« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Stuck on Stupid

What part of "We don't trust you" is so hard to understand?

Attention Mike Bloomberg, Rupert Murdoch, CEO’s of Disney, Marriott, and Boeing, and US Senators including McCain, Kyl, McConnell, Brown, and Graham:

COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM IS A NON-STARTER.

We, the great unwashed, may be dumb ourselves, but we aren’t “Stuck on Stupid.”  We observe.  We experience.  We learn.  We know that any bill that passes the President’s desk that includes elements of what you call “comprehensive reform” will be a bill light on border security and heavy on compassion and amnesty.  So don’t waste your time and money pushing one; you’ll find that you’re up against an implacable group of united citizens.

If you really want a plan to be passed that addresses the unknown millions of illegal gate-crashers in our midst, then you have a very simple chore–PASS AND IMPLEMENT A CREDIBLE BORDER SECURITY LAW FIRST.  One that ONLY addresses the problem of keeping gate-crashers out and that does NOT mention anything about the millions of gate-crashers who are alreadY attending the party.  One that includes physical fences, big ones that are better than the idiotic ones we see in the news clips, the ones with the illegals climbing and crossing them easily.  Regarding those fences, where is the concertina wire, the barbed wire, the hot wire at the top?  Gimme a break.

In fact, a new law may not be necessary.  Funding of the 2007 Border Fence law, including installation of a credible fence (see above), along with upgraded Border Patrol equipment and manpower might do the job.

Supplement that with high-tech methods where necessary and appropriate, but if a fence can be built anyplace on the border, BUILD IT.

Don’t just pass it and fund it, PUT THE FENCE IN PLACE AND ENFORCE THE IMMIGRATION LAWS.  Then watch it work for about five years.

That’s all there is to it.  Do all that, and you will have majority support for almost anything you want to do with the illegals living here.  They can become Disney park workers, or FoxNewsCorp. executives; nobody will care, because WE WILL KNOW THEY WON’T BE FOLLOWED BY ANOTHER WAVE IN A FEW YEARS.  Do less than that and you’ll get no help with your dreams of cheap labor and captive voters from us.

If you MUST do “something” during that five year period, separately enact a law changing the “Stuck on Stupid” rule that says US-born babies of illegal gate-crashers automatically become US citizens.  Canada (I’m told) is the only other country in the world that has such a rule, and our rule is based on a possible misinterpretation of the 14th Amendment.  If not a law, then pass an Amendment.  It makes no sense as it’s applied today, and the privilege of “free” citizenship is a strong motivation to illegal gate-crashers.

If you try to tell us in legislation that the border will be secured while the status of illegals is being adjusted, we aren’t going to buy it.  Again, WE AREN’T GOING TO BUY IT.  Because we aren’t “Stuck on Stupid.”  You are, however, if you try to run that pig by us again.  The secure border must be proven to us first, then we’ll talk again.

ps.  President Obama:  If you think some of us are upset with you now, we are calm compared to what will happen if you try to “legalize” illegals by executive order.  Can you imagine approval ratings under twenty percent?  Under ten percent?  Remember, 80% were against the failed comprehensive plan of 2007, and it was being put forward according to Constitutional protocols.  Who knows how many more would turn against you if you try to sneak it past us as a fait accompli?

pps.  As you may have guessed, the capital letters indicate ideas that are very important, but also very simple.  If you still don’t understand that we don’t trust you, READ IT AGAIN.

COMMENTS

  • Flagstaff

    or unbelievably wrong.

  • http://www.facebook.com/?ref=home#!/profile.php?id=1528745084 Gary Bentley

    I totally agree. The only thing I would like to see along with the fence first, is outlaw sending money back to Mexico. That will put the pinch on those still here and perhaps they will cross back as the fence is built.

  • romatrast

    But the passage of the universal health care bill made it clear that Obama and his crew don’t give a damn about the opinion of the majority of us voters. All they care about is reducing our country to its “rightful place” as a third-rate welfare state or worse.

    Let’s crush ‘em in November then impeach.

    • Flagstaff

      who has been there.

      It doesn’t really matter much what Obama is, only what he does. And what he’s doing is removing the US from its position as leader of the free world. The biggest reason it’s not going well for him is that his methods are hurting the rest of the world faster than it hurts us.

      Lovely riots in Canada today, eh?

  • Vegas_Rick

    Nice job Flagstaff.

    • Flagstaff

      I don’t claim that Vassar’s article is a bad idea. I do say that a secure border first is a prerequisite that can’t be combined with anything else. All else must be separate and after the fence is working, except for anything that reduces the attractiveness of the US for those who simply feel they just can’t wait. That can be simultaneous, but still must be separate.

      • edintexas

        Personally I doubt that we could ever truly secure the border without first addressing the lure which brings the hordes – employment. Either before, or concurrent with, efforts to secure the border we need to enact a strong system of verification for workers. It should be easy for any employer (even of a domestic) to use. It should be constantly updated to assure that identity theft doesn’t make it immaterial. And it should be accompanied by strong “incentives” for employers to use it (e.g. a fine of $1,000.00 for each worker found to be ineligible – for a first offense, 10x that for a second offense and jail time added to fines for any subsequent offense). No need to round up illegals and deport them, they’ll “self deport” with no job. No need to make money transfers (now so openly advertised) illegal, there will be far less money to transfer. But we’ll have to be prepared for the Mexican government to fail (well, fail more spectacularly than it already is failing) without the billions USD currently propping the country up.

        • Flagstaff

          “I doubt that we could ever truly secure the border” is a red herring the left likes to drag across our path to take our eyes off the ball of border security of any kind. We can’t do it if we don’t try, and once the left gets their ‘comprehensive plan’ they will NOT support better border control. We all know that, but we tend to forget it in our optimism. Witness the order to stop building the fence.

          NO system can guarantee that every single gate-crasher will be caught. A well-designed border barrier can insure that MOST of them will be caught, even with the attractions still extant. As callawyn so rightly points out, current law, IF ENFORCED, is the right start, with the addition of the already authorized fence to help. The number can be reduced to manageable size.

          The reason the problem is so big right now is that the number of current and future gate-crashers is so huge, and that many of them have been living here so long. I agree with the idea of ‘self-deportation by attrition.’ I wouldn’t have any objection to simply ignoring the presence of those who don’t commit any felonies. They and their children should NOT receive citizenship, however. How they will be able to earn a living wage is an open question, which might be a reason for some limited amnesty process (which itself might include legal residency permits but must prohibit naturalized citizenship for those who crossed the border illegally {not necessarily their minor children at the time of crossing}), all AFTER THE FLOOD OF NEW GATE-CRASHERS IS STOPPED. This means that what the left calls ‘comprehensive immigration reform’ cannot be part of, or even concurrent with, any new border enforcement law.

          Somebody else needs to help me out–aren’t there already significant federal penalties to employers caught knowingly using illegal workers? I know there are in Arizona.

  • callawyn

    There’s zero chance the Obama administration will enforce any of our immigration laws.

    We need to be sure the next R for president is committed to ENFORCEMENT of immigration law. That alone will make a huge difference. IMO existing federal law is sufficient to pursue a policy of ‘attrition through enforcement’, meaning most illegals will leave the country if there’s a serious effort at enforcing existing law.

    The beauty of it is you don’t need to get anything through Congress, just need a President with the cojones to actually enforce existing law. The problem is getting such a person to actually be our next nominee…

    • Flagstaff

      IMO existing federal law is sufficient to pursue a policy of ?attrition through enforcement’….

      The beauty of it is you don?t need to get anything through Congress, just need a President with the cojones to actually enforce existing law. The problem is getting such a person to actually be our next nominee?

      I agree completely, but the words didn’t go into my diary as it went from mind to keyboard. I should have included that very point. In fact, I’m embarrassed I didn’t. Thanks for improving the message.

      No new laws are needed, only enforcement. I assume the laws are still on the books to build an effective fence. Once enforcement is shown to be working, the other efforts can start.

      The fact that current laws are not being enforced now is proof that our current Congress and President cannot be trusted to create ‘comprehensive immigration reform’ satisfactory to the majority of Americans. In fact, IMHO the majority of us don’t see a need for reform, only better enforcement. Then perhaps new legislation to deal with the existing gate-crashers could be considered, if necessary.

  • callawyn

    Amendment XIV
    Section 1.
    All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

    The first sentence is pretty clear. At the time it was passed it probably made sense, but not anymore. We really need to amend this amendment. Probably the vast majority of Americans would support doing so, but only a small minority of our legislators would be willing to support the change.

    • Flagstaff

      “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,”

      could be changed to

      “All persons born of a citizen of the United States, or of a legal resident of the United States while in the United States, or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,”

      or something like that.

      And now we have a stand-up comedian (Al Franken) questioning a prospective Supreme Court Justice. That should be funny, but it isn’t.

  • Joe_Schmo

    I agree with your assesment. It’s as if we hired the same illegals we’re trying to fence out to build it. I’ve never seen fences that work like ladders on both sides, like these do.

    • Flagstaff

      They are working in the Yuma sector and in California. That’s partly why so many are coming through the Tucson sector in Arizona.

      A fence won’t STOP all, but it will stop most and slow them all down.

      • Joe_Schmo

        And, I’m glad to hear that fences people can’t climb over are being built. I was pretty disgusted with the whole deal when watching a news reporter climb up and stand atop a “fence” while doing a news report on our border security issues.

        • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

          Napolitano this week justified not building a fence because ” we will never stop all illegal border crossings.” O f course we all know that.

          We also know that the presence of a fence would substantially reduce the number as compared to those that could get in thru subterfuge over or under a fence.

          So that, when our side makes a huge point of a fence being only a part of the solution, we play into their hands.

          Lets get specific about “the problem” and “the solution”. There are PROBLEMS, not one problem.. The fence IS the 99% answer to the problem of illegal entry and that issue is THE MAIN issue before we could ever begin to deal with all the social and legal issues involving dealing with the illegal already here.

          We can’t deal effectively with those here while still vulnerable to millions more illegal entry.

          So that the fact that we can’t create heavan on earth with only a fence is not worth uttering. A fence solves lots of problems by itself.

          • Flagstaff

            There are PROBLEMS, not one problem.. The fence IS the 99% answer to the problem of illegal entry and that issue is THE MAIN issue before we could ever begin to deal with all the social and legal issues involving dealing with the illegal already here.

            John Stoessel, of all people, trotted out that “it won’t stop illegal immigration” red herring on O’Reilly tonight. O’Reilly effectively countered him.

            But because this is a set of related problems, discussing solutions to each of them can be complicated, especially if we don’t keep stressing that there are “PROBLEMS, not one problem.” MOST of the solution for the illegal entry problem is an effective physical barrier to entry. In fact, that’s the primary part of the solution that is missing, and it’s the part that the government refuses to provide. Its also the most cost effective part, because once it’s erected, it only needs to be observed and maintained. It doesn’t need a salary or employee benefits.

            And as you say, this problem HAS to be addressed before some of the related problems. “We can?t deal effectively with those here while still vulnerable to millions more illegal entry.”

            It strikes me that these problems are very similar to the Deepwater Horizon disaster, but they require reverse attacks. While the gusher in the Gulf should be stopped ASAP they don’t know how to do that yet, so while they figure that out we should simultaneously be directing ALL our other efforts at containing the oil already in the water, because it’s easier and we know how to do it.

            The set of problems called “illegal immigration” is the reverse. We KNOW how to stop the flow, but we don’t really know what we want to do about the illegals already in the country. That tells me address the border first, then the illegals.

            I’m presently listening to AZ AG Terry Goddard spout nonsense about why we can’t secure the border, but if we eliminate the coyotes it will stop the flow. As if there were only a few of them. A**hole.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            we can’t solve all problems and only partially solve some. But with respect to illegal entry, cost and benefits of a fence would be a huge net positive even if we never “solve” the other human problems that have been here since Eve bit the apple.

            But you stated my thoughts better that I as usual, and for that I appreciate you immensely.

          • Joe_Schmo

            You’re right, there several problems and a fence will definitely solve some.

            I’ll try and think of it as a water leak and how much damage your house gets compared to the size of the leak.

            Thanks to you and Flagstaff.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
          • Joe_Schmo
      • Joe_Schmo

        And, I’m glad to hear that fences people can’t climb over are being built. I was pretty disgusted with the whole deal when watching a news reporter climb up and stand atop a “fence” while doing a news report on our border security issues.

  • Joe_Schmo

    I agree with your assesment. It’s as if we hired the same illegals we’re trying to fence out to build it. I’ve never seen fences that work like ladders on both sides, like these do.

    • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine