01-18-2018 11:02:22 AM -0800
01-09-2018 01:54:15 PM -0800
12-22-2017 09:40:32 AM -0800
06-07-2017 12:17:49 PM -0700
05-09-2017 03:25:43 PM -0700
It looks like you've previously blocked notifications. If you'd like to receive them, please update your browser permissions.
Desktop Notifications are  | 
Get instant alerts on your desktop.
Turn on desktop notifications?
Remind me later.


Calderon vs. McClintock. McClintock wins.

I am still steaming about Felipe Calderón’s presumptuous address to  Congress the other day.  In fact, I am steaming on two burners. One burner is labeled “presumptuous twit.” This covers the fact that a foreign politician should think it appropriate that, having been granted the honor of addressing a joint session of Congress, he should proceed to  criticize Arizona’s new immigration law. When the foreign politician in question is from Mexico, whose own immigration policies are far harsher than ours, then the presumption is overlaid with a repellent cake of hypocrisy.

But the repugnant spectacle of Mexico’s president lecturing us about immigration pales before the even more repugnant spectacle of Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, and most of their Democratic brethren bestowing a standing ovation on Calderón for the favor of his temerity. That show of political correctness has me on a double boil.

The truth is that the Arizona law is practically identical to the federal immigration law that is on the books but is simply not enforced.  The preposterous outcry against it from “liberals” who have threatened to boycott Arizona borders on the surreal.  For what does the law require?  As Andrew Klavan put it with his customary humor, what they’re objecting to is the outrageous effort of “trying to criminalize . . . criminality.” We wouldn’t want that, would we?

How gratifying it was to watch Representative Tom McClintock from California deliver an articulate and condign rebuke to the two-thirds of Congress who applauded — applauded! —  a foreign politician who came to town to criticize them for endeavoring to secure their own borders and enforce their own laws. “The Mexican government has made it very clear for many years ,” McClintock observed, “that it holds American sovereignty in contempt and President Calderon’s behavior as a guest of the Congress confirms and underscores this attitude.”

It is highly inappropriate for the President of Mexico to lecture Americans on American immigration policy, just as it would be for Americans to lecture Mexico on its laws.

It is obvious that President Calderon does not understand the nature of America or the purpose of our immigration law.

Unlike Mexico’s immigration law —  which is brutally exclusionary — the purpose of America’s law is not to keep people out.   It is to assure that as people come to the United States, they do so with the intention of becoming Americans and of raising their children as Americans.

Unlike Mexico, our nation embraces immigration and what makes that possible is assimilation.