Archive for ‘illegal aliens’

October 23, 2008

Grrrrr. Palin on illegals

Interviewed by Univision, she says she supports a “path to citizenship” for illegals:

There is no way that in the US we would roundup every illegal immigrant -there are about 12 million of the illegal immigrants- not only economically is that just an impossibility but that’s not a humane way anyway to deal with the issue that we face with illegal immigration.

Gov. Palin, you have been deceived by the pro-amnesty crowd, who love to present this issue as a false dilemma, where we must choose between (a) amnesty for illegals or (b) a massive round-up of millions of illegals. This ignores the alternative favored by most opponents of amnesty, namely the attrition or “self-deportation” approach:

  • Enhance border security, to slow the influx of illegals.
  • Step up “interior enforcement,” especially targeting major employers of illegal labor.
  • Authorize state and local officials to identify and detain illegals (which would result in greatly enhanced interior enforcement).
  • Disqualify illegals for public benefits.

We have seen, as in the example of Prince William County, Va., when local officials act to step up enforcement against illegals, the result is a net outflow of illegals. If similar measures could be enacted on a nationwide basis, many illegals — unable to find employment, housing, etc. — would leave the country (self-deportation) and there would be a corresponding decrease of new illegals arriving, as word-of-mouth spread in the sending countries.

Once a net outflow developed — more illegals self-deporting than arriving annually, so that the illegal population was steadily decreasing — two major benefits would become apparent. First, there would be decreased political pressure for amnesty. Second, voters would no longer feel that their communities were being overrun by an invasion.

If government at all levels could work toward this attrition strategy for a few years, it would alleviate the crisis mentality that has developed over the past 15 years. As long as our borders are so evidently out of control, with hundreds of thousands of new illegals arriving every year, citizens will rightly demand a crackdown, and it will be politically impossible to enact any kind of comprehensive overhaul of the system.

Even those who favor a “path to citizenship” for illegals (which I do not) must understand that voters will not support such a measure so long as the illegal population continues to increase daily. Those who dismiss voter concerns by talking about the impossibility of mass deportations are missing the point entirely.

October 14, 2008

Campaign Pre-Mortem, Part II

VodkaPundit loads up on lasagna, gets philosophical:

Libertarians/Conservatives . . . underestimate liberals/progressives — and what we’re guilty of is projection. But when we’re drunk and honest, we have to admit: We’re effing pikers. To restate more plainly: We don’t want power, and don’t know how to wield it. We’re pikers.
Progressives have no such qualms. Given power, they’ll take more and they’ll exercise it ruthlessly. Look at the Democrats in Congress these last two years. In not even 24 months, they’ve sunk to depths it took the Republican Congress six or more years to sink to. Their unpopularity levels are even worse than the Republicans’ in 2006. And what will happen in November? The Democrats will win seats — because they know how to wield their power to deliver the goods to please their corrupt, greedy, grabby, needy base.

Yes, but don’t you think the failures of the GOP have something to do with the Democrats’ prospects for picking up seats this year? Excuse me while I mount my hobby horse.

Back during the 2006 pre-mortems, I argued that the Republican-led push for amnesty destroyed the enthusiasm of the conservative base. So what happened in 2007? The GOP pushed for amnesty again. And what did they do this year? Nominated Mr. Amnesty himself for president.

I hung out with Vodka during the Denver convention, so I know that the man earns his sobriquet every day. I also know that he is sincere in opposing the Lou Dobbs/Pat Buchanan/Michelle Malkin position on immigration (heckuva a coalition there). But I also know that open borders is a deal-breaker and a buzz-killer for most of the Republican base. You can’t do as much talk radio as I’ve done and believe otherwise. Except for maybe the La Raza people, all the passion on this issue is anti-amnesty. And screw the La Raza people.

Conservatives who oppose amnesty see quite clearly that illegal immigration enhances the power of the progressive/liberal/Democratic bloc. Not only does it give them millions of impoverished, ill-educated warm bodies to mobilize on Election Day, but it also provides them with victims to celebrate, and the liberal/progressive agenda is dependent on the victimhood narrative.

All this glib Emma Lazarus-quoting nonsense about decent, hard-working people just trying to grab their slice of the American Dream overlooks the plain fact that at least 80% of these people are automatically going to vote Democrat, and their children (thanks to public-school education) are going to vote 90% Democrat, and the immediate addition of millions of votes to the Democratic bloc is a far more important political fact than the theoretical possibility that in 2060 perhaps a large percentage of the grandchildren of today’s illegals will be sufficiently affluent to think about voting Republican.

Damn, that was a long sentence. But the point is that Democrats aren’t bashful about pursuing the expansion of their electoral power, while some Republicans — because of an abstract ideological or sentimental attachment to the idea of America as a “nation of immigrants” — keep chasing the “outreach” will-o’-th’-wisp.

I remember in 2006 being told over and over by certain Republicans, “But Bush got 40% of the Hispanic vote in 2004!” Right. And now explain how the continual augmentation of a bloc that votes 60% Democrat is going to create that “Permanent Republican Majority” you keep talking about, Karl.

Advocates of free markets and limited government see anti-amnesty fervor as ideologically inconsistent with their core libertarian principles. Fine. But your core libertarian principles are going to be trampled into smithereens after your pro-amnesty Republican loses this election to a Democrat who’s not going to be picky about whether his Hispanic voters in Florida, Virginia and Colorado are here legally or not.

¡Si se puede! ¡La educación es revolución!

PREVIOUSLY:

October 14, 2008

Video: Van load of illegals

Via Hot Air:

The story behind the video:

PHOENIX — Several people were caught running through a Valley neighborhood after bailing out of rolled van near 27th and Southern avenues.
The Department of Public Safety had been following the van as it drove erratically through Phoenix. The pursuit started in the area of Interstate 10 and 44th Street. DPS initially started following the van in the hope that it would lead them to a drop house.
After getting off the freeway, the driver of the van refused to stop, plowing though barricades and over medians. DPS said the van even tried to ram one of its cruisers.
DPS said it suspended the chase when the van entered a school zone.
The van was eventually involved in a wreck. It ran a stop sign, and then slammed into another car and rolled over. As soon as the van rolled, about two dozen people, suspected illegal immigrants, bailed out and ran through the neighborhood.

I love that “suspected” illegal immigrants. Gee, Sherlock, where’d you get the first clue?

October 7, 2008

Clergy call you a racist

First it was Barney Frank, now it’s the National Council of Churches:

At its September board meeting, the National Council of Churches approved a resolution essentially supporting virtually open borders for the U.S, ascribing support for border control to “fear” and racism.
“We acknowledge the ease with which we as human beings are prone to fear people who we consider ‘other,’ yet our faith challenges us to overcome such natural fear of those who are not like us,” the NCC intoned. It recalled America’s struggle to overcome “racial, ethnic, gender and religious discrimination.” And it expressed distress that America may currently succumb to “fear, xenophobia, and racist impulses directed against new immigrants.”

And, as always, remember: If you deny that you’re a racist, that only proves you’re a racist.

July 22, 2008

Illegals killed her family

Thanks to San Francisco’s policy of “sanctuary” for illegal immigrants, Danielle Bologna’s husband and two sons are dead.

(Via Hot Air.) Slaughtering entire families is apparently one of those “jobs Americans won’t do.” AllahPundit recommends Cinammon Stillwell’s San Francisco Chronicle column as background. Michelle Malkin:

The City of San Francisco wanted to keep criminal illegal alien juveniles like Edwin Ramos in San Francisco–or, at least, somewhere inside the United States. They were willing to frustrate a federal law to do so. And a devastating, preventable triple murder occurred because of their policy.

The problem with tolerating lawbreakers (which is what illegal aliens are) is that it encourages an outlaw attitude that allows thugs like Ramos to flourish. Illegals know damn well that they’re breaking the law, and the fact that they’re getting away with it fosters a contempt for society. Who wouldn’t have contempt for an America that looks the other way while its most basic laws are flouted?