And so: the Sunday news show circuit was alive and (not) well with notions of family separation at the border.

On CBS’s Face the Nation, Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, made clear she does not support the Trump administration’s policy of removing children from parents who are coming into the U.S. illegally. Collins labeled the practice “inconsistent” with American values.

She also claimed the approach traumatizes kids and serves as no deterrent:

“What the administration has decided to do is to separate children from their parents to try to send a message that, if you cross the border with children, your children are going to be ripped away from you. That is traumatizing to children, who are innocent victims.”

Earlier this year, Attorney General Jeff Sessions vowed that the Department of Justice would have “zero tolerance” for illegal border crossing, and that anyone attempting such a crime may be split from their kids upon detainment.

White House officials have asserted the maneuver does indeed act as a deterrent. However, members of both parties have criticized it.

Collins also insisted the controversy of family separation should not deflect from the great need to fight illegal immigration:

“That’s not to say we shouldn’t act to try to curb illegal immigration. We should, and I support the President’s proposals for border security. But we know from years of experience that we need to fix our immigration laws and that using children is not the answer.”

The senator favors another vote on a bill her half of Congress rejected in February. That legislation only covers two of the President’s “four pillars” of immigration reform, which are:

  • A Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) fix
  • Beefed up border security
  • Family-based immigration changes
  • The end of the State Department’s Diversity Visa Lottery

Just prior to the February failure, Collins had held high hopes:

“We’re very optimistic about getting an agreement on a bill. Of course, it’s never complete until everyone has a chance to see the language. … [But] I believe our group has come together on an approach.”

She turned out to be:

 

This entire issue is ridiculous, as is the media’s — as well as Susan’s and other politicians on both sides’ — handling of it.

First of all, it is extremely misleading to call the enforcement of a law a “policy.” That sounds as if Trump just came up with an idea and is carrying it out. To think that would be:

If you get a speeding ticket, is that Trump’s “policy” (yes — I understand that is a state issue, not a federal one, but you get the point)?

No.

Without attempting to address every possible scenario here, I’ll just say this: many cases of illegal children being separated from their illegal parents are products of the Flores Settlement Agreement of 1997, courtesy of the Clinton administration. It became law in 2008 (thanks to a Democrat-led Congress) and was re-interpreted by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals during Obama’s second term to apply to accompanied minors.

To say that the process of the Flores particulars being followed is a Trump “policy” is to tell a big fat lie.

“Zero tolerance” is the nature of law enforcement. That’s what a law is.

Secondly, many of the photos related to — and ideas about — this issue which are currently flooding social media are either from times past or in contradiction to the Democrats’ own participation in similarly ugly situations. Take a look at photos from the Elian González story from the Clinton years.

Thirdly, there is an easy way to not be separated from one’s children or detained at all: don’t sneak into the country illegally.

Having said that, it is always a worthy endeavor for the President and Congress to review current laws and the means by which they are carried out. Perhaps they should be changed. But what shouldn’t be happening is the present stupidity:

Step 1 – The media lie about an incident.
Step 2 – Politicians distance themselves from the President so as to extricate themselves from guilt, rather than point out the fact that the media is lying.

Such a paradigm was followed during John McCain’s campaigning for the 2008 presidential election:

G. Gordon Liddy had been a huge supporter of McCain, raising money for the war hero and touting him on his nationally-syndicated radio show. In November of 2007, as McCain appeared on Liddy’s program, the host called the candidate an old friend and the following exchange occurred:

Liddy: I’m proud of you, I’m proud of your family.

McCain: It’s always a pleasure for me to come on your program, Gordon, and congratulations on your continued success and adherence to the principles and philosophies that keep our nation great.

But then: in an attempt to create the McCain equivalent of Obama’s Jeremiah Wright/William Ayres, the Democrats struck with the terrifically idiotic idea that Liddy was, in fact, a Nazi. It was unbelievably imbecilic — Gordon was virulently pro-Israel, making a habit of taking trips to Israel and skydiving with the Israeli army. It was a complete lie.

What was McCain’s response? Was it, perhaps, “You’re a moron if you think G. Gordon Liddy is a Nazi,” etc?

No. It was more of a, “G. Gordon Liddy?? Who’s that? I don’t know that dude!”

Fail.

It’s easier to distance yourself from a lie than to chase it away with the truth.

Politicians are widely thought to be liars, but the media is even worse. In this climate of deception, we need leaders who will stand and tirelessly fight. For as long as it takes for the truth to win. As long as Pinnochio’s nose.

I’m Alex Parker, and that’s my 2 cents.

What’s yours?

Did you enjoy this article? If you did, please check out my other RedState work here.

Did you think this article stunk? If so, please still read more of my stuff for no apparent reason, here.

And please follow Alex Parker on Twitter.