Wednesday, October 03, 2007

Another Round of Immigration Stupidity

Eduardo Gonzalez, a petty officer second class with the U.S. Navy, is about to be deployed overseas for a third time. Making his deployment even tougher is the fact his wife may not be around when he comes back.

Essentially, Petty Officer Gonzalez's wife managed to put one foot wrong while dealing with the insanely complex immigration laws of this country. The instant she married her husband, she technically became an illegal immigrant.

OK, that is messed up.

But wait, there's more . . .

A judge in June granted her a one-year extension to remain in the United States. If her legal status does not change by June 8, 2008, she will have 60 days to voluntarily leave the country or face deportation.

That's just fine, according to Mark Krikorian, the executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, which lobbies for tougher laws on illegal immigration.

"What you're talking about is amnesty for illegal immigrants who have a relative in the armed forces, and that's just outrageous," he said. "What we're talking about here is letting lawbreakers get away with their actions just because they have a relative in the military. ... There's no justification for that kind of policy."

Yes, there is, Mr. Krikorian. The justification is that Petty Officer Gonzalez, unlike you, has shown that he is willing to sign a check for anything, up to and including his life, to defend this country--even down to utterly worthless oxygen-wasting dirtbags like you.

OK, immigration hardliners, justify this.

Heck, while you're at it, justify the law you were demanding last year:

Remember that big, tough immigration bill the House passed last year but failed in the Senate? It would have made harboring, in your home, someone without legal status a felony. The husband would be facing jail time. If it was base housing, then whatever officer made the decision to grant the base housing to her would also face felony charges, too. That's what the House Republicans wanted in their get tough immigration bill.

(Hat tip to doc30 at Darwin Central, the Conspiracy that Cares)

I don't want to hear "Well, I didn't mean that." That does not feed the bulldog. I want to hear you justify the law as written. I want you to justify your braying "Enforce the law!" in this case, or y'all can have yourselves a big helping of STFU.

The society that does not show loyalty to its warriors has no call on their loyalty.


reusha2000 said...

The law is the law! What if she was legal and caught with drugs and end in jail? Are you proposing military people with loved ones in jail, be allowed out? It's the same thing, a military person does not have the physical love of his partner. Except he can visit or stay in Mexico when he come back and FOLLOW THE LEGAL PROCESS!! REMEMBER ILLEGALS FOLLOWING THE LEGAL USA IMMIGRATION PROCESS!!

John Norris Brown said...

The great thing about laws is that they can be changed if they are idiotic. Clearly, the law deporting Eduardo Gonzalez's wife is an idiotic law, and should be changed.

Winghunter said...

Kenny Prescott;

Soldiers have married immigrant spouses for many decades and they risked the exact same infractions of the law. They either went through the process like everyone else or they risked deportation.

Nothing new here Kenny, all except for your whining.

Small bit of advice; Never say anything in print you're not absolutely prepared to say nose to nose.

Harold C. Hutchison said...

Hey, Winghunter...

What part of "granted political asylum" do you not understand? It was in the CNN report.

Ken Prescott said...

The law is the law!

The law, sir, is an ass.

What if she was legal and caught with drugs and end in jail?

That's not what happened. What happened is that she was here legally with paperwork pending, married a sailor defending this country, and her status instantly changed.

Would you be willing to live under a system that could:

1. Throw you out of the country for ten years because you screwed up one element of extremely complex paperwork, and

2. If you opted to contest being thrown out for ten years, upped the penalty to being thrown out permanently?

Just give me a yes or no answer.

Ken Prescott said...

Small bit of advice; Never say anything in print you're not absolutely prepared to say nose to nose.

Small bit of advice: never make that silly remark to a former Marine. Oops, you just did.

I'm perfectly willing to repeat my remarks to Mr. Krikorian's face. And yours, too.

I spent eight years in the Marine Corps defending, among other things, the particular flavor of stupid that you and Krikorian partake in. I want a refund.

ahas said...

What does illegal mean, it means breaking a law. But the punishment should fit the crime, it happens that people make mistakes. Immigration is a complex law, not everyone can afford to pay $4000 or more for a lawyer to make sure they don't make a mistake and break the law. Have you looked at the immigration website, it might as well be written in chinese because unless your a lawyer, your not going to know if what your doing is illegal. But mistakes happen and people shouldn't be seperated from their children or their spouse for it. Honestly if you make a mistake on your taxes you wouldn't get the death penalty, but if someone makes a mistake with immigration, they get the same punishment as the ones that entered illegally and they get deported. Doesn't sound like fair laws to me, change the laws to fit the crime!!! All people can do is complain about the illegal even if it's not hurting them, without thinking that the very laws they want people to comply with are hurting them by creating a sociaty that has children that grow up without the love and support of both parents. The world has enough kids that grow up without parent's, don't have laws that create more!!!!!!

ahas said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Aitch748 said...

So "the law is the law" and if the law mandates breaking up military families, not because the wife actually DID anything, but because of arbitrary rules that redefine a legal as an illegal because she got married, well, too bad, so sad. [/sarcasm]

It's this kind of fanaticism about and fetishism of THE LAW for its own sake, even when THE LAW is obviously stupid and harmful and unjust, that has left me disgusted with the death-before-amnesty types.