabaugh for his support of this change and for the appropriation of three of the committee’s seats to “pro-illegal immigration advocates.”

Yet the Ebersbach campaign is guilty of the common but lamentable practice of massaging information. By doing some simple research, voters can uncover Ebersbachís half-truths.

Look up SR 827’s language on the Georgia General Assembly’s website, and you will find that the “benefit” language was joined with the “effect” language, not exchanged for it. Thus, SR 827’s committee will now study both. Are we to believe that the committee’s study of both aspects of illegal immigration is a bad thing?

The flyer’s claim that Seabaugh supports adding “pro-illegal immigration advocate” seats to the committee requires closer scrutiny as well. The amendment gives three committee seats to the Governor's Latino Commission for a New Georgia, the Mexican American Business Chamber, and the Georgia Hispanic Chamber of Commerce.

I spoke with Lauran Salas, Public Affairs Director of the Georgia Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. She was surprised that anyone would call her organization “pro-illegal immigration.” In fact, Salas explained to me that the Chamber recently attended a national conference in Washington D.C. that focused on the Bush Administration’s shared initiatives with Hispanic Chambers of Commerce around the country. Salas stated that the Ebersbach campaign’s language was misrepresentative of the Chamber and that the campaign obviously did not understand the Chamber enough to be mentioning it.

The Ebersbach flyer concludes with a final morsel of pandering pathos. Ebersbach enjoins readers to trust her voting consistency based on the fact that she is a “former Sunday School teacher.”

This language is most egregious, as it implies that believers in the Gospel are honor-bound to support her political positions.

As a Christian, I fail to see how the flyer’s vehemently negative stance toward immigration is necessarily consistent with the teachings of Jesus Christ. Perhaps I missed the beatitude that calls blessed those who jealously guard their economic and social boundaries from their neighbors. The complexity involved in issues like immigration policy does not belong conflated into the certain moral and polemical perspective required of a Sunday School teacher.

The race is over; Ebersbach lost to Seabaugh. However, I find it necessary to resist the sophomoric rhetoric of the Ebersbach campaign. It allows us to extrapolate a moral for those seeking office.

Many politicians thrive on BINARY language: conservative or liberal; democrat or republican; patriot or terrorist. Such categorization seeks to eclipse one position as entirely wrong and another as entirely right. Some issues, on a varying scale for all of us are that certain. The problem with binary thinking is that it often ignores genuine analysis and solutions that lie between two extremes. The true political acumen of some leaders allows them to recognize the complexities of governing people and establishing law. Let’s hope Seabaugh is one of these.

Patriots, Americans should expect more, both from themselves and from their leaders, than lowest common denominator binary language.

Pete Rorabaugh
Senoia