Share This Article with a Friend!

Outsiders vs. Insiders: With malice towards none & charity for all the GOP must solve immigration

For those who are heartily tired of conservatives constantly being depicted by the establishment media as heartless child abusers over the recent flareup concerning the border patrol’s processing of immigration asylum claims at the southern border, a little perspective is in order.

Trump tweet borderFirst, the words of Abraham Lincoln upon delivering his Second Inaugural Address:

Each looked for an easier triumph, and a result less fundamental and astounding. Both read the same Bible and pray to the same God, and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God's assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men's faces, but let us judge not, that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered. That of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has His own purposes.

Lincoln’s second inaugural address has gone down in history as one of the finest orations ever delivered by a politician. It’s relatively short and to the point, basically synopsized as, “There’s not much that hasn’t already been said, so I’ll keep this brief. No one thought it (the war between the states) would’ve been this bad, but with God’s favor the right side won. Now it’s time to forgive and move on together as countrymen.”

Everyone similarly understands what Lincoln had to endure to reach that point. George Washington is credited (rightly so) as being indispensable to the cause of independence during the Revolutionary War, but the preeminent Founding Father enjoyed mostly unified political support (from his side at least) during the conflict itself. Lincoln not only had to battle the south but his political enemies were everywhere around him…in close proximity too.

If Lincoln sounded weary during his second inaugural address it was certainly justified. Everything changed in those four years – and the time had come to reconcile and heal.

Today’s conflicts don’t rise to the level of Washington’s or Lincoln’s yet there are many who are bone-tired of being called insensitive and cruel merely for believing in the rule of law and supporting the efforts of law enforcement and the military to keep America’s citizenry safe. Conservatives aren’t hypocrites – we’re compassionate for all. We believe the illegal border crossers should be treated with dignity and respect – but the law still needs to prevail.

Senator Ted Cruz offered his example this week, proposing legislation that would bring the sides together. Bridget Johnson reported at PJ Media the other day, “Cruz's forthcoming bill, which he promised to introduce this week, isn't expected to come with riders sought by the administration or conservative colleagues such as limiting family reunification, stopping the diversity visa lottery, or limiting legal immigration.

“The senator's office did say, though, that the Protect Kids and Parents Act would mandate quickie asylum claim investigations and processing, meaning those claiming asylum found not to qualify would be adjudicated and shuttled back to their home countries within two weeks. This comes as the administration narrowed the window to meet the asylum threshold, announcing recently that women fleeing domestic violence or immigrants fleeing gang violence would not qualify for asylum.

“Cruz's bill would double the number of federal immigration judges, authorize temporary family shelters, and mandate undocumented families be kept together ‘absent aggravated criminal conduct or threat of harm to the children.’”

Johnson’s article also contains quotes from Cruz’s Democrat opponent this year, Rep. Beto O'Rourke, who recently led a march on a tent city in Texas where children were allegedly being kept while their parents were processed through the system. O’Rourke says Democrats also intend to introduce a bill in the House to address the conundrum.

In his infinite wisdom Cruz acknowledges there’s a workable solution to this challenge – namely, devote more resources to the legal side and construct additional facilities to house families intact. For years conservatives have begged for more money to patrol the border, build a physical barrier and deal with the ill effects of allowing thousands of people a day to crawl (sometimes literally) through the cracks in the current policies.

There’s nothing new here, though the media portrays Republicans – especially President Trump – as only acknowledging one end of the controversy. There’s room to feel for the unfortunate plight of the newcomers but the other side needs a great deal of additional attention, namely that many of these vagrants aren’t “innocent” and the border problems include drugs, violent cartels and a whole host of illegal activities that are poisoning the interior of our country.

It’s not just kids and parents involved here – the criminal element is being ignored by the media.

The actual border situation is a lot different than how reporters frame the issue. Jenny Beth Martin of Tea Party Patriots recently spent time along the U.S./Mexico line and she wrote at The Hill that Americans aren’t receiving a fair portrayal of what’s really taking place there.  

Martin wrote, “The situation on America’s southern border is worse than we’ve been led to believe. While much is being made of the ‘humanitarian’ crisis on the border, few are paying attention to the much larger crisis, the one that has terrible consequences for our nation as a whole. This is the continuing movement of illegal immigrants, illegal drugs, and even human slaves across our porous and still largely undefended border...

“[T]he stories we’re now hearing in the media about young children being ‘ripped from their parents’ paint a misleading picture. The children are temporarily separated from their parents so their parents can be processed through the court system. The same would happen if children had been riding in a car that was being driven by their mother or father recklessly at 30 miles per hour over the speed limit.

“Children go to a detention center while their parents are processed in the legal system, and are then reunited with their parents when their parents are released. Sometimes the process takes 24 or even 48 hours. Sometimes it takes as little as 30 minutes. The average processing time, I was told, is about eight hours.”

Martin’s article is comprehensive and compiles the views of state and federal law enforcement officers who actually do the work of patrolling the border and try desperately to get a grip on a problem that’s hopelessly misrepresented in our culture. A few minutes of crying children footage on the evening news has sent liberals into a tizzy and even motivated former first lady Laura Bush to claim the child separation policy breaks her heart.

As a side note Laura’s husband George W. tried to extend amnesty in 2007 and was unsuccessful – so we know where the establishment Bushes come down on the illegal immigration issue.

Besides, it requires practically no moral courage for a famous person to come down on the side of weeping kids. Hollywood celebrities frequently try to boost their public images by championing obscure and easy-to-sympathize-with movements. Brad Pitt’s probably more well-known for his various tabloid-friendly causes than he is for his (bad) movies.

The media’s recent focus on illegal children is reminiscent of those television telethon fundraising commercials where sad looking third world tykes are shown wearing tattered clothes and sitting in filthy squalor while a recognizable voice begs viewers to call a number and “save a child” for less than a dollar a day.

Not to make light of legitimate world relief charities but this isn’t exactly what’s happening to the south of us. As Martin highlighted above the average processing time (and hence, the duration of separation) is eight hours. That’s the length of one work day, liberals. Hardworking American parents are separated from their children for longer than that practically every day. Drop off the kids at 7:30 in the morning and pick them up at 5:30 after work…that’s ten hours.

I don’t see Democrats falling over themselves to solve the problem of American kids being “ripped from the arms” of their parents five days a week. How about sponsoring legislation to encourage stay-at-home (or work-at-home) parents or reward businesses with a tax break for fostering family-friendly work policies? Is there a “crisis” in daycare in this country?

Democrats would only use such a happenstance as an excuse to federalize everything…so come to think of it, they should just butt out of the entire subject.

Many conservatives, such as Attorney General Jeff Sessions, have said if illegal parents don’t want to face the heartache of temporary separation from their children they shouldn’t be dragging the youth through multiple hazards (human and otherwise) to come here in the first place. In essence conservatives are showing compassion for these people by trying to protect them from child slavery, rape and exploitation. Where’s the media on these matters?

The law enforcement sources in Martin’s article also noted that extending DACA to the “DREAMERS” already in the country would only act as a magnet for more illegals to come here. Fraudulent documents would be in great demand, which encourages more underground illegal activity.

It’s bad news.

Of course, with the public in an uproar over this farce Republicans are fretting about how it might cost them politically this year. David M. Drucker wrote in the Washington Examiner, “Senior Republicans on Monday warned President Trump that forcibly separating migrant children from their illegal-immigrant parents was a political loser that could cost the party control of Congress in the midterm elections…

“Republican consultants focused on the midterm elections worry this could poison the well with female voters in suburban battlegrounds that lean conservative, adding undo burden to the party’s uphill climb to hold the majority in the House and diminishing opportunities to pad the GOP’s 51-49 advantage in the Senate.

“This cohort is inclined to vote for the GOP candidate but wavering because of lingering dissatisfaction with Trump. Of concern: Even as Trump’s approval ratings have reached the higher end of his average range, the generic ballot gauging which party voters would prefer be in charge of Congress has ticked back toward the Democrats.”

To his credit, one of the anonymous consultants Drucker quoted in his article said this issue could just as easily be forgotten by next week. We’re not even at the end of June yet and the swamp creature-infested establishment is fretting over a single news story that could supposedly sway public opinion for four months.

With these people it's always about “losing” suburban voters because the media likes to show how “cruel” Republicans are with #NeverTrumpers (like Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse) harrumph-ing their agreement. This begs a question: should Republicans support bad policy (i.e. capitulating on DACA and other elements of the immigration debate) in order to please a key, but small, segment of the voting public?

How many suburban white women would be brought over to the GOP’s cause by passing laws that screw the rest of the country? Isn’t that what Democrats are for, to obsess over what one constituency might think?

It’s stupid. Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen pointed out that all it would take to change the separation policy would be for Congress to act. Senator Cruz (above) presented a very reasonable potential fix to this “problem.” How long would it take to write up a bill, bring it to the floor and pass it? Couldn’t this be deemed an “emergency” like hurricane relief?

Would Democrats support an idea Ted Cruz announced? Here’s thinking they’d find some major “flaws” with the legislation and oppose it in toto. Could the establishment Republican leadership compel enough of their caucus to assent to common sense?

Until Republicans take the proverbial immigration bull by the horns they’re going to end up on the wrong end of the public narrative. The media will give the GOP no credit and Democrats will fan the flames of discontent with inflammatory statements of their own. Who will stand up?

Share this

With Malice Towards None? We need a little

to Jeffrey Rendall

Nice Piece.

I do disagree with this:

"We believe the illegal border crossers should be treated with dignity and respect – but the law still needs to prevail."

If there is no punishment for a crime there is no deterrence. We can't continue to treat these invaders with the sort of dignity and respect we have until now been affording them. We have to treat them like criminals, and they have to not want to come back - and tell their friends. I advocate making them do community service. Force them to wear prison jumpers and build the wall! Everyone on the opposite side of the border should see them doing it. Then they should be deported south of the wall they just constructed. I know; the media would go nuts, but if we are serious about stopping the invasion we have to do something like this.

We should have a little malice; these people are flipping us the bird, invading our country, stealing our social services, our jobs, our resources, and threatening to destroy our very nation. It is an invasion, an act of malice. Why wouldn't we be angry at them?

You made a great point with this:

"Hardworking American parents are separated from their children for longer than that practically every day"

In fact, liberals have labored to separate kids from parents for years, by encouraging women to work outside of the home (feminism fostered that), by extending the school day and school year, by promoting ever stricter child welfare rules that allow Family Services to take a child away from a parent for what they consider inappropriate parenting, some of which were old, traditional methods. The Left has been very quick to separate families, because they have always wanted to reduce the influence of parents over children and increase the influence of the government and the intellectual elites. Now they have the gall to be upset about temporarily splitting a criminal from his or her child.

Clearly the long, arduous, dangerous trip to Norte America can be viewed as child abuse. Why shouldn't these kids be taken temporarily from their parents?

And you hit the nail on the head with this:

"This begs a question: should Republicans support bad policy (i.e. capitulating on DACA and other elements of the immigration debate) in order to please a key, but small, segment of the voting public?"


Trump was elected largely on his promise to do exactly what he is trying to do here. The media ginned up this firestorm and the consulting class of the GOP are trying to tell him he's going to lose for fulfilling a promise, one that got him elected. I'm not buying it. I don't believe for a minute that the people who voted Trump to restore sanity to this alien invasion business are going to turn on him over some fake news story with photos from the Obama era. Yes, the GOP might lose a few votes from the weak and wishy washy but how many more will they lose for failing to act, or their own cowardly behavior?

Timothy Birdnow