The Caravan - The Border With Mexico is Congress' Job

The caravan should arrive at the southern border weeks after the mid-term elections. But that’s hardly a reason to suggest - like Shep Smith did at Fox - that people look in the mirror and shut up. Yes, the issue is being high-lighted by politicians but it’s being done because it’s key to how America sees itself and how the laws apply.

Every country has the right - a natural right - to defend and therefore reasonably control its borders. Try getting into Australia if you're on a ship full of refugees from Afghanistan, for example and see where the Australian authorities end up housing you. Try getting into Canada even, for that matter.

At the same time, however, America has been and has seen itself as a beacon for the dispossessed from around the world. There have been exceptions and hypocrisies to that view, just ask the Jewish refugees on the SS St Louis back in the late spring of 1939. But that view is deeply ingrained in much of America's history and lore. That generosity has always come with a set of rules however, from Ellis island to the current ICE officers. And there has to be some sort of trade-off between the dystopia of open borders that has wreaked havoc in Europe, and especially Germany, over the past years and a sealed citizenship based on blood and shuttered society to outsiders, like in the case of Japan, for example.

Here's Matthew Continetti writing in the Washington Free Beacon on the issue, and specifically on the plan to send about 5,200 soldiers to the border:

Our moral imagination asks us to put ourselves in the shoes of these families, denizens of failed states that offer neither personal nor economic security, lured here by the promise of a better future, and encouraged by cynical politicians and nongovernmental organizations eager to strike a blow against "The Empire" and its president.

But humanitarianism only gets you so far. In this case, our desire to help strangers unintentionally contributed to a mounting crisis that benefits no nation. And to which we have not responded adequately. Yes, calling in the Army is fine. The agencies on the ground need help. What they ultimately require, however, is congressional action.

Congress won't act however because it can't agree on a plan to deal with DACA - the illegals brought in as children and raised in America - or how to build the border wall, or whether to do any of those things, especially if Democrats take back the House.

So, President Trump's promise to institute some form of curtailment of birthright citizenship will meet both legal and political resistance unsurprisingly. But the details of his proposal need to be seen to see if it would have a reasonable chance of surviving the certain onslaught of court cases that will surely follow.

Control of the border is now seen as a patriarchal vestige of authoritarian societies. That shows how far left the radical progressives have dragged the issue. Just check out a young Senator Obama back about 14 or so years ago, or even Schumer if you need the proof. They now see demographics as destiny and Latino voters as a group to be wooed and seduced. That means agreeing to practically open borders based on hoped for demographic shifts in the voting patterns of voters in America.

And that's hardly a way to construct a smart policy on borders. Here's some of Continetti's suggestions from the same article. They're worth considering:

Amend the 2008 law to accelerate repatriations, address Flores in legislation that permits indefinite detention of family units, and tighten the standards for asylum. Provide more money for beds, judges, and bureaucrats to speed up legal proceedings. Announce forcefully and unequivocally that it is the citizens of the United States, acting through their elected representatives, who decide the conditions and criteria under which individuals are allowed to enter this nation.

He's talking about Congress, not the President and his idea of an executive order that likely will not work, although it's admittedly early to make predictions. But, remember, executive orders can be overturned. Continetti is right. This Congress' work, a work they have shunned for electoral reasons. They should get down to work on this and build a better wall.

And then we can talk about who to let in and how and why.

Posted by Keeley at October 31, 2018 3:29 PM
Comments
Comment #433772

“Control of the border is now seen as a patriarchal vestige of authoritarian societies.”

Keeley, I really love this sentence. It is succinct, poignant, and true for many on the Left.

I support legal immigration into our country.

Who does not agree that our government should know who is entering our country?

Who does not agree that our government should know the intentions of those entering our country?

Who does not agree that knowing who is entering and why they are entering is the duty of our government?

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 31, 2018 4:28 PM
Comment #433783

Who doesn’t agree? The democrats and the news media fer starters.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at October 31, 2018 7:41 PM
Comment #433800

I agree, but many Democrats do not.

WHY?

Democrats are trying to turn states blue (like California and other sanctuary states and cities) by despicably pandering to illegal immigrants, calling for open-borders, making promises of another amnesty, while Democrats are despicably pitting U.S. citizens and illegal immigrants against each other for more votes for Democrats (i.e. House representatives (and electoral votes) are determined by population, based on Every-10-Year CENSUS that does not verify citizenship);

Many Democrats, and others on the left want open-borders.

It is hard to understand, until you understand the nefarious reasons.
Democrats have learned how to use massive illegal immigration to acquire power.
Democrats have (despicably) pandered to illegal immigrants for decades, with promises of amnesty, citizenship, food stamps, welfare, education, housing, healthcare.

32% of all persons in federal prison are illegal immigrants
(source: cis.org/Huennekens/32-Federal-Inmates-Are-Aliens ).
The estimated annual net losses due to illegal immigration is about $297 Billion
(source: www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/jan/23/donald-trump/does-immigration-policy-impose-300-billion-annuall/ ).
51% of all immigrants

Hillary Clinton slipped in a paid speech in 2013, said she had a “dream of open borders”.

On 18-JUL-2018, 35 (of 186) Democrats in the House voted “NO” on a bill that simply expressed Congress’ “continued support for all United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers and personnel who carry out the important mission of ICE” and “the efforts of all Federal agencies, State law enforcement, and military personnel who bring law and order to our Nation’s borders.”
Such nonbinding resolutions don’t have the force of law. They’re just a statement.
Only 18 Democrats voted YES for this resolution, and the remaining 133 voted “present” (essentially, “NO”).

Many Democrats and others on the left say that anyone not for open-border (i.e. Republicans) are racist.

Many Democrats are calling for the abolishment of ICE (Immigration, Customs, and Enforcement).

  • Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said: “We must have the moral and political courage to abolish ICE”.
    - source: www.facebook.com/Ocasio2018/videos/we-must-have-the-political-courage-to-abolish-ice/1719147111509299/
  • Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez tweeted: “We must have the moral and political courage to abolish ICE”:
    - source: www.msn.com/en-us/video/mma/ocasio-cortez-wants-to-abolish-ice/vp-AAzeMXG
  • Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez lies about I.C.E.:
    - source: www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/jul/06/alexandria-ocasio-cortez/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-misrepresents-ices-detent/
  • more Democrats also calling for abolishment of I.C.E.:
    - source: www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/6/29/17518176/democrats-to-abolish-ice-movement-gillibrand-de-blasio-ocasio-cortez
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez makes no sense whatsoever, and is actually contradicting herself.
It is not possible to do both:
  • (a)abolish I.C.E. (or any form of Immigration and Customs Enforcement),
  • and (b)also enforce immigration laws
So, that should help explain WHY Democrats want open borders, sancturary cities, sanctuary states, and massive illegal and legal immigration (for votes).

So, the Democrats message is essentially:

  • [01]Open Borders; more illegal immigration; it is not surprising that California and other states flipped from red to blue after those states adopted open-borders and sanctuary city and state policies; source: www.nationalreview.com/2015/07/sanctuary-magnet-illegal-aliens/ ; want to abolish I.C.E. (Immigration, Customs, and Enforcement);
  • [02]another shamnesty like the one in 1989 (which quadrupled the number of illegal immigrants in the U.S.); Democrats are the party of Open Borders;
  • [03]more sanctuary cities and states (despite $297 Billion in net annaul losses due to illegal immigration);
  • [04]more state attorney generals, like Xavier Baccera (California), who threatens to prosecute anyone who assists ICE;
  • [05]more mayors like Libby Schaaf (Oakland, CA), who warns illegal immigrants before an ICE raid to arrest criminal illegal immigrants.;
  • [06]more (despicable) pandering to illegal immigrants for votes and more representation in Congress; despicably pitting U.S. citizens and illegal immigrants against each other for votes, and attempting to turn red states to blue states, via massive and uncontrolled illegal immigration;
  • [07]higher taxes; source: www.nationalreview.com/2015/07/sanctuary-magnet-illegal-aliens/
  • [08]a nanny-state with citizens increasingly dependent on the government;
  • [09]more massive cradle-to-grave government programs (which are usually severely mismanaged) that nurture a sense of entitlement and dependency on government;
  • [10]to disguise their lust for power for THEIR party (via distortion of electoral votes based on population) as compassion for illegal immigrants;
  • [11]reward failure and laziness; to disguise their envy and jealousy as demands for equality; and perpetuate the myth that we can somehow all live at the expense of everyone else; Democrats want more government and control, which is already beyond nightmare proportions; socialism, in general;
  • [12]to embrace “Guilty until proven innocent”; the end of the rule-of-law;
  • [13]to incite and encourage forcible and violent suppression of opposition (an element of fascism);
    Source: http://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2018/07/05/rap-sheet-acts-of-media-approved-violence-and-harassment-against-trump-supporters/
  • [14]to abolish the 2nd amendment;

Posted by: d.a.n at November 1, 2018 8:13 AM
Comment #433809

It really shouldn’t matter who comes into this country as long as they obey the laws and are productive. What we really need is a verified way of determining whether a person is a citizen of the U.S. or not.

How would that be possible? Aliens can apply for a SS number, driver’s license or ID, but that doesn’t verfiy they are a citizen of the US.

What would it take to implement a program that would establish a “Citizen’s ID”? It would be nearly impossible considering the resistance to mandatory ID’s for voting.

One thing I think is mandatory is that it starts with the local level where it would be easier to establish a history of the citizen applying. When a person applies for an ID a birth certificate is one of the determining documents needed to receive the ID. We could start with hospitals going through their births and sending Citizen’s ID out to those born in that hospital. Those naturalized should receive the Citizen’s ID when they receive their citizenship. Those who are in the country legally or illegally would not receive anything. Why would they?

One thing is certain. You can’t walk down the street and tell if a person passing you is a citizen or not. If they are asked for ID it does not stipulate if they are a citizen or not. Citizenship in this country is largely determined whether a person admits to being a citizen. An illegal would be very wary of claiming they are illegal and could very easily say they are citizens. Who could dispute their word in today’s environment? Who could do anything about it if they did admit to being illegal?

https://www.uscis.gov/us-citizenship/proof-us-citizenship-and-identification-when-applying-a-job

We do not issue any kind of citizenship document to a person who is a citizen by birth in the United States.

Perhaps this is a problem. What’s wrong with the federal government giving every citizen born in this country a little birthday present in the form of a Citizen’s ID?

Posted by: Weary Willie at November 1, 2018 1:41 PM
Comment #433810
You may be a U.S. citizen if one or both of your parents became a naturalized U.S. citizen before your 18th birthday

https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/eoir/legacy/2013/01/22/Determining%20US%20Citizenship%20-%20English%20(15).pdf

Dreamers have no one to blame but their parents.

Posted by: Weary Willie at November 1, 2018 1:59 PM
Comment #433819

Let’s revisit Collective Bargaining and Pension Reform in Wisconsin

“Wisconsin showed that a state could balance their budgets and reform public employee pensions and benefits without tax hikes, layoffs, or cuts in services. And as this new report shows, undertaking these reforms had the added benefit of reforming public education and reprioritizing students.”

https://www.realclearpolicy.com/articles/2018/10/31/collective_bargaining_and_pension_reform_in_wisconsin_110885.html

Once again conservative policies benefit all.

Posted by: Royal Flush at November 1, 2018 6:12 PM
Comment #433886
Weary Willie wrote: Perhaps this is a problem. What’s wrong with the federal government giving every citizen born in this country a little birthday present in the form of a Citizen’s ID?
Good idea.

eVerify, and/or some similar forms of verification of eligibility to work in the U.S., receive benefits (i.e. welfare, Social Security, Medicare, healthcare, etc.) is as (if not more) important than border security, because the magnets are the root cause of illegal immigration. Large numbers of illegal immigrants receive welfare, food stamps, free housing, free healthcare, free medicaid, drive without drivers’ licenses or auto insurance, free education, etc.)

As for resistance to IDs, an ID is already needed for the following:

  • board a flight;
  • buy liquor; buy cigarettes;
  • open a bank account; make large purchases; write a check; withdrawn money from a bank; rent a house;
  • apply for Social Security; apply for Medicare;
  • drive cars; CDLs for driving commercial vehicles;
  • get a passport;
  • vote (only in some states);
Why don’t Democraps don’t complain about those forms of ID ?

Posted by: d.a.n at November 3, 2018 10:18 AM
Comment #434018

Mexican government is accused of “terrorism” too.

People without Borders is supporting the caravan, accused Mexican immigration agents of harassing migrants in an effort to stop the group’s advance. He urged them to travel closely together.

“They are terrorizing us,” he said.

https://www.westernjournal.com/migrant-caravan-members-reject-offer-stay-mexico/?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=mixi&utm_campaign=westernjournal

Good read. Glad to read that Mexico is helping keep this mob from reaching our borders.

Posted by: Royal Flush at November 6, 2018 5:31 PM
Comment #434113

Sample Assignment offers an all year long, assignment help Australia (also known as academic assistance) or consultation to any student going to the Australian university may need. The subject does not matter since they possess a huge mix of subjects including the likes of Economics, Engineering, Law, IT, Statistics, Management, Marketing, and 400-500 more in their Assignment Help Australia Packages.

Posted by: Sample Assignment at November 9, 2018 2:33 AM
Post a comment