When Does Illegal Immigration Become and Invasion?

By Rich Kozlovich

The more things change, the more they remain the same.  I always chuckle when I read that, because that's a pattern that repeats.  Back in 2015 I linked an article by someone named Dan Phillips, no longer available on-line, saying:

Yawn. Another day, another hysterical article from a self-appointed Establishment "conservative" gatekeeper bemoaning the candidacy of Donald Trump and the imminent demise of the GOP and conservatism as we know it if Trump is not stopped. These have become so predictable that I didn't even bother to read the thing before I started commenting......

The article dealt with comments by George Will and Charles Krauthammer attacking Donald Trump, but the truth is, the names and dates could be changed and still carry the same stench.  

My view was the anti-Trump George Will/Charles Krauthammer Cabal was losing ground rapidly with conservatives, and the current crop of crows is equally flawed and also failing.  In the case of Will and Krauthammer, both really smart men, both highly educated, both have strong opinions, and both have published thoughts worth paying attention to. Unfortunately both have the same problem.  Both were academics and atheists, and thus, have no solid moral foundation to which they're thoroughly committed, always willing to sacrifice principle for expedience.  We're seeing that in the current crop of GOP candidates.  

Will is an "academic conservative", which is almost oxymoronic, and Krauthammer, who has since long passed, was an academic, and former leftist, who became a "conservative', as in “neo-con”.  Both "conservatives of convenience", neither conservatives of conscience, or moral conservatives if you will. Both had abandoned a strong moral stand of some sort when it wasn't part of the conventional neocon wisdom.  

They were Vichy conservatives, much like John Kasich who claimed he had the right to define conservatism as he saw fit, which meant he almost never saw a leftist position he couldn't embrace, and in point of fact, was a conservative heretic. 

All these faux conservatives profess to be against big government but follow and support so-called conservatives who support big government, big taxes, big expenditures and more regulations. None of the people they support has any plan to end any of that. In point of fact, an argument can be made their positions diametrically oppose every effort to turn things around, and that includes immigration.

Do these faux conservatives really think any culture can survive unlimited, unwanted immigration? Among Muslims it's called immigration Jihad. Fill a culture with Muslims and then take over and impose Sharia. That means destroying the Constitution. Do they think they can survive such an onslaught? 

As for Hispanic immigration, no one is opposing legal immigration. Everyone should be opposing illegal immigration, especially since so many of them wish to conquer the nation, not be a part of it!  At some point we need recognize it's impossible to have confidence in the views of these kind of people.  Their views are a contaminates clear thinking.   At some point someone needs to answer this question.  

What's the difference between illegal immigration and an invasion?