Jim Terry
April 26, 2013
Soft as mashed potatoes
By Jim Terry

Suppose Senator Marco Rubio came home after a busy month in Washington to find some strangers in his home. Suppose the strangers were poor, homeless family members- the father with no work, looking for food for his family, a comfortable place to lay their heads for the night. Suppose during the month the Senator was away, the trespassers have eaten the food from his pantry, worn his and his wife's clothes, enjoyed his pool, pawned some of his wife's jewelry and bought a car, living in his home as though it were their home.

Would Senator Rubio call the police and report burglars, trespassers, criminals who had broken into his home?

Would he offer them an opportunity to move in with him and his family and employ them as his servants with salaries so they could redeem his wife's jewelry from the pawn shop?

Would Senator Rubio offer them a path to adoption into his family?

Given the above scenario I suspect Senator Rubio, or any other senator, would call the police, file criminal charges of breaking and entering, theft, burglary, trespassing, or any of several crimes committed during the occupation by this poor family just looking for a way through their tragedy. Marco Rubio, as one of the leaders in the current immigration mess, is the proverbial fox guarding the hen house. Although he was born in the United States, he is a product of recent immigration. His parents came to the U.S. from Cuba in the mid 1950s and became naturalized citizens several years later. His view of immigration is colored by his family's experience. Rubio is as soft as mashed potatoes on illegal immigration.

Why do Washington politicians not see illegal immigration as a crime of breaking and entering, trespassing, theft, burglary, and a number of other crimes which derive from it?

One example of a law many illegal immigrants violate is the requirement that all male residents, ages eighteen to twenty-five (including illegal immigrants), must register for the draft. The penalty to not register is incarceration in a federal penitentiary up to five years and a fine of up to $250,000. However, the U.S. Department of Justice made the decision several years ago to not prosecute this offense. That is amnesty.

The Washington lying machine is working full-time to convince Americans that the immigration plan currently under consideration in the U.S. Senate, Rubio's plan, does not provide amnesty for illegal immigrants. One thing Americans can count on from the politicians in Washington, whether Democrats or Republicans, they emit a stink. It is the stink of mendacity.

Any law which allows a pathway to citizenship- and that is what we are being told Senator Rubio's plan contains- other than the pathway to citizenship for a person waiting to enter the United States under current immigration laws, is a form of amnesty. And, it is not equal treatment.

One provision in Rubio's proposal is that illegal immigrants currently here would have to pay taxes on prior earnings. Since many of them are living in the underground economy of cash, how will the government determine the amount of taxes they owe for work performed over the past ten, twenty, or thirty years? It cannot. Failure to pay the correct amount of taxes owed is amnesty. Yet, Senator Rubio continues to disclaim amnesty in his immigration law.

The way amnesty can be avoided is for current immigration laws to be enforced and all illegal immigrants to be returned to their countries of origin, which would give Americans some feeling of good faith on the part of their government.

Since the Simpson -Mazzoli Act was signed into law in 1986 by President Reagan, four presidents have not enforced many of the provisions put there to discourage illegal immigration. While that legislation contained no language of amnesty it, nevertheless, was acknowledged by politicians and the media as an act of amnesty for illegal immigrants.

The current president refuses to enforce any law regarding illegal immigration and, instead, recently released thousands of illegal immigrants who had been convicted of criminal acts beyond their illegal immigration.

In October 2006, President Bush signed into law a bill requiring 700 miles of fence be built along the U. S. Border with Mexico. The law passed both houses of Congress with strong majorities. This was to assure Americans the government is serious about protecting the country's borders against illegal immigration. In 2010, Obama stopped the project. The U.S.-Mexico border is not secure and Washington politicians don't seem to care.

Why should Americans believe any new laws passed by Congress, which we are told will fix the illegal immigration mess, will be enforced when current laws aren't enforced?

In effect, Rubio's proposal is equivalent to reducing the serious crime of illegally entering someone's home and stealing their property, to no more than a traffic ticket.

I doubt that Senator Rubio would extend to strangers who had violated the sovereignty of his home, the same courtesy his immigration plan extends to those millions of criminals who have violated the sovereignty of our home, the United States of America.

© Jim Terry

 

The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)

Click to enlarge

Jim Terry

Jim Terry has worked in Republican grassroots politics for 40 years. Terry was an administrative assistant to a Republican elected official in Dallas for twenty years. In 1996, he ran for and was elected to Justice Court 2 in Dallas County where he served eight years. Contact Jim at tr4guy@flash.net

Subscribe

Receive future articles by Jim Terry: Click here

More by this author