Point, counterpoint

[aadler]

It’s been interesting, watching the events that followed out when Florida governor DeSantis sent a busload of illegal aliens (I sneer at the pusillanimous PC label ‘migrants’, they’re foreigners here illegally) to Martha’s Vineyard. As it happens, of course, the discussion of the matter lasted a lot longer than the events themselves, since the MV people got the military to haul these unwelcome intruders away in less than two days.

You know what? I don’t blame them for that. I know I don’t want a crowd of illegals dumped in my community, and if legitimate authorities promptly carted them away, I’d cheer and comment favorably on this uncharacteristic example of government efficiency.

I don’t even blame them (much) for doing it after having styled Martha’s Vineyard as a “sanctuary destination” during the early days of Donald Trump’s administration. The ‘not in my backyard’ phenomenon is not limited to leftists/progressives, all kinds of people have found that living with the results of their stated principles is a very different matter from blithely voicing those principles. I don’t respect that — changing your stand once it affects you personally does not deserve praise — but I don’t go crazy condemning it, either.

No, what really stands out for me is how they managed to reverse positions instantly and effortlessly, while continuing to sanctimoniously complain about how awful was what DeSantis had done.

Even if I didn’t agree with him (when, in fact, I do agree), I would have to recognize that DeSantis was acting in accordance with positions he’s been expressing for a long time. Wrong or right in those opinions, he has been consistent in his statements and his actions.

Whereas the holier-than-thou virtue-signalers changed directions the moment they were the ones who had to live with the results, but still feel themselves to be morally superior to the lowbrow primitives who say ugly, reprehensible things like, “No, it’s our country, we need to enforce our borders and not allow non-citizens to invade illegally and en masse.”

They maintain this elevated opinion of themselves even after having behaved in exact accordance with the sentiments they so vehemently deplore.

They look down on us because they don’t agree with us.

We look down on them because they don’t even agree with themselves.

Comments

[aadler]

Our online relations have always been amicable, so I want to be very clear that there is no animosity in anything I say. If, despite my most careful efforts, some heat creeps in, that would be due to strong feelings I have about the issues, and is not in any way directed at you.

So, to reply:

> The problem I have with DeSantis’ stunt is first, he flew people from Texas to Martha’s Vineyard. What business does he have taking Florida tax dollars to fly people asking for asylum from another state to other locations? Doesn’t he have his own asylum seekers to transport?

This is the aspect that causes me the most uncertainty. How does a governor of Florida go about arranging the transport of illegal aliens from San Antonio to Martha’s Vineyard? Some have speculated that various Republican governors are working together in their strategic shipping of illegals to jurisdictions that claim to welcome them; I honestly can’t see how it could be done without such coordination. But I don’t know, and I would need more knowledge before I could offer any informed opinion.

> Second, the people transported this way were misled about where they were going and why.

I’ve seen that claimed; I’ve also seen statements regarding signed waivers and information packets containing maps of Martha’s Vineyard, which would argue in the other direction. Again, I don’t know … but I also don’t care, for reasons I will provide in more detail below.

> Lastly, and most importantly in my mind, some of the people in the transported groups had court days scheduled in the places they were transported from. Exactly what was the point of that? We already have insufficient immigration judges, the system is already clogged and problematic enough without absconding with the people who have court dates and wasting the court’s time.

If courts are overloaded, then someone who doesn’t show up — for whatever reason — is generally skipped over and “Next case!” called; given that, I’m not intensely concerned with the court’s time being wasted. As for the people with court dates, I don’t care (as mentioned above), because it’s not their country. They have no right to be here, any more than I have a right to move into Bill Gates’ home because it’s nicer than mine. If they’re deceived, I don’t care, because it’s not their country. If they’re inconvenienced, I don’t care; it’s not their country. If they get shipped off for forty-some hours in one of the toniest communities in the U.S. … well, that honestly would count as a brief luxury vacation they didn’t have coming to them because it’s not their country.

They have no right to be here. The federal government has no right to refuse to enforce immigration law, then refuse to allow states to do so, then call foul when governors of the affected states try to DO something about the elite-sanctioned invasion that’s been foisted on them.

Yes, it was a political stunt, absolutely. I’d like to see more such stunts … or, better yet, see such things be unnecessary because our national government was doing its actual job.

[texanfan.livejournal.com]

I can tell that this is a very important issue for you. First, let me say that I am not in any way against other states picking up some of the load. It's overwhelming and border states should not have to bear the burden alone. El Paso has shipped over 80 buses worth of asylum seekers to other parts of the country. But they did it what I consider the right way, people knew they were coming and services made available to handle the influx. With the number of people coming in the distribution should definitely be ramped up. What I'd love to see is a huge influx of immigration judges so we could get these people processed quickly. Help those legitimately seeking asylum and deporting those who need to be deported.

If I am reading your reply correctly it seems you don't believe people from other countries, mostly Venezuela at the moment, have a right to seek asylum in the United States because it's not their country. If that is the case I must respectfully disagree.

[aadler]

They have the right to seek asylum. We have the right to deny it, or to keep them out until a decision has been made. Asylum requests have become the de facto method for get-in-free.

And why should anybody have to ‘share the load’ for something they never agreed to in the first place? This is fiat from Washington, not only not approved by the population at large but in direct violation of actual existing law.

[texanfan.livejournal.com]

We find ourselves on different sides of this issue. I'm not conversant enough on immigration law to debate you on this and I certainly don't want to descend into uncivil discourse. So, I agree to disagree and quit the field.