A conservative reader from Kentucky writes…

Mark, the conservative Republican chairman of the Judiciary Committee in the Ky state senate has written a very humble and thoughtful piece on immigration and the crisis on the border. He is a state legislator, not a member of Congress, but he could be a rising star in the Ky GOP and is a refreshing, sane voice. Care to give him a little love?

http://www.whitneywesterfield.com/blog/2014/7/25/huddledmasses

Happy to.  Conservatism desperately needs voices to crowd out the lunatics who are currently dominating the discourse.  Thanks for showing that there is no necessary correlation between “conserving” and “heartlessness.”

Like Patheos Catholic on Facebook!

Patheos Catholic LogoCLICK HERE TO "LIKE" PATHEOS CATHOLIC ON FACEBOOK

The Leader of the GOP Field Just Endorsed Something Called "Operation Wetback"...
Ann Coulter Erupts in Know Nothingism
Senate Bill Included Amendment to Limit Stripper Weight
Today's Right Wing Francis Hatred
  • Olga Zurova

    We’re lunatics because we want to exist as a nation? Couldn’t we help the Central Americans (if indeed they really require our help) without bringing all of them here to live off of our tax money and take over our communities?

  • http://chicagoboyz.net/ TMLutas

    I read the letter and applaud the sentiment. I do think it wasn’t fully thought through.

    The legal immigration system is how we’re supposed to fix this situation. It’s horribly broken. I’ve gone through this system for myself as a child and for my wife as an adult and I’ve helped others from the sidelines to manage this for as long as I can remember. It is a broken system, still largely running on paper much as it was in the 70s when I was navigating through it. This is why it’s slow. This is a major reason for backlogged cases.

    There’s not a conservative out there that would protest updating the thing so that cases are handled expeditiously and that we sort faster. The resistance to fixing that all comes from the powers that be who fear their budgets and headcount will shrink if they move to a modern system and the left who fear the same because they are the party of, among other things, the government worker.

    If sufficient people from central america could apply for and get legal immigration, we wouldn’t have the border problem.

    We issue 9 million non-immigrant visas and about 475,000 immigrant visas a year. These are huge numbers. We aren’t doing a very good job at present in handling the challenges of this many immigrants in the legal system. Handling more is just asking for trouble.

    Unaccompanied minors are not usually allowed to immigrate. We passed a law that provided a loophole so that if they just present at the border, they will be able to, but only as a sort of ready made population of nascent serfs. Some people would enjoy having a serf class around.

    I would not.

  • Marthe Lépine

    From reading the linked letter, a thought came to mind: Could it be that the US have become smug in their power over the world? Power corrupts. The good intentions expressed at the time of building the statue of Liberty might have corroded over time. This is the impression I have been getting while reading all those comments about kids suddenly showing up at your frontier. Another point: As a Canadian, I admit not knowing anything about your past war with Mexico but I am wondering if, in some way, this could be the beginning of a movement to take back some of the former Mexican territory that got occupied by the US at that time? Sure, you can defend your frontier. But what actually happened to the Mexican frontier in that long past war?

  • Marthe Lépine

    Something just occurred to me: After reading all those concerns about those children arriving at your borders – their number is somewhere over 50,000, or more? – I thought of checking the number of abortions in the US. So, at somewhere over one million a year, without abortion, there would be at least 40 to 50 million more children born since that notorious Rowe vs. Wade judgement. If you think that it would be so difficult for your country to assimilate 50,000 poor children who have been showing up at your frontier this year, how would it have been at all possible to assimilate 1 million or more babies this same year? Do you mean that a pro-life person would be perfectly reasonable to object to the arrival of 50,000 new children, while still insisting that your country should have welcomed over 1 million newborn babies a year for the last 40 years? Seems to me it puts a different light on the problem…


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X