 |
EMIL
FRANZI |
Immigration debate
produces myths, posturesApril 11, 2007 |
Anyone who missed the recent
vituperative exchange between FOX NEWS personalities
Bill O’Reilly and Geraldo Rivera over illegal
immigration can find it many places on the Internet. Tom
Danehy and I re-broadcast it last week on INSIDE TRACK.
We believe it was genuine, not a ratings gimmick. We’re
expert witnesses — we yell at each other a lot.
We saw a classic confrontation between an authoritarian populist (O’Reilly has never claimed to be a conservative) and a blubbering liberal. Good place for defining us paleo-libertarians. We liked the Bill of Rights before there was one. We differ from constitutionalists and conservatives who defend individual liberty as it was codified by the Founders. Respect for their efforts aside, we believe rights are “unalienable” before governments get around to recognizing them. When O’Reilly screamed “anarchist” at Geraldo he lost me. A little anarchy is much better than a whole lot of oppression. But Geraldo looked just plain dumb (not a first) when he kept claiming the issue of two Virginia Beach girls killed by a drunk driving illegal alien was about drunks, not illegals. O’Reilly had him right there but he blew it. This specific illegal had already been convicted for DUI. Virginia Beach officials knew he was illegal but cut him loose after he served his time. “Illegal immigration is a federal issue.” I keep hearing that claim from most local jurisdictions. Us P-L’s have a terrible habit of using historical analogies. Try this: Early 1942 — submarine surfaces off the coast. Local Virginia cops observe raft put over side with several occupants. Raft heads towards shore. Should cops apprehend? Radio it in? Nah — not THEIR job, right? Besides, it could’ve been one of OUR subs. In 1942 that would have been called “dereliction of duty.” Dereliction of duty is what Virginia Beach officials were guilty of when they failed to remove permanently from their streets a convicted drunk driver who was an illegal alien. Geraldo says the issue is drunken driving regardless if it’s by Mexican, Irishman or Japanese. America — and I include Virginia Beach — has far too many drunk drivers now. The opportunity to reduce their population by deporting one when you can seems like a reasonable response regardless of their origin, which should include Mexico. Bill missed that part — and pulled a Lou Dobbs. Dobbs is another non-conservative authoritarian populist and is even scarier than O’Reilly at Bill’s worst. On a bad day both resemble Transylvanian peasants grabbing the torch and heading for the castle. In and old western movie Dobbs would get the line “ why wait for the law — let’s string ‘em up now.’ O’Reilly would at least want a trial first. Geraldo would demand an all-Hispanic jury. The illegal immigration debate has produced almost as many myths as it has postures. No, they can’t just come in legally like our ancestors, we tightened requirements. Yes, they use many taxpayer provided services, we had no welfare state back when grandfather came here. Yes, they pay taxes — sales, property mostly through rent, income through withholding and SSI which they don’t get back because they used fake ID. Yes, they’re criminals — not just for the paltry misdemeanor they commit entering but through the forged documents they use later. No, we shouldn’t keep those we convict of crimes after time served, we formerly deported LEGAL immigrants for that. Yes, our economy needs them. How many people you know work slaughtering chickens? No, they’re not becoming a permanently exploited underclass, most find better jobs. Yes, they’re learning English in spite of public school bureaucracies. Yes, racists use them to get votes, but other race manipulators need their body-count to fill up decaying urban districts and keep themselves in office. |
BUT WATCH WHAT YOU SAY! |
|
|
|||
