Tackling the immigration mess

Washington Times ^ | January.9,2004 | Jonah Goldberg

[Reagan Man]

Well, you can say one thing for President Bush's new immigration reform proposal: It makes all of the people who say he's a reincarnated Adolf Hitler look like idiots (again). It's kind of hard to see Der Fuhrer offering what amounts to a sweeping amnesty to millions of Third Worlders residing illegally in our midst.

[Ohioan]

Yesterday, this pseudo-intellectual pundit, offered another piece of ruminative fluff on the same subject. It would have been hoped that he would have realized that his hand-wringing contributed nothing at a time when others are making hard, long-term decisions. But here he is again, a day later, but not one whit heavier.

Let us take the first paragraph, and then, if anyone dissents, we can look at more of this piece of trivia:

Well, you can say one thing for President Bush's new immigration reform proposal: It makes all of the people who say he's a reincarnated Adolf Hitler look like idiots (again). It's kind of hard to see Der Fuhrer offering what amounts to a sweeping amnesty to millions of Third Worlders residing illegally in our midst.

This can be taken one of two ways, neiither of which reflects well on the writer. It can be considered a bit of demagoguery, deliberately encouraging those who seek to smear anyone who wants to preserve his people's ethnic integrity as being somehow a would-be "Hitler." That has been a bromide of the far Left (even while they were slaughtering peoples on a scale far exceeding Hitler's) since before World War II. In charity, we would hope that Jonah is not engaging in that sort of suggestion.

The second way to take it, is that he thinks refuting unwarranted smears, even at the expense of letting your enemies in effect dictate your policies (by your concern to refute them) is a good thing--worthy of the first paragraph of an article on perhaps the most important question of our times. The implications of that idea can hardly be to the writer's credit.

Oh, I understand that he is trying to be cute. That he is trying to lead into his ruminations with a gentle aside. Except that it isn't a gentle aside, it offers a window into his own thinking processes, which discredit his thinking processes among those who would preserve the America we inherited--that is among American Conservatives, for that is what we are about.

William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site

[Support Free Republic]

Rank	Location	Receipts	Donors/Avg		Freepers/Avg		Monthlies
47	Thailand	50.00	1	50.00	7	7.14

Thanks for donating to Free Republic!

Move your locale up the leaderboard!

[primeval patriot]

Some voices on the far right suggest simply rounding up millions upon millions of illegals and sending them packing.

We can send a man to the moon but we can't even attempt to control immigration.

If the President were to use his bully-pulpit to warn illegals they should leave of their own accord, we might see them deporting themselves en-masse.

But apparently that's too difficult a task for our President.

[Reagan Man]

Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., predicted Bush's "dangerous and unworkable" proposals would be rejected by Congress. "Neither Mexicans nor anyone else will go through the hassle and paperwork of seeking legal jobs as long as the border is porous and employers can ignore the laws with impunity," he said.

Illegal immigration can't be stopped without sealing the borders. Period. The President's proposal grants a pardon to illegal aliens. It gives them legal status. That's amnesty. No doubt about it.

[ckilmer]

Well, you can say one thing for President Bush's new immigration reform proposal: It makes all of the people who say he's a reincarnated Adolf Hitler look like idiots (again). It's kind of hard to see Der Fuhrer offering what amounts to a sweeping amnesty to millions of Third Worlders residing illegally in our midst.
////////////
Since the mid 60's when the immigration laws were changed to weight predominantly 3rd world non whites--the white race in the USA has been effecitively deligitimized. This means that no public policy can advanced/proposed/endorsed/implimented on the grounds that it advances the interests of the white race. Since most of the people in the USA are white--this puts the USA in the wierd postion in which the government is more legitimate than the people. And the people must constantly elect government officials who will not advance their interests.

There is a logical result to this--for which California is the leading edge. Sadly, today's majority cannot grasp that they are being systematically written out of the future of this country.

[Consort]

Some voices on the far right suggest simply rounding up millions upon millions of illegals and sending them packing.

Only simple people would call that a simple process. Right or wrong, it would be a massive, long-term undertaking with serious legal, social, constitutional, cultural, monetary, etc....implications with endless lawsuits and festering hate between neighbors — a lawyers paradise and an anarchist's dream. The required increase in government powers would turn most people off, except socialists and communists.

[Ohioan]

There are deliberate aspects of the attack on the racial character of the ongoing American nation that are such that one might well reach your conclusion. I would suggest however, that you acquaint yourself with the academic roots--the very sick, Leftist originated, academic roots--of the current dispensation. One needs to fully understand the enemy, to better fight it. (See Myths & Myth Makers In American "Higher" Education.)

Until Conservatives begin to understand the bogus science, bogus psychology and pacifist deceptions involved in deliberately brainwashing two generations of students, they will never appreciate why the Left has been so successful at undermining our sense of who we are, as well as our will to defend it. It is no accident that the gurus of the new humanism were Marxist activists in the 1930s.

William Flax

[Ohioan]

No increase in governmental powers is required to round up law breakers. If enough law breakers are involved, it might necessitate employment of more in law enforcement, but the powers to arrest and deport are already there.

But the more serious objection to your line of reasoning is that it would justify total anarchy, on the basis that the worse a situation, the less that should be done to deal with it. The only rational response to the situation, is to realize that we must act decisively now; the consequences of further delay and appeasement, might indeed breathe life into the scary scenario you predict.

William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site

[Consort]

Maybe you're right but I see massive social unrest, in part created by so-called "well-meaning" Liberals, among others.

[Lurkina.n.Learnin]

I'm skeptical of this proposal also but I must say what better time to have this debate than in an election year? The amazing thing is I haven't heard any of the Nine Dwarves speak out on this. Normally they jump right on any proposal President Bush makes. I wonder why that is. People are so ready to dump Bush over this but I welcome it.We are going to have the descussion now instead of the status quo of turning a blind eye and ignoring this problem. It puts the onus on these politicians to take a stand now. If you think the Dim's have a better answer than vote that way , but keep in mind silence is no longer the answer.

[Mike Darancette]

This is a winner for the Democrats in '2004, all they have to do is pledge that all illegals would be sent home and the borders patrolled by US troops.

[Ohioan]

I certainly welcome as full and frank a debate as possible. The essay that I have linked above, on Myths & Myth Makers, is Chapter 16, in the Conservative Debate Handbook. The Chapter on Immigration & The American Future, is 15. The more people openly discussing these issues, the better it will prove in the long run.

William Flax

[Ohioan]

Maybe you're right but I see massive social unrest, in part created by so-called "well-meaning" Liberals, among others.

You are right to put the "well-meaning" into quotation marks. The word "Liberal," should also be, as those people have nothing in common with classical liberals.

Let us face it, the Left has always recruited people with purposeless leisure for its revolutions, and the appeal to many misdirected people is the excitement in a good riot, etc..

But no matter what traditional society does, there will be those out there who will be looking for an excuse to protest--and the wilder the protest, the more it will appeal to people of that mindset. It wasn't the end of the Viet Nam War that made the 70s more peaceful in America than the 60s. Many of the ring-leaders of the 60s fried their brains on LSD, and couldn't manage a good riot after that.

William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site

[Ohioan]

My statement about the LSD usage, I should point out, was based upon what happened to a particular group based in Cincinnati. It might be a bit of an over-reach to extrapolate from that generally, although I have heard similar anecdotal evidence from other places.

But I wouldn't want anyone to go out on a limb on the subject.