Illegal Immigration: The Cancer of the Republican Party

     The presidential election of 2016 would have been a coronation for the Republican nominee. The average voter being at the end of their rope with the lawless Obama administration and the virtually no-growth economy. A coronation, that is until Donald Trump, et al misdirected the Republican electorate away from every other issue that is plaguing this nation except illegal immigration. Not that illegal immigration is not a problem for this country, however, it is an issue, more than any other I have seen, which has been dominated by emotion displacing reality.
     Real debate about solutions to this nation's illegal immigration problem has been replaced by invective doled out by the Trump-ites aimed at anyone who disagrees with anything short of mass deportation of upwards of 11 million persons. Every other well intentioned position is characterized as amnesty by those who are too politically simplistic or intellectually lazy to engage in an honest analysis of the problem and consider any other action but the aforementioned mass deportation.
      The Kato Institute (a well respected Libertarian think tank) has recently completed an exhaustive study on the illegal immigration problem. Their findings will, I am sure, earn them the ire and acrimony of the deport-them-all crowd. But one of the tenets of conservatism is a pursuit and respect for the truth, whether that truth supports the conservative ideology or not. The Kato Institute's findings are in opposition to some of the fanciful rhetoric being spread like manure by a particular Republican presidential candidate and his votaries. But as someone once said, "You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts."
     Kato has found that even with the well publicized child migration of some 15 months ago, the illegal immigrant population in this country has actually decreased in the last ten years. That, by the way, was the last time we had an economy growing at more than the pathetic 2% it has been since President Obama was inaugurated. Kato has found that the illegal immigration population has shrank by several million in that period.
     Further findings of the Kato study show that the illegal immigrants who are in this country have a lower unemployment rate, and rate of welfare use, than those persons actually born in this country. Poking more holes in the delicate fabric of the deport-them-all crowd's argument for such an action. Many illegals, almost half, entered the country legally and have simply overstayed their visas. Many more have been here for more than a decade and have jobs, have raised families, and even own property.
     Kato has also found that the incarceration rates for illegal immigrants is actually lower than for those who were native born to this country. Further alienating the deport-them-all crowd from the actual facts. I do not intend to suggest that illegal immigration is not a problem, only that the fallacy that binds the argument of the deport-them-all crowd has caused them to be zealots against those on their own side of the aisle with respect to 80% of the other issues facing this country.
     The cancer of extremism clothed in misconceptions, manufactured realities, and downright lies is eating away at the Republican Party like a cancer. If not stopped, and some reason brought to the discussion, we will not only lose next November's election, but very possibly any opportunity to recover the nation from the oppression of Socialism in which we have been sinking evermore quickly.
    

Birth Rite Citizenship Under the Fourteenth Amendment

     The issue of birth rite citizenship under the 14th amendment to the U.S. constitution has unfortunately become an issue for some in the Republican primary race. I say unfortunately because once again some on the Right insist on making Republicans in general look obtuse and disconnected from political reality. One can argue about what the 14th amendment intended or did not intend with regards to granting citizenship to anyone born on American soil, but when it comes down to it the best these birth rite citizenship deniers can hope for is a stale mate when it comes to the actual constitutional definition of that controversial amendment.
     The argument I have heard made by some on the Right like Mark Levin is that birth rite citizenship does not exist under the 14th amendment if one considers the entirety of this contentious statement. Their entire argument rests upon redefinition of one word, i.e. jurisdiction. This is the word used in the clause immediately following the one which grants citizenship to anyone born on American soil. It adds the disclaimer that the potential citizen must also be under the jurisdiction of the United States.
     Those who deny the citizenship authority of the 14th amendment strain credulity by saying that jurisdiction actually means allegiance. That the citizen in waiting should have allegiance to the United States, not simply be born here. There is no definition of jurisdiction, nor any synonym of that word, that would lead one to make the intellectual argument that somehow it is connected to allegiance. Is there anyone who thinks that if the framers of the 14th amendment would have meant allegiance they would have just said so, and not couched it in the completely different word jurisdiction.
     The other argument that is made by some who argue against the 14th amendment's birth rite citizenship is that the constitution in Article 1, Section 8 gives congress the authority over making naturalization laws, and therefore can simply revoke  the birth rite citizenship making ability of the 14th amendment without changing the constitution. This would be a fools errand for the Republicans to initiate because it would surely be vetoed by President Obama and it is a certainty they would not get Democrats to join them in overriding that veto.
     Even the Article 1 powers of the congress is a specious argument for revoking birth rite citizenship. Clause 8, section 4 of the first constitutional Article clearly states that congress can make rules, not laws, with respect to naturalization. Now for those who say rules and laws are one in the same, why would the Framers of the constitution use rules in some clauses and laws in others? They clearly meant to make a distinction between the two and meant to funnel major changes with respect to naturalization into the constitutional amendment process.
     Even if those in favor of revoking the birth rite citizenship authority of the 14th amendment were completely correct, what is the political advantage to Republicans in a presidential primary season for taking up this cause? Absolutely none. In fact it will feed into the narrative that some have that Republicans are nativists and anti-immigrant. Besides, birth rite citizenship is just a small part of the illegal immigration problem that we have, why spend our political energy on it instead of on solutions that may have bi-partisan support and go much further to solving the problem?

How The Republicans Lost The Immigration Debate

     There was a day, though I can not tell you the exact date, that Republicans acquiesced to the Democrats in the debate over illegal immigration. That day was when the Republicans accepted, as they often do, the Democrats' premise that immigration reform was needed. Instead of the Republicans articulating the roots of their Party that reach deeply into the soil of law and order, they put that concept on the back burner and accepted the premise of a debate they could never win against Democrats.
     The Democrats were brilliant, or maybe the Republicans were just that stupid, in implementing their strategy to fill their voting rolls with a fresh supply of an underclass that would stay dependent on big government and vote for the purveyors of that big government, i.e. Democrats. During the last six years, the Obama administration has refused to execute immigration laws currently on the books, and when border states like Arizona tried to do it themselves, they were set upon by the brown shirt enforcement arm of the Obama administration; Eric Holder and the Justice Department.
     The refusal by the administration to enforce existing immigration laws created a border crisis exponentially greater than what had existed, and which could have been resolved with stricter enforcement of current laws and beefed up border security. This placed Republicans in the position of articulating how the system for dealing with illegal immigration was not "broken", or giving into the Democrats' premise of a crisis they deliberately created. The Republicans chose the latter, and from that day forward put themselves in a position that was going to be subservient to the Democrat position no matter what they did.
     The proof of this capitulation by congressional Republicans is the amnesty bill masquerading as a "comprehensive" immigration reform bill passed by the Senate last year, with Republican senators lining up to curry favor with the Hispanic voting bloc, and creating quite the pandering spectacle. As if their pandering, or all the pandering in the world, was going to drive Hispanic voters away from Democrats into the arms of Republicans. The presidential election of 2012 proved that even if that happened it would have to be to such a great extent as to be out of reach for Republicans simply by passing amnesty.
     According to Byron York of the Washington Examiner, Mitt Romney would have had to secure the votes of 73% of Hispanic community in order to have won the presidency. And this after having pandered to the all important "independent" vote, which he received the lion's share of and still lost. When are Republicans going to quit following the advice of Democrats for how they can win elections, and stand on their conservative principles which when articulated well always win?
     One thing is for sure, no matter what President Obama does with regards to executive amnesty, the Republicans lost this debate when they did not initially stand on the principle of law and order and demand that the federal government enforce its current immigration laws and build better border security. Instead they have accepted that the immigration system is "broken" and needs a big government solution that has its roots in amnesty, an idea pushed by Democrats for their own political advantage.

George Will's Support For The Obama Wealth Redistribution Program

     The de facto scribe for the Washington establishment, George Will, stated over the weekend that we should distribute the "children" currently breaching our Southern border throughout the country, placing 20 in each county. Beyond Mr. Will's naiveté in believing that most of these children are "eight year old criminals with Teddy bears," is the fact that his numbers do not add up. Maybe demographic arithmetic is not a subject in George's wheelhouse, we already can surmise from his Teddy bear statement that being intellectually tethered to reality certainly is not.
     Primary to the ridiculousness of Mr. Will's comments on the current illegal alien invasion on the Southern border of the United States of America, is the fact that less than twenty percent of those that have breached our borders since this past April have been children. Unless of course you classify children as being anyone up to and including the age of twenty six, as the administration has done through the Affordable Care Act. The percentage of actual illegal alien children being dumped at the border as a direct result of Obama policy, is miniscule compared to the number of adults making the trek.
     Of the actual children, defined as those persons under the age of 18, more than three quarters are teenagers, according to the border patrol. These teenagers are capable of violent crimes as a function of their common matriculation into gangs like MS-13. And contrary to what George Will would have us believe, gang members do not carry Teddy bears. But they do carry disease, mental illness, and a predilection to engage in violent crime.
      George Will's statement, either deliberately or by design, misses the fact that the twenty "children" every county would be compelled by the force of law to welcome with open arms, and open checkbooks, will grow into hundreds or even thousands twenty years hence. The increase will be insured not only through others pouring over our open borders, but by those already here having children, all of which the taxpayers must support.
     Mr. Will made the point that we can surely absorb these poor, innocent, Teddy bear carrying "children" into our national family. That may well be true. But the issue that is missed by those who have been distracted by the phony refugee status of these "children," is the fact that a country without strictly enforced borders can hardly expect to maintain its sovereignty. Those on the Left, and those like George Will who swerve into it from time to time, are adamant about the United States butting out of other nations' affairs, except of course when it comes to receiving with open arms their citizens who have crashed our borders illegally in order to participate in the Obama Wealth Redistribution Program. And those on the Right like Mr. Will have unwittingly become supporters of this program, not out of compassion, but because the Republican establishment has bought into the myth that support for open borders will lead them to electoral victory.

Illegal Immigration And Reckless Compassion

     Anyone who has not spent the last few months in a bunker three miles under the earth's service with no radio or cable TV, is aware of the 52,000 unaccompanied illegal children from Ecuador, El Salvador and Guatemala that have journeyed up to a thousand miles to breech a border that has been so enervated by the Obama administration that...well unaccompanied children could sneak across it. Now we have also been told by way of a crowing Left Wing Media Complex that almost another 250,000 adult illegal immigrants have come across the border since April of this year.
      These 300,00 are only the ones that were caught or gave themselves up to border security. In the case of the children, who are being released into the custody of anyone who claims to be a relative, many may end up being condemned to working in the sex-slave market. This is the result of the Left and the Obama administration's "compassion." As per usual, the Left's "compassion" is severely suspect in its origins, and anything but compassionate for its intended targets.
     Another interesting aspect of the Obama Illegal Child Dump program is that many of these children were ferried over our border by coyotes, who are Mexican mercenaries who sneak across the U.S. border those looking for a better life, many times ending up cooked in a hot cargo van. My question is, "Who paid the coyotes for their services rendered in relation to these children?" We know that coyotes are not looking for humanitarian awards, they want cold hard cash for their "services." I have to wonder with everything else that this administration has done to pay lip service to the Rule Of Law, while at the same time grinding it into dog food in the basement of the White House, if some taxpayer money did not end up in coyotes' pockets.
     The obvious maneuver of overwhelming the systems of government in order to justify more government to compensate, is a classic of Marxist tyrants of the last hundred years. Mr. Obama is engaging one of the oldest tricks in the book for consolidating power in the central government. He has requested two billion dollars to fund his "compassion," and that is only seed money. More, a lot more, I am sure, will be forthcoming over the next few months.
     The Left in this country has tried to take control by appealing to the people's compassion. But   compassion practiced with reckless abandon always leads to the mitigation, and eventual elimination of liberty. This is why James Madison, Father of the Constitution, stated that there is no compassion in the Constitution. In order for free people to remain free it is essential that any compassion be exercised by the people, and not the government. Compassion consolidated in the hands of government leads only to tyranny because it involves the immoral act of funding said compassion with other people's money.
     The most compassionate outcome for these children would be for the United States to send them back to their families in their countries of origin. It would send a clear message to others that the trip to the U.S. border is not worth the struggle. It would also be the most compassionate thing for the tax-paying citizens of the United States who would have to end up supporting these kids. It is odd how the Left seems to have compassion for everyone but the U.S. taxpayer who ultimately pays for the implementation of that compassion.

The Dumping On America; Not Only An Immigration Story

     The Obama immigration policy, or the lack thereof, has directly resulted in the dumping at our borders of Guatemalan, San Salvadorian, and Peruvian children. Turning trained defenders of the border, i.e. the Border Patrol, into nurse maids and babysitters. A recent survey conducted by the Border Patrol of the children has concluded that ninety five percent of them made the arduous trip through Mexico because family and friends in the United States had sent word that the Obama administration had changed U.S. immigration law, so once they crossed our border they were assured of staying.
     This dumping of thousands of illegal immigrant children by the Obama administration is not the first time they have dumped on America. The president began his administration by dumping onto the taxpayers the bill for his compassion in helping those who got in over their heads with a mortgage they could not afford. He has dumped almost 8 trillion dollars in debt, and counting, on Americans who have not even been born yet, and their children and grand children. He has dumped a choking, drowning, and crushing amount of federal regulations on business, which has created one of the worst labor markets since the Great Depression.
     One of the worst things that Barack Obama has dumped on America is a hopelessness and despair of average citizens who see their country, a country once the envy of the world because of its Rule of Law and individual liberty, quickly disappearing into a cesspool of corruption and lawlessness that is the current administration. And the more venal and debauched the Obama administration becomes, the less liberty the average citizen enjoys.
     With all the dumping that Barack Obama has done on America, it is no surprise that he would use these illegal immigrant children as a political human shield. The president, and most of the members of his party, are motivated entirely by the singularity of the treachery of politics. Those who refuse to step into the light and see this administration, and much of the modern Democrat party, for what it is, do so at their own and the country's risk. There is no compassion in any of their policies, let alone in any of their rhetoric or causes.
     When President Obama recently said that our future depended on these children, he was speaking of course about the Democrat party's future. And it is a sin of the highest degree for Democrats and Leftists like Mr. Obama to deplete and confiscate, not only these children's future, but America's future, for the sake of ensuring political power for his party. And as Americans we must no longer travel through our daily lives in the stupor of emotionalism that is doled out by Leftist politicians whose only goal is to retard our critical thinking skills and replace individual liberty with collective responsibility.
    

Obama Math: Two And Two Is Five

     To say that the Obama administration has been soft on illegal immigration is an understatement on par with saying that radical Islam is a little naughty. It seems all but forgotten that only a few years ago, the Obama administration distributed pamphlets to Mexicans in Mexico instructing them on how to sign up for benefits provided by the confiscated wealth of others, once they crossed the border. At the same time, to avoid the appearance that he is not executing his constitutional duty to protect the sovereignty of the United States, President Obama has bragged that deportations are at an all time high under his regime.
     The number of deportations has increased in recent years only because the Obama administration has required the border patrol to transfer into Immigration and Custom Enforcement's custody those illegals snatched at the border. This practice jukes the stats to make it look as though ICE is deporting more illegals than they actually are. Subtracting the border catches from their totals, interior U.S. deportations have actually decreased under Obama. Further Obama restrictions on ICE have decreased illegals' subjectivity to deportation, making it a tiny sliver of what it use to be.
     The new regulations require catch-and-release practices by ICE when local law enforcement officials detain illegals for other infractions of the criminal code. This has caused the impression, and rightly so, in the minds of illegal immigrants, that once they breech our borders they are home free and it is very unlikely they will be deported.
     Herman Goerhing once said that "If the fuhrer says two and two is five, then it is." So it is with the Obama administration. They have reformulated the economic and public policy statistics to bend the truth in whichever direction they wish. So that persons no longer in the work force due to despondency are not counted as unemployed. And those who visit the government health care website and request information, but never pay a premium, are counted as sign-ups. And that two percent growth in the economy is a roaring recovery. And illegal immigrants caught at the border before entering the country are counted as deportations.
     The Obama administration takes full advantage of the fact that controlling statistics allows them the ability to control the truth, or at least the perceived truth. It is a phenomenon that the less the populace trusts the government, as has happened over the last five years, the more they acquiesce to that government. So in essence, by the acceptance of lower economic performance as typical, more illegal immigrants as inevitable, and gay marriage on a national scale as "equitable,"  the general fatigue among the citizenry has resulted in two plus two actually becoming five. And when truth becomes as malleable as cheap campaign slogans, and just as fleeting, then the foundation of liberty suffers and tyranny fills the vacuum left behind.      

Obama Gives Away America, One Tree At A Time

     President Obama made a speech this week in South Korea in which he proffered to the Korean people the heartfelt sympathy of the American people for the loss of life as a result of the recent  ferry tragedy. That part of the President's presentation was totally appropriate. However, I found it a little more than symbolic of this administration, and this president's radical ideology and world view, that he had an historic magnolia tree uprooted from its century-long home on the White House lawn, and shipped to the Korean school from where many of the ferry tragedy's victims came.
     I call it symbolic of Barack Obama's world view because in addition to redistributing America's wealth throughout the world, he apparently is now redistributing our national historical trees. Do not mistake this gesture of ostensible sympathy for what it really is, a lessening of those things important to the very history of this country. President Obama has been very deliberate in mitigating the importance of America's past prior to his election as its redeemer and savior. A past he sees as imperial and corrupt.
     Another recent Obama administration foray into the disbursement of America, is the redistribution of the very sovereignty of this great nation. The Obama White House, through the Department of Homeland Security, has proposed new rules for the deportation of illegal aliens, which essentially eliminates that legal remedy all together. The president and his administration say this a more humane policy towards those who have broken our laws to illegally breech our borders.
     The idea that children of illegals born in this country are bestowed with U.S. citizenship by virtue of the 14th amendment, has been challenged by legal and constitutional scholars who point out that the 14th amendment clearly states that the conferee of citizenship must be under the jurisdiction of the United States of America. A person who is in this country illegally, is hardly under its jurisdiction. Besides which, the 14th amendment says nothing about the parents of such a child being given special privileges to stay in this country under the manufactured practice of "anchor babies."
     The new Homeland Security policy dilutes U.S. citizenship and spreads it so thinly as to apply not only to those in this country illegally, but I suppose in the very near future to those living elsewhere in the world who wish to come here illegally. The president, without the constitutional permission or input from congress, has decriminalized illegal immigration. Once a nation has lost its sovereignty, one citizenship at a time, it becomes less a nation and more a collection of disparate persons with no single identity, or even a rule of law to unite them. The act of the president deforesting the nation, literally and figuratively, is no more evident than in his lending the weight of his office to the practice of illegal immigration.

Compassion And The Illegal Immigration Debate

     Throughout the current debate on so-called immigration reform, the Democrats have tried to shame Republicants into agreeing to amnesty for illegal immigrants already in this country by saying it is the compassionate thing to do. As if protecting our borders is somehow mean-spirited. Democrats characterize Republicants as unfeeling and hard-hearted if they refuse to make amnesty the prime directive of immigration reform. The Leftist thuggery of Democrats seems to be reaping results in their favor with recent statements made by Republicants that they are amenable to giving legal status to illegal immigrants brought to this country as children by their parents who sneaked over the border.
     The Democrat tactic of using children, even though in this case most of the "children" are well into adulthood, is straight out of the same old playbook they have used for decades. They characterize a segment of the population as weak and vulnerable, and therefore in need of their big government programs to protect them from the rich, white, Conservative males that mean them harm. Republicants in Congress refused to vote for the Dream Act a couple of years ago, thereby handing the Democrats a legislative defeat that otherwise would have given special rights of citizenship to people brought to this country illegally as children.
     The question that no one, Republicant or Democrat who supports the concept of legislation for "dreamers" can answer is, "How do we know who even falls into this category?" There are no records kept of the names and ages of the children that come across the border illegally with their parents. There is no way to verify this status, other than the word of illegal individuals who want the benefits that some in Congress say have accrued to them simply by staying in this country illegally for so many years. And as with any government program, the less verification that exists, the more that abuse and corruption have free reign to run rampant.
     The founders of this great nation created a system of government that operated under the rules of reason, common sense and law. They were wise enough to know that once human emotion made its way into the chambers of government, liberty would succumb to the arbitrary will of the human heart. They believed, and rightly so, that charity and compassion were best left within the purview of individuals, and not in the hands of a central government. To make the law malleable, as any legalization legislation would do, is to weaken the very foundation upon which freedom and liberty are built. At one time I believed Republicants in Congress understood this principle. But of late they have become as Democrats, hungry for an ever more bloated bureaucracy that limits individual freedom and places rule of law under the crushing boot of tyranny.     
    

As Illegals Step Out Of The Shadows, The Federal Government Retreats Further Into Them

     Much consternation and analysis has been engaged in recently over the debate on so-called immigration reform. But the core issue of immigration reform as it is currently being discussed has been missed by most on the right and everyone on the Left. While moderates like Marco Rubio and John McCain argue with Democrats over border security, fines paid by illegals on "the pathway to citizenship," how long those now in the shadows will have to wait until they are technically allowed to pop out of the shadows and what restrictions, if any, will be placed on them while they wait,  a much larger and more important issue is being missed. Even larger and more important than what is going to be the source for the additional billions of dollars required to administer these new programs designed to gently coax illegals out of the shadows and bestow them with the privileges of citizenship.
     Beyond the fact that the Rubio gang's immigration bill will turn a bad situation into a worse one, is the fact that it is one more nail in the coffin of Constitutional government, which has made this nation the greatest in history. The Constitutionally antithetical concept of bestowing dictatorial power on the executive branch through the agencies it controls like the Department of Education, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Homeland Security and others, has accelerated into hyper overdrive with the installation of Barack Obama as President.
     Congress passes laws like ObamaCare, Financial Reform and now, possibly, immigration reform, with hooks in them that basically state that some cabinet secretary has complete discretion how the law is implemented, or even if it is. Much of the specifics of ObamaCare and Financial Reform (Immigration Reform's elder siblings) are written after the law is passed by the United States Congress, in direct violation of our founding principles which require the people's representatives in Congress to be the only entity that creates laws. The founders created this type of system so that those who make the laws are answerable to those who must live by the laws. Cabinet secretaries are answerable to no one but the President. Over the years, a shadow government has been created in this country consisting of bureaucracies that have more power than Congress. The people's Constitutional authority over the lawmakers has been usurped by people like Barack Obama.
     One of the founding tenets of Conservatism is Constitutionalism, so I am perplexed by anyone who calls themselves a Conservative and supports the current immigration reform bill. The bill, along with its brother and sister bills, ObamaCare and Financial Reform, imparts untold and accountable power to unelected bureaucrats whose only function in life is do the President's bidding. Democrat senator, Chuck Schumer said that this bill will eliminate illegal immigration, and he is right. This bill will essentially require that as soon as someone has successfully sneaked over our border illegitimately, they will be handed U.S. citizenship and a Democrat voter registration card. And taking up a post at the welcome wagon will be Chuck Schumer, Barack Obama, John McCain and Marco Rubio.

The Game Of Identity Politics, Not Just For Democrats Anymore

     The fifteen Republicant senators who voted with Democrats for passage of the thousand page debacle known as "Immigration Reform", are committing a fatal error in judgment that Republicants can not seem to avoid in recent years. And it is not only the Republicant senators, but others on the right, including some in talk radio, that have allowed Democrats to convince them that Hispanics will give their votes to Republicant candidates in greater numbers if they would only support amnesty. Besides the obvious flaw in logic of these people on the right who think Democrats actually want to help them garner more votes from a majority Democrat voting block, is the fact that most legal Hispanics do not support amnesty for those who are not.
     It is ironic that just a couple of years ago in his race against Charlie Crist for the seat he currently occupies in the U.S. Senate, the man with the rapidly disappearing career, Marco Rubio, said that any kind of "pathway to citizenship" is just amnesty and will not solve the illegal immigration problem. In being the poster child for how to destroy your career by associating yourself with the extreme moderates in the party like John McCain, Marco Rubio has pushed the current legislative attempt at increasing the Democrat voter base by using the exact term "pathway to citizenship."
     Republicants in and out of the senate were mollified into supporting the immigration bill by an amendment to double the number of border guards and complete the 700 mile security fence. The building of the fence was a previous promise in law which the Democrats have made sure has gone unfulfilled, and the increase in border guards will never happen on a permanent basis. It is embarrassing how many times dunder-headed Republicants like John McCain can be fooled into voting for bills that are good for Democrats and bad for the country. The current bill gives complete discretion to the Secretary of Homeland Security with regards to how the specifics of the bill are implemented, or even if they are implemented. Secretary Janet Napolitano has already publicly stated that she does not support the building of the fence. So once again Democrats promise the moon to get amnesty for a fresh supply of an under-class who will slavishly vote to keep them in power in order to keep taxpayer-funded benefits flowing. And none of the security aspects of this bill will have to be implemented if Janet Napolitano does not want them to be, which I would bet my last dollar, she will not.
     Senator Lindsey Graham recently admitted that Republicants like him are not supporting this immigration reform bill because it is the right thing to do for the country, but because he thinks Hispanics do not like Republicants, and by giving amnesty to illegal immigrants, he and his cohorts can ensure that Hispanics will magically turn out for Republicants at the polls. What Senator Graham and others on the right who support the current immigration reform bill are doing is giving away the farm for some magic beans that hold the false promise of growing them electoral success. Remember that even had Mitt Romney received seventy percent of the Hispanic vote in last fall's election, he still would have lost. Democrats have always participated in the reprehensible practice of identity politics, but now it seems they have company from the right in the form of John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Marco Rubio and others.  

The "Gang Of Whatever" Strategy

     Unfortunately, every time Conservatives put their faith in a new Republicant standard bearer that is going to save the party, thereby saving the Republic, we are disappointed. The latest entrant is Marco Rubio. Just when we were all starting to heal from the Chris Christie betrayal, here comes Marco Rubio, looking like the successor to John McCain as the Republicant party moderate. The problem with those who occupy the middle of the road is that they insure that they will face an increased danger of being run over by both sides.
     It has always fascinated me how the call for moderation comes mainly from the Left, but is directed entirely to, Conservatives. There are never any calls from the media, or even the "reach across the aisle" club in the Republicant party, for even a modicum of moderation on the part of anyone on the Left. It has become so bad in recent years, that bi-partisanship has been redefined as Republicants moderating their position to be more aligned with Democrats. Never is the inverse even a vague suggestion. The record alacrity shown by Senator Rubio to moderate, and the redefinition of bi-partisanship to mean Republicants shifting their position to be parallel with that of Democrats, are amply illustrated by the current immigration debate.
     My opinion is that providing a pathway to citizenship for illegal aliens is like providing free cash to bank robbers or free cars to car thieves. I had had some hope that Republicants were going to show some spine and insist on border security first and foremost before any other changes to the immigration system were implemented by Congress. But the gang of eight bill has no real enforcement teeth. And the fines that illegals would have to pay on their "pathway to citizenship" are now being walked back by Democrats and Republicants alike. So the gang of eight bill is looking more like it was written by a gang of eight Democrats.
     I fail to understand why some Republicant senators insist on falling for the rope-a-dope tactic of the Left inherent in the "gang of whatever" strategy. It always ends in disaster for Republicants and the nation at large. The last most memorable (or forgettable depending on how one looks at it) was the gang of 14 during the Bush administration. The Democrats were filibustering every judicial nominee who was not a devoted Leftist. The Republicants threatened to use the nuclear option, which eliminated filibusters for judicial nominations and required a simple up and down vote, which at the time Republicants could have won for most of President Bush's nominees. John McCain, six other Republicant and seven Democrat senators agreed that the Republicants would not allow the nuclear option to be employed and Democrats would not allow filibusters on judicial nominees, except in extreme cases. The loss for Republicants was that "in extreme cases" meant only Left-leaning judges avoided that classification, hence we ended the Bush years with many federal judgeships being filled by activist judges who do not subscribe to original intent with regards to the Constitution.
     I am not at all sure if Democrats are that smart, or Republicants are just that stupid, but one thing is clear, the "gang of whatever" strategy seems to work for Democrats. Unfortunately, most of what works for Democrats politically is bad for the country and requires a loss of liberty on the part of those of us who still believe it is the best principle around which to organize a society.

The High Cost Of Amnesty

     The rush to pass a comprehensive immigration bill is for Republicants the fulfillment of a hope that they will garner more Hispanic votes in future elections, and for Democrats it is an addition of 8-12 million new voters to their base in one fell swoop. And while Republicant members of the "gang of eight", like Marco Rubio, can characterize the bill as anything but amnesty, in the final analysis, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it most certainly is a duck. And if the foundation of amnesty upon which this bill is built is not bad enough, the cost to taxpayers is even worse.
    The implementation costs alone for the proposed immigration bill went from 100 million to 1 billion dollars between versions of the bill. When questioned about the tenfold increase in implementation costs, Republicant gangers said the first estimate was a mistake. Sadly these same Republicants can not seem to muster the courage or the vision to see that the entire idea of immigration reform being discussed in the context of this bill, is a mistake. As it is with all government programs, the final cost to taxpayers will be solidly north of the estimate to which lawmakers are willing to admit.
     In addition to the implementation costs, taxpayers will be footing the bill for an even greater expense as a result of the amnesty bill. The Heritage Foundation conducted an economic analysis of the bill, and found that over a ten year period the bill will cost U.S. taxpayers 6 trillion dollars. These additional costs will be in the form of taxpayer-funded benefits, of which the newly amnestied immigrants can avail themselves. The six trillion dollars is the deficit between the additional taxes those given amnesty will pay and the real term dollars they will cost the nation as a whole in taxpayer-funded benefits.
     There is no greater sin that those in government can commit than to misuse precious taxpayer dollars that have been entrusted to them, especially when that misuse is a deliberate attempt to increase their political fortunes. This is a concept that we have witnessed for many decades by Democrats, and to such a large scale that it has become commonplace. But with the current amnesty bill, and the Republicants apparent capitulation on it, they have become no better stewards of the peoples money than their Democrat counterparts. The mis-characterization that those who support amnesty proffer at every opportunity when discussing illegal immigration, is that the current system is badly broken and in need of reform. My question is, "How can the case be made that a system of  laws that are not currently being enforced, be considered broken?" It is analogous to someone spending half a year's salary to replace their home's security system when all they really need to do is flip the switch to activate it.

Throw The Dog A Bone, And Hope He Returns With a Steak

     Immigration policy is one of those issues that the Left has spent the last 35 years or longer priming the public pump to actuate the free flow of their bad ideas, in this case granting illegal immigrants legal status. During the Reagan administration, Democrats promised stricter border security in exchange for giving amnesty to the three million people living in this country illegally. Ronald Reagan trusted the Democrats, a mistake for any conservative to make, and after amnesty was awarded, the Democrats ignored their promise of border security. In the ensuing years, Democrats have worked hard to give illegals more taxpayer money and more rights of citizenship, which in turn has given incentive for more lawbreakers to breach our borders. Today some estimates have the number of illegal immigrants as high as twenty million.
     In 2007, during the George W. Bush administration, there was a push by Democrats and Democrat-lites such as John McCain and Lindsey Graham, to once again pursue amnesty for those in this country illegally, although they now called it, "comprehensive immigration reform." The nation's Capital was inundated with so many calls and emails from U.S. citizens, that the re-election conscious politicians on both sides of the aisle dropped their bid to create new Democrat voters through amnesty. But commensurate with Leftist ideology, Democrats are once again trying to ram through the Congress of the United States legislation that is against the will of the governed. This is the tactic used by the Left when their desire for control is counter to the will of the people. They slowly drain the fight out of public dissent by constantly ramming their bad ideas into the wall of common sense. By the way, this is how every authoritarian regime throughout history has imposed tyranny.
     The Lefts struggle is made easier by Republicants who think if they throw a bone, i.e. "path to citizenship" to Democrats, that they will return with the T-bone steak of border security. Democrat senator, Chuck Schumer, said recently that they have the "metrics" for border security, but they basically are keeping them a secret until there is an  agreement on making illegals legal. I honestly can not understand why Republicants like Marco Rubio are members of the so-called "gang of 8", a group made up of four Republicants and four Democrats whose purpose is to give Democrats everything they want and make it look as though it is bi-partisan. I can understand the feckless John McCain allowing himself to be used by the Left as a tool to push through their agenda, but I thought Senator Rubio was more conservative and more savvy than the aforementioned Republicant dinosaur.
     The Republicant establishment thinks if they back amnesty for illegals, that this will somehow help them garner more votes from the Hispanic population. But the Republicant establishment fails to remember history, and history showed that after President Reagan signed the 1986 amnesty bill, the Republicant nominee George H. W. Bush, received fewer Hispanic votes in the next presidential election than Ronald Regan received in 1984. And now, once again, some Republicants want to throw away the baby that is the rule of law with the bath water that is illegal immigration.

The Obama Immigration Plan- Let 'em In, Let 'em Vote

     The Democrats have partially succeeded in winning the immigration debate because of the increasing percentage of the population that are low-information voters. This is the segment of the populace that comprised the majority of those who returned President Obama to office for another four years. And while the Democrats and the Left in this country have painted all immigration, legal and illegal, with the same broad brush, Republicants have been inept at providing a strong counterpoint.
     The Democrats have turned the illegal immigrant problem into the issue of comprehensive immigration reform, which is just a fancy way of saying, "amnesty for the purpose of transforming illegals into Democrat voters." This attempt by Democrats to locate a new vein of voters to mine  doesn't surprise me. What is surprising is how many on the Right have fallen for the subterfuge of "comprehensive immigration reform." Is our current immigration system really broken, beyond the fact that no one seems willing or able to enforce its laws? The Obama administration seems less willing to enforce the immigration laws already on the books than any other administration before. They are so unwilling that when Arizona tried to protect its own borders by enforcing federal laws, the Obama administration along with a compliant Supreme Court, forced them to cease and desist.
     The current salvo fired in the illegal immigration war has come from the Obama White House. The President let details of his "immigration reform" leak in an attempt to paint Republicants as  obstructionists, as he has done successfully in the past. The President's leak makes it clear that enforcement is not part of his plan, no way, no how. This has been the problem with immigration reform going back to Ronald Regan in the 1980s. Democrats promise enforcement later for amnesty now, only the enforcement never comes. Currently, President Obama has dropped all pretense of enforcement and is hellbent on transforming illegal aliens into Democrat voters enmasse. Remember the 800 mile fence that was part of a 2007 immigration deal? Very little of the fence has been constructed a full 6 years later, and it doesn't appear that it will ever be completed.
     President Obama has none the less had some unintended success with regards to illegal immigration. There are many fewer Mexicans wanting to make the illegal trip across the border due to a Mexican Gross Domestic Product that is out pacing that of the United States. President Obama has transformed the economy that once was the envy of the world into one which even our impoverished neighbors to the south don't see as a viable alternative to staying put. If this keeps up, Americans may one day be making the illegal trip across the border to look for work in Mexico.
  

Why Democrats Are Not Interested In Securing The Border

     Yesterday in Las Vegas, Nevada President Obama laid out a general overview for his immigration reform. Why the President had to fly a total of nine hours round trip and spend millions of taxpayer dollars for security while in Vegas, is beyond comprehension. The President spoke about the nation having the resolve to finally fix the immigration problem and put it behind us. Where has the President been for the last 10 years that Republicants have been proposing just that?
     The immigration debate is not really about immigration, but about people who break our laws and breach our unsecured borders. President Obama and his party have turned a simple matter of securing the border into some sort of civil rights issue. I just wonder if the President and the Democrats would be so reluctant to secure the border and so eager to give illegals the precious rights of citizenship if most of them voted Republicant? Therein lies the real motivation for the President's plan of converting illegal aliens into full-fledged citizens, it is so they can elect Democrats to public office.
     The President and his party don't want to secure the border because they see a porous border as an endless source of new voters. They would rather secure political power for themselves than execute their oath to protect this country. In order to understand the Democrats' position on immigration, one only needs to understand the source of the Democrats political existence. Having a growing underclass of people dependent on the Federal government, is the only way in which Democrats can win elections and hold political sway over the country. That's why the President made it clear that he has no interest in securing the border, but only creating a way to transform law-breaking illegals into Democrat-voting citizens.
     If Republicants were politically savvy, they would expose the Democrats' true intentions on border security by proposing something similar to the Limbaugh plan. Radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh proposed that our side agree to the amnesty plan the Democrats are pursuing but with one caveat, the newly formed citizens could not vote for 25 years. The great alacrity with which Democrats would lose interest in a "pathway to citizenship" for illegal aliens would be spellbinding to watch.
     Like every other issue that takes common sense to resolve, border security and dealing with illegal aliens already in this country, is made overly complicated by the politics of Washington. Prior to Democrats figuring out that they could convert illegal aliens into legal voters, our country protected our borders and deported those who broke our laws to take up residence here. But this common sense approach to border security, which almost every other country in the world employs, seems to be beyond the American political system.