There are things about Donald Trump's immigration platform that I like and that are doable, and there are things that are kind of absurd and unconstitutional—not to mention progressive.

Building the Trump Wall across the southern border with a few large doors is a good idea. I think most reasonable conservatives would agree. However, making Mexico pay for it is both ridiculous and unrealistic. I suppose he could try, but mostly, I think it's just populist bombast that sells good to the public. I guess is supposed to show how tough he is.

But tariffs, remittance payments and trade restrictions will not and should not pay for the wall. We can blame Mexico and Central American countries, but we did this to ourselves, so we should pay for it.

What many Republicans are really supporting--what supporters are jazzed about--is not just the wall, but also his idea to deport all illegal invaders. That, and his idea to end all sanctuary cities. And on this point, the left, the moderates, and the Chamber of Commerce wing of the Republican Party are spastic.

Ross Kaminsky at the American Spectator echoes the establishment voice quite nicely as he writes: "Mr. Trump wants to remove all illegal aliens from the United States. This is, of course, impossible, and, even if it were possible, it is an outrageous waste of tens or hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars. When asked by Chuck Todd on NBC's Meet the Press if he should split up families in which one or more of the parents is an illegal alien but their children are US citizens, Trump said no, clarifying in one of the most reprehensible statements I have heard from an American candidate for public office. 'We're going to keep the families together, but they have to go.'"

While I agree that you can't just deny the existence of the 14th amendment and deport citizens, I would have preferred that The Donald follow-up his infamous "they have to go" statement with the citizen has a choice. As a citizen, he or she (assuming they are not transgendering) may stay in this country or feel free to leave with his or her illegal family. It's their choice. Sure, it's not their fault that their parents are here illegally, but it's not ours either. Yet, both the left and establishment right say, as did Kaminsky, that even the suggestion is immoral.

Now, as for the impossibility and cost involved in deporting all illegals: that is just nonsense. This is the typical tired argument we always hear. The cost of deporting all illegals is estimated to be around $50 billion. Yes, that's a lot of money, if you had to keep shelling it out every few years. But that's what the wall is for. They leave and you close the door behind them.

And it is not impossible. It's been done before - and with relative ease. Of course, it was last done in a time when being an American actually meant something.

I've written about this umpteen times, but I guess it must, once again, be revisited.

The year was 1953, and 3 million illegal aliens were residing in the United States. That doesn't seem like much by today's standards, but our population was just a fraction of what it is now.

It was the same year in which one of America's greatest generals became president: Dwight D. Eisenhower.

Ike called it as he saw it, quoting a New York Times article: "The rise in illegal border crossing by Mexican 'wetbacks' to a current rate of more than 1 million cases a year has been accompanied by a curious relaxation in ethical standards extending all the way from the farmer-exploiters of this contraband labor to the highest levels of the federal government."

A couple of things should have jumped off the page. First, the fact that the New York Times would ever publish such a thing; and second, just imagine anyone, much less the president, quoting that passage. Today, he would be perp walked out of the Oval Office for a hate crime.

Needless to say, Eisenhower had a real problem with illegal aliens. In 1954 he appointed retired general Joseph Swing to head up the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) and gave him full authority to do what he had to do to stop the flow of illegals and deport the ones already here.

"Jumpin' Joe," as he was called from his days in the 11th airborne, got to work and did so with a mere 1075 agents. He tasked 750 of those agents to travel to Southern California and Arizona to round up 1000 illegals per day.

"Operation Wetback," as they called it, began on June 17, 1954. By the end of July, they had caught 50,000 in just those two states. And what happened then is what we have been saying for years. Another half-million fled the country on their own rather than be arrested.

This is called self-deportation, and when illegals know an administration is serious, that's what happens, and what would happen again.

The agents then moved on to Texas where they apprehended another 80,000 "wetbacks" and another 700,000 self-deported. The illegals very quickly understood that Eisenhower wasn't going to mess around. Consequently, illegal immigration decreased by 95% in the 50s.

After Ike left office, it was back to a relaxed attitude under Kennedy and every other president since, including Reagan. Eisenhower proved it could be done, if one has the will of a Supreme Military Commander. Simply give the order that it be done and charge the right people to do it! Frankly, he was the last president to actually do his job according to the law. That's rather sad.

Ike was able to rid us of the flood of almost 3,000,000 illegals with little more than 1000 agents, so never accept from anyone that it "Can't Be Done!"

Does that make Eisenhower an Immoral Angry White Man?

Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.