Immigration as the GOP Litmus Test

It does seem to be, now doesn’t it? You can pretty much rely on it that Jeb is going nowhere because he was forthright in his defense of comprehensive immigration reform, while we all know that Trump rocketed into first place in the polls based upon his “deport ’em” statement. And as I go around social media and the conservative websites, it becomes ever more clear to me that the GOP base, at least, has set down this marker: if you aren’t in favor of strict border security and at least some deportation, then you’re going nowhere.

Long time readers know that I’ve been an amnesty shill since 2007 – or even before; but that is as far back as I can remember making any sort of statements on it. But I’ve also been a vigorous proponent of border security – but not so much in service of keeping people out as in recognition that “open borders” works out to “borders controlled by criminal gangs”. And those criminal gangs treat the immigrants just hideously (to the absolute silence of open borders liberals, of course – they don’t want us talking about that aspect of it all). It astonishes me that the GOP isn’t dwelling upon the issue of what the criminal gangs do to illegal immigrants day in and day out – to me, it is the best way of making sure that the people understand that the desire for border security is based upon a desire for justice and mercy, not some manifestation of anti-immigrant feeling. But for all my support for border security, if I were running for office I’d be a RINO – because I’m not into deportation.

I don’t believe, as our establishment does, that being in favor of deportation in some form is political suicide. It does make it more difficult to appeal to Latino voters, of course, but I personally know Latino voters who are ok with the idea of shutting the door a bit and sending back those who cause trouble while in the United States. In spite of strenuous liberal efforts to present Latinos as a monolithic block on this issue, they aren’t. But, still, the GOP does have a problem here – because if we’re yammering on about deportation, then natural-born Latino Citizen A or even Naturalized Latino Citizen B do wonder if it means that Illegal Alien Relative C gets deported, even though he’s a decent chap who works for a living.

I do, though, worry about making immigration a litmus test. Marco Rubio has many of the qualities that any conservative GOPer can get behind. In addition, he is the most “natural” politician we’ve got. On the stump, he is fantastic and in debate he never stumbles. He’s young, ardently patriotic, he’s got a great life story and in spite of attempts by the MSM to gin up controversy, he’s never done anything dishonorable. In contrast to a worn out and corrupt Hillary, Rubio is stellar. But he’s also a RINO – because he did sign on to the misbegotten “Gang of 8” immigration bill. And even though he has now renounced that action and is promising border security if elected, he’s persona non grata for a large swath of GOP voters (as an aside, I’m still a Jindal supporter – but I’m pretty sure his destiny is HHS Secretary in President Rubio or Cruz’ Administration).

This is absurd. I do understand the single-issue thing – I’ve got a couple, myself. I cannot in good conscience ever vote for a candidate who would advance the cause of abortion, for instance. But I can’t see how immigration has become this massive issue which we must have first and foremost. We should, as I said, be border security fanatics – but we should also be talking up things like letting in more Christian refugees from the Middle East; more immigrants from the increasingly Christian (and massively socially conservative) nations of west Africa. We should be, that is, firmly demonstrating that we’re not afraid of immigration, as such – but that we are insistent upon justice and mercy for the immigrants…and that leaving them in the hands of bloody handed human traffickers (as the left de-facto does by refusing border security) is not something any decent person would do.

The more I look over the overall parameters of the 2016 race, the more I see a chance for a stunning Republican victory. A victory which would make Reagan’s 1980 triumph pale in comparison. We can win the White House. We can even possibly increase our numbers in Congress (very difficult in the Senate, but the fact that it is even in the realm of possibility shows the real state of the campaign). We can certainly increase our political power at the State level. But all of this will be put at risk if we’re just seen as running on deporting illegal immigrants. And we can rely upon the MSM to do the Democrat’s dirty work – they will relentlessly tell the people that we’re a bunch of kooks not ready to govern and we’d all better play it safe with Hillary. And LIV will fall for that nonsense – unless we are demonstrably not what is being said about us.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Immigration as the GOP Litmus Test

  1. Amazona November 13, 2015 / 8:03 pm

    I agree that the silence on the Right regarding the brutality of illegal immigration is a sin if not a crime——human trafficking resulting in young girls becoming sex slaves, desperate people being robbed of all they own, people dying in the desert or in cargo containers or box vans, etc. In this case, looking the other way and whistling past the graveyard is not just a metaphor—-it is literally a graveyard for many.

    We are equally silent on the number of non-Latinos crossing our borders, the vast numbers of Korans and prayer rugs found littering the pathways used by illegals after crossing the border.

    We ignore the dangers to Americans represented by uninspected Mexican trucks crossing the border and then disappearing into the American heartland. Not only are there no standards for safety of the vehicles or qualifications of the drivers, the cargoes are not checked. We used to offload Mexican cargo, to have it reloaded on the American side into trucks driven by Americans and subject to American safety standards and driver restrictions—no more.

    I, by the way, am in favor of amnesty, if it is part of a truly comprehensive reform package. That is, “amnesty” in its true meaning, the waiving of a penalty for breaking the law. Not “amnesty” in the way the word is used now, which is to reward lawbreakers by giving them perks and benefits. I think we should grant true amnesty to illegals who participate in registering and subjecting themselves to background checks and regulation, which would be to waive the pittance of a fine that is the only real punishment for being here illegally. This would allow us to own the word “amnesty” without the taint of rewarding lawbreakers. Illegals would still have to register, would still be subject to background checks, could still be deported for various things as the investigations proceeded, could still be deported for violations of the law after registering, and would never be able to become citizens. It would not be a matter of simply pretending they did not break the law and disrespect our country, but it would still be “amnesty” in the truest sense of the word. It would still attach value to the concept of American citizenship, instead of handing it out like Halloween candy to people who have not only done nothing to earn it but who have thumbed their noses at the country in general. It would still respect and honor those who DID value this country and its laws and go through the process of properly gaining citizenship.

    I believe that a 90-day registration period, after when anyone here without proper documentation who has not registered will be automatically found guilty of a felony and deported, and never allowed to return, would result in a lot of “self-deportation”. If we could find the backbone to pass new laws with teeth in them, such a making it a felony to break our immigration laws, I think many who would be afraid to register because their fingerprints are on file for prior arrests, and/or for convictions of prior crimes, would leave the country voluntarily rather than be caught and subjected to trials and possibly punishments for whatever crimes they were accused of committing.

    Following this, as people are picked up for crimes and run through the system, if they are not registered they can be deported—but this would not be mass deportations and would be manageable.

    • M. Noonan November 13, 2015 / 10:44 pm

      I think we can reasonably get some millions of the illegals to go home – border security will first off make it much harder for them to just cross and re-cross. Some of them will just go home and won’t be able to come back. Others can be induced to go home either by risk of trouble here, or because we’ve cracked down on hiring illegals. Yet more can be sent home if we provide an incentive for them to do so.

      The main thing for me is border security – to make certain, as far as is possible, that no one crosses our border without our leave. I can’t say I have all the answers on how to do that – but my marker is, “whatever it takes”. If we have to build a 100 foot high wall over every inch of our border, then that is just what we’ll have to do. I don’t think it would actually require that – but that is the sense I approach this with.

Comments are closed.