In our through-the-looking-glass world, we so often view matters backwards without even realizing it.  Take DACA (actually, leave it), where even many conservatives consider it a given that the individuals covered under it must somehow be granted amnesty.  Overlooked is that they've already been granted amnesty.

Imagine that you return from a trip to find that someone has broken into your home, is squatting there, and is eating your food and using your services.  Might you not call the police?  Might this invader not be charged with various crimes, such as breaking and entering, trespassing, and theft?

Now, let's say that for some reason you feel compassion for the individual – maybe because he's a young adult whose father broke open your door and told him to make himself at home – and instead of pressing charges, you just tell him he must leave your place and never return. H ow would you react if, after you exhibited such mercy, a community activist called you bigoted and intolerant and insisted you grant "amnesty" by allowing the interloper to live with you permanently?  Would you not be outraged and point out that you're already granting amnesty by not pressing charges?  In fact, the attack on your character might stiffen your resolve to expel the trespasser.

This is largely analogous to the situation with the DACA illegals.  They have already received amnesty.  We're not going to punish them for remaining in our country, even though they've long known their presence here is a violation of law.  We're not even going to demand they reimburse us for the American services (e.g., education, handouts) from which they've greatly benefited.  They're way ahead of the game (and we're being played).  Insisting that someone return to his native land is not punishment.  It's mercy.  It amounts simply to making things right.

Of course, we often hear the argument that the "DREAMers" – a sickening, manipulative propaganda term if ever there were one (how about "Schemers"?) – are enriching the U.S.  Contrary to this assertion, DACA recipients have considerably lower educational attainment than do American citizens.  Almost a quarter are functionally illiterate, 73 percent live in low-income housing, and only four percent complete college, according to certain studies.  Allowing DACA individuals – who range from high school age to middle age – to stay "is really the importation of an additional underclass," as American Thinker editor Thomas Lifson puts it.  (It's also the importation of future Democrat voters.)

Having said this, let's for a moment assume that Invasion USA advocates are right about DACA aliens' achievement.  They then should stop being selfish and allow these bursting-with-potential people to enrich their native lands.  Talk about cultural appropriation: we suck the best and brightest from these third-world countries and then wonder why those countries are in shambles.  You leftists ought to be ashamed of yourselves.  Denuding a developing nation of its intellectual capital is a type of resource rape.  

Returning to my analogy (and to seriousness), why aren't we outraged about the DACA appeals, as we'd be if someone insisted we coddle a home-invader?  Whether large or small, whether a family in a home or national family, such a cohesive entity will naturally defend the home front from invaders.  In contrast, a balkanized country, a land of strangers, doesn't react as viscerally to the introduction of more strangers.  It has already been diversified out of its defense mechanisms.

Everyone should be mindful that we have, quite generously, already offered amnesty.  We're not insisting on DACA – Draconian Action against Childhood Arrivals.  The Schemers just need to go home.

Anyway, that would be the dominant attitude in a nation.  As for us...well, that's a different matter.