RECENT IMPOLITIC COMMENTS BY DONALD TRUMP raised the topic of illegal immigration to new levels — and, to no one’s surprise, resulted in Trump’s excoriation by the open borders crowd.

His mouth later got him into more trouble with his remarks regarding Sen. John McCain, remarks that essentially removed him from further consideration for the presidency in the minds of many, though he continues to dominate the polls.

But if Trump’s comments about Mexican “rapists” and criminals flowing over the border do nothing more than further the issue of illegal immigration as a subject of political debate, then The Donald has indeed performed a service to the nation. And for that we owe him thanks.

The open borderists declare Trump’s comments to be xenophobic while ignoring basic troubling facts. More on that in a moment.
Immigration has a long history in our nation, one we are often reminded of — especially in movies. One iconic example is “The Godfather Part II,” a movie I can watch repeatedly.

One especially poignant scene in the film is when the immigrant-laden ship Moshulu sails into New York Harbor on the approach to Ellis Island (we will ignore that the ship is sailing out and not in). Recall the immigrants slowly rising to see Lady Liberty for the first time; the look of hope and awe on their faces is priceless.

Two of my wife’s grandparents passed through Ellis Island; one was her Swedish grandmother, Hilda, who arrived speaking no English. Hilda later declared to her children that Swedish was not to be spoken in the household; they were Americans now and they would assimilate by speaking English.

Hilda’s story has been repeated for generations. The names and countries vary, but like so many others she came to America seeking what she could not attain in the nation of her birth.

Be they Irish, Italian, Swedish, Vietnamese, Persian or any other nationality you wish to name, all paid a heavy price to become Americans. They also followed the rules — steerage passage on any old boat that would carry them, medical examinations and detentions at Ellis or Angel Island and perhaps years of wait before their name rose to the top of a very long list.

Last year President Obama addressed the nation on immigration: “We are and always will be a nation of immigrants. We were strangers once, too. And whether our forebears were strangers who crossed the Atlantic, or the Pacific, or the Rio Grande, we are here only because this country welcomed them in, and taught them that to be an American is about something more than what we look like, or what our last names are, or how we worship.”

The inclusion of those crossing the Rio Grande continued a troubling conflation of “immigrant” and “illegal immigrant,” a term now out of favor amongst the perpetually offended. Note that the term is not offensive to those who paid the price to come here legally; but they lack the political clout, or will, to control the dialogue.

Those with clout continuously redefine words in deceptive ways under the masquerade of political correctness. The misdirection by the president, as well as many of his supporters, is part of a strategy to achieve a desired “humanitarian” goal: the elimination of national borders.

It was this claim of “humanitarianism” that prompted approximately 200 cities to demonstrate solidarity with the president’s open-borders policies by proclaiming themselves to be “sanctuary cities.”

Such a nice term, sanctuary. It harkens back to Quasimodo fleeing the cruel mob, pleading at the doors of Notre Dame. How can anyone say no to such victims?

But today we are paying the price for the “humanitarian” decision to establish “sanctuary cities.” In view of recent events — including the killing of Kate Steinle on Pier 14 in San Francisco — a more appropriate term would be “aiding and abetting cities,” as that is exactly what they are doing.

Steinle is only the most well known victim of violence perpetrated by an illegal immigrant. There have been many others: Shane Oxendine (age 17), Naomi Mercury (18), A’Janae Jones (12), Zane Thurber (3), Anna Dieter-Eckert (6), Abigail Robinson (11), Serenity Ready (9 months) … Currently the known list of victims killed by illegal immigrants stands at about 300. The above names are but a small portion of the youngest.

A 2012 article in the Daily Caller highlights some scary facts from a report by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service:

• Illegal aliens released from custody between 2008 and mid-2011 have been charged with 16,226 subsequent crimes, including 19 murders, 142 sex crimes and thousands of drunken-driving offenses, drug crimes and felonies.

• There were 159,286 cases where legal and illegal immigrants were arrested, identified via FBI databases and then let free.

• Over a 33-month period, from October 2008 to July 2011, roughly one-sixth of those released from government custody were later arrested, accounting for an astonishing 57,736 crimes.

Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, stated in the same article: “(The criminals) in the government’s custody were identified as illegal immigrants and then let go because (the Obama) administration has refused to request the resources to hold them and deport them.”

This matches exactly the lack of action by “sanctuary cities” to enforce our laws by refusing to aid in the deportation of dangerous criminals. Of course, it should be axiomatic that deportation alone is insufficient as long as the border remains porous.

In addition to the violent criminals mentioned, other actions by illegal aliens are costing millions in taxpayer dollars. The Washington Times has reported that the IRS “pays out $6.8 billion in refunds to taxpayers who file using Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers. They generally are immigrants, here both legally and illegally.”

Former Attorney General Eric Holder once said that America was “essentially a nation of cowards” because we do not talk about race. The response to Donald Trump’s comments are an indicator of why we cannot talk about race or illegal immigration.

The simple fact of the matter is that there was an element of truth to Trump’s words. The facts back him up, yet those in support of open borders and “diversity” want to sweep these problems under the rug. Why?

What is the advantage to the open borderists to avoid this dialogue by attacking and demonizing? Are they really willing to tolerate over 50,000 crimes committed by people who were once in jail for other crimes?

How many women need to be sexually assaulted before NOW complains about those crimes, as they do regarding the far less numerous crimes of frat boys? Could it be that the frat boys are usually white, while the aliens are not?

If we are to have any meaningful dialogue on this issue, both sides must be heard. And one side needs to stop attacking those who raise the subject.

As a person who has traveled to numerous parts of Mexico over 15 times, I can attest that there are many wonderful things about the country and the Mexican people. The criminal element I am referring to can be found in all countries.

We have plenty of homegrown criminals already — do we really need to turn a blind eye while welcoming in more? Can we not allow in those we desire, while keeping out those we do not?

Do we really want to support politicians who refuse to respond to the violence we are witnessing? Is the pandering for votes we see from the likes of Jeb Bush, John McCain and others worth that price?

This is an issue that the GOP nominee needs to get right, or we will face a third Democrat term in the White House.

Dennis Lund is a mechanical engineer who lived in Benicia for more than 20 years. This commentary was originally published in American Thinker.