Arizona has taken a draconian — but quite possibly constitutional — step to try to control the explosive flow of illegal, mostly Mexican, immigrants across its borders. The new law signed by Gov. Jan Brewer last Friday puts the burden of proof of legal residency on anyone police in the state have probable cause to believe may be there illegally.
Round up the usual liberal bleeding hearts: They’ve been screaming like stuck hogs ever since, about racial profiling, violations of human rights, legal immigrants afraid to go out on the street — all the usual horror stories conjured up by the Left.
Of course, Arizona’s legislature and governor wouldn’t have felt forced to take such a drastic step if the federal government, Republicans and Democrats alike, had been doing its job in protecting our borders for quite a few years now. Our southern border leaks like a sieve — we all know that, there’s no serious question about it, and the feds who are responsible for border security have been willfully asleep at the switch for a long time.
Why is this? You could hold a “great debate” about that, but in my opinion, it all boils down to two things: The Republicans don’t want to stop illegal immigration because their constituents among business employers want cheap labor; the Democrats don’t want to stop it because they see every illegal Mexican as a potential and likely Democratic voter.
Arizona’s government didn’t take this step in a vacuum. The state is being inundated by these border jumpers. They’ve added immeasurably to medical costs, rising crime rates, and the like. Murderous drug cartel feuds among Mexicans are starting to spill over into Arizona.
The illegals do, indeed, take some jobs away from deserving Americans. People like to say, “They do the jobs Americans won’t do.” No; they do the jobs for less money than Americans would if they were the ones who were being hired for the jobs. Yes, many things would cost more if Americans and not Third World Mexicans were picking them, or making them, or hauling them. So it’s a question of what you want: Jobs for Americans and a dollar a pound more for tomatoes; or cheaper goods, and a gradual takeover of the Southwest by Hispanics, mostly Mexicans.
Many people will insist that that statement is both extreme and “racist.” They’ll say that the new Arizona immigration control law will allow police — presumably White and “racist” — to stop anyone they feel like who appears to be Hispanic and “hassle” them with demands for ID.
From what I’ve read and heard about the new law, it does not give police a “carte blanche” to do anything that extreme. But here’s the thing: In Mexican schools, children are routinely and systematically taught that the United States “stole” the Southwest from Mexico, and that it should be the goal of Mexicans entering the United States to some day constitute such nunbers in states like Arizona, Texas, New Mexico and the like, that they can vote for those states to secede, and be “re-united” with Mexico. That has a powerful, emotional pull on most Mexicans. Their government is doing little to prevent the flood of immigrants that cross the Rio Grande. After all, export them to the U.S., and Mexico is no longer responsible for them. Mexico has a rapidly growing population of 110 million; it can well afford to lose several million of its poorest citizens.
But Mexico has a higher standard of living than its neighbors just to the south, the Central American countries — with the possible exception of Costa Rica, which has long had a democratic government. So are people from Guatemala, and El Salvador, and Honduras, and Nicaragua, welcomed with open arms when they try to improve their lives by crossing into Mexico across its southern border?
Not on your tintype, they’re not. They’re met by the Mexican army, which routinely beats, robs and jails them. When it comes to the people who run Mexico, what’s sauce for the goose is most definitely NOT sauce for the gander.
You see? Other countries, besides the U.S., feel no moral obligation to allow immigrants in in significant numbers. They feel no guilt for not welcoming them. Japan has kept its population 99 percent ethnic Japanese by being very stringent about immigration. China, which is a several-thousand-year-old civilization, once built its Great Wall to keep out the “barbarians,” as the Chinese viewed them, from the north. Today, China’s population is 91.9 percent Han Chinese.
Only in America, Europe, and places like Australia and New Zealand, places once very largely Caucasian, have the bleeding hearts managed to berate and shame the governments into letting in millions of people who will not blend into the existing country, but will change it irrevocably.
“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses …” you say? The Emma Lazarus inscription on the Statue of Liberty? Ah, yes; wonderful sentiments; a country of immigrants; all men are created “equal.”
But those people were Europeans, who could gradually blend into a country still 89 percent White in 1960. And because they had to come across a wide ocean, it was much easier for our government to control the flow of them; to let more in in some years, less other years.
The Hispanic invasion of modern times is not like that. The federal government appears to have given up at trying to put any kind of controls on it. President Obama is belatedly talking about “immigration reform.” What does that mean? What is “reform”? Declaring all the illegals in the country, legal, at the stroke of a pen? Chasing down every American contractor and tobacco farmer who employs illegals and pays them in cash, and fining them? How many more federal bureaucrats will that necessitate?
We’ve treated the illegal immigration problem with “benign neglect” — at least the federal government has — until, all of a sudden, hey! it’s not a “problem” any more! It’s a crisis! Arizona is one of the states at the forefront of the crisis. Its government got tired of waiting for the feds, Democrats and Republicans alike, to stop squabbling and so something. So Arizona did something itself. Maybe it’s just the start of a trend. Remember when that guy said, a little over a year ago, “What we need is a new Tea Party!”?