Radio talk show host Mike Gallagher is the latest \u201cconservative\u201d media personality to endorse amnesty. \u00a0Since he revealed his Road to Damascus conversion on this topic a few days ago, Gallagher has been skewered by one-time fans.<\/p>\n
Perhaps they should cease the skewering by ceasing to listen to Gallagher\u2014or any other talk radio figure who favors amnesty.<\/p>\n
More so than the substance of their position, it is the bad faith and condescension with which these “conservative” hosts argue for their position that justifies this move.<\/p>\n
Those of us who affirm American sovereignty and the rule of law have long recognized that a government that wouldn\u2019t lift a finger to prevent millions of immigrants from flooding into the country illegally certainly isn\u2019t going to now round up and deport them all.\u00a0 So those who insist that this is the only alternative to amnesty set up what logicians call a false dichotomy\u2014one of the logical fallacies identified by Aristotle.<\/p>\n
Gallagher and his ilk attribute to their opponents a position that the latter do not hold.\u00a0 Worse, their enemies assign to respecters of the rule of law a position that is a species of wishful thinking, and one that the resisters of amnesty have always known, <\/i>and known better than anyone, <\/i>is wishful thinking.<\/p>\n
Those who ache for America to remain a sovereign nation of laws have always maintained that it is primarily through self-deportation<\/i> that the illegal immigration issue can be mitigated, <\/i>though never solved. <\/i><\/p>\n
This brings us to another point.<\/p>\n
Pro-amnesty \u201cconservative\u201d personalities and politicians\u2014along with such accomplices as Barack Obama, Janet Napolitano, and La Raza\u2014talk about the need for a \u201csolution\u201d to this problem of our \u201cbroken\u201d system.\u00a0 But genuinely conservative (and, for that matter, Christian) thinkers have always known that in life, there are no solutions.\u00a0 <\/i>As Thomas Sowell has said, there are only \u201ctrade-offs.\u201d<\/p>\n
Amnesty, regardless of how it is packaged, is no more a solution to our problems than is the status quo.\u00a0 It isn\u2019t even a more effective response to our situation.\u00a0 However, even if it was, this would not make it a solution, for it will give way to still more problems in the future\u2014like an increase<\/i> in illegal immigration, something that, according to border agents, is happening now as a result of all of the talk of amnesty!<\/p>\n
For amnesty\u2019s apologists to accuse their opponents of \u201cdoing nothing\u201d is more dishonesty, more bad faith, on their part.<\/p>\n
First, even if it was true that those who resist amnesty favored letting things be entirely as they are, this is still not a matter of doing nothing. It just could be the case\u2014it undoubtedly is <\/i>the case\u2014that here, the problem is less of a problem than is the proposed \u201csolution.\u201d<\/p>\n
Second, no one wants for things to remain as they are. Those who resist amnesty want for illegal immigrants to be denied all welfare entitlements, social services, employment opportunities, and voting and driving privileges.\u00a0 This way, they will deport themselves.\u00a0 Also, they want for the government to satisfy its job description and secure the country\u2019s borders\u2014an obligation that has never been subject to conditions.<\/p>\n
Gallagher and his colleagues obviously believe that their listeners are stupid. Why else would they expect them to believe that although in the past <\/i>the government has not managed to secure the borders and deprive illegal immigrants of all the benefits of citizenship\u2014i.e. enforce its own laws–it will <\/i>do so now<\/i>?<\/p>\n
And it is hard not to think that Gallagher and company aren\u2019t themselves a bit dense.\u00a0 They won\u2019t endorse any bill, they insist, unless it promises <\/i>to secure the border.\u00a0 Even in the midst of all of these government scandals, and despite all of their \u201climited government\u201d rhetoric, they are still going to accept the government\u2019s \u201cpromise\u201d to fulfill its constitutional duty\u2014though it hasn\u2019t done this in nearly half-a-century.<\/p>\n
On second\u2019s thought, maybe it is<\/i> the substance of their position favoring amnesty that calls for turning off these \u201cconservative\u201d media personalities\u2014at least until they wise up some. \u00a0<\/i><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Radio talk show host Mike Gallagher is the latest \u201cconservative\u201d media personality to endorse amnesty. \u00a0Since he revealed his Road to Damascus conversion on this topic a few days ago, Gallagher has been skewered by one-time fans. Perhaps they should cease the skewering by ceasing to listen to Gallagher\u2014or any other talk radio figure who…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":399,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-855","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"yoast_head":"\n