Apr 19 2008

Michelle Malkin Balks At Her Own Handy Work

Published by at 8:54 am under All General Discussions,Illegal Immigration

It is rare when I take on the far right. It is usually a waste of time since they refuse to listen and then I get a bunch of blow back for daring to point out their mistakes. But I am a glutton for punishment, and I have to point out things that are just blatantly misguided.

When the far right tanked the last chance for immigration reform last year I went on record that they now OWNED every result of that short sighted act. If there was something in the laws they blocked – like the immediate deportation of aliens who commit violent crimes -those acts are now on their shoulders. I have posted on this responsibility shift forever – it is no longer a Bush or Congress responsibility for these problems, they had a plan in place and heading for passage.

So when I see Michelle Malkin holding up an example of a problem with immigration which she and her Amnesty Hypochondriacs are responsible for, I have to point it out.

WRAL reports on a new statistical breakdown of illegal alien drunk drivers in North Carolina. It’s a blood-pressure-raising look at the deadly revolving door, catch-and-release, the deportation abyss, and the danger of sanctuary policies embraced by those sworn to defend and protect the public:

And the deportation abyss is because the laws did not get passed and there will be no new laws for years to come. This is as much Michelle’s fault as those she lambastes – she just won’t admit her efforts to stop the legislation kept the status quo in place. I want to remind people why I call Michelle and Tancredo and their ilk Amnesty Hypochondriacs:

The far right literally lied when they claimed all we had to do was exercise current law and we could fix our immigration problems. They crafted this lie because there was a chance the comprehensive immigration bill would pass the senate, and those here illegally for a long time would only be punished by a fine and back taxes, and held to the promise to stay crime free and register with the new immigration system. They called this less-than-deportation punishment “amnesty”. That is why I call them the Amnesty Hypochondriacs. There never was Reagan-style amnesty on the table – but they lied about that too.

As people know I will not debate on false pretenses and lies. As the comprehensive immigration reform got closer to reality some panicked and started to believe exaggerated and extreme theories. They became invested in myths just as the left has invested in myths that Iraq is a defeat.

I have no choice but to remind people that actions have results, and you better take responsibility for all the results of your actions, not just the ones you wanted but all those you did not think through. That is the essence of law and order: ignorance is not an excuse. You cannot say I had not realized that would happen and get a pass on vehicular manslaughter. You can only get the lowered punishment for negligence verses premeditation.

Michelle and the Amnesty Hypochondriacs traded endless drunk drivers for the opportunity to try one more time to deport the illegals, either directly or through coercion from lost wages, etc. There never was going to be the removal of 10-20 million people who have lived here for years, but they were not thinking straight, they had to stop the bill which would not have provided the punishments they wanted. They did not care the vast majority in this democracy did not agree with them, and therefore they should have accepted the fact they did not have the numbers and let as much reform get passed as was possible.

The fact is we had two choices and they gave us the worst of the two. Choice one was (a) comprehensive reform passes with its imperfections, (b) the long term illegals get a process to prove they should, and then pay, to stay, and (c) we get to deport the violent criminals without minimal resistance from the judicial branch (there would be some test challenges, always are.

The second choice is where we are: (a) no immigration reform, (b) long term illegals get to stay and (c) we still cannot deport violent criminals. The lie back then was we could fix our problems with current law. I have many posts on why that was a lie and is a lie. So when Michelle holds up these examples of what she and others wrought last year when they killed immigration reform I can only shake my head and ask “what were you thinking?” Remember Michelle, all those dead children might have been alive if the Immigration Reform package had passed and these criminals would have been deported instead of given a second chance. You all own this issue now, since you left us with this mess.

Update: Pam over at Right Voices is hosting a neutral debate corner – I suggest folks also comment there as well as here and at Michelle’s site. As Pam notes, it is a debate worth having.

62 responses so far

62 Responses to “Michelle Malkin Balks At Her Own Handy Work”

  1. Whippet1 says:



    “Your mind is closed so I will only do this one more time. The laws on the books have been weakened by challenge cases and precedence. It happens. The new laws would have limited the ability of the judiciary to ‘interpret’.”

    “But of course you knew that, right? ”

    Left by AJStrata on April 19th, 2008

    I will ask again…Where is it stated in the Bill that “The new laws would have limited the ability of the judiciary to ‘interpret’.”

    I have no other choices than to assume you either are too busy to provide the proof of your statement, that you have been unable to find it, or that it doesn’t exist.

    Maybe RickC or DC can provide me with that information.

  2. VinceP1974 says:

    Physical border fence/barrier works. “Virtual” bullcrap does not.


    “Even though Project 28 produced approximately 3,000 apprehensions since tests began last December, it is estimated that hundreds of illegal immigrants attempt to cross into the U.S. through the Tucson sector everyday. The number of presumed crossings in this sector, since the start of Project 28, clearly demonstrates the failure of virtual fencing as a stand-alone enforcement mechanism.

    “Conversely, crossing attempts and apprehensions in the Yuma sector, where approximately 30 miles of physical fencing has been built since 2007, have significantly declined. In 2006, before fence construction, there were almost 119,000 apprehensions in the Yuma sector. In 2007, when fence construction started, the number of apprehensions reduced to approximately 38,000 — and so far in 2008, there have been fewer than 4,000 apprehensions in this particular sector.”