On ‘Self-Deportation’ — The WSJ v. Romney
I find illegal immigration to be a vexing problem. Like most problems, it has been exacerbated by federalization. As I’ve previously argued (see, e.g., here), the framers left law-enforcement (including the expulsion of trespassers) to the states; the central government’s role was to set the qualifications for citizenship and protect the states from foreign invasion. If we went back to that, states could make their own immigration enforcement policies. Some would be hostile to non-citizens, some would be embracing, most would be in-between, and it would be much easier to adjust policies based on local employment and social conditions. This would be infinitely better than what we have now — for the states, the immigrants, and our public discourse.
But since both the Left and the Right seem determined to continue under a one-size-fits-all federal regime, self-deportation is the best of the available array of unsavory choices. It is the only realistic policy that stands a chance of gradually and humanely reducing the population of illegal immigrants to a manageable amount, for which we could then reasonably discuss some form of legalization — under circumstances where you would not be opening the floodgates and undermining the rule of law, because the government would have established its seriousness about discouraging illegality and securing the borders.
I understand the Journal‘s contrary view. I think the editors are wrong to promote legalization — I’ll avoid the counterproductive word “amnesty” — prematurely. First, the illegal-immigrant population must be materially reduced and a climate promoting assimilation and lawfulness must be established, and that will take some time. Yet I fully sympathize with the editors’ goal of embracing and welcoming hard-working, self-reliant, and often gifted people into our society. I also have no doubt that this is precisely the goal Mitt Romney and other supporters of “self-deportation” are trying to achieve, in a way that, while being sensitive, is responsible. I get why the Journal editors disagree, but I don’t understand why they always have to be so disagreeable in doing so. They’re too smart not to know that we’re not all nativists and that we don’t want mass-deportation.
Great. Now if we want illegals out we’re Nazis. Maybe we should just ask criminals to report to the nearest precinct after we arrest them.
When the powers that be – even so called centrist papers like the WSJ -start flaying themselves, you know that the pillars of society have gone to hell in a hand basket.
Instead of standing up for law and order, and what it means to be a nation which respects immigrants, but rejects lawbreakers – under the guise of multiculturalism – otherwise rational actors have become unhinged.
It is akin to posting, if you protect your home/business from thieves, then you are the one who needs to ‘reevaluate’ your priorities!
Civil society breaks down when the above differences are bastardized. And it is this self doubt, and its insidious infestation, which the radical left implanted into the body politic. It took decades, but they have succeeded. And this is the result of the election, and why so many intelligent people are behaving like babbling, irrational losers.
The WSJ is inferring, the reason why Romney lost is because he did not tack to the side of the ultimate lawbreaking duo – http://adinakutnicki.com/2012/10/20/what-are-the-chances-of-reining-in-a-lawbreaker-in-chief-who-abets-illegal-aliens-then-punishes-those-who-expose-said-lawbreaking-addendum-to-the-results-of-washingtons-dictator-in-chief-via/
The Editors should hang their heads in shame! They have lost all credibility.
No matter how much our political correctness ignores reality, reality knows us. Reality will assert itself in the end, for better or worse. The question will be whether this reality will be blamed and excused as it has been for the last 50 years, or given a solution.
So Murdoch is still being blackmailed eh?
From Lamecherry.blogspot.com
THEY STOLE IT….THIS MUST STOP…
voter ID…Purple finger….welcome to Obama’s gulag…
Lamecherry…again…
It is amazing in how a few short years that Puffy Lips Rove and Puffy Cheeks Obama have seized upon a new explanation on how elections are rigged as posted by Real Clear Politics.
Yes in 2008, we were told all the Republicans “moved” in America and that is why 10 million votes for John McCain disappeared, but in 2012 election theft the “white folks” simply just did not show up, but for some reason Sean Trende just can not figure out the numbers as he wants to blame Christians, but yet the Southern vote was not off, so it is these saltines who are missing and no one knows who they are, where they are or what they are…….they simply just do not vote.
The answer of course is Scytl, Sequoia and SOE, the Big Three S’s in vote fraud which Tiger Lily pointed out first. The programs are simply running now casino software making it a payout for the masses in the minority, while the “house” which is Obama or Rove always win.
It is amusing this RCP propaganda as it quotes numbers of these “minorities” which vote and they do not make up a great part of the vote. You got blackoids at 13 percent, hispanoids at 10 percent and the other oids of Asian at 5 percent with Caucasoids at 72 %.
It is amazing in these numbers that when it came down to missing white folks, that Obama still “wins” the elections as it is only the right wing white people who do not show up to vote in the missing millions.
I desire you to read this quote which is telling:
We’ll have to wait for this year’s absolute final exit polls to come in to know the exact estimate of the composition this time, but right now it appears to be pegged at about 72 percent white, 13 percent black, 10 percent Latino and 5 percent “other.”
How do the sources of Real Clear Politics know the race of people voting as that does not show up on registrations now does it. This is the clue in this that when Scytl runs it’s pre programmes that the 2012 election was designed to run on suppressed Obama voter numbers, so it immediately started running vote tallies exactly as the model was set up, the same model which stated that this would be a “close” election and other such things like a close Senate.
I make the point that Baby and the Plasmas have a most interesting offspring in Scytl in that it literally on the Obama model wiped 20% of the vote approximately off the Romney voting block so Obama would “win”. We know this absolutely, because in Missouri Todd Akin was doing well in winning that election, but was trounced by Clair McCaskill. I have watched this model working and something started projecting out in this Scytl monster went into North Dakota and flipped enough votes to send another Obama girl there, while Kristi Noem of South Dakota had a far too close of race against some bubblehead candidate
The national elections all evidenced an algorithm which broke hard for Obama liberals. Scott Brown of Massachusetts found this out in being booted out of office.
Al West is the bugger in this snot pile as he had 5000 votes just appear and disappear to boot him out of office. For some odd reason, the codex does not nuance as it should. This is a primitive gaming program by effects in it is just a nuke program that turns on and puts out the same effects and when the Obabots get their marching orders, they put ballots into places they should not be on the Al Franken voter fraud principles.
RCP goes on with this bizarre statement :
Obviously, this surge in the non-white vote is troubling to Republicans, who are increasingly almost as reliant upon the white vote to win as Democrats are on the non-white vote.
What surge, according to their own data, minority voting was down for Obama from 2008. The reality of this Mockingbird propaganda is to condition voters into thinking these stolen elections were valid, because Scytl was valid, but the reality is as this blog has been proven right again, is that across the board major anomalies were taking place A liberal Obama skirt in North Dakota beats a Conservative as the rest of the state goes hard GOP?
That is bogus and it is all that software turning on and off to throw elections based upon the population centers deciding things.
Kristi Noem of South Dakota “surged” in West River where……there were hand ballot counts.
As it stands, the bigger puzzle for figuring out the path of American politics is who these non-voters are, why they stayed home, and whether they might be reactivated in 2016 (by either party).
No it is not, the reality is Obama used corrupt software to steal another election and Mockingbird is conditioning the people to accept it.
Mark Levin is screeching about being the last man standing and this idiotry about next elections. That is all designed to pacify you, criminalize you and the main point is to keep you from revolution.
There is a way out of this and Lame Cherry will provide it. It will require you doing something though that will make things much easier financially for you. Yes Lame Cherry is going to from the poverty patch help you do things legal, not worrying about some frickoid politician or suckoid talking head like Limbaugh to save you and save America.
That is enough now in the Lame Cherry exclusives in matter and anti matter.
Do not fear my children. This is the brier patch and I was born here. I know how to get you out of here and to do it all legal and each of you rugged individuals is going to do this in the quiet of your homes. The patricians are secure and think in their election theft and absolute power they have you in the gulag where you are helpless.
Not the case, but pay attention as this is so simple it will explain the brilliance of God’s Inspiration.
Prepare yourself to accept every free gratuity which is being offered you. Do not be repulsed by this, but start pondering this as a chess move. It will be explained
nuff said.
You’ve been overtaken by events on that one. The illegals already have buses to take them to the polling places.
When you’ve left the bathtub water running and it overflows the very first thing you do – before grabbing for towels and mops and buckets – is to TURN THE WATER OFF. Once you’ve stanched the overflow, then you can deal with the clean-up at your leisure. Through mopping or toweling or evaporation if you like. The water will go away.
Seal the border first. Then go after employers who employ illegals. Fine them. Fine them heavily. To the point of bankrupting them if necessary (kinda like Obama wants to bankrupt the coal industry). And take away benefits from non-citizens. You will then find that much of the problem will self-correct. Maybe through a process of self deportation but if that term is too offensive, call it evaporation for all I care. But the problem is addressed and probably fixed using this method.
Anything is better than the current paralysis and pandering to a demographic that has more loyalty to its own group – flagrantly violating our borders and our laws – than to the concept of being an American. If that pisses them off, then I guess we’ll have to live with them being pissed off.
Oh, and I almost forgot…f**k them if that pisses them off.
Turn off the water. That’s the first step in solving the problem.
Why does no one in D.C. get that?
They do get it. They want the votes. That’s why they sued AZ.
I agree with everything you’ve said – but we have one problem with that – JUDGES.
Each and every time a state has passed laws – laws that citizens have voted overwhelmingly to pass – some group like La Raza files a lawsuit and the law is overturned by these judges.
I agree that going after employers who hire illegals will solve the problem. The only problem that no one will propose the legislation that could make this possible.
The system is corrupt to the core.
During the debate on Simpson-Mazzoli (sp?) the Hispanics and the civil libertarians (and lots of Democrats who wanted to torpedo the enforcement provisions of the bill, complained long and loud that checking for citizenship before employing a worker would lead to discrimination against Hispanics. They succeeded in watering down the documentation requirements enough that they are practically unenforceable. Hence it is probably useless to pursue an employer who has merely gone through the motions to check documents — even if they are forged or falsified. Those legislative efforts by the Democrats facilitated the explosion of illegals in this country that happened, as you would expect, after the last amnesty.
The problem is that we have let the situation go so long that any efforts to stem illegal immigration or to reduce the influx or to reduce the number who are already here will be considered as ‘anti-immigrant’. Given the lack of enforcement in the past, the present and future do not look promising. Too, while an ‘orderly’ management of immigration may be more ideal, to assume that vast numbers of ‘new arrivals’ will not change the American experience is simply navel-gazing naivete.
Unlimited or broadly expanded legal immigration, just as illegal immigration is doing now, will do more than any other policy to drive the final nail into the coffin of the ‘American Experiment.’ Surely, the Founding Fathers did not envision this.
There is not one poll showing Latino voters support more immigration. The myth otherwise is merely a constructed PR battle by the cheap labor lobbies. Blaming “socialists” just makes the speaker look like an idiot. Th Wage Shrinker Journal has also been for wage suppression.
The big problem is so-called “conservatives” who cannot point out the lobbies and their interests because they have been taken over by the Ayn Rand freaks who cannot image a big business not working for the good. Point out the profiteers, win elections, but lose the Paul Ryan types.
The WSJ and the pr groups running this campaign know their amnesties and wage market suppressions can only be done quickly, employing dumb Repubs and liberals desperate to point at someone and say “racist.”
It has long been clear that there is an unholy alliance of business interests and Democrats to prolong and aggravate the illegal problem, each group for its own interests. Never assume that all businesses are conservative or constitutionalists simple because most are our allies in the fight against higher taxes and excessive regulations.
The greatest mystery and disappointment in all this is the stance of the WSJ. Their editorial page is usually a paragon of logic and persuasion in contrast to the other junk I have to read in the Houston Chronicle. But on this subject they are seriously out of character, engaging in ad hominem and pushing the mushiest nonsense as support for their position.
WSJ has always been for mass immigration increases. There are two economic “growth” factors: depressing the wage markets and increasing market size. More mouths, more consumers. Or you can increase market share with those already present, like McDonalds, Wal-Mart, etc. big push to expand EBT and food stamps.
You won’t hear any Republican politicians speak the truth about that because their party has morphed into a Randian cult or otherwise adore the concept of “big business.”
Thank you, Jad, for pointing out to SongDog that the WALL STREET Journal (…you’d think the name would be a hint…) has historically been pro-business, and thus pro-mass immigration (as well as pro-free trade), which is part and parcel of being pro-free enterprise –something you and SongDog obviously are not.
You say (two posts above), “….taken over by the Ayn Rand freaks who cannot imagine a big business not working for the good.” ???? What the heck does that even mean? The good of what or for whom? For whom do you wish Big Business to serve? For those who didn’t work or risk capital to attain those hard-earned profits? What a typical SOCIALIST sentiment!
The Republican Party has for most of its history been pro-business and thus pro-mass immigration. My ancestors came to this country at a time of high immigration (1855 –when your ideological forbears, the “know-nothings”, were railing against all them funny-lookin’ fur’ners pouring into this country). Our country wouldn’t be as wealthy and powerful as it is today without the mass immigration of the 19th century.
If Barry Goldwater (“Mr. Conservative”, as he was known back in ’50s and ’60s) were to come back today, he would want to know what the heck you and SongDog and all the rest of you xenophobic, bible thumpin’, national socialists are doing in the Republican Party. Back in the day, you guys were called “dixiecrats”. You came over as a result of Nixon’s “southern strategy” — an effort to persuade white southerners to vote for him in ’68 and ’72. Now, go back home to the Democrat Party where you came from! You nationalist-socialist freaks are fouling up the place! The Republican message was supposed to be one of individual freedom (including free enterprise, which entails the freedom of trade and immigration). You and your ilk cost us this last election with the stupid rape-abortion comments and the your barely contained loathing of Hispanics.
Slow as I am in my dotage, it did occur that more workers might = lower wages that could benefit businesses. However, I doubt that we would find many illegals working at Boeing or MMM or Oracle –the kinds of businesses the wall street would worry about. Most illegals I’ve encountered work below the radar on construction, mowing the lawn, waiting tables, etc.
Now I’ve been a regular reader of the Journal since, mmm, about 1970. The editorial page, if not the rest of the paper, has gone down the line with conservative movement on low taxes and limited government. For many years, before Fox news and Rush Limbaugh, they were the only conservative media voice with national impact. It’s just hard for me to understand why the would be “open borders” types when that policy would undercut so much of what the otherwise seem to support. Low taxes and limited government is not what results from importing a poorly educated, unskilled labor force that places heavy demands on government social services and votes reliably Democratic.
Honestly, I could be for open borders, if we had certain changes to the game.
1) No illegals collecting any government benefits of any kind. Period. The corollary to this is they pay a different tax, one that doesn’t take out for social security or other government programs, whether federal, state, or local.
2) They identify, and don’t use false identities. That being said, they serve time just like everyone else for any crime they commit, and are then deported to their native country, not allowed to return. Period.
3) Voter ID. Not just legal citizens, but there needs to be a further check on voting. It needs to be tied to how much you paid in taxes, or whether or not you own property. Better yet, when you take government assistance of any kind, you are not allowed to vote.
4) They are only allowed to be here if a business sponsors them. Once the sponsorship drops, they have sixty days to re-employ or self-deport, or risk being jailed.
Under these conditions, anyone should be allowed to visit, unless they’ve proven themselves a threat to us. But no one should be allowed to pay taxes, collect from the government, or vote, unless they are a citizen, with some skin in the game.
The Wall Street Journal wants this country to have no control over its’ borders. It is as conservative as MSNBC. While the paper tries to portray itself as conservative, it is in reality just a mouthpiece for those in the business community whose greed knows no bounds including the destruction of this country.
Yes, in the end the WSJ and MSNBC are composed of “Liberals” who are really moderate conservatives and don’t care about labor exploitation. I raised that issue here: http://clarespark.com/2012/06/21/the-hispanic-vote/.
…it is in reality just a mouthpiece for those in the business community whose greed knows no bounds including the destruction of this country.
It is these ‘businessmen’ that I despise and would unite with the OWS scum – much as I detest them as well – in pulling down.
These are businessmen that want to do it on the cheap. Maximize their profit while passing on the costs – healthcare, retirement, schooling etc – to us, the taxpayer, so that we can pay for those costs.
Well, to be honest I’d rather pay a little extra for those things that would come to me cheaply thru illegal alien labor. Because it would be my choice whether or not to indule myself in those products. Take for example, paying $5 bucks for a head of lettuce as opposed to $2 as a result of cheap, illegal labor. I would consider it a treat…an indulgence when I paid the $5 dollars. But when I pay $2 dollars for it and then you transfer the retirement and health and education costs onto my shoulders, then the State is the one that extracts that cost from me. And I have no choice about it. Because the state ultimately comes with guns to take its share. So thanks, but no thanks. I’d rather pay extra up front rather than support your cheap workers while you rake in the profits.
I have no sympathy for and no mercy for those ‘businessmen’ *spit* who advocate open borders and cheap labor.
Although I am not “on the right”, I am calling for mass deportation.
Joe Rock is right. The WSJ editorial page is filled with worthless rants justifying the destruction of America through unrestricted immigration. To my mind the editors of the WSJ are traitors. Hell, this is the bunch that gave us Bush and they even hired the moron Rove to contribute his wisdom on their editorial pages.
These guys are beyond salvation. The Republican establishment, like the editors of the WSJ, just don’t get it. When you welcome the Third World into your society you get a Third World country. It is as simple as that.
Their willfull blindness about the threats of unrestricted immigration to the well-being of American society has not only contributed to the destruction of the conservative movement in the United States, it is contributing to the destruction of our once great nation.
The less we have to hear from them the better. They would still be championing the benefits of open borders even if the entire nation looked like Detroit.
They’ve always for cheaper labor. The problem is, basically so is the Republican party, or that’s how they seem. When’s the last time a Republican said, “I want to help the American worker…” Ronald Reagan?
the republicans had best figure this out quickly.
almost a million eligible latino voters turn 18 every year.
I believe that using E-Verify on every employee that is hired throughout the country will help to solve the problem since only those that are here legitimately can work. My former company uses it and it helped weed out those that are using fraudulent social security numbers. It’s a simple answer to a huge problem.
“I find illegal immigration to be a vexing problem. Like most problems, it has been exacerbated by federalization. As I’ve previously argued (see, e.g., here), the framers left law-enforcement (including the expulsion of trespassers) to the states; the central government’s role was to set the qualifications for citizenship and protect the states from foreign invasion.”
Must be that old devil, “mr. Unintended Consequences” stepping in.
The fact is that the Feds have no choice in enforcing the borders and determining citizenship, since they got all 14th, 15th and 16th Amendment on us.
The folly of letting California, for example, set its own immigration laws,(I leave the results to the most fervid of imaginations, because the reality would likely be FAR WORSE), would be apparent to anyone who knows a bit of history about the founding of the Republic of Texas.
Anglos infiltrated Mexico, and then declared independence, with the full connivance of Washington DC.
What’s the Spanish for: “Turnabout is fair play?”.
But there it is…the Feds took the job, and now they’ve got it, and I don;t think that it is too unreasonable to expect them to, at the least, not obstruct state enforcement of their same laws.
I would also advocate stripping “Sanctuary Cities” (so called), of ALL Federal funds until they get their minds right and tend to their proper business…resistance to immigration enforcement efforts not being one of them.
Illegal immigration may not be terrorism, but it is economic terrorism in the border states for middle class families struggling to keep up with the tax increases necessary to fund schools, Chip, Emergency Medicaid, housing vouchers. It is economic terrorism for low skilled Americans trying to earn a family supporting wage in border states as well. And every time the next “Immigration reform” aka amnesty starts to appear in news stories there is yet another huge influx of “economic migrants” hoping to get their ticket to a US taxpayer funded better life.
I have lived in Texas for 12 years. When I got here, 27% of the K-12 population was “economically disadvantaged”. Now it is about 65% and growing. Texas has virtually no private schools (less than 3% of Texas children attend private/charter schools), so that is a fairly accurate reflection of the population as a whole and the changes wrought by the failure of two successive administrations afraid to be seen as “nativists”.
” Anglos infiltrated Mexico, and then declared independence, with the full connivance of Washington DC.
What’s the Spanish for: “Turnabout is fair play?”.”
Oh bull.. The ‘Anglos’ were invited in by the government of Mexico to develop the region (something the native Mexican failed to do) and to provide an armed buffer against raids by Apache and Comanche tribes on Mexico proper.
The Anglos were required to pledge loyalty to the Mexican government and convert to Catholicism (the latter was pretty much ignored). The Mexican government was in turmoil much of the time, leaving Texas to run its own affairs.
Later, Santa Anna attempted to abolish Federalism (Texas self rule), the constitution, and replacing state legislatures with near direct rule from Mexico City. In other words, Santa Anna attempted to inflict tyrannical rule on the Anglos. The Anglos in response, revolted.
”
Oh bull.. The ‘Anglos’ were invited in by the government of Mexico to develop the region (something the native Mexican failed to do) and to provide an armed buffer against raids by Apache and Comanche tribes on Mexico proper.”
I’m so sorry that the specific details don’t exactly match up, but I would observe that the American government back in the 1940′s instituted the “Bracero” program, (IIRC), at the instigation of agribusiness for Mexicans to come and help “develop” the agricultural market sector.
How’s dem apples for ya? Close enough for government work, huh?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bracero_Program#History
There is much more to the history of the settlement of Texas and the Southwest than your analogy would suggest — like the Mexican-American War — but I will grant that the mass movement of people across international boundaries will have profound consequences, probably not good for the natives.
One of the few scholarly works to address the Central American immigration issue by an author with impeccable credentials is “Who are We?”, by Sam Huntington, who also wrote the book about the clash of civilizations. “Who are We?” is a demographic study of the United States in which the author concludes that the American Creed by itself is not enough to sustain our country as it is, but rather the western European/American culture is also required. Huntington sees the mass immigration from Central American as too much, too fast and likely to change our culture and therefore the republic in unforeseeable ways.
While he has been justifiable lauded for the Clash book and its insights into our difficulties with the Muslims, little has been said about “Who are We?”. That should be your clue: The left does not like his conclusions.
You can debate history for 5 years , but it is irrelevant because it solves nothing.Don’t forget to subtract land purchased by the US in your debates. Although arguing over land is bizarre ,considering the land mass Mexico controls.
Just so you know- Using the term “anglo” is offensive to many people .It doesn’t represent any ethnicity ,it is an old racial slur.
I give up. There is no stopping the new communist order and the destruction of European Christian civilization.
Arm yourselves and get ready for the collapse.
Well, they got their wish. However, I will sit back and watch as the socialists repeatedly screw everything up, this time with heavy “republican” cooperation (See Boner and his offer of giving hummers to the democrats), and then we’ll be buried in our own mess.
I did my part and voted against these hippie-thugs. I am saddened that there is nowhere to go to get the hell away from a world population that thinks it’s the government’s job to provide housing, food, TV’s, cellphones and birth-control, along with many other things.
The “poor”? Gimme a break. The word has been warped to mean “The oppressed who won’t do for themselves so they have to be given everything to keep their self-esteem”.
Like Rush said today, who’s gonna vote for self-determination and work to rise up and succeed against Santa Claus, when they maintain the attitude that they’re entitled to it all?
“Once the people learn they can vote themselves money, the republic is lost.”
Im jumping on the Cloward Piven strategy, and going to maximize my parasitic activity, by partaking of maximum blood sucking on the tit of state.
Every cloud has a silver lining, in this instance a future business opportunity:
Paling Salons patronized by Anglos who want to avoid being mistaken for Hispanics.
It’s Stockholm Syndrome.
They need to get out more. So does 4/5 of the Beltway/Wall Street crowd.
I feel like I’m reading people who are watching reality from some cheap dish connection on Mars.
The Dirty Little “Secret”: The reason that politician supporters of Open Borders want it is so that they and/or their campaign contributors can have serf labor. They would probably prefer actual out-and-out slaves but that is illegal. Open Borders Democrats, like Obama, also want it so that those who are now illegal can become legal and vote for them, if they aren’t voting for them already.
Does anyone think that any of these Open Borders politicians actually care one wit otherwise for the illegals. Does anyone think that any of the Open Borders politicians are going to invite these Mexican Indios and Mezclados to join their elite/exclusive golf clubs? Come to live in their gated communities, other than as servants? Invite them to their yachts, other than as low paid deck hands and/or servants? Invite them to their cocktail parties? Introduce them to their daughters?
The big majority of the Mexicans who have come here/will come here are Indios and Mezclados, not the Spanish descendant fair-skinned ruling class of Mexico. This is a form of ethnic cleansing by Mexico’s ruling class. So these Open Borders politicians are aiding and abetting and facilitating ethnic cleansing. If the U.N. were not such a joke, they would all be standing trial for trying to reintroduce a form of latter-day-slavery in the United States and for the mass ethnic cleansing of Mexico.
The ruling class in Mexico uses and encourages the lowest classes to emigrate as a social safety valve. Without an open border there would be a revolution in Mexico in less than a year. Last figure I saw was something like 28% of working-age Mexican men are in this country. Any country that would do that to its people does not deserve to exist. It is for the most part a benign ethnic cleansing. The Indios and Mezclados are looked upon as little more than beasts of burden by the purer-blood Spanish ruling class.
My solution is simple, kick all illegals out of this country. Then on their way across the border issue them an AK47 to use when they get back into Mexico. Then close our border shut with dire consequences for those attempting to cross. Also the employers of illegals, life in prison and sieze all their assets, no more, no less.
Also Mexico’s economy would collapse if the drug trade was blocked.
Almost 100% of marijuana ,80% of cocaine and heroin crosses the border.
There are over 1 million known cartel drug dealers in the US.8 million Mexican gang members .
Liberals love to whine about the environment but completely ignore the average border crosser leaves 8 lbs of garbage behind. They ignore the energy and water consumption of 12 million illegals and their trash.
64% of illegals collect government entitlements. They call SNAP cards Mexican Visas.
28% of fatal car accidents are caused by illegal immigrant drivers.
4,000 Americans are murdered each year by illegals.
90,000 sexual assaults are committed annually by illegals.
Illegals have brought diseases extinct in the US back.Whooping cough,antibiotic resistant TB,Leprosy,plague,bedbugs,measles ,hepatitis A – E……
Some may want to work but to expose citizens to crime to benefit Tyson and lettuce farms is stupid.We have millions on welfare capable of working.
We’ve had 7 “amnesties ” since 1983. Where are all the great philosophers ,scientists,businessmen and leaders we are told immigrate ?
>> They’re [the WSJ] too smart not to know that we’re not all nativists and that we don’t want mass-deportation.
Sure, but the WSJ position is much more frequently called blind advocates of “open-borders” and animated purely by vote-pandering This same crowd believed misguidedly that the last Bush administration unjustly persecuted Border Patrol agents who disagreed, when the truth was they were convicted by a jury of their peers over actual abuses (their pardon was wise though since the case had been sensationalized to the point where it wasn’t safe for them to serve their sentences). This crowd that demagogues on immigration includes Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin, each of which I listen to daily and agree with on all other issues. So Andrew, you needn’t be shocked if the WSJ feels the urge to get in a few shots of their own.
The WSJ wants open borders because they are essentially an organ for big business, which wants incredibly cheap labor. Especially illegal – pay them pennies, no health care or taxes, more profit.
Libertarians at least want open borders for principled reasons, but not the WSJ.
Will your reasons for advocating open borders change the result? Libertarians are fun until it comes to elections when they insist on voting for the pure Libertarian candidate and electing the Democrat on the process.
Give Obama and people like him enough time to foul things up and the immigration problem will become an emigration one. Anybody with decent education, ambition, etc will leave for somewhere more friendly to them. It was such a problem in the USSR that they had to put up walls to keep people in. I sincerely hope some upwardly mobile country recognizes the opportunity and creates a suitable environment. After Obama won I was left wondering for a time if it was worth continuing my PhD in engineering. After all, I’ll just refuse to work in a high paying job anyway if we get European level confiscatory tax rates. I am NOT going to work to pay for obamacare and obamaphones, I’d rather just go part time and make enough to live but avoid high taxation. Then it occurred to me that getting the PhD was valuable after all because it will make it easier for me to emigrate to another country if things get bad enough here. High value degrees like engineering PhDs are usually fast-tracked through immigration in a lot of countries. Depending on what happens it may be my best hope.
Look for Obama and the Dems to try and implement policies confiscating the wealth of those who flee the Reich, there’s already been some movement in that direction.
demographics, this election proves there isn’t enough angry white men left in America, that can push their agenda. there will be no race war, like the neo Nazis want.
the republican party needs to change from Angry white guys to Conservative, and include everyone who wants to be a conservative. you just can’t have 3rd generation anchor babies trying to close the door. 71 percent of Hispanics went for Obama, that reminds me of Jesse Jackson’s run for presidency in 84. he would have been the first black president if he wouldn’t have blurted out that it was a black thing only. his rainbow coalition went flat when Hispanics said “whoa I’m being used.” he didn’t get them again in 88. Obama didn’t make that mistake in 12. Obama is so full of symbolism, and that will get you a place under the Bus. all i can say is get your gardens ready and don’t use GM crops
Jackson’s 1988 primary #s were inflated by devious republicans who wanted to have a poor general election opponent or at least cause a schism within the dem party (dukakis may indeed have suffered a black flu in 1988 given he did not win many urban machine states). Dems returned the favor in 2008 by crossing into open primaries to select McCain for similar reasons plus the fear that the woman or the black would lose in November.
Hmm…don’t know about this. The author seems to raise the question of intelligence often enough to suggest his own shortcomings — common enough among those so brittle they always need to appear the smartest guy in the room.
Summarized (fairly) by the home page, he’s saying, rather pompously: “The [WSJ] should be smart enough to know that we’re not all nativists seeking mass-deportation”. Well, you can be confident the WSJ knows that. I’m no great lover of the WSJ — in particular, they deserve a medium-hot pit in hell for the MarketWatch site, a nest of dim liberal staff writers who’ll never make prime time — but the Journal’s approach to immigration is at least grounded in reality, and their tone is usually less ‘disagreeable’ than the author’s .
By contrast, like any good lawyer, if you can’t win on the ground, baffle ‘em with bullshit. Here he is: when a problem is merely illegal, as opposed to a threat to national security, the task of law-enforcement is to manage it in a manner commensurate with its relative seriousness, not attempt to extinguish it. To extinguish it would amount to punishment that does not fit the crime and a prohibitive expenditure of resources better allocated elsewhere.
Oh yeah? Stripped of the special pleading and blah-blah: when you’re outgunned and can’t trust the cavalry, fold your tent. That ‘well-ordered, just society’ of his is often based on the instinct for self-preservation at the expense of everyone else.
The comment at #15 above applies to many a GOP dinosaur and most lawyers. The lawyers especially deserve a deeper pit than the Journal does.
Barack Obama refers to illegal aliens as undocumented workers. He has illegally granted amnesty to millions. There will be no hope for America until this lawless thug is rebuked.
I am a LEGAL immigrant – one really has to love this country dearly to wait patiently for the long – and very costly – administrative process to end – until you finally get your papers. It definitely is not “customer friendly”!! The unfortunate reality: it is so much easier to just cross the border by night and settle down somewhere – mostly unmolested by the “authorities”. Bellyaching about the “illegals” – and not doing anything seriously year after year – is worsening the situation – and will have terrible consequences . Just wait until O. will select two new judges to the Highest Court – and see how that will change the country !!
Something that all consevatives should know, the WSJ is no friend to the consevative cause. The news is just as left-wing as the NYT and has been for years. You had to read every story expecting bias and watching for the writers’ politics to show. The editorial section has become more and more lefty since Murdoch bought the paper and it is now little better than the Times or Post.
I don’t disagree about the news pages but the editorial page has always seemed reliably conservative to me. Not to say I agree with them on everything –they are definitely biased when it comes to Wall Street. But Paul Gigot, Dan Henninger, Kim Strassel –those folks have been there since well before Murdock bought the paper and it is hard to imagine a mass defection.
I do have a longstanding attachment to the editorial page. In the ’70s there was only Robert Bartley and William Buckley on the conservative side of the national media, and they fought a long and lonely battle until Fox News, IBD and Rush Limbaugh came along later — much later. We owe much of what the conservative movement has accomplished over the past three decades or so to Bartley and his staff and to Buckley.
Agree with nearly all that. I’m not sure I’d dump too hard on Murdoch (at least not yet), since it’s early days still and the news bias was well in place before he arrived — you have to read between the lines in nearly every story, just like the NYT.
I don’t encounter Paul Gigot much in the online edition, which is a great pity. Seem to remember he has health issues, though don’t recall any detail.
Once again secure the borders; deport illegal aliens — i.e., those who have entered our country illegally. Consider letting some “immigrants” remain. “Illegal citizens” should be allowed to purchase legality — say, a $10,00 fee for every year the illegal has been in our country.
Criminals should be summarily deported or thrown in a stinky, subpar jail here.
Once again, secure the friggin’ borders.
Also. After an illegal alien buys his or her way into the body politic, he or she may not vote for 25 years.
“Self-deportation” is the right policy.
Conservatives and those who care about law and order should support it, rather than mass deportation.
Conservatives also should have fought back against Bush demonization with the Tax Cuts for the Rich — when the Rich paid a higher proportion of taxes afterwards than before.
When the Democrats (not “leftists” nor “liberals”) control the debate, they are most likely to win. Republicans need to more actively fight the secret-Dem media.
Pew study shows immigration didn’t even register for Hispanics in exit polls…
For Hispanic voters, according to the national exit poll, 60% identified the economy as the most important issue (of four listed) facing the country today, virtually the same as the share (59%) of the general electorate that identified the economy as the nation’s most important issue. On the other three issues asked about, for Hispanic voters, the economy was followed by health care (18%), the federal budget deficit (11%) and foreign policy (6%).
http://www.pewhispanic.org/2012/11/07/latino-voters-in-the-2012-election/
Way too many people are on board for the illegals: Californians wanting cheap domestics, teachers, helping profession and so on.
If they can’t work they go, like feeding or not feeding pigeons. Unfortunately, if that happens a lot of US allies will vanish in a puff of smoke.
My late mother used to say: “Bobby, choose your friends, don’t let your friends choose you”.
As usual I agree with Mr. McCarthy and think this is a great article. I appreciate him saying what is on my mind much better than I ever could. While Mr. McCarthy makes a living writing these articles, I don’t. If it was just the Jounalist editors to convince we don’t want to kill everyone that would be one thing. But it is not. there are just too many willing to believe this nonsense. The progressives do not want to hear reason they are all about character assassination. I only have one life to live and enjoy and I am certainly not going to spend anymore time trying to convince people who have never met me that I am not a racist and want to deport their grandmother or throw her off a cliff as Obama has charged. That’s their business to believe that, not mine, anymore. The country has spoken and they said they want their share now while there is still something to grab. The Hispanic vote went to Obama in 2008 and what did he deliver to them? Nothing. So now the Hispanics have joined with the blacks and single women especially those with kids in depending on the government first and selling their votes for political promises. Just ask the blacks how that has turned out?
I have better things to do. I will apologize to my son for what my generation has done to him and his kids and will try to leave something to pay him back.
American jobs for Americans. Must have e-verify for vote. Nothing is more important than an honest vote. Too divided and Nomo’ making more so. Racism elected NOno’.
One of the problems: Businesses can get into trouble now if they have illegal immigrants working for them. So if they are caught, they have so many months to get the illegals off their payroll. This gives them several months to finagle the system. The illegals can get phony papers. (I’ve overheard an employer, a sub-contractor on a federal job, telling illegals how.) The business can fire the illegals, then subcontract a company that hired them to do the work. (The subcontractor is a different company and thus is a different investigation case.) Or they can fire them for a period and then rehire them when the heat is off. So the business continues to employ illegal aliens but pays no fines for it.
I think instead of giving businesses a break if they hire illegals by giving them time to clean up their employment rolls, they should be fined on the spot both a blanket amount and a per head amount for the illegals in their employ.
Another problem: It isn’t just Democrats who favor the influx of illegal immigrants to bolster their power base. It isn’t just hippy commie types who think they are helping right the world’s injustice and unfairness. It is also big business, whether Democrat or Republican. Lots of cheap labor that has little say about bad conditions, overwork and such is great for them. More work for less pay means bigger profits. Don’t misunderstand and think that I am anti-big business. I am against businesses that exploit this situation. Several construction trades require licenses. Those trades cannot work without them. Both the employee and the company can be fined for the employee working without a license. It would not be very hard to make many trades have such licenses, and make proof of eligibility to work a requirement.
And of course we need to close the borders. Give the Border Patrol and Coast Guard teeth to confront the problem. Other countries are surrounded by no-man’s land, mine fields and such and the “international community” doesn’t seem to care. I don’t think we have to go that far, but something needs to be done to convince people that it is a very bad idea to cross the border at an undesignated place.
The whole chain migration, anchor-baby situation needs to be severely curtailed. Issue the babies free US passports or something.
I’m all for immigration, regardless of race or national background. It needs to be orderly. It needs to bolster our country and be an aid to the people.
Truth of the matter on illegal or legal immigration. Mexico, Central American
immigrants are not really looking for tax paying employment, They can all go on food stamps, ADC, free medical care, and all live better than their former life. They have no intention of becomming “Americans” There is not need.
And, they all vote Democrat. Most live in the major northern cities, which all provide all of the required social services, if they vote.
Obama and the Democrats have New York, Illinois and California in the bag, before on vote is counted.
The WSJ has never adjusted their old immigration thinking to the new illegal immigration and the increased government employment reaquired to provide the social services to the poor and immigrants. What a deal
Insulting conservatives as “nativists” because many oppose Shamnesty isn’t anything new for the WSJ. Their editorialists and oped authors got righteously indignant at that opposition in 2006, but readers didn’t appreciate their tone much back then. The negative blowback was pretty awesome at the time.