To the paleocons, the current immigration laws are to this debate as “states rights” were to the South in the Civil War. Suggest a change to current immigration law, and you’ll find out how much “respect” for the law they have, not to mention how much “respect” they have for our whole system and our legislators. Not much. It is about the law for them as long as the law helps them. When the law doesn’t favor their political position, their “respect” for stops abruptly.
That assertion is oversimplified and deceptive, at best.
Do I oppose changes to our current immigration law to immediately confer protected (and eventually legal) status on illegal immigrants? Absolutely.
On the other hand, I would have no problem whatsoever with significantly increasing the number of legal immigrants we allow into this country from whatever home country, so long as they follow the rules for applying to enter, pose no security or criminal threat to us, and either speak fluent English up front, or gain English fluency as soon as is practicable. I also don’t have a problem with hiring a bunch of additional people at the State Department to handle the increased applications.
In a nutshell -
Change the rules to allow more people to immigrate? Yes!
Change the rules to allow those here illegally to stay? No!
Very simple, very equitable, not at all racist.
