It was crystal clear when Republican Senator Marco Rubio announced his intent at constructing a bi-partisan immigration bill last November that President Barack Obama would not allow Rubio to steal one of the divisive political arrows from his quiver.
Nothing upsets the current administration more than having an alinsky-type
talking attack point removed from their arsenal before they have the opportunity to use it. [One only needs to look at the “Alligator Moat” Speech in 2011] Such is clearly the case with the current immigration proposals.
Yesterday the bi-Partisan initiatives Senator Rubio had previously discussed were outlined. The general process includes a pathway to “legal status” and eventually to a “green card”. The foundation of his proposal is contingent upon enforcement and border security first, then a pathway to legal immigrant status.
Obviously the general Legacy Media types will carry the Obama flag on their outlets 24/7 and tout the Presidents proposals as “mainstream”. Cue Mr. Tingles:
CHRIS MATTHEWS: People that believe in border protection, who believe you can stop somebody from coming into this country by higher towers, or more drones, or more people working there, I think are right-wingers or idiots. If you want to work and you’re looking for a job, you’re going to come to America, Congresswoman. You’re going to come in here and you’re going to find a way in, whether you have to take a boat, an airplane, or swim. Whatever you have to do, you’re going to get here.
And my question is, are we going to have a work permit situation that’s truly enforced so they’ll be no incentive to do that? Because you can’t work in the United States unless you’re here legally. If we ever have a system like that, we won’t be having this debate in 20 or 30 years from now all over again. (Hardball, January 28, 2013)
Mr. Tingles represents the general consensus points of the progressive media. If you make “work” contingent on legal status then people will stop crossing the border. The only problem with that prog-logic is the flaw of “welfare”.
“Benefits”, as in monetary value and quality of life, are the driver for immigration – not just abject capacity to be gainfully employed. Indeed, a stronger argument is made that job *opportunities* are stronger in Mexico than the U.S…… yet they still come. Why? Welfare, healthcare, and benefits. None of which are stemmed with the prog-logic proposals from Mr. Tingles et al.
And while you are contemplating this. There is another aspect to border security that is far more important than just economic masses of those “yearning to come to America”. There is a far more dangerous element hell-bent on taking advantage of this progressive logic and open border crowd. REMINDER – CLICK HERE