Jun 01 2007

The New Litmus Test: Immigration

Published by at 1:51 pm under All General Discussions,Illegal Immigration

We all have a new litmus test on the right, amongst conservatives. It is what side you chose on immigration – and it will define who is in and who is out in the GOP. And by defining who is in, it will define whether the GOP can create a governing coalition or become a minority party again for decades to come. The immigration issue has created a fissure because the far right, who have a lot of what they want in the Bush bill, will not allow anything other conservatives believe are valid and valuable elements in the bill. They have nothing but hysterical ‘what if’ scenarios which refuse to address what if things do work to some degree as advertised. But they have made it clear only their wishes can be passed – no one elses.

The hypocrisy is ripe with the immigration hypochondriacs. For years they have touted one story after another about crimes committed by immigrants (legal and illegal). This bill finally makes deportation a punishment for committing violent crimes, including DUI’s. Right now you cannot deport someone for the commission of a violent crime. You can only deport them for being here illegally. But that process is slow, rife with holes and clearly doesn’t work. The Bill fixes that – but the hypochondriacs resist the fixes. In fact, the hypochondriacs would let the status quo remain, with criminal immigrants staying in country, because they want more punishment on those workers who do not have a criminal background. They are willing to live with the violent criminals so they can get more flesh out of the non criminals. That is so screwed up it is scary.

Right now we cannot hold employers accountable to any real level because there is no repository to check if a worker is a valid immigrant worker. People who over stay are impossible to identify since they have some of the paperwork (like SS cards, etc) they had when they were legal. There is no tamper proof ID with a expiration date. The bill would fix that. The hypochondriacs oppose it. Therefore the immigrants will keep working here and therefore staying here.

And the best aspect of all is the guest worker program – where not a soul is elligible to become a US citizen. Not one. That is much better than the current practice. Come, work, stay a while. You will never vote. What is the response of the immigration hypochondriacs? No way – we would rather do nothing at all.

One of my readers who has commented many times he would rather leave things as they are than pass all these great ideas add the gall to claim he was putting security of this nation first. It was such a hypocritical statement I had to post one more item on this matter. Those of us who, like Bush, support the guest worker program and Z-visas do so because it expidites sifting the hard working, good immigrants from the criminal element – and all of them from the terrorist that may be hiding amongst them. It is not a perfect bill – but it does (a) document all the workers, (b) entices them to come forward instead of using law enforcement resources to go after them (all 12-20 million), and (c) allows us to focus our limited law enforcement forces on terrorism – not nannies, landscapers, painters, mechanics, cooks, maids, etc. The idea that we should divert more resources than we have in place today to deal with a population that is primarily made up of hard working people is insanity itself.

This reader was saying securing the border was better than patting down people in airports. He was wrong of course (civilian airliners make massive weapons well beyond anything that can be hauled across the border). I guess for the umpteenth time we have to remind the immigration hypochondriacs that the 9-11 attackers WERE HERE LEGALLY!!! All the border security in the world would have done NOTHING to stop 9-11. The NSA Surveillance program would have stopped it, but not a bigger fence. But the dems these far right allowed into power want to dismantle that. The hypochondriacs don’t care. They would sacrifice our security in a heart beat if it meant one undocumented worker could become documented after paying a fine and back taxes. They don’t think that is enough punishment. So they would rather let things remain as they are than let THAT happen.

The hypochondriacs can pretend to claim they are for security – clearly they are not. They resist all the new security in the bill. It scares them because more people will want to come to our shores. Get a clue, people will always want to come to our shores. Always. The hypochondriacs lamely claim ‘enforce the laws’ – like that has worked for the last 20 years. That is the same as saying ‘more of the same’ or ‘my way or nothing – nobody else gets anything’. Clearly democratic governance in their mind is dictating their views over all others.

I dare Scott Rasmussen to start tracking one questions. (1) If the choice on immigration was the current Bill in the Senate or the status quo, which would you support? I strongly suggest he then ask again what the support levels are for the Bill – because they will go up. Just like the liberals avoided the hard question on Iraq (“do you support surrendering Iraq to al Qaeda”) the far right is missing the point. It is not this Bill or their fantasies. It is this bill or nothing. America will not accept nothing again. Go ahead Scott – prove me wrong. Ask the question. I dare you.

Addendum: As to who will be in or out of the GOP I do not know. I do know this. Any group that is inflexible to compromise our allowing additional features beyond what they support is doomed to minority status. Coalitions are not dictatorships full of ugly sniping when one does not get their way. Coalitions are places were people respect each other, win respectfully and lose respectfully. And when they lose they do not pull their support from the coaition. If everytime a group lost a vote in Congress they seceded from the country we would have no country. Coalitions do not divert debate from the matters being addressed to feign their feelings were hurt when someone said ‘you are wrong’ in too tough of terms. Laura, stop with the feinting spells. Your ideas are not good for America. Even patriots make mistakes (ask Churchill and Roosevelt). I get flak for calling the far right the far right. Well since a compromise with Ted Kennedy is in and by itself not enough to wig me out (I prefer to know what the compromise is) then I am clearly left of the immigration hypochondriacs. Naturally I am, I am an Independent conservative. A Reagan-Bush conservative. I do not bow to the alter of LauRusHannitLevin or the GOP. If the Bush backers win there is a very good chance conservatism will once again overtake liberalism as we head towards a future of new, positive ideas. If the LauRusHannitLevin wing wins then the country will be seeing who races to the bottom quicker – the left or the right – on an endless zero sum game. Can we end the partisanship and get on with America now? That is the big question.

99 responses so far

99 Responses to “The New Litmus Test: Immigration”

  1. Bikerken says:

    Terrye, this whole gang post you put up proves my point exactly. If this bill were to become law, and a gang member signs a renuncification statement, they are magically no longer legally a gang member and none of this stuff applies to them UNLESS they are caught in gang activities afterword. At that point, you could deport them all you want, they’ll be right back. Here is a newsflash for you:

    CAREER CRIMINALS HAVE A TENDENCY TO NOT OBEY THE LAW!!!!!

    I don’t know how many times I’ve heard a border patrolman mention putting someone the the bus back to mexico only to hear, “See you next week!” amid the laughter of the others on the bus.

  2. DaleinAtlanta says:

    Ivehadit: sorry, I’m ragged on this; the part that ticks me off, is I think we ALL about this far >

  3. retire05 says:

    OK, so Terrye knows “some” Hispanics who are Catholic and conservative who are feeling insulted because they think they are not wanted. Terrye just can’t resist throwing in the “race” canard. Chalk it up to Terrye’s early days as a liberal.
    Guess what, Terrye? In my neck of the woods, they are called Tejanos. They can trace their roots back to the days before the battle of the Alamo and their ancestors fought for Texas independence. They have struggled to gain equality and now are producing some of the finest Texans we have seen since the fight for independence and men like Juan Seguin. And they don’t like the fact that a bunch of criminals are going to be given amnesty. The head of my county GOP is a Tejano. We gave him that honor after he returned from Afghanistan. His family has been in the central Texas area for 300 years and were part of the land grants given to Stephen Austin. And he, and others like him, are dead set against amnesty and that is exactly how he views this bill, AMNESTY. He will also tell you that the current crop of illegals from South America, Central America and Mexico are not of the same values as Tejanos. They are socialist in viewpoints because that is what they have been raised with.
    Take a look at all those “Catholic” Latinos you want to play the race card with. The unwed birth rate in Latinos is 50%. The high school drop out rate is alarming. Where are all those values? Do they reappear once the delivery is completed at ParkLane Hospital in Dallas where 70% of the births are by unwed Latino mothers?

    You can tout this bill as nothing less than miraculous but remember, Congress givith, and Congress taketh away. What guarantee do we have that this will not be another boondoggle like Simpson-Mazzoli?

    Build the wall; end social welfare benefits; go after employers. They will self deport just as they did during the days of Eisenhower.

  4. retire05 says:

    Oh well, another post that never showed up. Beginning to see a pattern?

  5. Bikerken says:

    Same here R05.

    Terrye, heres a deal for ya, lets say that we should treat mexican border crashers at our southern borders the same way that mexico treats illegal crossers at their southern border. Doesn’t that sound fair to you?

  6. MerlinOS2 says:

    AJ

    You are still playing the card of now we can suddenly deport criminals.

    That sir is just plain wrong.

    We always had that capability, it was just rarely enforced.

    We could deport them just because they were illegals with or without the crime committed add on.

    Because they had already committed another crime.

  7. MerlinOS2 says:

    AJ

    Do you actually believe a “guest worker” who overstays his pass can’t find a job paid under the table?

  8. MerlinOS2 says:

    AJ

    Exactly how are we to enforce all the provisions of this bill without stretching our “limited resources” to do it.

    To enforce it someone has to go around and check that everyone at the local Taco Bell is either a citizen or has a card.

    So explain to me please how that will not take up resources.

    The only other alternative is we are gonna enforce this on the honor system.

  9. Bikerken says:

    Great picture of Jorge here:

    http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55967

    “Every donor in 50 states we reached has been angry, especially in the last month and a half, and for 99 percent of them immigration is the No. 1 issue,” a fired phone-bank employee told the Washington Times.

    The FAR right has now reached all 50 states!

  10. MerlinOS2 says:

    Terrye

    Dale hit it right on.

    Many have posted specific issues and all we get back is hand wringing.

    You even quote a section of the bill and say “what’s this” instead of answering a specific question.

    And even that quote is from another thread I believe.

    Again the direct question to you, Have you read this bill, yes or no.

  11. patrick neid says:

    the hyperventilating continues………

    here’s the two part bill that passes in a landslide with the american people. every poll supports this approach. not the take it or leave it approach favored by the narrow minded.

    first bill—secures the border from stem to stern with a double link fence with a road down the middle. about 1500 miles is required. the other 500 miles has been determined to be physically not passable.
    here’s the pic…..http://tinyurl.com/guk5a

    second bill—the bill before the senate with a couple of amendments that even senator mccain say are necessary.

    the second bill takes effect when the first bill is completed. combat engineers will tell you that the fence in question would take less than two years to build if the government lifted all restrictions. right now the bill before the senate estimates that border enforcement issues will be taking 18 months. net delay six months. however we would have 1500 miles of secure fence not 375…..only 300 of which are new.

    case closed. both bills pass in a landslide. however it will never happen because it works. the people here and in power like open borders and writing new laws that are never enforced. that is why this festering sore has been open since 1965.

    while we keep discussing this madness, just remember, every week another 10-20,000 just stroll across the border. is this a great country or what!?

  12. Bikerken says:

    And now for something completely different…..

    News flash, Dateline Washington D.C. Dit di dit dit di dit: Changes have been announced to the FAR regulations. All right handed people will now be designated as FAR right handed people, All left handed people will be called FAR left handed people. All ambidexterous people will be reffered to as Fartous people. The Federal govt has issued a warning that any person who sides with the Far right and Far left or being extremely fartuous could spontaneously explode! The Far East will now be referred to as the REAL Far East. All near east locations will just be referred to as just East. Phar lap will now be called Phar Phar lap and anything far away will now be far far away just like the land in most fairy tales. The Far Side will now be the extreme far side like the far ends of the earth which will now be right back where you started. Far from heaven will now be completely in hell. A galaxy far far away will now be an old ford in a junkyard in Texas. A far cry will now now be a hysterical blubbering snotty tear fest. If you look up far from perfect in the dictionary, you will see Rosie Odonnels picture. So far will not be so good and these are the changes to the FAR regulations, so far far.

  13. ivehadit says:

    Thanks Dale, I hope we all get a good night’s sleep and have a wonderful week-end…maybe an immigration-free week-end!

    G_d bless this most beloved and magnificent country-Land of the Free and Home of the Brave- and all my fellow citizens, especially those here at AJ’s place!

  14. Brandon says:

    AJ,
    I understand your point. The problem I think many have is that this bill provides probationary visas that are renewable every four years for life as soon as the bill is signed. What people generally want is for the existing laws to be enforced, they want a secure border where people can’t just walk across whenever they want. Stop the flow, then lets debate the need for steps to legalize who’s here.

    As for security, perhaps all 19 hijackers were here “legally” but the broader point is what prevents the next 19 from coming across the undefended border to the south.

  15. biglsusportsfan says:

    reader2007

    I am glad you mention National Review. I ahve seen several post here in the comment section that are showing email to NRO that all show the supposed bases disgust with the immigration bill.

    The problem is that they dont print the other emails they recieve. Jonah Goldberg is about the only one over there that will print ONE every once in a blue moon. The rest don’t even email you back or acknowledge they are getting them. IT is all very frustrating

  16. apache_ip says:

    One of my readers who has commented many times he would rather leave things as they are than pass all these great ideas add the gall to claim he was putting security of this nation first. It was such a hypocritical statement I had to post one more item on this matter.

    Apparently, I am not doing a very good job of explaining this.

    What I said was that doing this deal would make matters worse, therefore, it makes more sense to not do this deal. I have stated this many times. I don’t understand why this is such a difficult concept to understand.

    Here are the facts as I see them –

    First, the quick answer for those with a limited attention span –
    I am ex-Army (well technically I still carry a green card – I am a CW3 on IRR).
    It should come as no surprise that I am a BIG believer in national security.
    I think that securing the border will go a LONG way towards solving two problems:
    1. strengthening our national security
    2. preventing the illegal immigration problem
    I think that if we agree to this bill, as is, then we will be giving up our only leverage against the politicians (they only seem to care about making all of the illegals legal) and in exchange for that, all we get is a promise that they will secure our borders, sometime in the next 6 years, subject to availability of appropriations.
    I think that once the politicians get what they want, they will completely forget about what we want.
    That makes this a BAD bill. We lose all of our leverage and get a promise from a politician.

    Now, the more detailed explanation –

    Depending upon your source, there are between 408,000 and 500,000 illegal aliens successfully avoiding our border enforcement and entering the United States every year.

    According to the Department of Homeland Security 275,680 illegal aliens were successfully captured attempting to illegally enter the United States in 2004.

    According to the Department of Homeland Security 145,367 of the 275,680 that they captured in 2004 were OTM’s, Other Than Mexican.

    According to the Department of Homeland Security 15,795 of the 145,367 OTM’s captured in 2004 were from Special Interest Countries and State Sponsors of Terrorism Countries.

    http://www.dhs.gov/xoig/assets/mgmtrpts/OIG_06-33_Apr06.pdf

    So let’s do some math. Let’s be conservative and say that during 2004 only 400,000 illegal aliens successfully avoided capture and entered the United States. We know that 275,680 were captured attempting to illegally enter the United States. That means that during 2004, we captured approximately 41% of everyone attempting to illegally enter the United States. Conversely, 59% successfully avoided capture and entered the United States.

    Of the 275,680 that were captured, 15,795 were from SST and SIC countries, Special Interest Countries and State Sponsors of Terrorism Countries. A little math and we know that 5.7% of the illegals captured were from SST and SIC countries.

    If we multiply 5.7% by the number of illegal aliens not captured, we can reasonably extrapolate that 22,800 people who successfully entered our Country were from SST and SIC countries. I find this completely unacceptable!

    Even if only 1% of the 22,800 illegal aliens from SST and SIC countries are actual terrorists, that would mean that during 2004 228 terrorists successfully entered our Country. And I think the percentage (from this very select group – SST and SIC countries) that are actual terrorists is probably much higher than 1%. I would be surprised if it wasn’t double digits.

    So, in the interest of National Security, I think it would be a good idea to secure our borders. Color me kooky.

    Here are my observations, opinion and prediction –

    Our politicians show almost ZERO interest in securing our borders. They never have. I see a whole lot of lip service and very little action. It has been over 7 months since President Bush signed the fence bill, and according to Chertoff only a “few” miles have been built. That is unacceptable.

    Our politicians appear to be very interested in making all of the illegals legal. They appear much more interested in making everybody legal than they appear interested in securing our borders.

    Now I don’t personally give a hoot how they get the border secured. I will leave that up to the experts. I hope they choose the most economical and most efficient method. I only care about results. I think hundreds, if not thousands, of terrorists sneaking into our Country every year is completely unacceptable.

    So we have an old fashioned Mexican standoff. They, the politicians, want to make all of the illegals legal, and I want our borders secured.

    This bill gives them, the politicians, everything they want as soon as it is signed. I on the other hand, get a promise that they will get around to it eventually. And in a slow prolonged manner. Subject to the availability of funding of course. And assuming their attention doesn’t wander off to something else. So I give up all of my leverage and get a promise from politicians that have lied to me about this very issue in the past.

    Somehow, once they get what they want, I don’t think they are going to get around to giving me what I wanted out of this bargain. That means that the border will never be secured and I have to live with the fact that hundreds, if not thousands, of terrorists are successfully entering our Country every year.

    That makes this a BAD deal. Our Country would be much better off if we held on to our leverage until after the politicians fulfill their end of their bargain. It would be best for National Security.

    I hope that was a concise and easy to understand explanation.

    He was wrong of course (civilian airliners make massive weapons well beyond anything that can be hauled across the border).

    Apparently this bill isn’t the only thing you haven’t read. I’m going to go out on a limb and guess that you haven’t read the 9/11 Commission Report either.

    In that report, they said that one of our worst failings was a “lack of imagination”. You are demonstrating that very fact.

    I put it to you that the most dangerous thing that can be hauled across any of our borders is a highly motivated, intelligent terrorist that has memorized a long list of telephone numbers and safe houses, and is carrying a back pack full of cash and traveler’s checks. That would be the most dangerous thing that can come across our border.

    He/she could acquire whatever they need right here in our own Country.

    Pretend you were a terrorist and you wanted to kill as many people as possible. Let your imagination run wild for a moment. Poison the water supply of major metropolitan area? Try to bribe or steal some deadly strain of virus? What would you do?

  17. For Enforcement says:

    Terrye

    This bill does set up more courts and detention centers and streamlines the process for faster deportation.

    Absolute, total BS. You said you haven’t read the bill, so where are you getting your info on what’s in it?

    You need a different source because the one you’re using, well he don’t understand it either.

  18. For Enforcement says:

    Ivehadit,

    Dale, I was not needling you. I am sick of this topic and think we all need to take a break. Imho, there is very little fact being tossed around and lots of over-reaction. I am awaiting the debate between NR and WSJ. It should be informative.

    The sad thing about all this is that we all have so much in common but are lashing out over this issue and attacking the president…who is just trying to get this quagmire under control…no amnesty and no animosity…thredding a very fine needle and I applaud him for that.

    Just for the record, you and reality are strangers. there is very little fact being tossed around Now, from the side that is for the bill, that’s true. The other side has based it’s entire argument on quoting the bill. The proponents have quoted “nothing” and will not even claim to have read the bill.

    and attacking the president…who is just trying to get this quagmire under control…no amnesty and no animosity

    He’s not trying to get the quagmire under control, he’s the cause of it. No Amnesty? semantics, true they call it ‘forgiveness’ but a pig in a poke is a pig in a poke.

    You might want to get a working acquaintance with the terms of the bill, you display zero knowledge of it’s contents at this time.

  19. For Enforcement says:

    Terrye, following that long post, you said:

    Ah well, this does not mean anything anyway does it?

    Now you’re beginning to understand. The truth is, no it does not mean anything because that whole thing you printed is preceded by a section that gives ALL ILLEGALS immediate legal status and NONE of what you wrote applies to ILLEGALS that have legal status. And that legal status lasts for many years. So you left out the single most important part of the bill.