A Conservative Position at Counterpunch

Perhaps Paul Craig Roberts writing for them is rubbing off on them.

Here's an interesting piece on immigration on the Counterpunch webiste that gets down to the nitty-gritty as to why immigration-law enforcement is important, and why we need to distinguish immigration from simple migration.

Here's a sample:

For, have no doubt, a country that cannot enforce its borders is a country no longer. A blind acquiescence of the concept of immigration anytime, anywhere, without suitable forethought, is a far more pernicious threat than the downing of the World Trade Center. Illegal migration is a direct challenge to a nation's sovereignty, pure and simple. To throw epithets like racist, fascist, heartless, etc. at all those who hold this view, is no different than President Bush (representing the mother of all illegal squatting -- the vagrant in the White House) condemning those who protest his warrant less wiretapping felony as soft on terrorism...These basic premises should be form the basis upon which other considerations of pragmatism, personal stories, and compassion, may apply.

A great deal of the article, if not all of it, would be in very good harmony with any number of paleoconservatives or traditionalists.

That is all.