"Get In Line!" to share "Get in Line!" Share it freely.

Here are the words:

1. I come to land where the peo-ple are hap-py! Where there is so much op-por-tun-i-ty! I get a job, I work hard, I pay tax-es. But one more thing peo-ple say to me. They tell me: "Get in line like ev-ery-bo-dy else! You're il-le-gal! You broke the law! That smells! Why not ar-my, folks like me ex-pels! Get in line like ev-ery-bo-dy else!

2. I ask law-yer where this line I can get in? He fill out forms, send my fees, I be-gin. Twen-ty years la-ter the court still de-ci-ding if I'm in line but still I can't win. Peo-ple say (chorus)

3. Well, fif-ty years, now I fin-ally am le-gal! I'm still in line! Thir-ty years more, I vote! Then fif-teen years more, my wife can come see me! She no swim! She can ride in a boat! Now I say "Get be-hind me^in bur-eau-crat-ic Hell! You're il-le-gal! You broke the law! That smell!

4. Im-mi-gra-tion laws are like a speed li-mit five miles an ho-ur on the in-ter-state: We should be ashamed of our-selves to de-fend it! Fix those lines so no life-time we wait! But folks say (chorus)

(For lead sheet (music with chords and lyrics) and the music for the trumpet solo, send $5 to Dave Leach, 137 E. Leach, Des Moines Iowa 50315.)

"Get in Line!" answers the demand of conservative leaders like Rush Limbaugh that undocumented immigrants should "Get in line like everybody else!"

Has anyone been able to explain to Rush that those lines are generations long, IF you can find one?

Does he know the minimum wait for an immigrant to come here legally (never mind becoming a citizen) who is sponsored by his brother who is a citizen, is 12 years?

Does he know the minimum wait for an immigrant sponsored by her husband who is here legally, is 7 years?

Does he know how many of the 12 million alleged "illegals" ARE in line, but are still counted as "illegals" by hypocrites like immigrant newspaper columnist Michelle Malkin whose article about the Real ID Act complains about the "loophole" that exempts "illegals" who have applied to the USCIS for "adjustment of status", and are required to wait for years while the USCIS decides whether they are here legally or not?

Border Kybos Let's say you have 1,000 people waiting to use the bathroom, but you have only 10 Kybos. 1% of the need. But behind the Kybos are an unlimited supply of bushes, but they’re behind a fence with a "No Trespassing" sign posted. Not only that, but there is no organized line, and for every person exiting a Kybo, 10 more arrive to use it. Now no one wants to use the bushes, and no one wants to dishonor a no trespassing sign. But as long as the preferred relief requires waiting longer than it is humanly possible to wait, the bushes will remain busy, no matter how high you build the fence. That explains immigration. As long as the front door is only wide enough for fewer than 1% of those already here, so that the wait time is 100 years if no one else gets in line, but 10 times as many are trying to get in line as who get through it, and even though there is no organized line the politicians are telling you to get to the back of it, the back door will remain busy. In fact, the pressure on the back door will be greater than any security bar can restrain. Even if we hire Big Brother to create the most powerful police state in world history, fulfilling the Mark of the Beast prophecies of Revelation, all we will get out of that will be a police state. The only real solution is to provide more Kybos. But this is where the analogy breaks down. More Kybos are expensive. But repealing Numerical Limitations costs nothing, but saves money, while solving every economic and security problem related to immigration.

Malkin doesn't need years to decide if applicants are here legally. She knows the second they apply! They are not! She hates them for "breaking our laws", but she has no use for our laws as ruled by our courts, which say that while the USCIS is getting around to deciding whether they are here legally, they cannot be deported as if they were definitely here illegally. 

The politicians demanding immigrants get in those Lines from Hell, which are generations long and which require years to even find out if you are in one, would never get in one themselves! No! Most of our ancestors had no such "lines" as we impose on immigrants today! There was no such thing as being here illegally until the first US immigration quotas were  established in 1882, in between the beginning of construction on the Statute of Liberty and its delivery to New York.

Unless those complainers are Native Americans, their ancestors came no more than about 15 generations ago to this land. I am descended from Richard Warren, who came over on the Mayflower in 1620, 12 generations before my own. European history here doesn't go back farther than that. We are recent immigrants, who cannot say what makes us deserve to escape these "lines" we so ruthlessly impose upon others, other than that our parents came here 3 or 4 generations ago, instead of one or two. 

God has something to say about people who want more oppressive laws for others than they will stand for themselves:

"Woe unto you also, ye lawyers! for ye lade men with burdens [laws] grievous to be borne, and ye yourselves touch not the burdens [laws] with one of your fingers." Luke 11:46

In other words, some laws don't deserve our allegience. In fact, our system of laws was founded on the works of Blackstone, whom our Founding Fathers often quoted as explaining that "any law opposed to the Laws of God is no law at all."

The War between Conscience and Rhetoric. I believe if people understood what immigration is really doing to America, they would welcome immigrants with open arms. There are so many myths fueling anti-immigration that even Snopes.com is trying to help. The political debate is so out of step with the facts as I understand them that I continually have to pinch myself to tell which one of us is dreaming. Take our "line" for example. I have concluded from talking to campaign staff that some candidates literally do not know their goal of a "path to citizenship" for our DUN's (Disenfranchised, Unloved Neighbors), and their plan to make DUN's get at the "end" of that "line", without repealing Numerical Limitations, are logically irreconcilable. Other candidates partly know, but are either afraid to explain the facts, or think they lack the eloquence to get their hotheaded supporters to digest the facts. And all candidates have only rare opportunities to concentrate on any issue for more than 20 seconds.

Is anyone interested in the Laws of God on this subject, which are the standard for measuring which of our laws are legitimate laws, which in turn are the standard of just who are the real lawbreakers?

"One law shall be to him that is homeborn, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among you." Exodus 12:49 (also Lev 24:22, Num 15:16, 29) "Love ye therefore the stranger [foreigner]: for ye were strangers [foreigners] in the land of Egypt." Deuteronomy 10:19

Yes, exactly so. Our fathers were foreigers when we immigrated from Europe. Why can't we remember that as we write separate laws for immigrants from Latin America?

Hmmm. According to what "rule of law" has meant in America since its beginning, the "lawbreakers" here are those who would impose upon immigrants today Hellish conditions which their own fathers never had to endure! 

Share this song, and let's come together on a common vision for a sensible and reasonable immigration policy. Engage! Enter the debate! Don't leave the debate to be overrun by lawbreakers!

Pr 29:18 Where there is no vision, the people perish: but he that keepeth the law, happy is he.

In Jesus' Name (Col 3:17)

Dave Leach

Other Fantastic Articles, Books, Movies, Music: Get In Line!