With yesterday's demise of the bipartisan immigration reform bill, many who call themselves conservatives are rejoicing in what they see as a victory. SWNID does not.
SWNID's conservatism is of the kind that thinks it's pretty cool when people want to work hard at something useful so that they can provide for themselves and their families. We believe that America's immigration "crisis" has stemmed from a long-term inability to face up to the economic reality that this country has work to do and there are people in other countries who desperately want to do it. Sympathetic to those who believe they have been displaced in employment by immigrants, we believe that the general direction of the economy over the last two decades, trending toward low unemployment and rising standards of living, supports the belief that immigration is as good for this country as it ever has been.
Beyond the present laws governing immigration, which have been ignored to the benefit of nearly all parties so far, lies the economic law that where a demand exists and a supply exists, people will find a way to bring them together. Of course, government has a moral responsibility to regulate such transactions when they are harmful to the public or individual good, as in, say, narcotics transactions. But to oversimplify, SWNID doesn't think that a man leaving his home for months at a time to hang drywall north of the border is doing the same thing morally as a drug dealer. An orderly process for managing the flow of workers from abroad that reckons with this reality is all we seek.
For all those who insist that the rule of law, whatever it is, demands that no one who has ever entered the country illegally be granted legal residence, we ask whether they want similar enforcement of the speed limits or whether they would say the same for the Fugitive Slave Act prior to 1863.
Jean Valjean stole a loaf of bread to feed his family. His life was never the same thereafter. Javert spent his life trying to bring ostensible justice to the man who had sought redemption from the past by giving his life in service for others. In the immigration question, which is no fiction, we side with the Valjeans over the Javerts.
9 comments:
Beside the odious misappropriation of a French classic here, I would have to say that this is another proof of why Rush and Sean should take vows of silence (and perhaps fasting and chastity would do some good as well for the former) and SWNID receive their all too influential spots on talk radio.
Forza SWNID!
SWNID's comments here make me miserable.
I think we should grant constitutional rights to inmates at Guantanamo. Afterall we brought them here legally; they didn't swim across the Rio Grande illegally.
Guantanamo inmates should also be forgiven for their mistakes and released into the general population without birth certificates or any other form of identification. They are simply misguided souls that have sought to defend their religion from the imperialism of Western Christianity.
While here supporting their religious family back in the middle east, they should get free healthcare, food stamps, and section 8 housing. They should also not have to pay any taxes, for taxes should be reserved for citizens, not merely those with constitutional rights.
I pity the fool who morally equates workers from Latin America with Islamofascist terrorists.
Careful, SWNID, or a tide of undocumented "anonymous" comment mongers will huff and puff and blow your blog down with false analogies, failed irony and inability to make distinctions!
To begin, I am going to assume that the anonymous poster was probably miserable prior to reading SWNID's comments.
I understand the point that opponents of "amnesty" or whatever one wishes to label it are making. People should not be rewarded for illegal behavior. But, the fact of the matter is that for years, the US's immigration policy has taken into account illegal immigrants when calculating the number of legal immigrants to allow across our borders. While this does not make it legal to "swim across the Rio Grande," it at least testifies to the fact that America winks at such behavior. Creating a situation similar to a commonlaw marriage, or perhaps driving 4mph over the speed limit.
All of this, in addiion to the excellent points made by SWNID, sustains a pretty strong argument.
Caution, SWNID, or a wave of carefully documented autonyms will self-importantly defend your blog with scary adjectives rather than humor or thought.
Jim Shoes,
Nifty is the fool who cannot distinguish parody from equation.
The only equation is in SWNID's comments: citizen traffic violators are equated to those who violate the sovereignty of the United States, evade taxes, and claim the right to expensive and free social services. With those kinds of equivalencies, who needs inequalities? Algebra will certainly get easier.
Using SWNID's reasoning, there is no border or nationhood, only supply and demand. Fences will be scaled. Borders will be crossed. Rules will be broken. The ability to "distinguish" or rather prioritize (in enforcing the rule of law, and sovereignty, etc.) is lacking in SWNID's thought.
Heck, we don't need visas, passports, border patrol, or CDC requirements (TB, etc.). It's a free for all. Supply will simply meet demand. And by golly there's a demand. Get a pony; get a tricycle, get a raft. If you can get here, you're entitled to all the benefits and none of the responsibilities.
I think I might move to Mexico to become a Mexican citizen. Then I'll cross the border and be better off.
I don't think that driving over the speed limit and coming across our borders illegally are even close.
And as far as the jobs go, it's a fact that's it's become harder for our teenagers to find part time jobs because of all the illegals. I went into a burger king the other day and every employee was mexican, and could barely speak english.
And what about the crime rates in the towns and cities along the borders.
In my town, which used to be a very safe town, the crime rate has gone up considerably over the last 8+ years.
We had a women attacked and beaten and she would have been raped if she had not gotten away by a mexican man.
We have an entire area now , that used to be a nice neighborhhod called little mexico, and it's rampent with crime.
So don't tell me that it's Ok for all these people to be coming over here and taking our jobs and homes and free money.
And another thing who do you think is paying for their health care?!!! You and I are with our tax dollars.
I have no problem with someone that goes through the system and makes an honest living, but the fact is they are criminals and should be treated as such.
Final anonymous dude, do you think that crime is committed only or mostly by immigrants? Do you think that illegal immigrants might actually be harder to police because they're here illegally and so are parts of communities that are less likely to cooperate with authorities? Do you think that if we have a more realistic immigration policy that met demand for workers, we'd have a better shot at keeping out the criminals?
Don't insult everyone's intelligence by saying that teenagers are losing jobs to illegals. I've done my share of hiring, and I'll guarantee that teenagers aren't applying at that Burger King. They're too busy doing teenager stuff, like studying. In the summer, they want cool, outdoor jobs, not fast food. The only thing that's put the kabash on teen employment is the minimum wage increase.
Your remarks are only about two degrees removed from overt racism.
Post a Comment