scratch-mark

Immigration and The Stupid Party

"The Stupid Party." That’s what I, and others, call the Republicans (Democrats are "The Dishonesty Party," "The Evil Commies," "The Jerry Springer Party," or whatever else I can think of at the moment; in case you were wondering).

The main reason republicans are so stupid, politically, is that they have accepted each and every commie premise of the left–only, they’ll be "better commies" than the left. I dunno; I suppose they’ll let you make you go to church on Saturday or Sunday (you know, it’s about FREEDOM!). But that’s for another day.

I’ve been blogging a lot lately about the notion that "the law is the law." You know, the idea that if we’re being consistent about it, like those of The Stupid Party insist we must, we should be executing people who, after repeated warnings and citations, continue to habitually and defiantly exceed the speed limit. It is the law, y’know. OK; well, then we should at least lock them up, right? as potential dangers to society? No? OK; then how about deportation?

Look, the clear and observable fact of the matter is that speed-limit laws, as an example, are completely and totally unenforceable. Everyone knows it. Everyone speeds and violates other "traffic suggestions" (my term for them) virtually every day of their lives. Can you begin to imagine what lengths, costs, and restrictions on movement would be required to enforce traffic laws to a point where only an insignificant number of traffic "accidents" could be attributable to their violation, leaving only accidents caused by equipment or bodily malfunction, or inattention/human error? But, that is the cause of most accidents. Traffic rules exist, in part, to redefine the cause. Most people drive according to their own sense of reasonable "feel," except, that is, when they are distracted into trying to understand traffic rules because of fear of enforcement. I’ll also point out that traffic rules that make the most sense (stoplights and stopsigns) are generally observed by most people most of the time–though I have no problem rolling through them at 3 a.m., once I’ve verified there’s no oncoming traffic.

The second is that the U.S. doesn’t control its borders, isn’t going to
control its borders, and probably cannot at any acceptable cost control
its borders, in the sense relevant to the terrorist issue. In 2004, the
most recent year for which I found figures, there were more than eighty
million tourist arrivals
in North America, presumably most of them in
the U.S. Anyone with sufficient resources and ability to pose a serious
terrorist threat can get into the country as one of those tens of
millions—he doesn’t have to scramble through a tunnel under the
U.S./Mexican border. And making it a criminal offense to hire illegal
aliens will have very little effect on those aliens who are working for
al-Qaeda. They already have a job.

(emphasis, mine)

That’s a quote from David Friedman, as I segue to the topic of immigration. Guess what? If I had the misfortune to have been born in Mexico to a poor family without a hope in their lives of every climbing out of that "do it tomorrow culture" and parasitic political corruption, you bet your ass I’d be crossing the border in search of trading partners (that’s "get a job" for those of you who don’t really understand what a job is). You know what makes me want to reach through the radio and rip the heads off shit-brained morons like Sean Hannity? When they say crap like I just said–that they’d cross the border too–and then they turn right around and advocate strict enforcement of the borders "because it’s the law."

The border and immigration issue is no more enforceable to a level that makes it any more than an exercise in bureaucratic masturbation than the speed limit is enforceable to a level that makes it any more than an exercise in revenue generation theft.

Richard Nikoley

I'm Richard Nikoley. Free The Animal began in 2003 and as of 2021, contains 5,000 posts. I blog what I wish...from health, diet, and food to travel and lifestyle; to politics, social antagonism, expat-living location and time independent—while you sleep—income. I celebrate the audacity and hubris to live by your own exclusive authority and take your own chances. Read More

5 Comments

  1. Neal on March 29, 2006 at 16:24

    You gotta love David Friedman.

    Two things: one, check this out: it's a bunch of kids observing the speed limit on I-285 in Atlanta. To your points, amen, amen and amen. The second thing is that Americans don't seem to realize that illegal immigrants free up Americans to have better jobs. I know the concept isn't super easy to understand, but it's not rocket science either. Sigh.

    Okay, a third thing. I'd be curious to know your thoughts on a post I did a little while back on the difference between Democrats and Republicans.

    Neal

  2. Richard Nikoley on March 29, 2006 at 18:30

    Yea, I'd seen the thing about the kids obeying the law somewhere. And, you've got it about right regarding the differences. Superficial only.

  3. Richard Nikoley on March 30, 2006 at 09:21

    Dawn:

    The problem is that you're drawing a false distinction.

    If these so-called "rights" cannot legitimately be claimed by "illegals" (I assume you are referring to certain "entitlements"), then they can't legitimately be claimed by "legals" either. Why? Because they aren't rights. You have no right, either directly or through your gun-and-lethal-syringe-backed agents, the government, to be "entitled" to anything of mine–not a single cent or second–that I don't voluntarily consent to allow you in gift or trade.

    Understand: I'm not defending their snuggling up to the public teat–with its milk a product of the cannibalization of productive people in bits and pieces–I'm condemning yours, or if you don't yourself partake, then I'm condemning the notion that you advocate it for others on the arbitrary basis of having been born here or survived some gauntlet maze set up to get in here that hasn't a thing to do with me, my property, or my time.

    I'll not dispute that many of them may be just as parasitic as that class of organisms that we have in such native abundance here (most populating government buildings, by the way). But if this, America, can rightly be claimed as someone's "own country," as you put it, then such can rightly be claimed by anyone who wants to claim it. And I'll tell you what: some guy crossing the Rio Grande to work his butt off to support his family has one helluva lot higher moral right to claim it than does some bloodsucker bureaubot in some nameless g-office, or one of those G.I. Joe Stormtroopers who regularly knock down the doors of innocent people who aren't hurting anyone.

    "America" is a spirit, a culture, an ideal, and most of all, a particular ethic, and it exists all over the world.

  4. Dawn on March 29, 2006 at 21:02

    With all the energy illegals displayed over the weekend during their rallies to demand rights they cannot claim, I can't quite understand why they can't use that same energy to change things in their own countries.

  5. Anton Sherwood on April 7, 2006 at 09:02

    It's an unfortunately rare pleasure to be reminded that I'm not alone in this.

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

YouTube1k
YouTube
Pinterest118k
Pinterest
fb-share-icon
40
45
Follow by Email8k
RSS780