"dialogues" with "comprehensive immigration reformers"

In the spirit of Cinco De Mayo, I just had to repost some real-life "dialogues" I have had with the advocates of the farce and fraud known as "comprehensive immigration reform", a.k.a. Simpson-Mazzoli Redux. It saddens me to see how many "conservative" Republicans just don't get it. Their arguments in italics, my responses in plain type:

"Comprehensive Immigration Reform" advocate: "Well I guess I just do not have a brain then. Or maybe I am just dishonest because I still want to know who is going to pick the lettuce while you are building your wall."

Me: Gee, how about the 11 million or more ALREADY here? I didn't say mass deport them, simply because that isn't possible. (For starters, in the absence of a secure border, they would be back in a week!) Never mind the lack of personnel and facilities and political will with which to do it.
However, what IS possible--and in fact necessary--is to secure the border, FIRST.

THEN, and only then, can we discuss what sort of immigration policy we can have, and contemplate either legalization or deportation of those who will by then be trapped up here, north of the border.

Without secure borders, we cannot choose our immigration policy; Mexico and other nations will choose it for us. And at that point, we lose our country, given the Reconquista Treason element we saw last May Day. It is really as simple as that. Why can you not comprehend this?

"Let me get this straight. You do not want mass roundups you just want them all gone. Like magic."

Another straw man to pitchfork. I NEVER said I wanted them all gone. I said I wanted the inflow to STOP. Then we can calmly discuss legalization of those who have been working and obeying the law here. However, in the absence of border enforcement FIRST, we might as well just give up the nation. Do you really not get this???

"You do not want to consider a bill that allows for more than one thing because it is impossible to build a wall and implement a guest worker program at the same time. The laws of physics dictate this."

That's right. Simpson-Mazzoli proved this. In the absence of enforcement, FIRST, it doesn't matter a whit what kind of program you pass, because it will be violated! It is really as simple as that! Moreover, Victor Davis Hanson has eloquently written about the "helot" problem that guest worker programs create, a problem that the Euros are discovering to their dismay as well.

"So what if the comprehensive program can take pressure off the border?"

You really don't get it, do you? The program The Demunists are pushing, and the RINOs are going along with, will ADD pressure to the border, as it effectively says "olly olly oxen free, come and get it" to those south of the border, and another "bum rush for the border" occurs just as it did in 1986. I will hammer this home until it sinks into your skull: enforcement must come first.

"ten years minimum (moratorium on immigration and wall building period) you say. Why? Because you say so."

Yes, that was a guesstimate on my part. It will probably take that long to get the physical barriers completely finished, the detention centers built, the visa tracking system in place, and the personnel fully hired and trained.

I will be more than happy to be proven wrong.

Once upon a time, Seabees could hack airbases out of the jungles in New Guinea and the Solomon Islands in a matter of weeks, but that was sixty-odd years ago, and that kind of American spirit has been lost, sadly.

"better not to deal with it at all than to compromise one iota, because anyone who does not see things your way is dishonest or stupid."We can compromise on the numbers of former illegals we ultimately let in, a decade or so down the road. We can compromise on the fine they will pay. We can compromise on citizenship vs. resident alien vs. guest worker status. But NO, we cannot compromise on the order in which what has to be done is done. We cannot put the cart before the horse. Do you really not get that???

"Fine, so what are you going to do with these people if not round them up and deport them?"

Until we have enforcement to deal with them, leave them in the shadows where they have been. They have been there for decades already, right? But for heavens sake, don't encourage more of them, which is what the Senate's Demunist-RINO sellout does.

"And what are you going to do about all the folks who come in here illegally but do not cross that border and for whom your wall will be no obstacle?"

That's what the (change to) felony status and building of detention facilities are for....moreover the overwhelming bulk of them are crossing the unguarded border. Furthermore, the Eurotrash who decide they like America and overstay their tourist visas are typically educated and professional and DO NOT become net takers from the welfare and social service systems, unlike the Mexican illegal aliens. And if you think it's "racist" to say that, then you are a dupe. It's "classist" I grant you, but there is nothing wrong with that. Americans should be wanting more professional immigrants, even more professional illegal ones.

"Ten years is a long time to go without any kind of immigration reform to a system so many say is broken."Enforcement first, simple as that. The enforcement process make take ten years to fully implement, but we can begin it right now! Any legalization provisions before enforcement is complete simply means another amnesty, another Simpson-Mazzoli farce, and 30 million or more illegal aliens before we know it.

Instead of keeping on chasing that dead horse (of border enforcement), why not pass some flag laws? Why not pass some laws about English? Why not pass some laws so we can clean up the social programs?

Okay here we have a core concept to the debate. What would be the point of passing yet another set of laws? We have laws appropriate to addressing illegal immigration and employer sanctions as well as any other peripheral issue arising from illegal immigration. The problem isn't with law, it is with enforcement. It would seem to me that all of these extra laws being considered are a method to obfuscate and bureaucratize. In fact it may be more of a cover so that bad policy may be attached to these "urgent" laws in a stealthy attempt to do the very opposite of what the constituency demands.

But lets look at this a bit further. Let's say we reward illegal aliens with amnesty, albeit an amnesty that demands assimilation - including those recent arrivals expediting their trek into the nation because they see Americans demanding law enforcement. Will those assimilation encouragement laws stand a chance of being enforced at a future date when a voting bloc who assuredly opposed similar laws (while they were breaking them to enter this country and get benefits/employment) grows in significance? If legalized will they not just vote for officials who will reverse course once again? Will we not have an even larger and more influential voting bloc which would reward future illegal immigration (like the rest of their family and friends in economically depressed areas and not political refugees) and either ignore current law or reverse it?

This is the natural progression of such a policy. So, are we a nation of laws? Do we need to amend that principle to "we are a nation of enforced laws"? It seems we are at that point here because unenforced law is no longer a law - it is mere filler in the expansive texts that keep lawyers employed. We will have abandoned the singular component that separates us from everyone on the planet.

Some would retort that the singular component that makes us unique is, in fact, our immigration - you know, "nation of immigrants" and all.

And that would be false. Many other countries on the planet are nations of immigrants, so in this regard, we really aren't that unique. It is our regard for law, individual rights and equal justice for its citizens that is our crowning jewel. Sadly, too many would just give it away.

"No! Don't enforce the borders! The all-important Latino vote will hate us!" Bush, Rove, and the Wall Street Journal counsel a strategy of "Hispandering".

It won't work. Republicans can't out-pander the "Party of Pandering"! We offer amnesty for 5 million Mexicans, the Democrats make it TEN, and offer them more Medicaid!

MOST OF THEM ARE ONLY GOING TO HATE US ANYWAY....repeat this until it sinks in.

With the notable exception of Cuban Americans, most Latinos will go Democrat no matter what we do. Here's why:

1. They are net takers of social services, and net takers vote Democrat. It's really as simple as that. They are obviously not bad people, mind you, but they are poorer and hence net takers. Always remember that.

2. The Demunist Commiecrat element of the Democrat Party, which now controls that party, will seduce them with the feel-good but utterly destructive "identity politics" of Multi-culturalism. You know, hate whitey, you owe us, acquit the criminal who happens to be of our color, gimmie gimmie gimmie socialism. Most of the African American population is hopelessly lost to this.

Multi-culturalism should really be called multi-communism, given that it is just communist propaganda in racial terms.

And I say Demunist Commiecrats for a reason. Michael Moore and Howard Dean now run that party. Noam Chomsky is their Godhead.

These were the same people who looked the other way or even cheered it on when the communists took over Southeast Asia and the killing fields emerged. They urged appeasement and surrender in the face of the Soviet threat. They knelt down and bent over to perform political fellatio on the Sandinistas.
Where are they now? Why, they are entrenched in academia, the media and much of the bureaucracy. Their Communist dreams failed, so they have changed their tack, playing the racial tragedies in American history to their advantage.

Note that Cuban Americans, who know better about the communists, are resistant to this. You don't see them wearing Che Guevara T-shirts and taking down or burning American flags. But Mexican American youth, indoctrinated by the 5th column in Academia, went out and rallied on Communist May Day.

"Are you in the camp that thinks Bush is just stupid? He understood that this was a done deal when he ran. This is the next voter block."

Then Bush IS stupid, because the bloc won't vote for us (see above), so stop importing more of it!

"Why do you think all the minority groups tried to get these people on board? What makes me disgusted.....I actually know people that Bush changed their minds about the Republicans. Mexicans that voted Bush(Republican!!). "

While it is true that a good many Latinos are disgusted with the Homo-crat element in the Democrat Party, that won't be enough to overcome the seduction of welfare and of an easy scapegoat to hate, which is what multiculturalism is.

"Why not pass some flag laws? Why not pass some laws about English? Why not pass some laws demanding assimilation?" (similiar to an argument above, repeated by someone else)

I am all for fighting the poison of multiculturalism. But don't you see? The Demunists WANT more of an imported underclass, non English speaking, to create a bigger need for the social(ist) programs and to further their goal of Balkanizing America. Mass immigration and lack of assimilation is their tool!

I used to wonder why people who harped about the need for a "living wage" supported immigration policies that reduced wages! But upon reflection I know why they do it; to import a larger and larger underclass that they can manipulate. Heads they win, tails we lose....don't you see?

"Why not welcome them but insist that they become Americans if they live here."
Because the Demunists will say, "vote for us, and you don't even have to become Americans." And people of all races are seduced by the easy way out, even if it is a dead end.