Look Who’s Separating Families Now!

After years of ludicrous accusations that enforcing federal immigration laws breaks up aliens’ families, Americans can now plainly see that Mexican and Central American parents are not only willing but eager to split up in exchange for the lure of permanent legal residency in the United States. Images of the recent illegal alien surge on the U.S. southwestern border show children alone or traveling with their mothers.

A recent Arizona Republic story described the Tucson and Phoenix scenes this way: “Almost all the migrants were women traveling with young children, some as young as two months old.” Dad is rarely in the picture. He either stayed behind or went ahead months ago.

Whichever the case may be, those families made individual decisions to separate. Apparently, love doesn’t conquer all – at least it doesn’t outweigh the motivation to illegally enter the U.S. with the hope of cashing in on Obama’s nonexistent immigration law enforcement.

The stop-breaking-up-families mantra is and always has been a tool of the Hispanic lobby used to win amnesty converts in Congress and influence under-informed Americans.

When a foreign national sets out to illegally migrate to the U.S. without his family, he voluntarily chooses to leave spouse and children behind. When the whole family comes as a unit, the adults know that the consequences might include deportation.

For the illegal immigrant, the process is a crap shoot: he may enter, get a job and live the rest of his life in the U.S., or he may be deported, although that option is increasingly unlikely under President Obama’s all-are-welcome, all-will-be forgiven immigration policy. As Obama likes to say, “We shouldn’t be in the business of tearing families apart who are otherwise law-abiding.”

Unfortunately, in another blow to professional journalism, the separated families theme, having gained media traction, is here to stay. Like “in the shadows,” still a favorite despite illegal immigrants’ omnipresence including at Obama’s State of the Union address, once amnesty advocates latch on to weepy lexicon regardless of how much the evidence belies it, getting them to drop it is well-nigh impossible.