A Crock

There was an appallingly bad piece in the American Spectator yesterday by Brandon Crocker arguing in favor of a ``guest-worker`` program for illegal aliens, and against the ``extremists`` who want to enforce the law. I`ve written a point by point rebuttal.

First off, Mr. Crocker tries to obliquely play the ``hate`` card, subtly accusing those who don`t agree with him of intolerance, and complains that Congressman Tom Tancredo `` seems only interested in punishing people and throwing and keeping people out of the country.``

Gee, I thought that was the point of enforcing the law. Lawbreakers should be punished, and people trespassing in this country should be thrown out and kept out. Would he hold the same view if some of these people were to break into his home and set up housekeeping?

He goes on to say``Effectively squeezing out probably upwards of 10 million workers from a U.S. economy that only has an indigenous long-term unemployed population of about 1.4 million, does not strike me as wise public policy, especially if there are better alternatives.`` Uh, what exactly are those better alternatives? Allowing tens of millions of aliens to violate our sovereignty is not an alternative. Increased efficiency, automation, and innovation are a better alternative. Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, etc. all prospered from their lack of cheap labor-they found new ways to do things, and production went up while prices fell. Does Mr. Crocker really believe that cheap labor ultimately helps the economy? Fat lot of good it did in the antebellum South; he is advocating a plantation system.

He shrugs off the argument that a guest-worker program will undermine enforcement; `` Again, there is no reason to believe that such stronger enforcement would be less likely than under an "enforcement only" approach, which would face far larger political and practical problems.``

There is every reason to believe that; the guest-worker program would increase demand for illegals by making it easier to obtain cheap labor, and regularizing them would lead to vertical movement, which would mean new aliens would need to be recruited. Does Mr. Crocker want to see the AFL-CIO unionize the ``guests`` and recruit them into the Democratic Party? Has Mr. Crocker ever thrown bread crumbs out for the birds? The more you throw, the more they come. The guest-invader program would have the same effect.

Don`t believe me? It happened in the U.S. Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands; they`ve had a guest-worker program for years, and the islands are full of illegal aliens who have destroyed the indigenous culture.

``And though not all working illegals may find the security of legal status worth the expense of the $2,000 or the hassle of the other requirements, their employers will.``

REALLY? Who`s going to make them? The Government has refused to enforce the law for 20 years; are they going to have a change of heart and start now? Besides, when the guest-worker moves on, or the company grows, will the employer follow the legal path, or just hire his guest-worker`s kid brother and skip the hassle?

Mr. Crocker makes a fatuous argument; ``It is true that the processing of millions of illegals would take a bit of manpower. But this is a strange objection coming from a group that uses the phrase "whatever it takes" as a slogan`` Now, we are told that it is impossible to deport all of the illegals in this country, but that we can legally process and organize this bunch. If we can catch them and tag them, we can deport them. The fact is, this will require an enormous bureaucracy which will have to have a way of identifying and keeping track of all of these people. It will either be impossible or will require a National I.D. card for ALL Americans.

His remark that `` There simply are not enough Americans around to do all the jobs currently being done by illegals, and the impact of eliminating upwards of 10 million workers will be a bit more than merely forcing a few middle class families to clean their own homes and mow their own lawns`` simply ignores the slow attrition rate that would allow the economy to adapt. This is a straw man argument, an argument which requires us to assume all 11 million invaders will be deported immediately.

The guest-worker program is an atrocious idea, an idea which will merely accelerate the invasion. This immigration is as dangerous to the ultimate welfare of the Republic as Islamic Terrorism, and if we want to have a country, we must deal with this threat, and now. You don`t get rid of pests by feeding them, and you won`t get rid of uninvited ``guests`` by accommodating them.

There are three things which need to be done: Secure the border with all means at our disposal, maintain strict enforcement of all laws pertaining to the hiring and aiding and abetting of illegal aliens (I advocate setting up work-camps for illegals on the border, so their friends will see them working for weeks or months for no pay-call it a voluntary WPA program), and, finally, pressure Mexico to clean up it`s act. That last is an often forgotten necessity; if the illegals don`t make it to the border, we won`t have a problem. The CIA has too much time on their hands; they`ve engaged in special ops against the President. Perhaps we should allow them to do what they do best down in old Mexico. Perhaps regime change is in order? (Why not? We`ve done this sort of thing before.) The Mexican government is hopelessly corrupt, and has repeatedly squandered the money we have given them for economic development. It`s time for a change.

Of course, regular readers of Birdblog have heard this all before. I sometimes feel I`m shouting into a void; certainly, sophomoric arguments like the ones made by Crocker suggest that few are listening.

Sigh...