Rhetorical Shenanigans IV: “Cruz confused Deportations with ‘Removals’ In the CNN Debate”

By: Brett MacDonald

Update: We have sought out the origin of the DHS definition — See Part V here.

It’s pretty amazing to see people run amok trying to figure out what to do about the revelation made by Cruz last night — that under President Clinton and President Bush roughly 20 million illegal aliens (no, not ‘undocumented,’ Dartmouth College) were deported.

Take a look at these graphs below before we continue, its the product of very careful and clever data manipulation.

After nervously sweating out all of the caffeine from their watered-down Starbucks Americano “grande,” liberal interns thought they had finally found an out and eagerly scampered over to their editors.

“We have an idea! According to DHS if someone is only here for a short amount of time before they are forcibly removed, its not a deportation, its actually a removal!”

“Are you kidding me?” Their editors must have been perplexed. But they ran with it. Repeatedly.

The Department of Homeland Security has been redefining what a deportation is in order to make it appear more favorable to Latinos, who, by an overwhelming super-majority, are ardently opposed to any deportations according to the Pew Research Center.

But how are they redefining deportations, you ask?

Under the new definition, deportations have been split into two categories: deportations and removals.

Deportations include any illegal immigrant that enters the country, is detained, and goes before a judge where he is then forced to leave the country.

Removals include all those that are caught, waive their right to see a judge, and are then sent back over the border without protest, but with force.

So this is all underhanded enough as it is. We can all agree that crossing the border, whether you agree with it or not, is illegal.  If you cross the border, in essence, you have committed a crime.

What do we call a thief who waives his right to a trial? A thief.
What do we call a a murder who waives his right to a trial? A murderer.
What do we call a deported illegal who waives his right to a trial? …Apparently not a deported illegal alien.

Hmmm. Well that just doesn’t seem right. Because saying that a deported illegal alien isn’t deported because they were sent back right away doesn’t make them any less of a deported immigrant.

Let’s look at what it takes to be an illegal alien: you enter the country illegally.

Let’s look at what it takes to be deported: you are forcibly removed.

So what is the difference between a “removal” and a deportation in the eyes of those that tell you there is some difference? A willful disdain for logic.

It’s semantics. Anyone that tells you different either thinks you are stupid and easily manipulated, or is himself stupid and easily manipulated.

But that isn’t even the best part!

Let’s think for a second about what is really being said by liberals that are posting this BS: “Obama deported more illegal immigrants than Bush or Clinton.”

Well, no. We already decided that was a manipulation. But let’s humor you for a second and look at what those two numbers mean. Here they are again for reference:


Even if we were to concede that the imaginary unicorn wedge dividing the two groups of “removed” and deported illegals — one thing is clear: under Bush and Clinton over 20 million (~10 million each) illegal aliens were prevented from establishing permanent residency here.  Even if you add up President Obama‘s deported and “removed” categories he has only prevented a grand total of 4 million aliens from establishing residency.

And even if he has deported more than the other two, and we agree that removals don’t count as deportations, that means he has let more cross over the border by relaxing security. That means that, Bush and Clinton kept our border infinitely more secure, and by doing so, rendered the need for future deportations (which are far more costly and require a long legal process) unnecessary.

So, go on, liberals: try to have your cake and eat it too. The fact remains — Bush and Clinton, through rigorous border policy, saved money, deported more illegals, and kept us safer in the process. No amount of squawking and revisionist re-defining will change that.

Don’t be bamboozled.

image

 

One thought on “Rhetorical Shenanigans IV: “Cruz confused Deportations with ‘Removals’ In the CNN Debate”

  1. Pingback: Rhetorical Shenanigans V: Deportation Defined – A Clintonian Conspiracy | Political Wave

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s