Skip to content

Altered Reality

It is apparent that many in Washington D.C. — most of which lean left — look at the world through a different prism than many others. It is incredulous to watch and listen to claims that are made, most of which are political, without any factual basis or that are “alternate” facts.

Don’t take me the wrong way: Democrats do not have an exclusive on stretching the truth or bending it a little. Republicans have their fair share of callouts for sometimes stating facts that are not quite exactly as described. And this propensity is not exclusive to D.C. either. Human nature alone finds us all tempted to stray away from hardline facts to embellishment.

Here’s the problem with that: most people don’t live in a world in which they make life and death decisions daily, especially when each decision directly impacts the lives of millions of people. Members of Congress ARE in that position: their decisions directly impact us all. One would think the weightiness of that revelation would cause those folks to spend much time, thought, and prayer in objective contemplation before raising their hand on any issue placed in front of them. Throw into that group the President and members of his administration and those appointed to head departments like FEMA, the FCC, CMS, Veterans Administration, the Military, federal courts, etc., and the importance of those decisions being objective and well-thought through are literally empirical in their requirements.

In most cases, I’m sure they do think through those choices. But what we are daily witnessing as a nation are many of these leaders that have misplaced the truth in and the necessity of making those life-changing choices based strictly on the will of the American people. What are the causes for America’s leaders to go in that direction? There certainly are many. But the one that is front and center now and best illustrates the problem is the Illegals coming to the U.S. at our southern border. And it is not just their illegal entry and presence here, it is the unfathomable costs to Americans — not just in dollars but in infrastructure and manpower, and the personal injuries and even deaths that a segment of these undocumented illegals cause.


Quite honestly, the messaging from the Left on this topic is outright shocking. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) in 2006:

  • Americans don’t like illegal immigration
  • “Illegal immigration is wrong”
  • People illegally in the U.S. are “illegal aliens,” not “undocumented”
  • Border fence made the southern border “far more secure…created a significant barrier to illegal immigration”

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA):

Nancy Pelosi said on March 21, 1996, “I agree with my colleagues that we must curb illegal immigration responsibly and effectively.”

The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (“IIRIRA 96”), originally the “Immigration in the National Interest Act of 1995,” was signed into law by President Clinton on September 30, 1996, after the final conference bill passed the House 370-37 and the Senate by voice vote. How times have changed!

This bill essentially contained all the promises Trump has made, from the wall and clamping down on visa overstays to robust interior enforcement and expedited deportations, except that it was tailored for that time period. Many of the provisions failed because they were ignored by past presidents and state and local governments and twisted by the courts. This bill was designed to fulfill the wayward promise of the 1986 amnesty and to finally fulfill the pledge to protect Americans from the cost of illegal immigration. Those promises have not been met, and millions of illegals later, millions of pounds of drugs later, and trillions in costs later, these same politicians have no interest in rectifying the promise they helped break once again.

In this Republican-sponsored bill, one of their agenda items was to cut back on legal immigration, which was a failed promise of a 1990 bill. The other was to end illegal immigration – completely. It was the former goal that Democrats opposed, which is why Republicans originally attached their legal immigration cuts to the illegal immigration bill. Democrats gutted it. But they all broadly agreed on the goal of stopping illegal immigration. To be clear, Democrats weakened some provisions and only allowed for a ban on in-state tuition for illegals, not K-12 education per the original version of the bill, but they still all agreed on the core provisions of interior enforcement we are trying to implement today.

As the Washington Post explained at the time, “By shifting their focus to a crackdown on illegal aliens, the representatives seized an issue on which there is a broad agreement but did little to lower the overall influx of immigrants, most of whom come to the United States legally.”

To punctuate this point, don’t forget that the Welfare Reform Act of 1996, which was signed just one month earlier and born out of the government shutdown the year before, explicitly barred illegal immigrants from accessing welfare. The bill contained language expressing the sentiment that it was a “compelling government interest to remove the incentive for illegal immigration provided by the availability of public benefits.” The bill used the word “alien” 93 times.

Know what was in that bill?

  • It provided for funding of 5,000 border agents and a 14-mile triple-layer border fence in San Diego, which worked well for years. Section 102 also gave the attorney general (now the DHS secretary) a general mandate that he “shall take such actions as may be necessary to install additional physical barriers and roads (including the removal of obstacles to detection of illegal entrants) in the vicinity of the United States border to deter illegal crossings in areas of high illegal entry into the United States.”
  • The bill called for an automated entry-exit control system within two years to clamp down on visa overstays.
  • The bill dramatically expanded deportations and explicitly stripped the courts of jurisdiction to adjudicate many of these cases. For example, the bill stated, “No court can accept jurisdiction in most cases where persons assert an interest under legalization provisions in the Immigration and Nationality Act.” We are tragically paying for the results of courts ignoring these provisions to this very day.
  • Section 531(4) updated the public charge laws by directing adjudicators of green card applications to consider factors such as age, health, family status, financial resources, education, and skills. All relatives bringing in immigrants were forced to sign a legally enforceable affidavit promising to provide financial support if needed. Unfortunately, none of this has been followed until the Trump administration, but it is still the law, a law that Pelosi and Schumer supported. Only .00008 percent of applications between fiscal year 2005 and fiscal year 2011 were disqualified on the public charge basis, even though overwhelming majorities of immigrants from a number of top sending countries are on welfare.
  • The bill provided for new programs promoting employment verification. While E-Verify was developed from this bill, the intent of the law was never followed through. In fact, the IRS still explicitly invited illegals to work, file tax returns, and receive refundable tax credits, a violation both of this provision of IIRIRA and the welfare reform bill.
  • The bill tightened up asylum requirements and barred asylum to all those who have access to another safe country, which in today’s cases means Mexico. It also permanently barred those applying under frivolous pretenses from ever immigrating here. The intent and letter of this law have now been flipped on their heads by the courts.
  • The bill expanded the definition of “aggravated felony” as defined to trigger deportability of even legal immigrants. This is another provision that has been twisted by the courts. Congress also criminalized female genital mutilation, another provision that has been “struck down” by a wayward district judge.
  • The 287(g) program was created to allow states to work with the federal government to train local law enforcement in helping enforce immigration law. Obama gutted the program, and now many sanctuaries have pulled out of it.
  • It barred states from providing in-state tuition breaks to illegals. Nevertheless, this was never enforced, and at least 20 states were allowed to aid and abet illegal immigrants.

While Democrats opposed the idea of slashing legal immigration and some grumbled about increasing deportability of certain crimes for legal immigrants, none of them had the fortitude to side with illegal immigrants. Clinton’s chief of staff, Leon Panetta, who would later become Obama’s secretary of Defense and CIA director, best summed up the Democrat view at the time, as reported by the San Francisco Chronicle. “We all understand the problem of illegal immigrants. We’re all trying to ensure that we have additional enforcement to protect against illegal immigrants,” he said. “But I, for the life of me, do not understand why we need to penalize legal immigrants in that process.”

This is why Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin, Steny Hoyer, and James Clyburn, Democrat leaders who were all in the House at the time, voted for the bill. Only 13 Democrats in the House voted no. In fact, more Republicans voted no because they were upset that the bill was gutted too much in conference and wasn’t strong enough.


Trying to understand the flip-flop moves of Democrats regarding illegals in our nation, and trying to reconcile their current messaging while comparing it to their messaging from some time ago, I have really struggled at how to deal with it. “I hate illegal immigration today,” and “Illegal aliens should never receive the same rights as Americans or legal immigrants,” and “We must fund necessary steps to stop illegal immigration,” ring constantly while listening to their “Politi-speak” today.

So instead of trying to comprehend their purposes, (although I’m certain it has to do with attracting illegals by the droves to give them votes to build the dying Democrat Party) I’ve decided to simply term “who” they are,”what” they say, and “what” they do regarding this issue with some new terms with their definitions. (I think some of you will probably adopt one or several of these):

  1. Demorality:  Dems have their own version of morality. It’s not the same as Webster’s or mine. So whenever Lefties use the term “morality” in their talking points, I just consider it — “their” version — as “Demorality.” That way I don’t get confused;
  2. Demotegrity: I honestly don’t think many Democrats understand the true meaning of “integrity.” Frankly, I do not remember in this discussion regarding immigration any of them ever using that word describing themselves — and they shouldn’t. Thus: their version of the word;
  3. Demotruth: Do I even need to explain here? Saying the things said years ago then today saying the exact opposite without explanation for the changes proves Democrat leaders have abandoned “truth.” When they speak, we hear “Demotruth,” not REAL truth;
  4. Demofact: Of course their facts often are not OUR facts or REAL facts. Nevertheless, they are important to know — even more important to understand. So, “their” facts are “Demofacts.” Maybe that way we can understand the differences in their minds.


You may have chuckled at the introduction of the above words. But isn’t it ludicrous that even needing to consider and create a Democrat reality about the words “morality,” “integrity,” “truth,” and “fact” as compared to the real meanings of those words is necessary?

Here’s the simple fact the meaning of which cannot be altered no matter what and no matter who tries: any person entering the United States without U.S. government approval is perpetrating a crime and therefore is a criminal. Sugarcoating the term as much as you want doesn’t change that fact. The only people that can change that fact into a REAL “NEW” fact are members of Congress.

The “Demorality” in which they live, the “Demotegrity” which they possess, the “Demotruths” they create for the media, and the “Demofacts” they throw out do not alter reality!

Actually, reality is absolute: what it is regarding everything is exactly that — “Reality.”

One more thing: Caring about Americans over illegal immigrants is not an idea invented by Trump. It was once a universal value until the elites completely betrayed us. That’s a reality!


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.