At the Intersection of Faith and Culture

At the Intersection of Faith and Culture


Neither Marco Rubio Nor His Amnesty Plan are Conservative

posted by Jack Kerwick

Not so long ago, such conservative movement notables as Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and many of their colleagues were singing the praises of Florida Senator Marco Rubio.  The latter, we have been told, is a rock-ribbed conservative and GOP star who could very well be the next president of the United States.

Doubtless, it is courtesy of the pivotal role that he’s played in promoting the amnesty agenda of “the Gang of Eight” that accounts for why the enthusiasm for Rubio among movement celebrities at least appears to have cooled some.  Hopefully, appearance here coincides with reality, for Rubio is not now, nor has he ever been, a conservative.  His position on immigration is just the latest proof of this.

Yet it isn’t just that Rubio has been tenaciously advancing amnesty for millions upon millions of illegal immigrants, though this is bad enough.  What’s worse is the dishonesty that he’s shown in his pursuit of this end.

Rubio features in an ad that is played incessantly in Republican-friendly venues in which he tries to convince his party’s base that his amnesty plan is “bold, very conservative, a tough line on immigration.”  But, observes Jon Feere from the Center for Immigration Studies, given “all the exemptions and waivers” contained in his bill, “it is difficult” to buy this.

Rubio also promises that for the 11 million or so amnestied immigrants, there will be “no federal benefits, no food stamps, no welfare, no Obamacare,” and “they [will] have to prove that they’re gainfully employed.”  Feere’s response: “Rubio is simply wrong with these assertions.” He explains: “Illegal immigrants are already receiving federal benefits and this bill would do nothing to stop that.” Moreover, Rubio’s plan “would actually extend greater amounts of benefits to illegal immigrants by giving them legal status.”

Rubio claims that his plan deals with the problem of illegal immigration “once and for all,” but as Feere points out, the 1986 amnesty on which Reagan signed off also promised to deal with this problem “once and for all.”  It failed abysmally to deliver. Why think things will be different now?

According to Rubio, his bill does not incite immigrants to come to America illegally.  Feere remarks that, evidently, Rubio is not paying any mind to “border officials” who have testified to the contrary before Congress.  Feere cites a Washington Times article in which Border Patrol Chief Michael J. Fisher’s testimony before the Senate is relayed.  Fisher is blunt: “We have seen an increase in attempted entries.”  The article continues: “He [Fisher] said part of the reason for an increase is that Congress is talking about legalizing illegal immigrants, which is luring more foreigners to try to be in the U.S. when amnesty takes effect.”

Rubio’s claim that amnesty is not “unfair to the people who have done it the right way” is just as bogus as his other assertions.  Feere writes: “The reality is that illegal aliens get to stay in the country the moment they apply for amnesty.”  As soon as they pass “the simple background check, they receive legal status and nearly all the benefits of citizenship [.]”

Rubio’s ad calls for us to “stand” with him in putting an end to “de facto amnesty” while supporting “Conservative Immigration Reform.”  Feere replies that “Rubio wants to turn the de facto amnesty that we’re currently experiencing as a result of non-enforcement of immigration laws into a de jure amnesty for millions of people who do not belong here.”  At the same time, he “asks you to ‘stand’ with him, but Rubio himself is standing with Obama, Napolitano, La Raza, the ACLU, and many other amnesty supporters who cannot be described as ‘conservative’ in any sense of the word.”

Feere does a thorough job of exposing Rubio’s comprehensive amnesty plan for the sham that it is.  However, just a modicum of common sense is enough to see that Rubio and his accomplices in the Gang of Eight are trying to pull one over on us.

Our government has proven itself to be either incapable of or unwilling to enforce our immigration laws up until this point.  Now, after Rubio and company heap new conditions upon the old law books, we’re expected to believe that the government will finally do what it has neglected doing for decades.

But if you believe this, then you’ll believe that Marco Rubio is a conservative.



Previous Posts

Abortion Reconsidered II
John T. Noonan, a Catholic jurist whose work on abortion regularly features in ethics textbooks, contends that the traditional definition of a human being remains rationally superior to its competitors. A human being, Noonan insists, is anyone who has been conceived by human parents. The most com

posted 10:13:20pm Oct. 01, 2014 | read full post »

Abortion Reconsidered
Judith Jarvis Thomson is a veteran philosopher who, several decades ago, penned a thought-provoking essay that features in virtually all of the contemporary texts used in college-level ethics courses. Her objective is to show that what she takes to be the standard argument against abortion fails to

posted 8:08:09pm Sep. 30, 2014 | read full post »

ISIS: How You Know It's All Hype II
Recently, I cautioned my fellow Americans against falling for the notion that the so-called “Islamic State” is among the gravest threats, or any threat, that the United States had ever encountered. I noted that if the hyperbolic cries of politicians and their media propagandists in both parti

posted 8:37:02pm Sep. 27, 2014 | read full post »

ISIS: How You Know It's All Hype
There is much talk about “the Islamic State,” or “ISIS,” or “ISIL,” or whatever we are calling it. To listen to the talking heads, both Democrats and Republicans, one could be forgiven for thinking that these 15,000 or so Muslim butchers are the biggest threat that the Western world has

posted 8:05:29pm Sep. 24, 2014 | read full post »

The Politically Incorrect (?!) Language of the Politically Correct
It would seem that the Enlightened, i.e. those whose moral sensibilities are offended by the name of “Redskins” for a professional sports team, want to purge our language of every “racist,” “sexist,” “classist,” “imperialist,” “colonialist,” and “homophobic” word. The

posted 5:10:35pm Sep. 22, 2014 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.