Skip to main content

Originally posted on Citizen Orange

UPDATE: DREAM Act Vote Tomorrow!  Call Your Senators

When anti-migrant advocates speak up, they get called racists.  When pro-migrant advocates speak up, they get deported.  Is there even a contest?

Tam Tran bravely testified before Rep. Zoe Lofgren's panel (D-CA) and was covered on the front page of USA Today.  Three days later, her family was detained by Immigration and Custom's Enforcement (ICE).

Duke has already written a better post about Tam Tran then I will ever be able to write, so I'm going to write about this from the unique perspective that I bring.

First, ICE is the most frightening enforcement agency within the U.S.'s borders.  ICE is accountable to no one and it has far too much power.  Second, Tam Tran is a stateless individual like so many others on the earth, today.  She can't go back to her country because she doesn't have a country to go back to.  What is her place in the world? Is she worth nothing like so many others that weren't born within the borders of a prosperous country?  Third, Congress need to pass the DREAM act.  There are problems with it, sure, but I can't look in the faces of the many young migrants that have their hopes tied up in the DREAM act and tell them I don't support it.  Migrants need a victory, and we'll fix the problems with the DREAM Act later.

It is with that in mind that I've taken a series of the best nine videos on the DREAM Act and dedicated them to nine senators that hold the fate of the legislation in their hands.  Below is the video that I got from the Illinois Coalition on Immigrant and Refugee Rights (ICIRR), which I've dedicated to Senator Mel Martinez. 

ICE's job is enforcement, but it's actions show that it is working as an engine of political intimidation as well.  ICE isn't only enforcing the law, it is fighting a political battle as well.  If a migrant speaks up, ICE will find a way to deport that migrant.  Think Progress has listed some of the many times in which this is the case:

Since Bush crony Julie Myers
took over ICE, the agency has increasingly become known for its
willingness to retaliate against immigrants who publicly discuss their
situation in the United States. Arrests have been made after
individuals spoke out on everything from immigration reform, to workplace rights, to the right to fair wages, to the right to report crimes without fear of retaliation.

The clearest example I can think of is that of Elvira Arellano.  She was left untouched for over a year when she took sanctuary in a Chicago church, but as soon as she decided to leave and speak out about the U.S. immigration policy, she was deported

ICE will always say that the detentions and deportations are not politically motivated.  Yet, in effect, there should be no doubt that they serve to silence dissent.  Is that the kind of "America" people want to live in, where political dissent is thrown out of the country?  ICE manages it's information like a dictatorship.  The agency gives information to no one and is very selective about the information they do give.  Couple ICE's lack of transparency with the enormous power they have and it's a recipe for abuse.  Abuse that's hard to imagine occurring within the U.S.'s borders.  The latest reports suggest ICE is now drugging migrants before they are deported.

This brings us back to Tam Tran, who's family was detained after her appearance on the front page of USA today.  Rep. Zoe Lofgren accused federal officials of "witness intimidation".  Anti-migrant advocates will say that Tam Tran, who was offered a spot in a Ph.D. program, should go back to her country.  The problem is Tam Tran doesn't have a country.  She is stateless.  Her testimony before the judiciary committee says it better than I ever could.

I hate filling out forms, especially the ones that limit me to checking off boxes for categories I don’t even identity with. Place of birth? Germany. But I’m not German. Ethnicity? I’m Vietnamese, but I’ve never been to Vietnam. However, these forms never ask me where I was raised or educated. I was born in Germany, my parents are Vietnamese, but I have been American raised and educated for the past 18 years.
...
On application forms when I come across the question that asks for my citizenship, I rebelliously mark "other" and write in "the world." But the truth is, I am culturally an American, and more specifically, I consider myself a Southern Californian. I grew up watching Speed Racer and Mighty Mouse every Saturday morning. But as of right now, my national identity is not American and even though I can’t be removed from American soil, I cannot become an American unless legislation changes
...
Graduation for many of my friends isn’t a rite of passage to becoming a responsible adult. Rather, it is the last phase in which they can feel a sense of belonging as an American.

We can look at Tam Tran's case as an exception, but it is not. We are no longer living in a world where citizenship can be the sole guarantor of rights.  I could be considered stateless like Tam Tran, but I'm lucky enough to have a U.S. passport.  As long as I am worth more because of my U.S. passport than my Guatemalan passport, everyone loses.  Every problem that progressives care about, from racism to workers' rights, has it's root in this fundamental global inequity.

That is the larger problem.  But the immediate problem is the fear that 12 million migrants live through every day they live in the U.S.  They need a victory.  They need alleviation from that fear.  And the solution with the most political capital right now is the DREAM Act.  I turn back to the words of Tam Tran:

Without the D.R.E.A.M. Act, I have no prospect of overcoming my state of immigration limbo; I’ll forever be a perpetual foreigner in a country where I’ve always considered myself an American.

There are problems with it, sure.  XP wrote my favorite post on the green card draft and he's most recently voiced his opposition with an embedded video highlighting the techniques of military recruiters: "there's peer pressure and then there's military pressure".  During better days, I would agree with XP, but I can no longer look in the people like Tam Tran in the eye and tell them my ideology should get in the way of alleviating their suffering. 

Pass the DREAM Act now. We'll fight the green card draft later, with the help of the thousands of college students that benefit from it.  I want to say that getting sent to Iraq with the certainty that your life is your own, is better than living every day with the prospect of having your life uprooted at any second, but the whole point is that I don't have the right to say that.  Migrant youth have too much hope and activism locked up in the DREAM Act for me to tell them that it's wrong.

There are nine more videos where the one from above came from.  Please look them over and give them to people you know living in the relevant states, and hopefully we can spread these virally.  I got the senators names and numbers from Duke's Hot 19.  Give these senators a call and tell them you support the DREAM Act.

<div style="text-align: center;">-DUKE'S HOT 19 - </div>
Murkowski (R-AK) 202-244-6665
Stevens (R-AK) 202224-3004
Pryor (D-AR) 202-224-2353
Martinez (R-FL) 202-224-3041
Inouye (D-HI) 202-224-3934
Brownback (R-KS) 202-224-6521
Landieu (D-LA) 202-224-5824
Collins (R-ME) 202-224-2523
Snowe (R-ME) 202-224-5344
Conrad (D-ND) 202-224-2043
Dorgan (D-ND) 202-224-2551
Dominici (R-NM) 202-224-6621
Voinovich (R-OH) 202-224-3353
Smith (R-OR) 202-224-3753
Graham (R-SC) 202-224-5972
Johnson (D-SD) 202-224-5842
Cornyn (R-TX) 202-224-2934
Warner(R-VA) 202-224-2023
Rockefeller (D-VA) 202-224-6472


I've used Moe Train's punk-cover of La Bamba for all the videos because the song has a Creative Commons license, and I've used videos made by various individuals.  I tried to get in touch with the filmmakers to ask for their permission, but they didn't get back to me and the pro-migrant call-ins start on Monday.  If anyone has a problem with it, contact me using the form on the front page and I will take the corresponding video down.  I also encourage people to RSVP to the facebook event "education not deportation" that is staging a national call in from Oct. 22-24.  Over a 1000 people have already responded.

Originally posted to kyledeb on Tue Oct 23, 2007 at 12:33 PM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tips (7+ / 0-)

    Hope you liked the diary.

    The U.S. "immigration debate" has lost sight of justice.

    by kyledeb on Tue Oct 23, 2007 at 12:37:19 PM PDT

  •  I have made my views on the DREAM Act known here (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    importer, bdevil89

    For some time -- if you have disagreement with them -- I invite you to respond.

    I wrote some comments in Duke's diary both last night and today.

    They are here,here,here,here, and finally and I think most importantly here.

    But please, if you are going to respond, I would ask that you be more creative in your reply than 'you are just anti-migrant', primarily because I completely reject your use of the term 'migrant' as you apply it illegal immigrants.

    <div style="font-size:10px;text-align:center;background-color:#ffd;color:#f33">If the terriers and bariffs are torn down, this economy will grow - G. Bush

    by superscalar on Tue Oct 23, 2007 at 12:54:11 PM PDT

    •  Yes, you have made your views known... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      theboz, Nightprowlkitty, kyledeb

      ... and you have also made it known that you have made up your mind on the issue.

      The issue for many of us is compassion. The fact that you refuse to accept that fact means that discussion with you is impossible.

      And please stop with the "us vs them" thing. The idea that you can't help immigrants without hurting Americans is wrong. Giving motivated kids a chance to become legal is not a threat.

      And yes... I get the argument that inflicting harsh punishment on these kids for the crimes of their parents will stop future parents from coming.

      I don't buy it. From abortion, to anti-sodomy laws to prohibition... harsh punishment has never worked.

      Not only do I think this is immoral... it is also ineffective.

      •  I believe that I have asked you (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        burrow owl, bdevil89, lemming22

        The issue for many of us is compassion. The fact that you refuse to accept that fact means that discussion with you is impossible.

        On more than one occasion 'What are your suggestions for worksite enforcement?'. I don't believe we can move on from this point without a means to enforce immigration at the worksite -- yet you have not to my knowledge ever said one word about the enforcement of immigration law.

        I have also said on numerous occasions that I believe the status of those currently here illegally must be the last thing considered, not the first. In 1986 the status of what was then 750,000 illegal immigrants was considered first, and we got amnesty for 3.2 million and virtually nothing else. I personally am not prepared to walk down that road again.

        I have also remarked to you that I know that you have no interest in the larger issue of immigration policy -- your entire raison d'etre in this discussion is 'a path to citizenship for the 12 million', and whether that number is 12 million or 200 million, I don't believe you care, and I don't believe you have any interest in what happens following that, or what the impacts of that policy are.

        and you have also made it known that you have made up your mind on the issue.

        And you have as well, so we both have made up our minds. It then must just be your 'compassion' that makes you so very good, and makes me so very evil -- right?

        <div style="font-size:10px;text-align:center;background-color:#ffd;color:#f33">If the terriers and bariffs are torn down, this economy will grow - G. Bush

        by superscalar on Tue Oct 23, 2007 at 01:44:17 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Enforcement. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kyledeb

          And that is what you never answer.  From my comment below, quoting from the NYT editorial -- it spoke of three different measures to take for "enforcement" - deporting 12 million (not possible); and these two:

          B. Find out who they are. Distinguish between criminals and people who just want to work. Get them on the books. Make them pay what they owe — not just the income, Social Security, sales and property taxes they already pay, but all their taxes, and a fine. Get a smooth legal flow of immigrants going, and then concentrate on catching and deporting bad people.

          C. Catch the few you can, and harass and frighten the rest. Treat the entire group as a de facto class of criminals, and disrupt or shout down anyone or any plan seen as abetting their evildoing.

          (emphasis mine)

          Right now we are doing "C." in this country.  And you have not said one word, ever, about that.  It is despicable, and not theoretical, as your little snark about compassion in your comment.

          I am in favor of B.  Yeah, it's messy and imperfect.  But I don't accept what is happening now, where alternative C. is happening right now and you are willing to accept that, not speak out about it, in your anti-migrant zeal.

          You can parse words all you like, superscalar.  What you are advocating by ignoring the reality of what's going on now is indeed unethical and inhumane, and a great example of the text above that I emphasized in bold.

        •  I will answer your question once again... (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          theboz, Nightprowlkitty, kyledeb

          First, you are right about my priorities-- and I don't feel the need to defend them, nor am I offended.

          What happens to the 12 million people who are here is more important than what you are calling "immigration policy". The idea that we need to break families and disrupt lives for "immigration policy" goes againt my values (and I believe the progressive values of America).

          So if the choice is "immigration policy" or human treatment for families... I will side with the families every time.

          Second, we agree that "illegal" immigrants are bad for the country. It is clear that they lower salaries and it is clear that people living in the shadows is bad for security and society at large.

          Where we disagree is the effect of legalization. I understand you think the roof will cave in. I am sorry, but given our countries history, and my personal experiences in a sanctuary city (Cambridge, MA) with "illegal friends" I don't buy it.

          Legalization of these "illegals" is a good idea. We legalized abortion, interracial marriages and homosexuality. In each case there were dire warnings that society would collapse. In each case we ended up with a more just, diverse and healthy country.

          I can't speak much about "workplace" enforcement because quite frankly... I don't think dealing with the immigration "problem" outside of making sure that everyone here has rights is not very important. I am agnostic about open borders, but I wouldn't mind an immigration policy that didn't depend on harsh treatment of families.

          The interesting question to me is how you and I can work together.

          If we agree that having people here as "illegals" who can be exploited and paid nearly nothing is a bad thing... how can we compromise on the other stuff.

          I would be willing to talk about a solution that would perhaps involve workplace enforcement or border enforcement.

          •  No -- you're wrong here (0+ / 0-)

            Where we disagree is the effect of legalization. I understand you think the roof will cave in.

            It is not a case of my thinking 'the roof will cave in'. I will refer once again to what I wrote to Senator Kennedy's staffer here (and I have written to Senator Kennedy here as well) more than two years ago now.

            Quick Guide to Kennedy- McCain Immigration Bill

            Look, I am not against a full amnesty for all illegal aliens currently in this country. Do it. But at least go into the process with some intellectual honesty i.e., no illusions as to what the result will be. Kennedy can talk all he wants about American workers' rights and wages, we have the evidence as to what the result will be, because it was done in 1986, and has been perpetuated with 245(i). Our newly minted American citizens will be put out of work by new illegal aliens, just as they put out of work those whose jobs they took.

            And simply because I don't feel the need to establish my 'street cred' as to my feelings about, or interactions with, immigrants in general or illegal immigrants in particular, that doesn't mean that I don't know anything about and don't care anything about people. Many of my neighbors are illegal immigrants, the fact that someone from Vermont comes into a diary, someone who's only interaction with an illegal immigrant is when they pay them for mowing the lawn, and calls me a 'racist', is a reflection on their ignorance, not mine.

            I would be willing to talk about a solution that would perhaps involve workplace enforcement or border enforcement.

            My point has always been, and I don't really see myself changing this position, that we must talk about enforcement first (the fact that the enforcement happen first is a secondary issue).

            Without a plan to provide for real worksite enforcement and a US VISIT program that can tell you when a visa holder leaves all we end up with, no matter what else we do, is a repeat of IRCA.

            <div style="font-size:10px;text-align:center;background-color:#ffd;color:#f33">If the terriers and bariffs are torn down, this economy will grow - G. Bush

            by superscalar on Tue Oct 23, 2007 at 04:02:32 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Development not Enforcement (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Duke1676, Nightprowlkitty

              Europe has some of the toughest measures and enforcement in the world, but migrants still flood across their borders.  

              The root of the problem is development, not enforcement, and if you really cared about people then advocate for giving them the opportunity to stay in their own countries, not for putting them through the paralyzing fear that the enforcement first crowd is advocating for.  

              You still have yet to answer my question superscalar.  See below.

              The U.S. "immigration debate" has lost sight of justice.

              by kyledeb on Tue Oct 23, 2007 at 04:08:49 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  If I really cared about people? (0+ / 0-)

                The root of the problem is development, not enforcement, and if you really cared about people then advocate for giving them the opportunity to stay in their own countries

                Charlie Rangel, Steny Hoyer, Carl Levin, Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, the list is long, are going to try and force new free trade agreements with Peru, Panama, and Colombia down our throats before Christmas, yet there is no talk of any reforms to NAFTA or CAFTA.

                Governor Bill Richardson said during a debate that he strongly supported 'comprehensive immigration reform' yet had not one word to say about how many of the illegal immigrants who are in the US today came to be here, and that he was instrumental in their coming, and is strongly supportive of policies which will make sure that they never have the oppurtunity to go home.

                Yet they are looked upon as 'progressive Democrats', and I am told that I 'really need to care about people'.

                I think your comment is misdirected.

                You still have yet to answer my question superscalar

                I think I did reply, and all I can say is sometimes work is just more important.

                <div style="font-size:10px;text-align:center;background-color:#ffd;color:#f33">If the terriers and bariffs are torn down, this economy will grow - G. Bush

                by superscalar on Tue Oct 23, 2007 at 05:01:04 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Using your reasoning ... (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Duke1676

                  ... the problem then is in NAFTA, CAFTA, and policies that would be "instrumental in their coming."

                  What changes would you advocate in order to make this situation fair?  You speak of enforcement, but you give no solutions that you support.

                  And it seems to me you are NOT in favor of what is happening now in terms of enforcement -- in which case where is the problem in admitting it?

                  Our present policy is being driven by nativists who are more interested in terrorizing folks than coming up with an equitable immigration policy.

                  We can do better.

                •  Development is Different than Free Trade (0+ / 0-)

                  It doesn't matter if you took away all the free trade agreements in the world that would do nothing to solve the global inequities that are forcing migration in the first place.

                  I'm sorry superscalar.  Usually you provide reasoned arguments but you are failing tonight.

                  The U.S. "immigration debate" has lost sight of justice.

                  by kyledeb on Tue Oct 23, 2007 at 05:15:28 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  And I agree to an extent (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Duke1676

                    It doesn't matter if you took away all the free trade agreements in the world that would do nothing to solve the global inequities that are forcing migration in the first place.

                    No matter what, there will be illegal immigration to the US.

                    But that doesn't explain the fact that 56% of all illegal immigration to the US is from from Mexico, and most of that has occurred since the passage of NAFTA. Why do you think the IIRIRA of 1996 was passed?

                    <div style="font-size:10px;text-align:center;background-color:#ffd;color:#f33">If the terriers and bariffs are torn down, this economy will grow - G. Bush

                    by superscalar on Tue Oct 23, 2007 at 05:28:19 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  The only way that's going to stop (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Duke1676

                      Is if you give people jobs in Mexico, not if you enforce the border.  Even with the staunchest workplace enforcement migrants will always find people willing to pay cash.  Give people jobs.  You talk about addressing the root of the problem, lets address development.  While we're addressing it, let's alleviate 12 million people from the daily terror of losing their lives.

                      The U.S. "immigration debate" has lost sight of justice.

                      by kyledeb on Tue Oct 23, 2007 at 06:00:17 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, you have made your views known..... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        theboz

        Sentido, this dude have made his views
        known, and his views have made up his mind.

        Let us send this Repug to testify before
        the committee hearing the Dream Act resolution. He would make a great witness
        in arguing that brown people are a threat
        to him and "HIS" country.

        Where in the fuck do these jerks come
        from???? Shiiiiittttt!!!!!

        Ole Texan

        •  I will stand up for superscaler (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Duke1676, Nightprowlkitty

          Superscaler s arguing from a position of protecting labor, and of rule of law. I disagree with him, but he doesn't deserve this attack.

          I have not seen superscaler use personal attacks and I don't remember a case where he said anything I would consider racist.

          Accussing him of racism and name calling is over the line and inappropriate.

          Superscaler is arguing from a position of principle, and I want people on my side of the issue to do the same.

    •  Seriously Addressing Superscalar (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Nightprowlkitty

      I would really like to address the core of your beliefs superscalar.

      First of all do you realize the extremists you are siding with when you spout your views.  David Duke is featuring your arguments prominently on his website today.

      I'm not comparing you with David Duke, I'm merely alluding to the famous Miguel Cervantes quote:

      Tell me thy company, and I'll tell thee what thou art.

      I don't want to get into the nitty gritty of the DREAM Act I really want to understand why it is you feel so strongly about this.

      And you can't simply say it's about your logic conclusions because we have to think greater than that.  We have to think about the systemic consequences of what we do.  

      Systemically the views you are legitimizing empower what white supremacists have grappled onto to further their interests.

      Please just tell me why, that's all I ask.

      The U.S. "immigration debate" has lost sight of justice.

      by kyledeb on Tue Oct 23, 2007 at 01:40:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Let me 'replay' a little of what I wrote (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        bdevil89

        I don't want to get into the nitty gritty of the DREAM Act I really want to understand why it is you feel so strongly about this.

        Here a few months ago. This company is down the street from me. The guys bring their trucks in to get gas every morning at the same gas station I frequent. Nice guys.

        This company now advertise themselves as 'one of the largest pool remodeling companies in California'.

        Now, you may disagree with me, but I think I can make a strong case for the reason that got to be the 'the largest pool remodeling company in California'. They hired a crew of illegal immigrants, underbid their competition, and drove them out of business.

        Do you know what plasterers used to make in CA? About eighteen dollars and hour (in 2002 dollars).

        Do you know what plasterers make in CA now? About eight dollars.

        Additionally, given that one does not speak Spanish, what do you think the odds are of getting on a plastering crew as an apprentice with this company?

        This is playing out all over CA.

        What is the logical extreme of this situation? It's called the race to the bottom -- and the scenario is effectively no different than if we sent the jobs to China.

        <div style="font-size:10px;text-align:center;background-color:#ffd;color:#f33">If the terriers and bariffs are torn down, this economy will grow - G. Bush

        by superscalar on Tue Oct 23, 2007 at 04:52:10 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Still haven't answered my question (0+ / 0-)

          First of all there would be no race to the bottom if countries like China and Mexico and Guatemala were better off.  Which brings us back to development.  

          But you still haven't answered my question, do you even care about the crowd you're hanging out with when you spout the rhetoric that you do.

          The U.S. "immigration debate" has lost sight of justice.

          by kyledeb on Tue Oct 23, 2007 at 05:17:23 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  I find it interesting ... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kyledeb

    ... that anti-migrants take such time and effort delineating the terrible effects of allowing undocumented migrants to stay in the USA, yet take no time at all in denouncing what is happening right now to human beings in our country, human rights abuses that rival those at Gitmo.

    We did not get immigration legislation this year -- yet we may as well have had Sensenbrenner's egregious and punitive legislation passed when it comes to the terrorizing of families that we are now witnessing.

    The DREAM Act is one very small step in showing we are aware of the humanity of those who are trying to better their lives, who were not responsible for their being here in US, and would provide a tiny measure of justice on the other end of the spectrum to the injustices we are right now perpetrating in this country.

    The two go hand in hand, imo -- the injustices, the violations of human rights going on now towards undocumented migrants, far beyond any reasonable "enforcement of law" and the opportunity to do the right thing.

    As kyledeb so eloquently puts it:

    When anti-migrant advocates speak up, they get called racists.  When pro-migrant advocates speak up, they get deported.  Is there even a contest?

    I find it impossible to take anyone seriously who opposes the DREAM Act who does not also loudly and emphatically oppose what is going on now with ICE enforcement (and please remember, the ICE is a division of the DOJ, and many of the immigration judges are political crony appointments from the likes of Alberto Gonzalez and his nasty crew).

    If you condemn the one and not the other, and offer no reasonable alternative to help those who deserve it, then I find the sincerity of that position extremely dubious (and that is putting it politely).

  •  Read the ... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kyledeb

    ... editorial in The New York Times -- a very radical publication, of course!

    Let’s concede an indisputable point: people should not be in the country illegally. But forget about the border for a moment — let’s talk about the 12 million who are already here. What should be done about them?

    A. Deport them all.

    B. Find out who they are. Distinguish between criminals and people who just want to work. Get them on the books. Make them pay what they owe — not just the income, Social Security, sales and property taxes they already pay, but all their taxes, and a fine. Get a smooth legal flow of immigrants going, and then concentrate on catching and deporting bad people.

    C. Catch the few you can, and harass and frighten the rest. Treat the entire group as a de facto class of criminals, and disrupt or shout down anyone or any plan seen as abetting their evildoing.

    Forget A. Congress tried a version of B, but it was flattened by outrage.

    And so here we are at C. It’s a policy that can’t work; it’s too small-bore, too petty, too narrow. And all the while it’s not working, it can only lead to the festering of hate. Americans are a practical and generous people, with a tolerant streak a mile wide. But there is a combustible strain of nativism in this country, and it takes only a handful of match tossers to ignite it.

    Catch the few you can and harass and frighten the rest.  That's the policy anti-migrants are endorsing.

    I can't live with that.  I don't know anyone with a conscience who can.

  •  Isn't a more likely explanation (0+ / 0-)

    for the deportation of those mentioned above simply that they admitted, very publicly, to being in the country illegally?  I don't see why we'd have to posit some devious explanation when the obvious one is sufficient.

    •  Please answer my question above, posed to supersc (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      theboz, Nightprowlkitty

      burrow owl.  I have yet to get a good answer from either of you.

      The U.S. "immigration debate" has lost sight of justice.

      by kyledeb on Tue Oct 23, 2007 at 03:47:14 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I take that as concession (0+ / 0-)

        that I'm right.  Thanks much.

        •  No. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          theboz, kyledeb

          You are not right.  As a matter of fact, your comment makes no sense at all.

          This family was not in hiding.  The feds knew for years they were here -- they had to report often and did not have a problem.

          From USA Today:

          Bo Cooper, a Washington-based immigration attorney who this week agreed to take the Tran family's case free of charge, said he's puzzled that "the U.S. government would go and try to deport someone who doesn't have a criminal record and who has been given formal protection" because of his treatment at the hands of the Vietnamese government.

          Nantel acknowledged the Tran family had been reporting to immigration officials regularly.

          So there was no hiding by this family.  You are wrong.  It was only three days after the daughter testified that this happened.  Hardly a coincidence.

          Now perhaps you will answer kyledeb's question?

          •  My pleasure: (0+ / 0-)

            I don't feel strongly about this.  More specifically, there are a lot of different notions that line up on different sides for me, leading to what Kant termed "apathy," which is a state of equipoise deriving from the equality of opposing forces and considerations.

            Most of them are pretty standard: economics on the one hand, incentivizing greater illegal immigration on the other.  At a more visceral level: hispanic immigrants (and no one's fooling anyone: that's what this is about) seem, generally, hard working but also deeply culturally conservative and traditionalist.

          •  They'd already been given deportation orders. (0+ / 0-)

            That seems like the important part. (ordered to be deported in 2001)

            •  Burrow Owl (0+ / 0-)

              Can't you admit your wrong.  They were given deportation orders but they had nowhere to be deported to.  As such they reported every year for a work permit.  You're wrong on this one.  Sorry.  It's not a football game, but you talk about logic, and your logic is wrong on this one.  Do the research.  Tam Tran's family should not have been detained.

              The U.S. "immigration debate" has lost sight of justice.

              by kyledeb on Tue Oct 23, 2007 at 05:58:32 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Again you are wrong. (0+ / 0-)

              But seeing as you are so apathetic to this issue, I wonder that you continue to post so consistently on this subject.

              kyledeb already answered your comment.  Your original notion was that they had not let the authorities know they were here illegally.  You are wrong about that, the authorities already knew that.

              Now you're just weasling.  Yeah, right, 3 days after the daughter testifies, they just "happen" to deport the whole family.

              If you believe that, I got a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you.

          •  Schooled!!! (0+ / 0-)

            You're killing these anti-migrant advocates on this post NPK.  

            The U.S. "immigration debate" has lost sight of justice.

            by kyledeb on Tue Oct 23, 2007 at 05:20:46 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Please answer my question (0+ / 0-)

          This is what I asked superscalar

          First of all do you realize the extremists you are siding with when you spout your views.  David Duke is featuring your arguments prominently on his website today.

          I'm not comparing you with David Duke, I'm merely alluding to the famous Miguel Cervantes quote:

             Tell me thy company, and I'll tell thee what thou art.

          I don't want to get into the nitty gritty of the DREAM Act I really want to understand why it is you feel so strongly about this.

          And you can't simply say it's about your logic conclusions because we have to think greater than that.  We have to think about the systemic consequences of what we do.  

          Systemically the views you are legitimizing empower what white supremacists have grappled onto to further their interests.

          Please just tell me why, that's all I ask.

          The U.S. "immigration debate" has lost sight of justice.

          by kyledeb on Tue Oct 23, 2007 at 05:18:33 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site