Emotion Trumps Logic in Politics
Liberals use emotion to further their lies.
Check it out:
From the Associated Press: “The new Homeland Security secretary says an earned path to citizenship for the roughly 11 million immigrants living in the United States illegally is a matter of national security.” We have simply got to give them their citizenship. To deny them their citizenship is a matter of national security.
I have a question, and I’m sure this question’s borne of total ignorance. How does being in the country illegally and taking jobs away from Americans and getting benefits like education, welfare, food stamps, and all that, without paying any taxes, how does that earn you anything?
You know why this works? I mean, here you have the department — and Obama’s gonna make a big deal about this tonight. He wants these people registered as Democrats. And for some reason — well, it’s not for some reason. We know now who’s pressuring the Republicans. It’s the Chamber of Commerce. Moneyed donors are determining the Republican position on amnesty. We know that now. The issue had died electorally for this year, but now the Democrats are urging Obama, hey, keep working with Boehner, because Boehner is saying the Republicans are gonna make this happen, independently of what Obama wants. It’s what their donors want. The Republicans, they’re not doing this to please Obama, to please Democrats. That may be a side benefit in their minds. They’re doing this because this is what their donors want.
Now you’ve got the Department of Homeland Security, the secretary, saying that making sure these people are granted citizenship is a matter of national security. And that they’ve earned it, by the way. All of the years they’ve been here and all of the hard work they’ve done and all of the taxes they’ve paid and all of the living in the shadows they’ve done and all the hiding and all of the running away from authorities and all of the pressure and all of the intensity of maybe being deported, they’ve earned it. They’re in violation of the law.
How would this work, if the crime involved were, say, a bank robbery? Like if Bonnie and Clyde had tried and failed for a number of years to rob banks and suffered the humiliation. They were basically good people. They just wanted to rob banks. Would we at some point say give them the money, because they’ve earned it? They have expended so much effort and they’ve done so much, in this case for the state of Texas? It’s a flawed analogy here.