Immigration Law Is Not Emotional

Randy Minnick

05-27-10


According to at least one of the Webster’s Dictionaries, a law is defined as: “That which is not subject to change in its given parameters”. In other words, a law is an absolute unless changed by the one’s who made the law. Then, it may be repealed like “Prohibition”, amended, or modified in some way. This makes sense when one doesn’t want to be governed purely by anarchy or emotional dynamics. The law can be counted on to provide clarity of matters that may evoke great depths of emotion but it will not be moved nor is it supposed to be moved. It has been codified after accounting for all factors pertaining to the issues while applying previous law and experience by men of wisdom and understanding from over the ages.

We can also say that law institutes logic that cannot be swayed by an emotional factor. Rather, it is understood that it is (ideally) the “letter of the law” with the accounting for of the “spirit of the law” so that is fair and just for all. If we have the letter of the law only, then there is an inflexible tyranny foisted upon the people. While the law is, by and large, inflexible, the spirit of the law must be accounted for lest there be injustice. In any case, it is unemotional.

One purpose here is to point out that what has been stated is an absolute that has been the course of wisdom and reason for millennia. Since the beginning of time “truth” has been observed by the vast majority of thinkers (certain philosophers excepted) as being law and therefore absolute. We can even use God’s word as an example because it is “the truth”; it never changes and is, therefore, law. We should consider that some of our current laws are direct descendants of “Hammurabi’s Code” (ca. 1790 BC). This is the desired and proven way for establishing and maintaining the law of the land that is supposed to account for a peaceful and orderly society (without oppression and tyranny as such).

But, there is a fly in this ointment. These things are immutable social truths unless you are a liberal. Liberals abhor bottom-line truth and do not allow it to interfere with their deceitful and utterly corrupt Marxist doctrines. It has been demonstrated on a national level as of late that there are federal, state, and local laws that just aren’t effectual because liberals just don’t like them and refuse to enforce them (or allow them to be enforced). They simply ignore them and tacitly intend to subvert the law. They, likewise, gainsay and oppose anyone who would dare to be patriotic and enforce any law with which they disagree.

It is of great note that this is largely due to the fact that liberals reject all absolutes anyway. That’s why they reject both truth and law and make them entirely subjective and irresolute. It leaves them with rabidly defending such things as the indefensible position that “My truth is better than yours!”. At that point it is a matter of fighting, kicking, screaming, decrying, gainsaying, lying, and smearing to defeat the opposition. They can then define “truth” as they please. Conscience and civility are not allowed to attend these bouts. It is little wonder that they have earned the sobriquet “loony liberals”. They are on logical black ice at all times. They have clearly demonstrated that their conscience has been seared with a hot iron.

Such liberal philosophy introduces the decidedly unstable factor of emotion that determines to undermine the efficacy of law. It purposes to override the establishment (i.e. the established law and culture) by using demagoguery as a key motivator to either change, destroy, or subvert the law to meet their standards and opinions. It never seems to dawn on the employers of such a philosophy that, if what they had was good, peaceful, and truthful, people would come to them rather than having to be brutally forced (e.g. Lenin), and/or deceived (Hitler), into accepting what they tender.

While there is any number of examples, this specific reference is regarding immigration law which has been established for the protection of the people of this country and its sovereignty. Now, let’s tie this into liberalism with more focus.

In effect, immigration law means nothing to liberals. It is a law that is absolute to all but them. That also directly means that the Constitution of the United States is a worthless scrap of paper to them because it is the law of the land. It is the Constitution that gives the government the power to protect its own people. Therefore, immigration law of America has been rendered without teeth and ineffectual because of their subversion of the Constitution and the laws meant to protect "we the people". Americans are suffering brutally because of their disdain.

“What about the “Border Patrol. Aren’t they doing (or allowed to do) their job?” some would ask. This is where the next principle of socialism comes into play. “Change everything except what is apparent or presented to the masses”. It does appear that the “Border Patrol” is enforcing the law. But, to what degree are the allowed to enforce the law? Seriously….does catching a (comparatively) few illegals while millions are unchallenged and are even protected by the president of the United States prove any kind of effective enforcement? Doesn’t the lack of a protective wall or not positioning the Army and/or Marine troops at the border extraordinary proof that America’s leaders are traitors who are prohibiting enforcement of the laws of the land? Doesn’t the almost unhindered drug trafficking along the border and the absolute refusal to protect our citizen’s from drug lords scream of dereliction of duty?

To aid their cause, they force emotional attachment to the plight of (illegal) immigrants using it to instigate class and a (presumed)race conflict. In fact, they level the charge of “racism” and "racist" to those who demand law enforcement and who want to save their country from a mass invasion of illegals (we're talking millions not thousands of immigrants. Ten percent of the population of Mexico is already here in this country). “Mexican” is a nationality and not a race but such facts are ignored by "double-speak" liberals who twist words to fit their desires(the word "attorney" means "word twister"). The sobriquet “illegal aliens” sticks in their crop so political correctness is brutally enforced for just such matters. To mitigate facts and truth, they are now “undocumented workers”.

In carrying out this nefarious practice of distortion, they make “good” appear “evil” and “evil” appear to be “good”. In other words, being a patriot and loving one’s country is considered a “hate crime” to a liberal when few in history would make such a declaration.

In their thinking, one is supposed be sorry and ashamed that he is an American and should apologize for his existence. He should also be punished by forfeiting his culture, his livilhood, and his country. It is therefore considered being “racist” if he doesn’t surrender his land to the invading armies. No, there is no actual rationale or logic to their thinking at all. But, after years and even decades of (soviet style) brainwashing, any lie becomes “truth” to be defended with alacrity (especially if it comes from some bearded anti-American college professor who is a socialist guru). To them, the end justifies the means (including national suicide). If they were alive today, Nietzsche, Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Marx, and Mao would be proud of them.

Liberals do this while trying to maintain a phoney and diaphanous moral high ground by clamoring about the greatness of their “spread the wealth” “hate the rich” socialism. Illogically, they maintain and proclaim a philosophy that entitles people to break the law and dine freely at the table of the rich Americans (which, when compared to Mexico, is almost all Americans). They tie in the untenable socialist egalitarian position that every is equal. However,don’t bother to say that it’s their job to bring the middle-class down. In doing, everyone is, infact, equal: equally poor, equally dependent upon the NAZI government, and equally enslaved to totalitarianism and without the cover of our Constitution (which actually does make us all equal under liberty and not slavery) .
actu

If anyone should think that liberals care one whit about the middle class, they need only do a bit of homework to discover that they are in full march to confiscate as much as 75% of the wage earner’s paycheck (it’s actually near that now with all taxes considered). That, incidentally, is precisely the tax rate in the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republic (the USSR being as far from a true republic as a duck is from being a dinosaur).

To compound matters, they scream “diversity is best” while anyone with only a few brain cells to rub together (including our founding fathers) knows that “divide and conquer” is the very first rule of warfare (and they most surely are at war with America). By demanding non-assimilating illegal Mexicans (who are conquering the US without firing a shot), Americans in some parts of the country are now the minority population. They also conveniently overlook “E Pluribus Unum” which means “out of many, one”. It was never our founders' intent to “take one people and turn them into many splinter groups that have no commonality at all and thereby destroying the nation. Ah, but there are those pesky facts again.

It is actually a normal response to care that illegals are human beings. It is understood that they are trekking to this country through the harshest of conditions and that many are suffering brutally. It is also understood that they have much to gain and are in high hopes of boarding the ”freebie train” in the “promised land” that flows with milk and money (sic). Such a reaction understands that these are desperately poor people who are living in squalor and who desire a better life. They want their children to have a chance in life and to escape the grinding poverty in which they were reared. But, are emotions a qualification to usurp standing law? And, even if the law is not accounted for shouldn’t common sense be brought to bear? One would think so until we realize that liberals do not believe in common sense (or we would see at least some modicum of evidence that they did). Common sense is an absolute that has been inculcated into mankinds thinking through the millinea. But, it cannot qualify as a participant in the liberal agenda.

Do I have a true understanding of this suffering or am I just an uncaring armchair soccer forward? Was I un-moved by a recent NPR report on Mexican children and youths who are suffering unexpected hardship and deportation as illegals because they had been brought into this country as babies by their parents? Was I saddened by the fact that they considered themselves to be Americans and yet they actually were not and had to face the consequences of their parent’s actions? Oh, yes. It was sad and I was moved accordingly. But I also knew that the suffering was due to decisions made by the parents and that no one else should bear or be required to bear any of that responsibility. Their suffering was being exploited for political gain to the max. The only thing more powerful than my sadness was the urge to throw up at the blatant demagoguery being vomited by NPR.

And, I’ve also been to the Baja peninsula and to Juarez, Mexico. I’ve seen entire villages that have no running water, no indoor plumbing, and no electricity. Their diets were almost exclusively corn tortillas and frijoles (beans). Then, there are the compos (labor camps) where families are living in what can only be described as chicken coops with tin roofs and dirt floors. One camp had a row of outhouses a hundred yards away across a large dirt yard. It had a single 1 ½ “ vertical pipe with a hose bibb from which the entire camp drew their water by the bucket. I am not unmoved by such a scenario. In fact, I was moved to tears. My emotions were very alive and well and very much affected. So let it be understood that I have first-hand knowledge of the economic conditions that motivate the illegals.

But immigration law is unemotional. This matter of emotion has already been accounted for by those who drafted then passed the legislation. By enacting a law it was understood that a priority had been established and that priority was self protection and preservation and not "spreading the wealth" to anyone who dared invade our nation. And the law is not without care or concern. There is a proviso that says that you are most welcomed to come to this country but do so legally just like everyone else.


The law also accounts for the fact that you can’t “save the entire planet” and assuage all of its misery. It knows that, if you take too many aboard your lifeboat, the boat will sink and everyone will drown. Astoundingly, liberals have no such common sense (their KGB brainwashing having been completed).

Today, far too many of those in Congress have lost that concept of self preservation and are forcing this nation into the dangerous position of becoming overwhelmed with illegal aliens. America is hemorrhaging money and resources like it had a transected aorta and there is no end in sight. But, there is just so much blood and when it’s gone, life as such cannot be sustained.

Congress has turned a blind eye to the preservation of our domestic tranquility and national sovereignty. They have forsaken their oath to uphold and defend the Constitution (a treasonable offense). For instance, according to every reliable news source (now forced to report at least partial truth due to overwhelming empirical evidence), illegals are now responsible for as much as 50% of the crime in border towns and in other cities across this nation. Many have mental health issues and some bring in diseases that this country has not had to deal with in decades (there is whooping cough epidemic in the west now). There is also a bed bug epidemic with which we must contend (after 50 years of having almost no bed bugs in the country at all). Our women are being raped and robbed and our children molested. Our people are being slaughtered on the highways by drunken illegals (the author has been involved in two traffic accidents and both involved drunken illegal Mexicans). Diseases and afflictions not seen in this country for decades are on the rise with some becoming pandemic. Liberals take absolutely no thought for matter at all other than loving and protecting the illegals more than their own countrymen.

Many illegals, along with their American-born supporters, are even activists who belong to openly anti-American organizations and who openly flaunt that they will conquer America with the “power of the penis” and not the gun (e.g. there are three Hispanic births to every one non-Hispanic in my area and there are other regions of California where it is much higher). They have determined that Mexican “love” will eradicate the US. They would appear to be emotional too.

Facts like these should stir another emotional response with our leaders but, incredibly, they don’t. In fact, to a normal person these dangerous assertions should actually evoke a counter emotion and that emotion would be one of self preservation and law enforcement. But, the liberals have yet to do so which, again, points to unmitigated and open treason.

With this understanding, though, we can now also see that liberals/progressives/Marxist/socialist/Democrats/communists (for all intents and purposes they are the same) are a bunch of wild-eyed demagogues who are without the ability to think correctly or accurately and certainly not patriotically. They capitalize on such evocative issues by preying on people’s emotions to garner power with which to steer our country over a political cliff so we will freefall into a “changed nation” of slavery and tyranny. Even after proof after proof that socialism does not work and cannot work, they forcefully campaign for socialism to our destruction. They are completely unconcerned that law is unemotional and do so to the peril of our nation. Is this any less than legitimized insanity?

This matter can no longer be held under an emotional microscope and judged by bleeding hearts with their perverted and twisted logic and their Marxist ranting. And, doing nothing and waiting for someone else to act is no longer an option. There must be line drawn in the sand and the passionate fight for survival must begin.

But, when will enough be enough? When will we passionately enforce the dispassionate laws that were set in place to protect America? When will we fight for our lives with the same alacrity that history recounts happened in WWII? Only time can tell. I certainly hope that it will be soon since the water in the pot is rapidly heating and the frog has hardly budged.