The thing that always stands out, at least to me, is that the United States has laws on the books that SPECIFICALLY state that (1) it is illegal to be in this country without proper documentation and (2) Those apprehended MUST be either held in prison or deported back to their country. THAT IS THE LAW.
I agree that Reagan "sort of" opened the door for illegals, however, this problem existed all the way back to Dwight D Eisenhower's administration (The ******* Act) - and yes, that was what it was called. Laws have existed since to protect America's sovereignty.
Why is it then, that both liberals and conservatives feel this inane "need" to bend over backwards to accomadate the Latino's attempt to violate our countries' laws? This nonsense (and it IS nonsense) that we "can't deport 11million illegals" is nothing more than waving the white flag of surrender, when WE have more than 15 MILLION Americans out of work? We can fight wars in 2 countries, mobilized millions in WWII, yet we can't send these "trespassers" back home?
Sorry, I don't buy this. It's much like the current gnashing of teeth over gun laws - the answer is SIMPLE. ENFORCE THE LAWS WE HAVE!!!!
Up through Nixon's terms illegals came and went. Sure some stayed, but mostly they had places to work seasonally, then went home. These were the Mexicans who really did take jobs Americans didn't want.
Can't explain why but they started staying in the 1970s. My personal opinion is welfare cheating; in those days social services personnel led the "if we don't spend it this year, they'll cut us next year" bleat low quality state and locals bragged about back in the day, so fraud was incredibly rampant. Some of them learned the language and got jobs.
By Reagan's time big employers of low skill labor saw the potential and the result was Reagan's amnesty. Be clear I don't give a **** about cowboys and Indians (nutball Republicans vs the fake liberal freakshow). Neither party's core actions match their words so to me all of the leadership of both parties are lowlife cocksuckers and serious partisans are basically human cattle. In my past an important lesson was to not see filigree and shadow but rather to see what is THERE, including separating promises from results. By 1982 it was pretty clear there was no there, there, in the nutball revolution. By 1986 Goldwater and Buckley had concerns about deficits and the national debt but proximity to the president bought their general silence.
In a hundred years 1980 will be seen as a sea change in US politics. A disastrous sea change. Every president since IKE has been a step down with the exception of Pap Bush, who cut growth in spending and raised taxes thereby setting the stage for Clinton/Rubin to balance the budget by accident. Because the economy was undergoing disorderly change, and because anti-American fake liberal scum really do believe immigrants are better than citizens, resistance to amnesty was painted as mean spirited grinchy stuff instead of good judgment.
Lack of adults in the process, from Reagan, a halfwit who never had an original thought, to Tip O'neill who never met a bag of money he wouldn't blow someone to get at, and because borrowing created the illusion of growth, amnesty passed. It was one of the worst decisions of the ReagaNUT years because look what happened next: it was like rats coming over the rail of a cheese ship.
Anyway, that is what the recent history of illegals looks like to me.
