Earlier today, Kentucky senator Rand Paul gave a pro-amnesty speech at the US Hispanic Chamber of Commerce that in some ways is even more shocking and more crazy than the pro-amnesty speeches George W Bush gave. In addition to being borderline nuts, Paul misleads and uses a string of pro-amnesty talking points just like his dad.

First, it's necessary to point out that Paul isn't calling for a "path to citizenship" as the Associated Press claims (link). Instead, he just wants to give nearly all the illegal aliens in the U.S. work visas. But, it doesn't matter: those who Rand Paul would legalize wouldn't just remain non-citizens: the Democrats would change the rules later on to convert them into citizens.

Second, it's necessary to define terms. This site uses "amnesty" to mean any form of mass legalization of illegal aliens. See the note at the start of this post. If you want to claim that Rand Paul doesn't support amnesty because there's no "path to citizenship", then when you see the word "amnesty" in this post, just substitute "a massive legalization program that the Democrats will later modify to put those millions of former illegal aliens on the path to citizenship".

I'll quote Rand Paul's speech (as prepared here: peekURL.com/zU6jaJC ), followed by why what he says isn't credible. I'll then describe something very effective you can do.

After a great deal of intensely obsequious Hispandering - boosterism of one ethnic group he wouldn't accord to any other - Paul said:

Republicans need to become parents of a new future with Latino voters or we will need to resign ourselves to permanent minority status.

The Republican Party has insisted for years that we stand for freedom and family values. I am most proud of my party when it stands for both.

The vast majority of Latino voters agree with us on these issues but Republicans have pushed them away with harsh rhetoric over immigration.

Republicans have been losing both the respect and votes of a group of people who already identify with our belief in family, faith, and conservative values. Hispanics should be a natural and sizable part of the Republican base.

The idea of Hispanics as Republicans is not supported by the facts; see all of the work that Heather MacDonald and others have done over the years, such as this.

While some minor GOP leaders do occasionally engage in "harsh rhetoric", other cases are puffed up by groups like ThinkProgress. Instead of taking on ThinkProgress (part of the Center for American Progress), Rand Paul is enabling them. If some or many Hispanics have a problem with calls to enforce our immigration laws, the problem is with them and not our laws.

That they have steadily drifted away from the GOP in each election says more about Republicans than it does about Hispanics.

That's an outright lie. Since 1972 (before which the term "Hispanic" wasn't in wide use in regards to elections), Hispanics have been voting for the GOP at the same general percentage: around the mid 30%s (exit polls: peekURL.com/zzvhRdF ). In only one presidential election since 1972 has it been at or over 40% (see this). In 1992 and 1996, it was lower than Mitt Romney's percentage.

...Whether we are discussing hard work, respect for life or the quest for freedom, immigrants bring with them the same values that previous generations of immigrants did.

See immigration tradition fallacy for why that might not necessarily be true.

Defense of the unborn and defense of traditional marriage are Republican issues that should resonate with Latinos but have been obscured by the misperception that Republicans are hostile to immigrants...

See the MacDonald note above.

...Republicans who criticize the use of two languages make a great mistake...

Many Republican leaders could care less: they're willing to create a Spanish-language version of their websites if it'll get them more votes. Some Republican leaders do care about the use of two languages outside the home, especially for governmental functions. They (highly correctly) worry that will lead to balkanization. I don't think I've ever heard a Republican leader or anyone else for that matter complain about bilingualism at home. Rand Paul is lumping all those forms of bilingualism together.

...Many have faced intolerance and bigotry. It was not always easy to be German American in the face of two world wars started by Germans. Intolerance is not new, and it is not limited to one language or skin color...

Tell that to the pro-Nazi German American Bund of the 1930s or all the many German spies operating in the U.S. before and during World War II. Rand Paul would have us believe that concern about Nazis operating inside the U.S. was just "intolerance". It's true that Hispanics aren't about to go to war with us, even if Paul's Hispandering isn't far off from ethnic boosterism one might have heard at a Bund meeting in the 1930s. But, there are legitimate concerns about a "Chicano Quebec" forming inside the U.S. The Mexican government has a great deal of political power inside the U.S. and Rand Paul's plans would give them even more.

...I've never met a new immigrant looking for a free lunch...

While I'm sure there are immigrants who come here specifically to take advantage of our generous social welfare programs, Rand Paul is mostly engaging in a strawman argument. The issue is that immigrants (and their children) - especially low-skilled illegal aliens from Latin America - use more social services than others since their incomes are lower than other groups.

...It is absolutely vital for both the success of our immigration policy and for the purposes of national security that we finally secure our borders.

See secure the border; Rand Paul means it in the "first" sense.

Not to stop most immigrants from coming - we welcome them and in fact should seek to increase legal immigration.

The Republican Party must embrace more legal immigration...

With millions of Americans unemployed, Rand Paul not only wants to legalize millions of illegal aliens, he wants even more labor to come here legally. That will drive down wages for American citizens, leading to even more problems such as social discord and higher social welfare payments.

...Let's start that conversation by acknowledging we aren't going to deport 12 million illegal immigrants.

Rand Paul is trying to deceive you, see deportations false choice.

If you wish to work, if you wish to live and work in America, then we will find a place for you...

What about all the rest, all the other things people do? What do Republicans think about the fact that, in addition to working, somewhere around 2/3 of them will eventually end up voting for the Democrats? See people vs workers for more.

Then, it's time for his plan:

The first part of my plan – border security – must be certified by Border Patrol and an Investigator General and then voted on by Congress to ensure it has been accomplished.

This is what I call, Trust but Verify.

Top Republicans in Congress are pushing amnesty in a misbegotten quest for the Hispanic vote. They can't be trusted to certify that the border is secure, because then as now they'll say or do anything to reach for the unreachable brass ring.

With this in place, I believe conservatives will accept what needs to come next, an issue that must be addressed: what becomes of the 12 million undocumented workers in the United States?

My plan is very simple and will include work visas for those who are here, who are willing to come forward and work.

His very simple plan will fail miserably. If it were passed, the very next day the Democratic Party and their allies in the media and in immigration groups would begin trying to weaken it. Those groups have managed to push amnesty this far and have spent years and dozens of millions of dollars enabling illegal immigration. They aren't about to just stop what they've been doing for years and let those millions stay in a non-citizen state. And, they'll use the same technique to do that that they're doing now: holding the Hispanic vote out as a carrot to gain support from the GOP. If Congress can legalize millions of illegal aliens, there's little to stop them from turning them into citizens several years later.

A bipartisan panel would determine number of visas per year. High tech visas would also be expanded and have a priority. Special entrepreneurial visas would also be issued.

For a preview of how the panel wouldn't work as Paul wants you to think it would, see this. For the rest, see skilled immigration.

Imagine 12 million people who are already here coming out of the shadows to become new taxpayers.12 million more people assimilating into society. 12 million more people being productive contributors.

See living in the shadows for others who've used that misleading talking point. The idea that legalization would result in assimilation is absurd: legalization would give more power to groups like the National Council of La Raza that resist assimilation. Mass legalization would give the "Hispanic bloc" a tremendous amount of ethnocentric power. Mass legalization wouldn't result in giving those with grade school educations college degrees, nor would it result in those from Mexico who don't speak Spanish or English becoming fluent in either.

Conservatives, myself included, are wary of amnesty. My plan will not grant amnesty or move anyone to the front of the line.

Rand Paul is playing word games, but if you want to join in see the notes above. Call it what you will, his plan would greatly harm the U.S. and it's not in any way conservative.

For the rest, see immigration line. His plan will require a massive bureaucracy to process all those legalization applications, and that will definitely impact those waiting (sometimes for more than a decade) to come here legally.

But what we have now is de facto amnesty.

Did he pay Marco Rubio to use that line? We only have the current situation due to massive public and private corruption; if politicians had done their jobs and represented the national interest, we wouldn't have anywhere near as much illegal immigration. Instead of penalizing those corrupt politicians and businesses who've allowed and enabled illegal immigration, Rand Paul wants to reward their malfeasance.

The solution doesn't have to be amnesty or deportation - a middle ground might be called probation where those who came illegally become legal through a probationary period.

As discussed above, even that is a false choice: the alternative Paul isn't mentioning is attrition. And, whatever his "probationary period", similar to what's discussed above the Democrats will work to make it as short as possible so they can move on to putting them on the path to citizenship.

My plan will not impose a national ID card or mandatory E-Verify, forcing businesses to become policemen.

We should not be unfair to those who came to our country legally. Nor should we force business owners to become immigration inspectors-making them do the job the federal government has failed to do.

In other words, Rand Paul opposes eVerify. Which means that there will be even more illegal immigration since businesses will continue to not face risks when they hire illegal aliens. Rand Paul will reward crooked businesses for their past support for illegal immigration, and will make their future malfeasance easier.

After an Inspector General has verified that the border is secure after year one, the report must come back and be approved by Congress.

In year two, we could begin expanding probationary work visas to immigrants who are willing to work. I would have Congress vote each year for five years whether to approve or not approve a report on whether or not we are securing the border.

For the reasons discussed above, the Democrats will work to weaken that to their advantage, and the idea that his fantasy reports would only happen every five years shows just how bogus his plan is: in five years, millions upon millions of new illegal aliens could come here.

...Let's make it a land of legal work, not black market jobs. Let's make it a land of work not welfare. Our land should be one of assimilation, not hiding in the shadows...

That's delusional for the many reasons outlined above. Rand Paul's plan would retard assimilation by giving more power to the far-left. It wouldn't increase the education levels of current illegal aliens. It would result in more social welfare, as the Democrats worked to expand programs (such as Obamacare) to the newly-legalized.

Finally, Rand Paul gets even crazier than he did in his intro:

Some say to generalize about any ethnic group is be a racist... So it is with trepidation that I express my admiration for the romance of the latin culture. I am a fan of Gabriel Garcia Marquez. [Rand Paul reads a Pablo Neruda poem] ...How can we not embrace such passion. How can we not want that culture to merge with and infuse the American spirit. They are not called the romance languages for no reason... A dialogue that shows that the GOP sees all immigrants as assets and that Latinos can come to see the GOP as the party of opportunity, the party of the American Dream, - El partido del sueno Americano

I've read dozens of statements George W Bush made in support of amnesty and Hispanic ethnic power, but that takes the cake. I'm sure Bush thought things like that, but he never said anything quite so nuts.

Rand Paul's plan isn't conservative, nor is it liberal. Heck, it's not even libertarian since it would result in much more power for those who support big government. It's just a crooked plan to increase his power, even if it means greatly harming the U.S.

Want to do something about this?

Go do a Twitter search - nor or in the future - of anyone who supports Rand Paul and send them the short link to this post (see below) or make the points above to them. Do the same in comments sections, on pro-Paul sites, and on Facebook. Work to undercut his support by pointing out to his supporters just how deceptive he is and just how much harm his plan would do to the U.S.