Monday, May 22, 2006
Diana West takes my notion that we may not actually have immigration laws any more and ups the ante. She's not sure we even have a nation any more.
Diana West takes my notion that we may not actually have immigration laws any more and ups the ante. She's not sure we even have a nation any more. Excerpts follow. (The whole article is here.)
A nation has borders and defends them. "We" do not. Otherwise, building a fence against an unprecedented invasion by Mexico wouldn't be considered a harsh and radical position in the political mainstream. A nation has laws and upholds them. "We" do not. Otherwise, the Babbitts of the business world wouldn't illegally build American commerce on the backs of law-breaking (and ill-paid) aliens, and seek their mass legalization (along with their families). A nation defines itself as a nation. "We" certainly do not. We are, as we are endlessly told, a Nation of Immigrants, a concept that blows to smithereens the unique nature of the "nation" to which immigrants have traditionally assimilated: the European-derived, mainly Anglo-Saxon polity, born of the Enlightenment and extraordinarily blessed by Providence, which the current president is now rapidly phasing out. . . .
To survive, to prosper, and to project power, great nations must be guided by reason and principle -- not childish feelings. But with national interest no longer at heart, our leaders have only heartstrings. . . .
I have this terrible feeling I finally understand what a "compassionate conservative" is: an emotional train wreck. It's time to get a grip and build a fence -- a pledge, possibly, to become indivisible again.
'Nuff said. Well, probably not.
Copyright 2006 by David Rodeback.
All rights reserved.
Permission is given to publish this article elsewhere on the Web or via e-mail only under these conditions: The article is published intact and unchanged, and is properly credited to the author; and a visible link is included to the article's page at LocalCommentary.com.