A primer for the Stupid Party

Clark Coleman writes:

I will concisely list five arguments against immigration amnesty that even the elected members of the Stupid Party should be able to understand.

1. Doing your duty is not negotiable. You cannot trade a promise to enforce our existing laws for anything in return, because you must do your sworn duty to enforce our existing laws, regardless. It is as if a husband and wife are discussing their troubled marriage, and he says, “I will stop committing adultery if you, in return…” and she interrupts, “Don’t you have to stop committing adultery as a non-negotiable commitment to our marriage, as your marriage vows promised? Why do I have to trade something for that?”

2. Ignoring point #1, enforcing the laws was promised in the 1986 amnesty deal. You cannot trade it for anything now; it has already been bartered. Put simply, you already owe us strict enforcement.

3. Speaking of 1986, conservatives are supposed to be the “common-sense” types who learn from empirical evidence, unlike those liberal ideologues who never admit the evidence that indicates failure of their policies. How did the 1986 amnesty work out? Did Hispanic voters, out of gratitude to the GOP, ever hit 50 percent support for GOP candidates post-1986, even for a little while? How stupid is it to ignore the best empirical evidence we have? [LA replies: George Bush the elder, in the presidential election immediately after the 1986 amnesty, got 30 of the Hispanic vote.]

4. Why would Hispanics give more credit to the Stupid Party than to the Evil Party if a bipartisan amnesty bill passes?

5. Speaking of #4, if the GOP pro-amnesty crowd is correct and Hispanics flock to the GOP after a bipartisan amnesty, why don’t those stupid Democrats see this electoral disaster coming? Why are they pushing for bipartisan support for amnesty? Don’t they realize they will lose the Hispanic vote forever? Does the GOP have a record of pulling a fast one on those gullible Democrats that we can point to, so that GOP voters can be reassured that the opposite is not happening?

P.S. Note that point #3 carries the implication that mainstream GOP politicians include a select number (McCain, Rubio, Cantor, Graham) who are in fact liberal ideologues.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at February 11, 2013 08:04 AM | Send