Part of the problem with immigration discussions is the critical way in which opposing interests characterize each other. Both have many heartfelt concerns but many appear to have a greater loyalty to foreigners and foreign governments than they do to their own country. That may seem like a hypercritical characterization but when one carefully considers the definition of terms like loyalty and patriot there can be little doubt about the veracity of that statement. The term loyal is defined as bearing true allegiance to one’s sovereign or government, supporting and defending it, especially in times of crisis or war; constant or faithful in any relation or obligation implying trust and confidence. By extension then, in the case of immigration’s unarmed invasion, one would expect anyone who professes to be loyal to place paramount importance on the rule of law, border security and enforcement, and on the national interest and sovereignty rather than the interests of foreign workers and foreign governments. Those who are loyal share a concern about the future of our country if present immigration trends continue.
Regular roundups of illegals and a significant level of involuntary repatriations is a critical element of border security. Without interior enforcement that sends a clear message there is little chance that border enforcement can succeed. Physical barriers are not sufficient. Electronic and aerial surveillance are not enough. These must be buttressed with significant disincentives to border violations in the form of penalties for illegal aliens and those who employ them or give sanctuary.