The Wisdom Of Mark Steyn
Hugh Hewitt had his normal Thursday guest in Mark Steyn. I am not going to cite the whole interview, but I will bring up the comments he made in regard to the immigration compromise.
HH: There's a lot to cover, but we've got to start with the immigration "compromise." Now I've only seen what's on the New York Times, which says you know, if you've been here five years, you get on a path that takes you so long, and two to five years, and one year. But I have been told by senior Republican sources on the Hill that the border fence is indeed part of this. But John Cornyn just took to the floor to denounce the lack of border security and the lack of a temporary worker. Thus far, with what little we know, what do you make of it, Mark Steyn?
MS: Well, it doesn't sound to me like a compromise. It sounds like the people who want to legalize every illegal immigrant to the United States have got their way. And we talked about this last week, and I always feel slightly uncomfortable talking about this, because I am a foreigner. It's hardly my place to tell Americans who should be coming to America. But just to put this into perspective, as someone who's been through the immigration bureaucracy here, and as someone who crosses the U.S. land border, I would guess, more frequently than 90% of Americans do, what I don't understand is how they will be able to distinguish these categories. By their definition, illegal immigrants are not people who are in the computer records. So who's to say whether somebody's been here five years, or two to five years. Essentially, an illegal immigrant can give his own date for that. And what means do they have of sifting through the evidence? I would say that essentially, these people will be able to declare what it is they wish to declare, and an already overloaded immigration bureaucracy will effectively just take them at their word.
HH: In reality, isn't it likely that those who can easily prove their duration, or can come up with the counterfeit documents will stay. The rest will stay underground, but that we'll get the fence. Is that a good enough of a deal for you?
MS: Well, I do think legal immigration, including the fence on the Southern border, has to be fixed, and has to be streamlined. And this is a bureaucratic agency that has a sort of pathological inability to prioritize. And I hope that there will be...if there is no enforcement mechanism here, and if there is no fence, then it is a waste of time. You know, someone said to me the other day, I'd actually crossed the border yesterday, and I was joking with one of the guys up there. And he was talking about the compromise bill, and I said you know, I think my ideal compromise would be that all 300 million of us legal residents and citizens get to become undocumented, too, because I think the undocumented guys have a great deal. They're living in the shadows, so-called. They're not paying any taxes. If they have to produce I.D. for anything, they produce fake I.D. that gets accepted everywhere, they get their free health care and free schools. Personally, as a legal immigrant, I feel overdocumented. And I do think there is a danger that this particular issue can backfire very badly, and that it's essentially rewarding bad behavior without showing that that bad behavior will stop in the future.
I stated that last part here. Right after all the updates I did today. The simple fact of the matter is this: Mark is correct. This is a waste of time. It was a waste of time the moment the "compromise committee" began, and it is a waste of time now. This is more bureaucracy that is simply going to be ignored. Congress seems to like creating such things. They can pat themselves on the back, and claim that they did a good job.
Meanwhile, the country gets shafted. There is no fence. There is no solid reinforcement to obey our laws. I cannot fathom how our representatives in Congress do not understand this. They are illegal. They are here illegally, and do not belong here. And this compromise does nothing to help the situation. Mark was correct when he pointed out that they will be able to declare what they want to declare, and the bureaucracy will take them at their word. And despite what was pointed out by Senator Frist on his site, this bill will never be upheld the way it should be, and it is a band-aid on a cancer that will just get a minor zap, but will continue to grow.
The Bunny ;)
Hugh Hewitt had his normal Thursday guest in Mark Steyn. I am not going to cite the whole interview, but I will bring up the comments he made in regard to the immigration compromise.
HH: There's a lot to cover, but we've got to start with the immigration "compromise." Now I've only seen what's on the New York Times, which says you know, if you've been here five years, you get on a path that takes you so long, and two to five years, and one year. But I have been told by senior Republican sources on the Hill that the border fence is indeed part of this. But John Cornyn just took to the floor to denounce the lack of border security and the lack of a temporary worker. Thus far, with what little we know, what do you make of it, Mark Steyn?
MS: Well, it doesn't sound to me like a compromise. It sounds like the people who want to legalize every illegal immigrant to the United States have got their way. And we talked about this last week, and I always feel slightly uncomfortable talking about this, because I am a foreigner. It's hardly my place to tell Americans who should be coming to America. But just to put this into perspective, as someone who's been through the immigration bureaucracy here, and as someone who crosses the U.S. land border, I would guess, more frequently than 90% of Americans do, what I don't understand is how they will be able to distinguish these categories. By their definition, illegal immigrants are not people who are in the computer records. So who's to say whether somebody's been here five years, or two to five years. Essentially, an illegal immigrant can give his own date for that. And what means do they have of sifting through the evidence? I would say that essentially, these people will be able to declare what it is they wish to declare, and an already overloaded immigration bureaucracy will effectively just take them at their word.
HH: In reality, isn't it likely that those who can easily prove their duration, or can come up with the counterfeit documents will stay. The rest will stay underground, but that we'll get the fence. Is that a good enough of a deal for you?
MS: Well, I do think legal immigration, including the fence on the Southern border, has to be fixed, and has to be streamlined. And this is a bureaucratic agency that has a sort of pathological inability to prioritize. And I hope that there will be...if there is no enforcement mechanism here, and if there is no fence, then it is a waste of time. You know, someone said to me the other day, I'd actually crossed the border yesterday, and I was joking with one of the guys up there. And he was talking about the compromise bill, and I said you know, I think my ideal compromise would be that all 300 million of us legal residents and citizens get to become undocumented, too, because I think the undocumented guys have a great deal. They're living in the shadows, so-called. They're not paying any taxes. If they have to produce I.D. for anything, they produce fake I.D. that gets accepted everywhere, they get their free health care and free schools. Personally, as a legal immigrant, I feel overdocumented. And I do think there is a danger that this particular issue can backfire very badly, and that it's essentially rewarding bad behavior without showing that that bad behavior will stop in the future.
I stated that last part here. Right after all the updates I did today. The simple fact of the matter is this: Mark is correct. This is a waste of time. It was a waste of time the moment the "compromise committee" began, and it is a waste of time now. This is more bureaucracy that is simply going to be ignored. Congress seems to like creating such things. They can pat themselves on the back, and claim that they did a good job.
Meanwhile, the country gets shafted. There is no fence. There is no solid reinforcement to obey our laws. I cannot fathom how our representatives in Congress do not understand this. They are illegal. They are here illegally, and do not belong here. And this compromise does nothing to help the situation. Mark was correct when he pointed out that they will be able to declare what they want to declare, and the bureaucracy will take them at their word. And despite what was pointed out by Senator Frist on his site, this bill will never be upheld the way it should be, and it is a band-aid on a cancer that will just get a minor zap, but will continue to grow.
The Bunny ;)
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 11:45 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home