Immigration Reform - So Few Words, So Much Meaning

There is a fine line that one should walk these days, when discussing the Presidency of George W. Bush. I say this because I firmly believe that the President is a good man. I believe that he is truly a Christian. Unlike a recent occupant of the White House, he does love and honor not only his wife, but his children, his parents, his extended family, his supporters and his God.

President Bush was handed a difficult task, in September of 2001. He has met that task head on, and in a number of ways, has provided an excellent response. His directives concerning Afghanistan and Iraq have been masterful. I am so glad that he had the foresight to appoint Donald Rumsfeld his Secretary of Defense, and Condoliza Rice his National Security Advisor. Both these individuals are sharp as tacks, and have obviously contributed towards the goals the President set for the nation, and seems to be achieving. Threading a fine line between being too receptive to those who wanted him to hold off some military moves, and taking a harder line suggested by the other end of the spectrum, President Bush seems well on his way to liberating for generations to come, the inhabitants of two nations in the middle-east.

There have been times when I wondered if the President were doing the right thing at certain points. This last Sunday, I along with others were pleasantly surprised at how well things have come together. The Iraqi people went to the polls in great numbers. Even those who had wished the President well in his efforts in Iraq, were relieved that the elections were so successful, I among them.

When it comes to the war in Iraq, when it comes to standing up against the leaders of Europe, when it comes to defining the path that we will take to repair Social Security, the President has my full support. I am very glad to have someone in the White House who advances policies on these issues, the way he does. His talk on these and a number of other issues is like sweet music to my ears. How sad I am that I must now talk about the fingernails on the chalkboard issue of our time, illegal immigration.

The President for all his power, for all his positives and all his good intentions, is still a man. He is a man that has many fine qualities. He is also a man that can and sometimes does make a mistake. I consider his desires to change certain aspects of our immigration policies, to be a colossal misjudgment. Unlike Iraq where I felt very uneasy, but avoided for the most part challenging the President's actions early on at Fallujah, and a few other places, I can see no room for compromise concerning the ongoing invasion of the United States.

This evening the President once again addressed the issue of immigration. Once again the meaning was crystal clear to those of us who disagree with him on that subject. Before I continue I want to be clear about something. I address this issue, because this is the issue where I find fault with the President. I don't do this because I am happy to have one issue to disagree with him on. I am very unhappy that I have to address this issue. I shouldn't have to at all, but this issue is important enough that I am going to address it continuously until the issue is resolved, the policies I cannot endorse are changed to protect this nation. That should be our overriding concern here. It is mine.

Here is what President Bush said this evening. This is the way I see the issues he raised.

America's immigration system is also outdated - unsuited to the needs of our economy and to the values of our country.

There are three issues in this charged sentence. I do believe that there are areas for improvement regarding the guidelines and procedures that govern Visas and short term visitors to the United States. I have no problem with the President trying to get a handle on who is entering our nation, how long they stay and whether they actually go home or not. This is not just an issue with Mexico. It's an issue that confronts us across the board with all who enter this nation. In this, I can support the President. I believe he is wise to address this component of the immigration issue.

Where the President and I part ways, is when he implies that our economy can't meet it's needs without poor, uneducated, unable to be financialy responsible for themselves, men and women from foreign countries. If the President were addressing the problems of the world's poor, I might be more inclined to listen to his proposals, but he isn't. This isn't about the world's poor. It's about one nation's poor. Yes, illegal immigration has an multi-national component to it, but it is primarily one nation that is flooding ours with it's citizens. I can't help but address this fact. It's true and so this one nation is addressed more than any other, for it's sordid practices.

When it comes to the issue of values, it is clear the United States is second to none when it comes to philanthropy. Our citizens give medical, educational, housing and other forms of help to the citizens of Mexico in Mexico. Physicians, nurses, teachers, aid workers, volunteers have been conducting mission work in Mexico for as long as I can remember. This represents our values. We are a good-hearted people who wish the best for the Mexican people. We gain no pleasure from seeing their national leaders abuse them, and I am firmly convinced this is the true condition of Mexico.

Values are not one-dimensional, and they don't exist in a vacuum. Extending a helping hand to millions of new Mexican poor each year is an admirable goal. The question is, how do you achieve that? Do you allow them to pour across your frontier in an endless stream that creates instant slums where ever they go? Do you allow them to swamp your communities, health care and education resources? Do you allow them to soak up tens of billions of dollars of funding that citizens have every right to expect to be spent on their local community and state needs? The answers to these question are a resounding no.

If I want to help someone out, I dig in my pocket and donate the appropriate amount based on what I can afford, what the actual need is. If you were to do that with my money it wouldn't be right. When the government does it, it's not right either. In fact, it would show a complete avoidance of reasoned values to do such a thing. Please don't talk to me about this nations values, while suggesting that I and hundreds of millions of other U.S. Citizens will have to hand over our hospitals, schools, infrastructure, and even a portion of our futures, so this can be facilitated.

We should not be content with laws that punish hardworking people who want only to provide for their families, and deny businesses willing workers, and invite chaos at our border.

These sentences are some of the most charged sentences I've ever seen. At once they are complex, a misdirecting slight of hand, and dishonest.

Mr. President, your fellow citizens are hard working people who are trying to provide for their families. What about folks like us? Why do you seek to punish us so that others can get services for free that we cannot? Why should non-citizens get free health care while we have to pay through the ying-yang to get it? Does it really seem like good values to you, to allow businesses to pay sub-scale so that illegals can work, when I and my fellow citizens have to pay so much for their health care, education, and other assorted freebies? Why should we subsidize these businesses this way? Does it seem like a good idea to flood this nation with people who have only a 4th to 8th grade education? How will they put a roof over their head on minimum wage? Who will feed clothe and house them? Who will pay for the deliveries of their children? What community can thrive with tens of thousands of these poor people in their midst? We are talking about instant slums across this nation. Some localities will be besieged in greater numbers than others. Where is your compassion for them?

Mr. President, there is only one group causing chaos at our border. It is the illegal alien who has shown themselves unwilling to respect the laws of our nation. When you frame the debate the way you have, you simply side with them. And I might add, you side with them against us. Why? What did we do to deserve this?

It is time for an immigration policy that permits temporary guest workers to fill jobs Americans will not take, that rejects amnesty, that tells us who is entering and leaving our country, and that closes the border to drug dealers and terrorists.

Mr. President, I'll make a deal with you. If you respect me, I'll respect you. Please do not insult my intelligence by claiming these will be guest workers. At this very minute, you are loathe to send anyone back to their nation of origin. How can you expect me to believe that in six years, you'll be sending anyone back to the nation of their origin then? You know as well as I do that these guest workers will bring families that we, not they, will pay for. They will develop homes here. They will invest years of their lives here. Who are you trying to kid? You're not going to send even one of these people home. Instead you will be asking to up the quota.

Here's another question for you Mr. President. Is it fair to the other citizens of the world to have millions of Mexican citizens enter our nation through expanded immigration quotas, while they have to go through all the same procedures they always have? Would it be a good idea to open up our guest worker program to all the world's poor? Should we allow millions from every poor nation around the world, to enter our nation each year? If not, then how do we justify it for one nation?

Here's a problem you haven't seemed to consider. If we allow two million worker permits per year, do you think that will end illegal immigration? It won't. Those who can't get in under any quota you set, will continue to come over the border as they always have. You'll immediately have a worker entry program, the continued illegal immigration on top of that, and the folks who were here when it all started. We're looking at thirty million people within five years. We have ten to fifteen now. We'll let another million or two in each year legally. We'll still have illegal immigration. And while all this goes on, we'll still have hospitals and schools inundated at a rate double what it has been.

Where is the solution in this Mr. President? What will it resolve? We'll have infrastructure crumbling faster than before, health care and education already on the ropes, placed on life support.

Illegal immigration will still see millions of undocumenteds coming across. Gang and terrorist group members among them.

You see Mr. President, you would have to close the borders to illegal immigrants for this plan to work. Unfortunately, you have refused to do that. In light of that your plan will never work. This nation will just be torn apart one neighborhood at a time at an even faster rate than it has been, until someone finally turns out the lights.

I sure wish I didn't have to address this issue. This plan doesn't make sense on any level. With that last comment, I'll just concede that folks in Washington won't be able to resist it. What a sad day for America it will be, when this plan hits the ground running.

...even Rushbo has realized it's a major problem.

Rush has changed his tune lately.

I caught a bit of last Friday's replay on my local station, Rush touch briefly on the subject, he no longer thinks the cheap labor is worth all the costs to Americans born of it. He now realizes that wages for Americans are being depressed across whole industries.

I hope to hear on future shows more from Rush on the havoc being wreaked by the Illegals. [I usually am too busy at work to pay much attention but I do try to listen]

Great post.

I intend to send it to the White House. Maybe if they get enough of these, they will begin to recognize that Americans are just not going to go for this overrun of our Country, and an amnesty by another name.

I'm certain the bayourod person will show up - s/he always does. Since they are unconvincible, I suggest you ignore their posts, as s/he seems resistant to any reasoned, logical argument and I've read their position on so many threads, I don't even read what s/he writes anymore. Seen it once - don't need to see it again. Drivel, all of it.

I think Sabertooth had the best idea on this. Create a bounty for each illegal alien turned into INS (or whatever it is called these days.) He noted that following 9/11, there was an announced push to find and return home all those Pakistani's who had overstayed their Visas, or were here illegally, whatever the mechanism. Pakistanis took themselves home in droves. IIRC, some 4000 Pakistanis took themselves right out of America and returned to Pakistan.

Therefore, having seen the effectiveness of a bounty, why don't we do the same thing with any illegals?

And before anyone asks. Yes, I have called the INS to report illegal aliens, some who even showed up to roof my house here in No. VA. Right up front they told me how overworked and understaffed they were, and that they'd really like to follow-up, blah, blah, blah - nothing is going to happen.

Don't argue with bayourod. He either owns business's that employ illegal aliens or he's one himself. He will argue with you forever and never listen to what the people want. Hey, maybe he's a politician! At any rate, don't waste your time. He's hopeless and will never change his views any more than the 90% of us who disagree with him will change ours.

Great post!

". He's hopeless and will never change his views any more than the 90% of us who disagree with him will change ours. "

The problem is 2/3 of our elected officials agree with him and could care less about the 90% of us and our "culture". They're all feeding from the trough of illegal immigration and the poor trying to get in and the rest of us are their pawns. Must make him feel warm and fuzzy all over.

Must read.

Humor break:

More email Cow Humor

PURE DEMOCRACY You have two cows. Your neighbours decide who gets the milk.

REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY You have two cows. Politicians decide who gets the milk.

AMERICAN DEMOCRACY You have two cows. The government taxes you to the point that you have to sell both. Your tax is used to support a man in a foreign country who has only one cow, which was originally one of yours, a free gift from your government.

BRITISH DEMOCRACY You have two cows. You feed them sheep brains and they go mad. The government does nothing.

LIBERTARIANISM (USA) You have two cows. One has actually read the constitution, believes in it, and has some really good ideas about government. The cow runs for office, and while most people agree that the cow is the best candidate, nobody except the other cow votes for her because they think it would be "throwing their vote away."

In the immortal words of General George S. Patton:

"You magnificent bastard!"

D1, you have honestly and thoughtfully articulated on those points of this critical debate what many of us believe with our own eyes and eyes and hearts.

A viable solution to the issue should be a priority for the President, because it certainly is a priority for America's citizens.

I challenge those who disagree with your point-by-point assessment to refute your observations with tangiable evidence to the contrary.

"...appears on the surface that the outcry against this is motivated by selfishness, anger, and a whole lot of xenophobia - none of which are feelings that a Christian in a state of grace should have. Yet, many of you who express these things are the most vocal about your Christianity"

How Christian is it to break through barriers (law and borders) and rob your neighbor? How Christian is it to take money from your hard working tax paying citizens to prop up the corruption emanating south of us? How Christian is it to allow the corrupt narco-traficing govt. to our south continue to drive out their own people from their own land? Jesus said to protect the poor and helpless, yet, vicente and crew go on, secure in knowing they've got people like you to protect them. After all, they're not the problem, it's those selfish lazy Americans fault, right?

The mexican govt. is not only totally corrupt, they're marxists. Yet, you say it's not "Christian" and it's racist if we resist rolling over for it? Nuts!

Here's what Michelle Malkin has to say about the speech last night:

On immigration, Bush offered the usual platitudes:

America's immigration system is also outdated -- unsuited to the needs of our economy and to the values of our country. We should not be content with laws that punish hard-working people who want only to provide for their families, and deny businesses willing workers, and invite chaos at our border. It is time for an immigration policy that permits temporary guest workers to fill jobs Americans will not take, that rejects amnesty, that tells us who is entering and leaving our country, and that closes the border to drug dealers and terrorists.

No recognition at all here from Bush that the vast majority of Americans favor stricter immigration enforcement against both "willing" employers who have put profits over national security and the willful illegal alien lawbreakers they are employing. No word of support for House Republican efforts to push for secure identification and asylum reform. Even Hillary would have done better.

www.michellemalkin.com

Thanks for the Singapore link. However, there were a lot of gaps in the article, necessary I guess for such a short article. This was one significant difference:

Zaleha’s normal work routine begins with recording statements by the accused. Once that is done, she will prepare the necessary court documents for the following morning when the crime sentence will be meted out in court. On busy days, the GIT can handle up to 40 cases a day.

Not surprisingly, there is plenty of legwork involved. A typical day of an investigator would entail visiting an accused in prison,....

That is pretty rapid turnover, indicating a lot of work had already been done to get to that stage.

However, I assume that Singapore was on this problem from the start, giving them a procedure and a process, along with public support, to make this a pretty routine endeavor. That means they never faced what we did in this country, that being the purposeful and concentrated effort by a corrupt administration to encourage and make easy a massive influx of illegals across our borders in order to convert them into Democrat voters so as to assure reelection, even bypassing FBI checks for those who were going through the legal process. Of course, I am talking about the Clinton/Gore administration. After that, attempting to get a handle on this problem is much more difficult. Had it not been for the Clinton administration we would not be in the situation we are. Had they resisted illegals and gone to the lengths we are now demanding of Bush, perhaps we would be in the same position as Singapore. Instead they handicapped the INS and other agencies and gave direct orders to bypass certain procedures.

"BTW, Bayourod. Any input on what Huckleberry said about this bill to cut off state aid to illegals? "

I made my comments several days ago when I posted the original article from the Arkansas Gazette. Where do you think worldnetdailey picked it up?

I'm not a resident of Arkansas. The residents can do whatever they want as long as it doesn't interfere with any of my rights.

But if FReepers from Arkansas start blaming Bush for any problems that they have created or fail to solve, I reserve the right to point out to them that it ain't Bush's fault.

I'm thinking of two big old concrete walls about 50 yards apart, with a mined "no man's land" in between and razor wire up top. Oh, and devices underground that can detect tunneling.

No doubt that would work. However, what about the beaches and all those expensive beach front properties? We have difficulty getting political support for much less extensive measures. After all, the Dems see the illegals as probable voters and a reliable disenfranchised welfare constituency so they are for it.

Those in the concrete business would love it, though.

"Yes and they all learned English and did not expect companies and schools to teach Spanish to accommodate them "

Hispanics learn English as fast as any other wave of immigrants did. It's difficult for adults to learn a new language. The ones in the workforce learn what they need to do their jobs. The young children pick it up fast, same as other immigrants.

Schools are not for the benefit of the parents or the kids. They are for the benefit of our entire community and state.

We educate them so they can be productive taxpayers. Texas has one of the best programs for vocational education. Our large pool of workplace ready employees is one reason we were just rated the most favorable state in which to locate a business.

Businesses pay the vast majority of taxes, not average individuals. Maybe that's why we have a $6.5 Billion surplus.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.