« The Problem With Reason | Main | Weekend Caption Contest™ Winners »

Giving The Boston Globe A Wedgie

The Boston Globe, that ever-reliable source of political correctness, has an editorial touting a possible "wedge issue" that could be used to split the Republican votes -- immigration.

The editorial goes on to discuss how the various candidates have handled various questions and issues, showing how there's a fairly solid split in both parties.

Of course, this is the Boston Globe, so you have to remember: they have a vested interest in conflating "immigrants" and "illegal aliens." So they freely switch between the two groups throughout the editorial.

This disguises the rather awkward fact that, for the most part, the candidates all have similar positions on legal immigrants: they love them. They welcome them. They celebrate them.

I do, too, and probably for similar reasons. I am immensely proud of my American citizenship, but I've had that since birth. There is no way I can appreciate that blessing the same way as someone who had to work to achieve it.

The issue is not "immigration," or even "immigrants." It's ILLEGAL aliens -- or, if you prefer the politically correct term, "undocumented immigrants."

If you keep that in mind, then the Globe's story is fairly accurate. There are strong interests on both sides that come down on opposite sides of the illegal alien issue. And there arguments on both sides, as well.

I come down on the side of the unions and the social conservatives, against the bleeding-hearts and big business. To me, "illegal" pretty much sums it up.

These people come here seeking the blessings of America, and begin by spitting on our laws and violating our sovereignty. Further, they spit in the faces of those immigrants who do go through the entire convoluted process, who get in line and wait, who obey the laws. To the Globe, there is no difference between the two.

Indeed, a case can be made that the Globe actually prefers illegal aliens over legal immigrants, if one bases the matter on how much favorable coverage the two groups get in the pages of the newspaper.

So, the Boston Globe wants to help illegal aliens get drivers' licenses, learn English, live and work without fear of arrest and deportation, and eventually win citizenship. This leaves me with one rather simple question for the Globe:

In your world, why the FUCK would anyone bother trying to come here legally?

Pardon the language, but indulge me here. It's been proven time and again that one of the most reliable ways of regulating human behavior is the "carrot and stick" approach, the "reward and punishment" model. You reward people when they act in the way you wish, and punish when they do not.

The Globe's ideal (and it's one shared by many) would take all those people who currently do what we do not wish them to do -- come to the United States illegally -- and strip away all the potential penalties for that action. At the same time, they would grant them access to all the benefits offered to those who come here legally.

As has been noted many times before, coming to the United States legally is a rather cumbersome process. I believe that it's the easiest in the world, but it's still difficult. but the whole point of going through it is the reward at the end -- residency, perhaps even citizenship.

So, imagine you're a foreigner who wants to come to America. You can go down to the local American embassy or consulate, fill out the forms, pay the fees, get all the documents, and get in line and wait for the bureaucrats to dot all the t's and cross all the i's (I am convinced that the only way bureaucrats know how to cut red tape is lengthwise), then go back and start over when you realize that the bureaucrats crossed all the i's and dotted all the t's.

Or you can just get a tourist visa, come to the US, and never leave.

Or, even more simply, you can just sneak across the border.

In the Globe's world, it won't make a damned bit of difference.

Pardon me, but I see a huge one. And I'm tired of people trying to pretend there isn't.


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/25588.

Comments (6)

There needs to be better ar... (Below threshold)
jpm100:

There needs to be better arguments put forth other than "its wrong because its illegal.".

Otherwise someone will pass a law making the illegal, legal, and poof there's no argument against it anymore.

The "its wrong because its illegal" argument has appeal as an argument since it is the most resistant to a racist smear. Its also the easiest to make disappear. Which is the reason for the scramble for Amnesty or Guest Worker programs.

Say if someone puts legislation through that makes the Southern US border an at-will crossing zone. There would be no justification for reversing that anymore if "its wrong because its illegal" was the only good argument.

I think we need to include the reasons that have brought about it being illegal. The two strongest for me are:

1) We have the right to reject undesirable immigrants, this would include rejecting criminals and those who would threaten our national security. It also includes the right to reject someone who would be an economic burden.

2) We have the right to regulate immigration so that it won't outstrip capacity for the integration of immigrants into American Society. That integration would include willful and capable participation and respect to our systems of Justice and Government.

At some point you have to damn the smear attempts and go to the core reasons something is wrong or against common sense. Otherwise someone will pull the rug out from under you and you're done.

Jay, you are exactly right.... (Below threshold)

Jay, you are exactly right. There is a big difference. jpm is correct as well and his two reasons, to me, are two of the biggest. Assimilation into our society is what has made the immigration policies of the U.S. successful over all these decades. Bilingual catering only does what the Donks want it to do - keep the poor dependent on the government and therefore voting for the Donks and the little stipends they hand out to keep the votes coming. They offer nothing to create opportunity for these people because if they become semi-successful they may vote otherwise.

Sometimes that "F" word jus... (Below threshold)
Wordygirl:

Sometimes that "F" word just seems to fit...

Good post.

jpm100, I couldn't agree mo... (Below threshold)

jpm100, I couldn't agree more.

Convengo... (Below threshold)
epador:

Convengo

THE BOSTON SLOB atill a lib... (Below threshold)
Spurwing Plover:

THE BOSTON SLOB atill a liberal left-wing lie a day news rag no worth reading not worth linning a birdscage with AND STOP DELITING THE VOWELS FROM MY MESSAGES OR I,LL GET VIOLENT SQUAWK SQUAWK
depp=true
notiz=Pepto Bismol™




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy