Trump’s immigration policy annoys the Wall Street Journal

Home  »  Immigration  »  Trump’s immigration policy annoys the Wall Street Journal
Print This Post Print This Post
Aug 18, 2015 No Comments ›› admin

LOGIC MINUTE
by Lynn Woolley

Make no mistake! Donald Trump is leading the Republican pack because he has spoken out on immigration.

Photo:  FOX News

Photo: FOX News

Over at the Wall Street Journal, the Editorial Board is miffed. With writers and pundits that live in the northeast and inside the Beltway, the Journal is clueless on how the public could sign on to Trump’s immigration ideas.

There are millions of people who just might agree with Trump – but they’ve been told by the Mainstream Media that they are racist if they believe we should enforce immigration laws. But Trump is saying – “enforce them!” That makes it almost cool to come out of the shadows and support such things as border security and even deportation of some illegals. The Journal brings up some straw issues – but they’re the same old same old and are easily fixed. The fact is, with some tweaking, Trump’s plan is workable.

Straw issues.

Here’s a quote for the Journal’s article of August 17th:

“Are his police going to search from door to door to arrest 11 million people? How else will they be rounded up?”

Oh, please.

This is the language used by Rep. Luis Gutierrez. Trump is talking about threatening to deport all illegals—but he knows that would be hard to do. So let’s suppose for a moment that Trump is an intelligent guy and that maybe he reads this article. Here’s how this deportation thing works:

First of all, our laws call for it. Plain and simple, if you sneak into this country and break our immigration laws, you are subject to deportation. The American people know this and they cannot understand why the people in charge – Democrats and Republicans alike – do not do anything. That’s why Trump is resonating. The culture is being decimated so that we can pick strawberries – and most of us would rather not have strawberries than lose what used to be called the American Way.

So! No door-to-door Nazi tactics like the WSJ is implying. But illegals here would have to keep their hands very clean. If they get stopped for a traffic violation, they would have to have a valid drivers licenses. No license? Then immigration status would be checked.

That means fewer illegal lawbreakers, because running a red light, speeding, a burnt-out taillight — anything like that might get you deported. Many people would think twice before sneaking across. Of course, major crimes would get you jailed and eventually deported.

Birthright citizenship.

Again, quoting the Wall Street Journal:

“For no apparent reason, he [Trump] would end automatic birthright citizenship for children born on American soil. This would require editing the Fourteenth Amendment.”

This is not true, and the editors of America’s largest paper should know that. The framers of the 14th Amendment specifically knew that babies would be born in the United States that would not have citizenship conferred upon them. Children born to diplomats stationed here from other countries, vacationers, women on business trips or family trips that might go into labor early, and (of course) women who are in the country illegally.

14th Amendment 1

This amendment carries an “out” clause for such events while protecting children of former slaves. But liberal court rulings conferred the meaning of the amendment to any baby born here for any reason. It’s foolish, and few countries practice it, but we are one of them. The practice has led to “anchor babies” and then to chain migration.

So what to do about it?

Essentially, we need a test lawsuit to be filed, and then work the case up to the Supreme Court. Then, we need an originalist interpretation of the amendment. That’s it. Of course, the Supreme Court would have to act within the law – something it hasn’t done too well of late. But assuming a correct and original reading of the amendment — and birthright citizenship for illegal aliens would be over.

Picking our good fruit.

Yes, we need seasonal workers and construction workers and someone to clean hotel rooms.

With birthright citizenship ended we could have real guest workers programs that would satisfy the need for workers, help poor migrants from south of the border – yet not lead to chain migration and culture changes. This is what’s called a win-win.

Trump also wants a “pause” in immigration – and the Wall Street Journal heart flutters over that. But he’s right. We need time to assimilate the immigrants we have. There is nothing wrong with the idea. The American people would not be so upset about immigration if more immigrants spoke English and assumed the customs of their new country.

We “restrictionists”…

“Restrictionists” is the Journal’s name for people who believe that we are a country and that we have a right to decide who comes in. So I’ll proudly wear the name. I do not think the United States owes illegal aliens a damn thing. On the other hand, they are hard workers and do a good job when hired so far as I know — and for not much money.

We can formulate a policy that will work for Americans and for the immigrants. But we can’t do it with John Boehner and Mitch McConnell and the Status Quo politicians in both parties. That’s where Donald Trump comes in! That’s why he’s leading the pack!

lynn@BeLogical.com

Tagged with: , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

%d bloggers like this: