The Debate Over Illegal Immigration Gets Even Crazier
June 4, 2010 by Chip Wood
Remember the expression, to swallow a camel but choke on a gnat?
That’s how I feel about the reaction of several people who commented on what I recently wrote about illegal immigration. The first column was called Arizona, Si! Obama, No! You can click here read it. The second ran a week later and was titled Anchor Babies and the Illegal 14th. If you missed it, click here to read that one.
The three most important points I made in those two successive columns were:
- The Federal government has refused to protect us from an illegal invasion. Because of this failure by our national government, Arizona had a responsibility to its citizens to act.
- Of all the crazy aspects of this situation, the most insane is our policy of granting immediate and automatic citizenship to any child born in this country—even if both parents were illegal immigrants.
- The justification for this absurd policy—and many others that have allowed the Federal government to expand dramatically and dangerously—is the 14th Amendment. My research has convinced me that this amendment was never legally ratified.
Now those are some pretty big issues, wouldn’t you say? We’re talking about a president who flatly refuses to enforce the law. About an absurd policy that creates instant citizens of the offspring of illegal immigrants. And about a conspiracy—there’s no other word for it—to twist and distort our most important legal document, so it can be used to enslave us.
I thought that most people who read those columns would respond to one of these truly momentous points. I anticipated receiving some interesting, intelligent and well-informed arguments—some agreeing with me, some not.
And while there were many comments that fit that description, there were a surprising number that did not. One of the most mind-numbing replies I’ve ever received to anything I’ve written for Personal Liberty Alerts came from a David Warheit, who argued:
“Has the legality of the 14th Amendment ever been ruled upon by the U.S. Supreme Court? Of course it has, in hundreds if not thousands of cases. Every single case decided by the Supreme Court which cites the 14th Amendment serves as a ratification of its legality.”
How do you like that for circular reasoning? Because the Supreme Court cites an illegal amendment to justify even more unconstitutional encroachments by the Federal government, why of course that means I’m wrong, doesn’t it?
In my United States history courses I was taught that our justice system was one of the most unique in history because both sides to an issue got to present their best arguments in open court. They were encouraged to cite all of the evidence they could find, with the very best witnesses they could subpoena, before an impartial jury or judge rendered a verdict.
But according to Mr. Warheit, we don’t need any of that. Forget any evidence; ignore any arguments. Why, if the Court cites the amendment in a ruling, then it must be legal, proper, and oh-so constitutional. Sounds like an argument by the Red Queen in Alice in Wonderland, doesn’t it?
But the absurdities surrounding this issue don’t stop here. We also have the incredible spectacle of the most powerful lawyer in the land, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, vowing to use the full resources of his department to get the Arizona law declared unconstitutional—while at the very same time admitting, in sworn testimony before Congress, that he hasn’t even read the law!
That startling admission came during testimony before the House Judiciary Committee. Rep. Ted Poe (R-Texas) offered to loan the AG his own copy of the Arizona law. After all, as he noted, “It’s only 10 pages long—a lot shorter than the healthcare bill.” There’s still no word on whether the country’s top lawyer has read the bill he so vociferously opposes.
Meanwhile, ABC News reported that State Department officials engaged in talks on human rights abuses apologized for Arizona’s tough new anti-illegal immigration law—to the communist Chinese! Yes, you read that right. Continuing President Obama’s policy of apologizing to every tinhorn despot and Marxist dictator anywhere for his country’s “failings,” your country has now officially apologized to the leaders of one of the least free nations on earth for the actions of a state that is only trying to enforce the law.
Adding insult to injury, the administration then arranged to have their dear friend Felipe Calderon, the left-wing president of Mexico, address a joint session of Congress. To no one’s surprise, the Mexican president—whose own country has some of the harshest anti-immigration laws in the world—condemned the actions of the governor and state legislature of Arizona for trying to curb the flood of illegal immigrants pouring into their state from… Mexico.
Insulting as Calderon’s performance was, there were two that were worse. I’m referring to the two most powerful Democrats in Congress—House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.)—who both leapt to their feet and applauded like mad when his diatribe was done.
I have to tell you, I can’t remember a week in which I have been more disgusted with my country’s leaders.
So in the midst of all of this, I was delighted to get a call from an old friend who asked me if I would do a telephone interview with a guy in Phoenix who had the media in a dither because of a T-shirt he wore to a basketball game. Here’s the story.
Do you remember when Robert Sarver, the owner of the Phoenix Suns, announced that the team’s uniform would be changed temporarily from the Suns to “Los Suns?” Since Sarver had previously marched with Al Sharpton and other leftist agitators in opposition to Arizona’s new anti-illegal immigration legislation, he left no doubt what he meant by the change.
The media loved it. Heck, even President Obama gave a shout-out to the new jerseys during a press conference in the Rose Garden.
This was too much for one fan. Jim Clark promptly had some T-shirts made (in the same bright orange of the Suns’ jerseys) that said “Viva los 1070”—the number of the legislation that was causing all the uproar. He and a buddy wore them to that night’s game.
Turns out Jim’s seats were in the front row, right behind the bench of the San Antonio Spurs. So every time TNT, which was broadcasting the game nationally, scanned the bench, Jim and his buddy (and their T-shirts) were on national TV. Same thing when the jumbotron in the stadium showed the Spur’s bench.
This was too much for some wuss in the Suns’ organization. Before too long a couple of burly security agents showed up. First they asked Jim and his friend to remove their shirts. They refused. Then they asked them to turn them inside out. Again, they said no.
It turns out their third choice was to be tossed out of the game. When ordered to leave, they complied. But once outside the stadium, they asked to speak with someone with more authority. After much back and forth and some private phone calls, Jim and his friends were allowed to re-enter the stadium. The crowd around them applauded enthusiastically when they took their seats—proudly wearing their “Viva los 1070” shirts.
So there the story ends, right? Not on your life. Jim and his shirt became a cause célèbre in the local media. He was interviewed on several local talk shows and TV programs. Then Fox News picked up the story nationally. Glenn Beck talked about it on his program. Jim was asked to be a guest (by phone) on radio shows as far away as Portland, Ore., and Minneapolis.
And this being America, orders for that T-shirt started pouring into Phoenix. Jim responded as would any good entrepreneur—he created a website. Now you too can go to http://www.vivalos1070.com and support Arizona by wearing your own personal “Viva los 1070” T-shirt.
So here’s to one patriot who isn’t afraid to stand up proudly for his beliefs. Or, in this case, to sit quietly behind the bench of his favorite basketball team and let his T-shirt do the talking.
Until next time, keep some powder dry.