Immigration

Republicans LOVE Comparing Immigrants (and Tourists) to FedEx Packages

Anatomy of an authoritarian GOP meme, from Newt Gingrich joke to Chris Christie proposal

|

Boob. ||| Fox News
Fox News

As mentioned in this post yesterday about outrageous immigration quotes from 2016 GOP presidential contenders, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie took some heat over the weekend for comparing America's immigrant-tracking system unfavorably to that of FedEx, and proposing that:

We need to have a system that tracks you from the moment you come in, and then when your time is up, whether it's three months or six months or nine months or 12 months—however long your visa is, then we go get you and tap you on the shoulder and say, "Excuse me, thanks for coming—time to go."

Such a system—physically tracking the movement of human bodies upon their legal arrival into the United States, and then connecting that presumably round-the-clock surveillance to some tap-on-the-shoulder expulsionary enforcement—would likely run afoul of Supreme Court precedent, trigger payback-surveillance for Americans who travel abroad, and violate the basic precepts of human liberty. But perhaps more importantly, Christie's authoritarian trial balloon ain't even original: He cribbed it from Newt Gingrich.

Here's the GOP's once and future ideas man, musing aloud during his last presidential run, at the 2012 Conservative Political Action Conference:

No fact-check required. ||| AP
AP

How many of you have ever gone online to check a package at UPS or FedEx? I want to drive this home. This is not a theory. It is a practical reality that we have the technology that enables us to track between UPS and FedEx–we track 24 million packages a day, while they are moving, and we allow you to find out where they are for free. That's the world that works.

Now here's the world that fails: The federal government today cannot find 11 million illegal immigrants, even if they are sitting still. Now I have a simple proposal. We send a package to everyone who is here illegally. When they open it, we pull it up on the computer. We know where they are.

Let me say for my friends in the news media: That was hyperbole and we don't need a fact check.

OK, so it was more of a joke (one that Gingrich first drew headlines with in November 2011) than a serious, Chris Christie-style proposal to get FedEx brains on the visa-overstay problem. But at least it was original! Or was it???

Turns out that Mike Huckabee was singing the FedEx song more than four years before that, at the Sept. 5, 2007 GOP presidential debate in New Hampshire. Ironically, as the video will attest, Huckabee's FedEx riff was bookended with the context that he's far less "racist" and "mean" about immigration than his contemporaries. Here's the relevant bit:

He was so much younger then. ||| Fox News
Fox News

The reality is that we track packages from UPS and FedEx every time we order from Amazon.com. And, yet, we've got a government that says we don't know what to do and how to keep up with people.

If necessary, we ought to outsource this whole issue to FedEx and UPS. They seem to have a better way of keeping up with packages than our government does with people.

But I want to be clear: If someone is looking for a president who is going to have a mean spirit toward other human beings, I'm not their guy.

So Mike Huckabee is the font of the immigrant/FedEx tracking system? Not so fast!!!

Three months before that, Gingrich gave a speech at the American Enterprise Institute, from which he hived off a quick and immediately popular video titled "FedEx vs. Government Bureaucracy," featuring his world-that-works vs. world-that-doesn't-work riff:

[N]ow to me that leads to a very obvious proposal, which is that we send a package to every person that's here illegally. UPS and FedEx delivers them, we track 'em on a computer….See if [Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael] Chertoff would call me we could fix a number of these things very fast.

Watching the video below provides an important bit of context: This was a punchline:

I didn't find any other modest proposals about FedEx and illegal immigrants prior to that.

So in summary: What started out as a Newt Gingrich joke about the superiority of the private sector has evolved into an actual Chris Christie proposal involving the police state surveilling legal visitors and then tapping visa-overstays on the shoulder. All in the course of three Republican presidential cycles.

Related reading:

* Hot August Fright: The Month Republicans Lost Their Minds Over Immigration

* Democrats on Immigration Since 1980: From Apathy to Anger to Amnesty (of Sorts)

* When the Entire Democratic Party Was Like Donald Trump

* The GOP's 35-Year (D)evolution on Immigration

* The GOP's Trump-Carson 1-2 Punch in the Nuts

Advertisement

NEXT: In Defense of Asian Birth Tourism

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I’ve decided to vote for Trump in the Georgia primary just to give the GOP the candidate the “base” wants for once Let’s see them wail on AM radio when no one builds a fence or starts deporting Hispanics en masse.

    WE BEEN BETRAYED AGIN!

    1. You’re right for once, PB. Trump is no more likely to build his beautiful wall or deport illegal aliens than Obama was to shut down Guantanamo or lessen conflict in the Middle East or create good jobs. It’s all just stupid bluster designed for people who want to be deceived. At least the AM radio crowd sometimes comes to some realization that they’ve been had. The other side just becomes more and more delusional, even to the extent of supporting a notorious liar like Clinton or a pinko like Sanders.

      1. Well, there IS less conflict in the Middle East from a US perspective. A lot less money wasted too. A few drones and Tomahawks don’t cost as much as the $3 trillion Nation Building Bush promised he wouldn’t attempt.

        1. It’s deliciously funny when you fill in the punchline without even the slightest hint that you’re doing it.

          1. Retards gonna tard.

            1. And retard and reretard and …

              1. Your ad hominem attack is the sign of an inadequate education. An ill-educated person behaves with arrogant impatience, whereas truly profound education breeds humility.

            2. Must … Not .. Remind … Team Red ….. about … Bushpigs.

              Got it!

              1. Your ad hominem attack is the sign of an inadequate education. An ill-educated person behaves with arrogant impatience, whereas truly profound education breeds humility.

            3. Your ad hominem attack is the sign of an inadequate education. An ill-educated person behaves with arrogant impatience, whereas truly profound education breeds humility.

              1. Yeah, Ed… I guess that was what you were trying to say….

              2. You would’ve looked like a smartass but then you posted the same thing three times so I was only half right.

        2. Hey. PB, day ain’t over yet. Your boy ducked the Middle East hard lettIng ISIS spread like it has. Chickens coming home to roast and all. And I’m sure as a good ole’ Georgia southern boy you can appreciate those prodigal chickens making a homecoming.

  2. Meh. After 8+ years of shit economy, it’s hardly surprising that much of the public has soured on immigration. Politicians with their finger in the air are bound to follow suit.

    1. Shit economy? Just look at how great the stock market is doing… oh…

      1. My Obot acquaintances used to harp on the stock market but are now awfully quiet about it.

        1. My 401K has been at a standstill for a couple years now. Thank god I’m nowhere near retirement.

          1. Hope you like staying that way.

        2. I’m still moderately heavy in a short position, and not unhappy about it.

          Dead cats gonna bounce. And today makes it look like that cat’s done bouncing.

    2. People are fixated on immigration because “MUH BENEFITZ”. They think that they can drive all the (recent) immigrants out and the crime rates will go down, citizens’ pay will go up, and the welfare state will be more solvent. They think this is completely valid because of statistics concerning crime rates, pay, and welfare usage by immigrants. The problem, however, is that statistics don’t capture causality or network effects. Nobody has particularly answered to any real degree of certainty why those variables are correlated in the way that they are. The commonly cited justification of “culture” does not have the explanatory power that so many think it does. Cultures can and have changed drastically in less than a generation. People respond (in the aggregate) to incentives; the best question for why a particular statistical trend exists is to ask: what are the incentives at play? The real factors underlying the answer to this question aren’t going to change appreciably even if all the illegal immigrants were deported tomorrow.

      Part of me would like to see it happen anyway, though, just so people stop having it as an excuse. See? We did what you asked, and our society is still just as fucked up as before. Now what?

      1. People are fixated on immigration because they know goddamned well they are being lied to about it. Their “These people are here illegally, therefore they are criminals” may be simplistic on several levels, but denying that it is also fundamentally true has been a major tactical mistake on the part of people who don’t want to just do mass deportations.

        Now, I’ll admit that I don’t know what should have been done. But denying that “undocumented persons” = “illegal aliens” = “lawbreakers” set a lot of people’s backs up, and now they re going to insist on some kind of massive acknowledgment that they were right before they are willing to listen. Something like a wall, or a serious effort to throw out and keep out border-jumpers who commit crimes involving violence or property damage.

        1. No doubt there is a lot of lying, and some of Reason‘s own writers like to get in on the act, too. However, that you are being lied to is a constant of politics. Ideally you want to sift through the lies and get to the facts, but in the presence of nothing but lies one shouldn’t rush to judgment, except to condemn the liars.

      2. For me it’s not so much about “”MUH BENEFITZ” as it is about ME PAYING FOR EVERYONE ELSE”S BENEFITZ.

        What you may think about what other people think appears to have little actual relationship to what other people actually think but it does reek of a sense of detached superiority.

        1. ME PAYING FOR EVERYONE ELSE”S BENEFITZ

          Outside of this board, the momentum for curtailing benefits is non-existent. Borders are a hotly debated topic, the welfare state is not.

          What you may think about what other people think appears to have little actual relationship to what other people actually think but it does reek of a sense of detached superiority

          That may be so, but it wasn’t really the point of what I was arguing, either.

          1. To clarify what my point was:

            Given the statistical premises, it is entirely possible that driving all the illegal immigrants out will have a net positive benefit to the US. That something is morally distasteful to me does not refute its practical utility. However, I remain highly skeptical about that utility, and moreover about the costs that must be imposed to effect the desired end. I think some people drastically overestimate the benefits and underestimate the costs. This is typical of public policy analysis and is not particularly unique to any group; liberals love to look at their preferred policies as being nothing but benefits and their opponents’ policies and/or the status quo as being nothing but costs. But the cost-benefit analysis of proposed action is entirely hypothetical and, especially where government is concerned, rarely held up to scrutiny after the fact.

      3. I would argue I am more concerned about the cost and the fact we have system we are requiring some to adhere to and others a free pass. Let’s be consistent. I would argue we are endangering the lives of hundreds of thousands of Mexicans by allowing them to cross hundreds of miles of open desert accompanied by nefarious criminal elements who abuse them and of course use them as cover to also enter the US and continue criminal enterprises. I would argue without a secure border we are vulnerable to diseases and terrorists. I would argue that pouring money into financial assistance provided to illegal immigrants is money wasted that could be better spent on our own people and infrastructure. I would argue that while illegal immigrants may not be any more likely to rob, murder, rape or abuse children then US citizens the fact those crimes would have happened at all if they were not here is significant enough. I would argue without designated secured borders we really don’t have a country.

  3. Has anyone else noticed that both delivered packages and Mexicans are brown?

  4. So we can end the USPS monoply on the delivery of mexicans?

    1. What about the pot and ass-sex?

    2. Can we get Immigrant Prime subscriptions with guaranteed two day delivery?

  5. I’m going to one-up them all and say that we need to FedEx immigrants back where they came from.

      1. Outsource those. They’re probably filled with immigrants anyway.

        1. B-b-but muh one-hour deliveries!

          1. Look, do you want an immigration-free America or not?

            1. Yes. Everyone back to Eurasia! That includes you, indigenous peoples. Back across Beringia.

              1. I think that might just have been migration. Or were the mammoths and sabre tooth cats checking passports?

                1. No, and see where it got them?

                  1. That’s true. North American megafauna must have felt pretty dumb once they all got eaten.

  6. The reality is that we track packages from UPS and FedEx every time we order from Amazon.com. And, yet, we’ve got a government that says we don’t know what to do and how to keep up with people.

    For someone who openly talks about Armageddon, he seems awful eager to start numbering people.

    1. Yeah, what does he want to do, barcode everyone?

      1. You know who else…

    2. Can I be Number 6?

  7. It is common for Reason to not allow facts to factor into the immigration debate. Such as:

    Such a system?physically tracking the movement of human bodies upon their legal arrival into the United States, and then connecting that presumably round-the-clock surveillance to some tap-on-the-shoulder expulsionary enforcement?would likely run afoul of Supreme Court precedent,

    Lawful permanent residents must register a change of address with the federal government within ten days, or risk penalty. This has been the law since WWII and has never been successfully challenged.

    1. Does the penalty involve gnabbing violators and returning them to their state of origin?

      Would an obtrusive surveillance apparatus set up to track their movements run afoul of the 4th amendment?

    2. Does registering a change of address involve physically tracking people’s bodies?

      1. I’ll answer this one: Of course it doesn’t.

        1. We won’t know until a whistleblower deep within the USPS data dumps that program.

        2. Keeping tabs on where somebody physically lives isn’t “tracking people’s bodies”? Does this also apply to sex offender registries, or is that a little inconvenient?

          1. Well, it isn’t. Not in the case of legal permanent residents anyway. They can travel freely.

          2. No, it isn’t. Requiring someone to register a change of address is not the same as physically tracking them. They could fail to register the change, for one thing. For another, physically tracking them as described in the OP would entail continuous, or at least frequent periodic, tracking?again, clearly not the same as requiring notification IFF you move.

            1. It’s not the same as continuous FedEx-style package tracking, but yes, it absolutely is tracking, in the exact same way that a sex offender registry is tracking. That you can refuse to comply with the law doesn’t change the fact. You can refuse to comply with every law.

              1. You can refuse to comply with every law.

                While technically correct, this statement elides the fact that there are wildly different consequences for refusal to comply with different laws. Refuse to comply with the law against murder? You better be a fucking ghost. Refuse to comply with the law against speeding? You could live your whole life without a single change and never get so much as a ticket.

                1. True enough, but it’s a good deal more serious than a traffic ticket if you fail to comply with the registration requirements in either of the above cases. If such a system wasn’t “tracking”, then it would serve no purpose of any kind whatsoever. To try and pretend like it’s something other than a tracking system is disingenuous.

              2. And…this post is about Fed Ex?style package tracking. Of people’s bodies. You’re not tracking their bodies if you aren’t continuously tracking them.

                1. And…this post is about Fed Ex?style package tracking.

                  Actually, this particular subthread started with someone mentioning the address registration requirements for legal permanent residents, to which you replied:

                  Does registering a change of address involve physically tracking people’s bodies?

                  I would argue that, yes, indeed, it does. Your response has been to continue begging the question as if it were self-evident that registering the physical location of the place where your body resides a significant portion of the time was somehow completely and totally different from “physically tracking people’s bodies”. If there’s a difference, it is one of degree only. Registering the location where you can normally be found is precisely the same as registering the exact geological coordinates of your body for the portion of the day that you spend there. I have no clue whatsoever why you’re so invested in pretending that a location registry is something other than a tracking system only in the context of immigration, but it’s every bit a tracking system just as it is with any other type of location registry (I keep going back to sex offender registries because they are a convenient example).

                  1. But it doesn’t, as far as I know. Does the legal resident ever have to demonstrate to the officials that they are physically present at their legal address? Even if they have to prove that it is their actual domicile and they actualyl spend time there, they still aren’t tracked because there is only one place where they sometimes sleep that thepotential trackers know about.
                    If your definition of tracking is used, then we are all already being tracked. The IRS, and my local and state governments all know my address. Does that mean that they are all tracking my physical body? I don’t think so.

        3. It would be nice if you guys writing these articles weren’t so obsessive about this subject. Some of the candidate’s rhetoric gets a bit absurd at times, but the sentiment and frustration are reasonable and legitimate. Having 30 million non citizens here against our immigration laws as they are is not a tolerable situation. Please stop treating those of us who disagree with you like we’re some kind of idiots. We’re not.

          It’s this sort of thing that makes it hard for me to get people interested in libertarian ideas. I try to get friends to read articles on this site, but lately there have been some real embarrassments. I’m not saying this article is in that category, but there have been others (Sheldon Richamn……..).

      2. Nice strawman, have you considered how you are going to trrack it?

    3. AND WHYCOME AINT THEY LET IN NO WHITE MEXICANS

      1. They let in Old Mexican.

      2. Because they kill all our black children.

  8. Can I take the opportunity to point out that New Jersey Democrat Chris Christie will never be president.

    1. He cribbed that from Newt too.

    2. If he did, he’d put the oval into Oval Office!

      *da-da-dump*

  9. .physically tracking the movement of human bodies

    Been reading a bit too much Ta-Nehisi Coates, Welch?

    1. ugh, I knew that didn’t sit well with me, now I know why

    2. No. The comparison was made (over and over again) between tracking FedEx packages, and tracking foreigners inside the United States. One of the distinguishing differences between packages and foreigners is that foreigners are made out of skin and bones and organs and so forth. Hence the emphasis on physical personhood.

      1. WHYCOME AINT WELCH NO NOT WANT OUT MEXICAN GET COSMO

      2. One of the distinguishing differences between packages and foreigners is that foreigners are made out of skin and bones and organs and so forth.

        Hey, I’ve had plenty of packages containing skin and bones and organs!

        How else am I supposed to piece together my Frankenstein’s monster? Grave robbing? They won’t let me in the cemeteries anymore.

  10. Could be worse. At least they aren’t talking about managing them like boat anchors.

  11. OK, so how does this tracking work? I mean, are they scanned at regular intervals (like packages being loaded from one truck to another)? When they get on buses or go through the doors of public buildings? Or are we going to GPS chip them and ping them every few minutes?

    And these are the people were are letting in legally, right? No reason not to treat them like shit, tourist dollars don’t matter. Or does Trump and his idiot followers think the barcodes or chips are just going to magically appear on illegals?

    And what if they don’t want to be scanned? They just cover up the code or disable the chip, right? So how do we know that Person A that just got on the bus isn’t just an illegal covering up? Oh, that’s right… everyone wears a code, so you can catch out the refuseniks as possible illegals or visa overstays.

    1. It’s a trade secret subject to multiple layers of NDAs and the threat of swift civil action.

    2. It’s completely absurd. The only possible way to control immigrants like that would be to have a seriously massive police state and mandatory ID for everyone at all times.

      1. That’s a feature and not a bug to some.

      2. You mean like having to show two forms of ID (one from column A & and one from column B) when merely applying for a job? That’s what the first amnesty mandated employers to do. amazing populists don’t remember the past nor think through their proposals.

        1. The idea that your employer has to ask the government for approval before hiring you is a really egregious violation of liberty and yet there is basically no political movement to reverse it.

        2. Yeah, like that. Employers shouldn’t even have to know your name if they don’t want to and they shouldn’t be conscripted into enforcing immigration laws.

          1. Well shit, while we’re at it lets strike all those laws about it being illegal to be an accomplice to a crime. Wheel man for a bank robbery? Not the driver’s problem where his passengers came from, right?

    3. Issuing some kind of identification to temporary visa holders that conforms to REAL ID standards would enable just about the level of tracking you’re talking about. You can’t so much as rent a car or fly on a plane without showing ID, and the states are already mandated to be in full compliance by next year. Might as well subject tourists to the same indignities as the rest of us.

      1. You can’t so much as rent a car or fly on a plane without showing ID, and the states are already mandated to be in full compliance by next year.

        But you could buy a car and drive it across the country.

        Further, when I get on a plane they don’t scan my ID into a database that lets the Feds know when I’m heading to a different city, and when I’m heading back. So real ID doesn’t do this at all.

        1. And it still doesn’t get at the idea of “tracking them like packages.” The point of package tracking is to know where the package is or at least is supposed to be at any given moment.

          There are still millions of places and events in America not requiring an ID or firing that ID into a national database.

        2. But you could buy a car and drive it across the country.

          Without showing ID? Without registering the car? Without mandatory insurance? Without plates? I can only guess you’ve never actually purchased and driven a vehicle if you actually think that (which is enviable).

          Further, when I get on a plane they don’t scan my ID into a database that lets the Feds know when I’m heading to a different city, and when I’m heading back.

          Not really necessary in order to determine where you are, who you are, and if you’re on an overstay. No, it’s not FedEx tracking, but it does provide an unnerving level of information access.

          1. Yep, there’s no illegal immigrant who knows anyone who would register a car for them. I mean that’s just crazy talk. And for sure, there are currently no illegal immigrants who own and drive cars on the regular. All 11 million of them walk everywhere.

            Not really necessary in order to determine where you are, who you are, and if you’re on an overstay.

            It’s…exactly what’s necessary to determine where you are. How on earth are they going to know where you are if they aren’t tracking your actual movements? Your comment about checking your ID when you get on a plane was approximately 100% irrelevant to the whole concept, since all they do is look at it rather than keep track of where you are going.

            1. Again, that you can defy the law doesn’t change the law. Also, I don’t know what state you live in, but when your state has a statewide insurance database, upon which vehicle registration is contingent, upon which license plates are contingent, all of which requires state ID, which is the case where I live, it’s pretty difficult to drive in a way that isn’t going to turn you into an instant heat score (which is why my state instituted non-ID drivers licenses for illegal immigrants to undermine all of the intrusive security theater bullshit in order to prevent hundreds of thousands of people from driving illegally with no ability to purchase insurance).

              It’s…exactly what’s necessary to determine where you are.

              Your body and the ID in your hand is pretty much sufficient to establish that. They’re not checking your ID at the airport to make sure some charlatan hasn’t stolen your ticket. That’s already a requirement, REAL ID just forces states to include more and uniform background information when issuing you an ID card or drivers license, and gives the federal government better access to state ID databases. Or you can bypass that step by informing a TSA agent that you don’t have any ID and answering a few simple questions based on public database information…

              Again, it’s not FedEx-level tracking, but it’s tracking of one kind.

          2. Further, when I get on a plane they don’t scan my ID into a database that lets the Feds know when I’m heading to a different city, and when I’m heading back.

            Uh, yeah, they pretty much do. You can’t get on a plane without showing your ID at least twice, which is verified and tied to your plane ticket, which is, in fact, in a database that shows where and when you are going, and where and when you are coming back. One-way tickets are flagged for extra scrutiny.

      2. So day-tripping visitors from Canada get issued an ID card? That sounds fun.

        1. I didn’t say it was a good idea, only that we’re rubbing up against that level of tracking already.

    4. You know the Suicide Squad? It’s like that. Immigrant steps across the wrong state line and BOOM, problem solved.

  12. which is that we send a package to every person that’s here illegally

    ummm…if you know where to send the package then what’s the rest of the “plan” for? Did I miss the genius of this idea? Is this the joke?

  13. How about this: brand illegals like cattle, and put an “i” into their foreheads. Once they become legal, we can brand an “L” over the “i.”

    Just so no one thinks I am a racist, we should brand Canadians, too.

    1. Start with Canadians. Less political resistance.

      1. And they are harder to distinguish. A Canadian could be right next to you now, and you would never know. think about that for a minute.

        1. That is why they must be branded. We will test their blood for high maple syrup content just to make sure they are Canadian; I am not a monster, after all. Sure we will snag a few legal Vermontians, but I would just consider that collateral damage.

          1. Many are cunning and have blended in diabolically well. As long as they don’t say “sorry”. That’s always a giveaway. And they do love to say “sorry”.

            1. Actually, little-known fact but you can also often identify them by their queuing abilities.

              1. Funny, and useful; they will be easy to corral.

          1. Haven’t seen that in a while. Good shit.

          2. They left out the Quebecers!

  14. Chris Christie is lucky we don’t tap the shoulders of fat bastards as friendly reminders to GTFO.

  15. Hmmmm.

    Yes, JUST LIKE Fed Ex packages, people who want to stay here illegally will voluntarily comply with the tracking procedures.

    I hear some politicians have proposed passing laws against cancer and suspending the law of gravity in certain regions. I fully support their efforts.

    1. Only in CA. Fer sure!

  16. The reality is that we track packages from UPS and FedEx every time we order from Amazon.com.

    This perfectly illustrates why it’s so frustrating to contemplate the fact that political reality is what it is: you are dealing with people who are competing to become the most powerful person in the world, and yet who lack the basic ability to differentiate between the nature of a person, and that of a cardboard box.

    1. I would also like to point out that FedEx, UPS, Amazon, and other logistics companies, have every incentive to track packages and inventory as cheaply as possible. Whereas the United States government has no incentive to do anything cheaply, and in fact has a number of incentives to do things as expensively as possible.

    2. POTUS overrated. How is it “the most powerful person in the world”? Does no one else count?

  17. Chris Christie has no political future in New Jersey. As a non-Democrat, the machine will replace him with one of their own eventually, and there’s no reason to think any GOP contender is about to turn to Christie for help as a running mate in the bluest part of the northeast. So, he’s running as a means to get some national exposure and maybe get himself a talk show on CNN or MSNBC or something. I mean, if Al Sharpton can get a show, anything can happen, right?

    So, he’s playing like Trump to get his name in the news–if we stop paying attention to this guy, there’s a chance he really might go away. Christie doesn’t speak for anybody but himself–and unlike Trump, he doesn’t even speak TO anybody else. What Christie says isn’t indicative of what the GOP thinks, nationally, and it isn’t indicative of what the people he resonates with think either–since he doesn’t resonate with anybody.

    If Chris Christie is interesting at all, it’s only because he represents what big media types in New York City wish the rest of the GOP was like–but that isn’t really interesting to anybody either.

  18. I have 60 bucks worth of stuff that USPS says was delivered to my mailbox last Friday that I never got, and I’m going to be spending my morning on the phone with my local post office for the 2nd day in a row arguing about it, so take that for what it’s worth.

    1. Sir, we delivered your Mexican 3 days ago. We’ve even got a signed receipt.

  19. “Now here’s the world that fails: The federal government today cannot find 11 million illegal immigrants, even if they are sitting still.”

    If you made them legal, you could track them. I have to update my address in a DHS website every time I move even if it is just to a different apartment, let alone a different part of town or another city.

    1. If you made them legal, you could track them. I have to update my address in a DHS website every time I move even if it is just to a different apartment, let alone a different part of town or another city.

      Wait a minute, you’re HERE, INSIDE the country?

      1. He’s in your kitchen, eating your foodz.

        1. He’s in your kitchen, eating your foodz.

          That’s ok, I like OldMexican. As long as he cleans up after himself.

    2. But, could we deny them the societal (taxpayer provided) benefits so many here seem to think they aren’t getting?

  20. What started out as a Newt Gingrich joke about the superiority of the private sector has evolved into an actual Chris Christie proposal involving the police state surveilling legal visitors and then tapping visa-overstays on the shoulder.

    Will somebody tell me why they think the violation to immigration statute is overstaying your visa? Do you know what would happen to a 10-year visitor’s visa-holder if he or she overstays his or her I-94 permit?

    It is the PERMIT that allows you to stay in the US. One can perfectly stay for the whole period the permit allows even if the Visa expires. The Visa is only for entering the country and grant you permission to either work inside the US or not. But without your permit you can’t stay at all (beyond the 26 mile limit.)

    A lot of people are going to get hurt because of ignorance. It is one thing to not know how a process works but it is quite another to be spreading falsehoods around.

    1. A lot of people are going to get hurt because of ignorance. It is one thing to not know how a process works but it is quite another to be spreading falsehoods around.

      I have every confidence that they perfectly understand the present legal situation and will account for all of the nuance involved in whatever law is written. Just like they did with the PPACA.

  21. How is it that a politician can say something so grandiosely stupid in front of dozens (if not hundreds, or thousands) of people, and NOBODY LAUGHS OUT LOUD?
    I would prefer they bombard him/her with rotting vegetables (or stones), but to just sit quietly and allow themselves to be victimized by that level of cretinous jibberjabber? I weep for America.

    1. Would you want him to sit on you?

  22. In ye olden times, if an American visited a communist/totalitarian regime, they were accompanied everywhere by a political officer, who controlled their movements and activities. Is this what we can expect?
    JOBS PROGRAM.

  23. We need to have a system that tracks you from the moment you come in, and then when your time is up–

    All I can say is these people are simply demented. Thank God this man will never be president. Whether or not it’s because people recognize what an authoritarian lunatic Christie is, or whether America simply isn’t ready for its first morbidly obese president in modern times, I don’t know. I’m just glad he has no shot.

  24. Somewhat related: Yesterday CNN was going on about the trending horrors of pimps tattooing their girls. Never in their piece did they seem to be aware that those brands work both ways and clearly tie the pimps to prostitution. My bet is those tattoos fall by the wayside shortly after prosecutors starts highlighting it at trial.

  25. All joking aside, we have a lot of people overstaying their visas and a federal government that doesn’t particularly care, and therefore doesn’t do anything about it. As with border control, it’s not that the logistics of enforcement are so daunting. I believe that is Christie’s point.

  26. violate the basic precepts of human liberty

    You’re saying the presidential candidates of the party that claims it is “steadfast in [its] defense of liberty” is actually FOR plans that impinge upon human liberty? I’m shocked, SHOCKED, I tell ya! https://www.gop.com/issue/liberty/

  27. Mark me down as a grouch, but it seems to me we couod save a great deal of outrage if we adopted a policy of “if we throw you out of the country for comittng a violent crine, and you sneak back in, we simply shoot you. You aren’t a citizen. You got one warning. Commit another violent crime,,get convicted, and we shoot your ass.”

    Of course, I want to see police and prosecutors held responsible for their actions first. Lie to put an innocent man in jeopardy of his lfe, amd you should be tried for attempted murder.

  28. You can deal with ALL the immigration problems in essentially the same way – at low to no cost, in less than a year – all the criminal aliens will be gone and the ones who have overstayed their welcome will be on the way out.

    Just put sniper teams on the border. Video a dozen kills – with all the gore – body parts flying through the air, bloody mist where a head used to be.

    Transmit the video to Mexico 24/7/365 with the message, “This is what invaders can expect.”

    Then to get rid of the criminal aliens already here, give them six months to get out. Any caught after that forfeit all property and spend two years in a desert tent prison in Arizona run by sheriff Arpaio. Then they’re deported with the warning that if they EVER return, they will be executed.

    Handle those who have overstayed their welcome the same way. If anything, the idea of being penned up in a tent prison in the Arizona desert with a bunch of criminal alien Mexicans will motivate them even MORE strongly than the criminal aliens.

    The final piece of the puzzle: Fine employers and landlords who employ or rent property to criminal aliens (or those who have overstayed their visa) $1000 per day. For reoffenders, add a day in jail for every day of violation. If you don’t e-verify, and you employ or rent to a criminal alien, you pay fines and wind up in jail.
    (cont)

  29. End all services to non-citizens who are in an illegal status. No schools. No emergency health care. No fire or police services. If a criminal alien reports being robbed, raped, beaten, mauled… too bad. They broke the law to get here, they don’t get to use the law to address their problem.

    With no jobs, no place to live, the possibility of being shot coming across the border and two years in prison after losing all their property, the flood of criminal aliens will stop – immediately. Those already here will self-deport.

    Problem solved.

    1. But,,,but,,,,but,,,, don’t you understand???? They aren’t illegal. They just lack “documents”.

      I deal with these advocacies day in and day out and hear this BS mantra.

      My wife feeds the birds in our yard. This year, our yard and house were invaded by rats and mice. They were attracted by the bird seed. We not only have had to stop feeding the birds, we’ve had to take drastic measures to kill mice and rats. They’ve chewed through wiring, chewed through vent screens in both the attic and the crawl space. Sure, that wasn’t the action of all the rats. But it was expensive destruction none-the-less and, who has time to figure out which rats did the chewing and which were just hanging out?

      You start by removing the bird seed. You follow that up with kill traps and lethal weapons. IT isn’t pretty but it has to be done or you lose everything.

      You never “finish”; they’re always be a few rats around. But you do gain control so that we can all live peacefully together……………those of us that remain.

      Alternatively, try this in another country. You might be surprised by the reception you receive. Even in peace loving Canada.

  30. Reason could save a lot of money by NOT allowing Matt Welch to
    write another “we can’t do nothin'” immigration article. It actually is quite easy togt the illegals moving out – we control most of their sources of income (govt) and can force employers to jettison illegals or else. That will get them moving Southward. Matt Welch has no ability to think outside the box. Matt Welch, the abominable “NO” man. I’m sick of his immigration nonsense

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.