Immigration, Libertarian Food Fight Distraction
by Larry Perrault on February 1, 2010 at 10:52 AM
Lauro Garza reopened the discussion over the stark anti-immigration language in the GOP, which also opened some discussion about l(L?)ibertarianism. What is most notable about these discussions is the resemblance the comments bear to liberal Bloggers on the web, with all of the scorning and name-calling. Instead of, “hateful racist, homophobic, selfish corporate tools,” an article like Lauro’s draws taunts of, open borders advocacy, liberal appeasement, anti-constitutionalism, and the dreaded…(I waited for it and sure enough it came)…RINO! I have to wonder whether, like many of the liberal dive-bombers, some of these people search on or are subsribed to Google-Alerts of certain key words so that the cyber-jets are scrambled when the word is published and the verbal assault can begin.
Recently, Norman Adams posted a reasonable plan here, (A Plea To The GOP) for a productive conservative approach to the immigration issue, particularly in light of the large and growing Hispanic population in the US and the need for Republicans to appeal to their generally conservative disposition. And, Norman very specifically noted and explained that he was not calling for any kind of amnesty or neglect of the law. But, he mentioned the word, “immigration” in a context other than emphasizing mass arrests and deportations and foreboding border fences or walls, and the same dive-bombing began. Whether from these immigration hawks or from liberal Blog trolls, it reminds me of this: Blogging Dregs.
THE most important thing that gets lost in this sort of discussion is this: The big threat isn’t among Republicans or conservatives. And, the big threat isn’t from immigration. The BIG threat that has been eating America’s lunch for a year is from American LIBERALISM! We can argue both (or probaly more) sides of these immigration and libertarian questions, but it’s a ridiculous diversion. We shouldn’t get carried away with a fight over the activities schedule when there’s a gigantic hole in the ship’s hull! All hands on deck! We have a population to save! That threat is real! So while I discuss THIS issue, remember to keep your eye on the ball. Time to grow up.
Listen, I’ve been called a RINO here, too, which I can only find amusing. I’m a constitutional hawk. Except for enforcing our laws, immigration hasn’t to do with The Constitution. And, no one here is advocating neglect of the law. Because it is neglected however, people cross the border for opportunities to earn money. It’s a little like speeding down a road where the speed limit isn’t enforced to get to an important appointment. I opposed the bill a few years back that Bush, McCain, and others supported. The bill called for border enforcement. But, it didn’t make it prior to the other provisions. After it failed, McCain said, “I get it. The American people didn’t believe us.” He was right. I didn’t. The bill said in essence, “The law hasn’t been enforced up to now, but after we pass all of this other stuff, it will be.” Pretty ridiculous. I want the law enforced, and so do most Hispanics. But, once cleared as law-abiding productive workers, I want as many Hispanic immigrants as possible, as fast as we can get them. And, I want conservatives to stop fuming and make certain they are not Democrats!
There has been much talk of Ron Paul both from Lauro and a vigilant cyber-force of supporters. Ron Paul makes so much sense on monetary and fiscal matters, sometimes it seems like other legislators don’t even understand him. Also, Ron Paul is a pro-life Dr. who has delivered thousands of babies. I’m certain that ex-Air Force man would defend America when under assault. And, I undestand that we should as Eisenhower said, “be wary of the military-industrial complex, which afet all can become just another expansive government bureaucracy." But, when he talks as though America can shun both security and moral engagement with the contemporary world, I don’t know what he’s talking about. In a world with high-speed travel and mass-destructive technology, we have moral and security challenges to mind. Isolationism is an unsafe and amoral fantasy. The founders who warned against “foreign entaglements,” never saw a jet or a nuclear bomb. Jefferson engaged pirates on the Barbary Coast of Africa to protect trade. I think he would act to defend us from assailants who can circle the globe in a day, or defend people from toture or genocide that Americans can monitor on televisions and computers at or near real-time.
But, the first thing we must worry about is liberty from social engineers in our own country; not just in defense but in coping with severe damage already done.