I well understand that the title of my article today, Amnesty
Versus Bigotry, might be read to imply that I think those who
oppose amnesty are bigots. I want to make it clear: that is
absolutely not the case. I understand that the arguments against
almost any path toward legalization of the current population of
illegal immigrants are based on real, important matters including
the rule of law, economic impact, and moral hazard for the
future.
I am not denigrating those who steadfastly support anything that
has even the slightest whiff of “amnesty” about it.
I believe that legislation that allows some sort of eventual
path toward legal status, and eventually (but hopefully not too
soon) citizenship for most current illegals is inevitable. It can
either happen with Republican participation (and therefore get a
tolerable, if not optimal, outcome) or without it, in which case we
get the immigration equivalent of Obamacare.
My point is not that Republicans/conservatives are bigots. It is
that the party’s positions on immigration and gay marriage make it
all too easy to portray the GOP that way. And while I don’t
consider myself conservative, and I recently dropped my Republican
Party registration and became unaffiliated, the GOP is the nation’s
only real hope at this point. Unfortunately, the GOP knows neither
how to market their brand nor really what their brand is.
This morning, I received a long comment to my article. The
gentleman, whom I will not name, was not happy with me. I would
like to share it, along with my response, with you:
Mr. Kaminsky:
I have been informed and enjoyed your previous columns. Your
latest shows me you care not one bit about this country.
As a German immigrant, who became a citizen on my 18th
birthday and spent 3 years in the military - including combat duty
in Vietnam -, I found your column very deceitful and
traitorous.
America has a unique culture and identity and you propose to
destroy that culture and identity with people who have no respect
for our laws and our traditions.
We are already bankrupt as a nation and you want to legalize
another unskilled 40-60 million people who will receive welfare.
(The 10-15 million illegals and the other 30-40 million relatives
who will be allowed into this country for purposes of ‘family
reunification’.)
Worst of all, you propse turning this nation into a
place of men instead of laws and a ‘thurd world’
country.
It is not bigotry to believe in the rule of law.
It is not bigotry to believe that we have a right to our own
culture and traditions.
It is not bigotry to believe that I should not have to pay
welfare to criminal foreigners.
It is not bigotry to believe that we should keep America as a
large majority white European, Judeo-Christian country.
It is not bigotry to believe we should follow the
Constitution.
It is not bigotry to believe that Americans, not illegal
criminal invaders, have the authority and right to determine who
enters this country. (You seem to have a problem with that.
Finally, I have come to the conclusion it would be far better
to split the country. No doubt you will join the Liberal
Fascist anti-America side.
America has three enemies:
1) Islam
2) Liberalism
3) The business elites who have no allegiance to any
country. You are in that group.
(Name signed here.)
And here’s my response:
Mr. ******,
You very much misunderstand me.
I do not want millions more on welfare. In fact, I would rather
see most of the illegals leave than stay under any circumstance.
But we have to live in reality; they’re not leaving.
I do not propose to destroy the culture. I believe that a good
understanding of American history, the Constitution, and some real
level of proficiency in English should be required of any citizen.
I believe that the balkanization of the country, esp. with people
not speaking English, is a big problem.
I would not increase the use of family visas unless the family
can prove that they won’t need welfare, and unless states can
refuse them welfare.
I want to enforce the borders as well as other
immigration-related laws, but still we have the policy problem of
the people who are here already and the political problem of the
damage this issue is doing to the only major political party that
does love and respect what this nation stands for.
In your “It is not bigotry…” list, I am for every proposition
you suggest except that I don’t see how it’s possible to ensure
forever that we are a majority of a particular color or even
religious background, though the former is clearly more at risk
than the latter.
As for me personally, I’m hardly “business elite.” I work for
myself, don’t make a lot of money, etc. My parents were both
officers in the US Navy, I lived on and around military bases, and
I am extremely patriotic and think that the Constitution and
Declaration are the most important political documents in the
history of mankind and should be respected and honored.
My primary point in the article was a political one: A
combination of issues is being spun by opponents of the Republican
Party to make the GOP look like bigots. It’s working. It’s killing
the GOP. Now you have to decide whether you want to be absolutely
pure to everything you consider a principle and proceed to lose
every election and have a government which destroys every principle
you believe in, or whether you are willing to give up a little
around the edges (but only a little, hopefully) and have a chance
at winning elections and returning this country toward respect for
our Founding documents and principles.
In my experience, some things that people think about as
political “principles” are better thought of as goals, in the sense
that some things are worth refusing to compromise on, but other
things can be compromised on without selling your soul. I do not
claim to be the arbiter of where the line is drawn other than for
myself. I simply suggest you ask yourself where those lines are for
you, and the varying implications in both policy and politics based
on where they are drawn.
Thank you for your patriotism and your service to our great
nation.
RGK
