Skip to main content

I’ve decided to make this entry not only to say why I am so disgusted with the current activism on immigration, which is currently wasting what in other circumstances would have been an excellent opportunity to have things done, but also, and much more important, in the naïve hope that, believing as I once believed that Daily Kos should be a place where liberals gather to exchange ideas and plan some intelligent action, somebody else takes this cause from where I’m leaving it.

Dedicated to the next Joaquin Luna, who will unfortunately fall in the same deep, dark hopelessness that claimed the life of Joaquin, that same hopelessness that is the only possible result of the immense mediocrity of the current pro-immigrant leadership.

After trying so many times to give some feedback and propose some alternative line of action to Emmy Ruiz, Immigration Campaign Manager of Organizing for Action (or to whoever process information for Emmy Ruiz), I visited some of the events sponsored by Organizing for Action. It’s not the first time the grassroots movement Obama created under this or other names to supposedly support his agenda has addressed immigration as an issue and, like the rest of the traditional Hispanic leadership, its efforts has not been precisely crowned with success. When you drag an uninterrupted record of failure for years, you should at least be curious about what others have to say, especially if they express commitment with an alternative line of action that could be worth the pain trying, especially because what you’re doing is not working.

At that moment, my expectation visiting those events was to find intelligent, like-minded activists unsatisfied with the present results and with enough determination to fight not for a feint but for a positive change. I failed in this too and sometimes it was particularly depressing to find people who showed even hostility when you provided them with the facts that demonstrated that they were taking not the right medicine to cure their illness and preferred instead taking the traditional medicine, no matter how useless it was to cure the illness, just because they had gotten used to its flavor.

In one of these events I met a nice activist through who I channeled my concerns to a local supposedly pro-immigrant organization, Casa de Maryland. I was proposing a low-budget line of action that could be way to begin addressing the problem I am going to present after this introduction. Uninterested in the solution or in the problem, once again Kim Propeack showed why her organization is proud of unrepentantly providing failure since I began following this issue in 2004.

1. You have already enough sympathy
The Kennedy-McCain bill of 2005 at some point reached in the polls about 60% of public support, as did the Specter bill of 2006, and the Kennedy-Kyl bill of 2007, despite being a clearly inferior bill, reached up to 72% of public support, as the Schumer bill of this year did. You have enough public support to pass the bill if passing a bill were the result of public sympathy. Unfortunately it’s not. Just remember the Background Checks bill on gun control, that reached up to 92% of public support and it still was sunk in Congress. More, even though polls showed the constituents of a number of districts favoring background checks, the congressmen of those districts still refused to support the bill. That should have taught us that, especially in the gerrymandered districts with which we will have to live in the next years, the opinion of their constituents is much less audible to these congressmen that the angry threats of the Tea Party. Unfortunately Kim Propeack didn’t pay attention to that lesson.

Thus, as if their main problem were a public support of under 30%, case in which the image of the Dreamers holding hands with a colorful choreography in the background or telling moving ethnic stories, immigrants dancing with flags on the streets and even the more serious Phone Banks calling constituents of these heavily gerrymandered districts could have a noticeable effect. If you are the leader of one of these institutions, you should know this. You should also know that if you have been beaten all these years, it has not been because of lack of general public support and you should study experiences like the NumbersUSA experience of 2007; you should be willing to learn from your enemy and from history.

Said this, even though the xenophobic right has an efficient machine for their messaging of misinformation, they owe their success basically to the volunteers and fundraising they can bring to the districts of their interest.

a)    Knowing this, you should wonder whether you can win this war with only one independent PAC, Immigrant’s List, which in 2008 couldn’t even get the congressmen in the swing districts of their interest to accept their money because the immigration issue was radioactive over there.
b)    Knowing this, you should wonder whether Kim Propeack can do something really useful focusing the assets of Casa de Maryland on the congressmen of Maryland when she should be interested in identifying the congressmen from Virginia, Pennsylvania and North Carolina whose districts fit the profile mentioned above.

If I were a Republican moving from Maryland to Oklahoma to deliver the electoral districts of Oklahoma to the Republican candidate, my effort would be certainly laughable and I should not expect anybody to take me seriously. I don’t see why Propeack’s approach in Maryland should be seen differently.

With a recent Supreme Court decision breaking the teeth of the Voting Civil Rights Act and Texas, North Carolina and Virginia ready to pass state legislation to disenfranchise minority voters, the most interesting place to begin for Casa de Maryland should be the gubernatorial race of Virginia of this year in order to, with the governor in its side, prevent such legislation from passing while you identify the districts where you can register and bring enough Hispanic voters to the voting places in 2014.

Many Republicans moving to the right to avoid the challenges of the Tea Party in the primaries find this decision easier to make because they know that Hispanics don’t show up in the midterms. If you are one of them and, paying attention to the Republican establishment, declare your support for immigration reform, you know that in the next midterms you’re going to have a very unpleasant encounter with your Tea Party challenger so, in any case, you are better off trying to resist in the general elections siding with the xenophobic right. It you are Kim Propeack, you should be interested in making a statement by bringing to the voting places as many Hispanic voters as you could to show that Hispanics now also show up in the midterms. Unfortunately that’s not the case.

Also, those Republicans would have to think twice about the general elections because it would make them a very little favor to win the primaries caving to the Tea Party if the Hispanic voting trend in the mid terms grows up to the point of putting him at risk in the generals. What if before a more expanded electorate you could use his own words to brand him as the next ‘Macaca candidate’ and have to organization to make that possible? So even if you don’t support one of these candidates, that candidate will have to think twice before pushing too hard to right just to please the xenophobic Tea Party.

But what if you can’t find any district where a significant Hispanic registration and GOTV could succeed? Then you have to be realistic and be prepared for a longer fight, one that extends itself until 2020. Fighting the way the traditional leaders have told you even though you know very well that that doesn’t work is as idiotic as looking for a key where there’s light instead of where you lost it and if you are so stupid, you should not be leading an effort on which the lives of 11 million people depend.
Failure is not the result of the passing of time or of a gypsy course. It is the result of the mediocrity of your acts.

2. Know your enemy
If you feel good thinking that the Republican Party will cave to immigration reform because they know that screwing up this bill will close the door of the White House for them in 2016, you should grow up, get better information or both.

Nothing better than the words of Boehner, a man came from the Republican establishment, killing the Senate bill to realize who is winning the internal struggle inside the Republican Party after the results of the 2012 elections. The Tea Party obviously prevailed and for the Tea Party winning the next general elections is not a priority. As far as they can keep their little feudal electoral kingdoms they will be fine in the belief that eventually their time will come. If you are, after all this, still directing your artillery to the Republican establishment, you should not be directing this effort.

Now, as we have seen, you can’t persuade the congressmen in these districts with a nice choreography or even with an intelligent argument and not even their own constituents will be able to persuade them. To address this problem you need a plan similar to the one I proposed Francisco Acosta in 2012 (http://www.dailykos.com/...) though adapted to the present circumstances. You need the tripod (volunteers, fundraising, messaging) of which I have written before, just focused this time in registering and bringing to the voting places enough Hispanic voters in selected districts where you can make a difference. To make this possible, you have to bring volunteers from the states where you have plenty of support to work in the districts where you need them.

Also, learning from the experience of 2007, you need to improve your fundraising effort and part of that is to improve your image and messaging so the immigration issue is not radioactive in those districts anymore and the candidates are willing to take your money, what Immigrant’s List couldn’t do in 2008.

Also, learning again from the NumbersUSA experience of 2007, this effort has to be a coordinated effort. It might not be gigantic or even nationwide but, whatever it scale, and supported with good visibility, it has to synchronize efficiently the three legs of that tripod... if you really want to win.

If you’re curious about Kim Propeack’s Casa de Maryland’s alternative to this tripod, it is the endorsement by Casa de Maryland to the hard-hearted candidates of those gerrymandered districts only if they make a change of heart and support immigration reform. Yes, you read it right. Even if you don’t have money or an organization on the ground to back that endorsement, those congressmen who, in fear of the Tea Party have turned their backs to their principles and even to their constituents, are going to change their hearts because Kim Propeack is going to endorse them.

3. Misery even in the messaging
I myself would be in favor of getting at least the Dream Act passed if there were no chances of passing comprehensive immigration reform in the long term but we’re not at that point yet. Fighting for the Dream Act from the very beginning is stupid if you want immigration reform because the Dreamers are the most presentable face of immigration reform and taking them out of the picture would hurt immensely the chances of passing immigration reform afterwards. That’s why Republicans favor a piecemeal approach. If you don’t understand this, your messaging lacks coherence and you should not be playing with the lives of 11 million people sat on a chair that is obviously too big for you.

Unfortunately the left, and much less the so called pro-immigrant movement, doesn’t have something like Heritage Action, that conveyor belt that is less worried about making serious research than it is on affecting policy. That conveyor belt is the point of origin of that messaging that should end in columns of opinion and editorials, the answers of your spokesmen when they’re interviewed and, at the end, in the slogan of your grassroots. Unfortunately the good research of the Pew Hispanic Center and the Cato Institute remains buried in their Web pages while the dishonest pseudo-research of Heritage and the Center for Immigration Studies take roots, deepening the campaign of disinformation the xenophobic right has spread for decades.

When a few weeks ago the President, your main ally, declared publicly that illegal immigrants have to go to the ‘back of the line’ you know you are screwed because if you know the law, you will see that that ‘line’ doesn’t exist. For example, due to the national origin quotas, an Austrian will come in months while you, if you are a Mexican, will have to wait years even if the two of you file their petition at the same time. In short, your place in that imaginary line depends not on the time when you file your petition but on your caste of birth. If you were born in the wrong country or family, sad day for you because you might find that there’s not line for you or that, even if it exists, you will have to wait for 30 years or so while other people, born or assimilated by marriage to better castes of birth, will come legally in six months. If the myth of the line is repeated by nobody else but the President, your main ally, you should realize that your communications effort sucks and you should quit. Illegal immigrants are not so because of the excitement of the experience but because when they wanted to come legally there was no real or realistic line for them.

Precisely because our leaders didn’t do that, the House Republicans find today so easy to use this cheap trick speaking now that an eventual ‘path to citizenship’ should not go through a ‘special line’ but though the ‘regular process’ knowing well that that line doesn’t exist and that, that way, immigration reform would end up in the bizarre result of putting more teeth on enforcing the system of castes that is the current immigration system while kicking illegal immigrants back to the illegality from which they were trying to escape.

Another example of this misery was the ‘$6.3 trillion cost of immigration reform’ pseudo-paper of Heritage. As in the case of the ‘line’, Kim Propeack was not there to set the record straight debunking that pseudo paper and it had to be the Cato Institute which exposed that pack of lies for what it was. Still nobody has exposed the cheap trick that the House Republican’s position about the legalization of illegal immigrants ‘through the regular process’ is.

4. What if you are not immigrant or Hispanic?
Well even in this case you should be interested in an effort like this. Hector Perez Garcia, maybe the last Hispanic leader to provide results for the Hispanic community, engaged in the campaigns of Kennedy and Johnson moved by a series of grievances about segregation in schools, treatment of veterans, discrimination in the labor market, poll taxes, etc. Perez Garcia was successful moving a Mexican American community that before had been overwhelmed by the apathy and his success was rewarded by Johnson on the issues of his interest.

Now, no other community has been more devastatingly affected by the housing bubble and Hispanics, who had lost on average 40% of their accumulated wealth, should have been your main ally in the battle for financial reform. A large proportion of Hispanics are poor and so are much more affected by crappy public schools or by, in general, spending policies, and they should be the first ones interested in reforming the current education system. Also, they are as affected by gun violence and gangs as black communities and have declared in polls their concern for the effects of climate change but when you see the last study of the Pew Hispanic Center about Hispanic attitudes towards voting and you see the lame excuses with which they excused their absence from the voting places, you might conclude that Hispanics are not a reliable ally on those battles. Nevertheless, had you read about the case of Hector Perez Garcia, you would have had to conclude that it was not always that way and that it doesn’t have to be like that. What you need is to sponsor leaders like Hector Perez Garcia, a leader who can provide results because he knows how the political system works and is more interested in results than in choreographies paying homage to his own vanity. If you don’t do use the momentum created among the Hispanic community by this issue and don’t do anything to organize intelligent and determined Hispanics who can develop this new brand of immigration activism, then don’t complain about how unreliable Hispanics are as political allies because that apathy is in good part the result of their clownish leadership.

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

  •  Rec'd for mentioning national origin quotas (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    slowbutsure

    among other things. Very good diary.

    A good horse is never a bad color.

    by CcVenussPromise on Wed Jul 17, 2013 at 01:12:21 PM PDT

  •  And At The Same Time (0+ / 0-)

    For example, due to the national origin quotas, an Austrian will come in months while you, if you are a Mexican, will have to wait years even if the two of you file their petition at the same time. In short, your place in that imaginary line depends not on the time when you file your petition but on your caste of birth

    Mexico has dominated legal immigration into the U.S. since the 1986 IRCA.

    depends not on the time when you file your petition but on your caste of birth

    No it doesn't, it depends whether you have family in the U.S., because the U.S. immigration system is family based, it really has nothing to do with where you come from, and your implication that all of the legal immigration into the U.S. is coming from places other than Mexico is incorrect.

    Again, a plurality of all immigration into the U.S. has come from Mexico for more than two decades now.

    I won't be coming home tonight, my generation will put it right - Genesis 9:3

    by superscalar on Wed Jul 17, 2013 at 01:19:14 PM PDT

    •  READ THE POST BEFORE YOU ATTACK IT (0+ / 0-)

      1. Nowhere in the article I say that ‘all of the legal immigration into the U.S. is coming from places other than Mexico’
      2. If you’re an Austrian filing a petition for your brother in Austria and I am a Mexican filing a petition for my brother in Mexico, even if I file my petition first your brother will come first and for a difference of years. So much for ‘family based immigration’… If you are curious and can read, you will find out that that is the result of the national origin quotas. That, of course, unless you decide to use that market of sham marriages as a shortcut and have the contacts here to make that possible.
      3. In the same example of (2), if the Austrian decides to come as a tourist to see prospective employers, he will find that he is exempt of visa and that after contacting his prospective employer he can come back legally in a matter of weeks while the Mexican, unless he has somebody with good incomes to sign an affidavit for him, he will have to try to contact a prospective employer using telepathy.
      4. If the ‘line’ is not based in the order in which you filed your petition and the result is that the Austrian can come in six months and the Mexican in thirty years I wonder if your sense of morality is as unequal as the system you try to defend with deceptive affirmations.
      Yes, the American immigration system is a system of castes in which your character gives you few avenues to escape honorably your caste of birth, unjustifiable in a country based on the notion of CHARACTER.

    •  More to expose your convenient ignorance (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      CcVenussPromise

      Let me add another example. A Mexican crosses the border and a Cuban reaches the shores of Florida. Depending on their place of birth, the latter will be allowed to stay legally and the former will be deported. And if you're going to tell me that the reason why you deny the American dream to the Mexican and not to the Cuban is Castro as if the Mexican were a Castro supporter and the Cuban not, please think twice before you embarrass yourself even further.
      It makes me sick to find these cowards who misrepresent the text of the post to make a point. If you are for the racism hidden in the broken system of castes incarnated in the current system, at least have the balls to say it openly. The Mexican of the first example didn't have to wait thirty years because he was taking consecutive siestas or dancing the Sombrero dance while the Austrian came in six months. It is because they were born in different CASTES.

      •  And Just How Is The System Racist? (0+ / 0-)

        If you are for the racism hidden in the broken system of castes incarnated in the current system, at least have the balls to say it openly

        Immediate Relative Immigrant Visas (Unlimited): These visa types are based on a close family relationship with a United States (U.S.) citizen described as an Immediate Relative (IR). The number of immigrants in these categories is not limited each fiscal year. Immediate relative visa types include:

        * IR-1: Spouse of a U.S. Citizen - Learn More

        * IR-2: Unmarried Child Under 21 Years of Age of a U.S. Citizen

        * IR-3: Orphan adopted abroad by a U.S. Citizen - Learn More

        * IR-4: Orphan to be adopted in the U.S. by a U.S. citizen - Learn More

        * IR-5: Parent of a U.S. Citizen who is at least 21 years old

        Family Preference Immigrant Visas (Limited): These visa types are for specific, more distant, family relationships with a U.S. citizen and some specified relationships with a Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR). There are fiscal year numerical limitations on family preference immigrants, shown at the end of each category.  The family preference categories are:

        * Family First Preference (F1): Unmarried sons and daughters of U.S. citizens, and their minor children, if any. (23,400)

        * Family Second Preference (F2): Spouses, minor children, and unmarried sons and daughters (age 21 and over) of LPRs. At least seventy-seven percent of all visas available for this category will go to the spouses and children; the remainder is allocated to unmarried sons and daughters. (114,200)

        * Family Third Preference (F3): Married sons and daughters of U.S. citizens, and their spouses and minor children. (23,400)

        * Family Fourth Preference (F4): Brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens, and their spouses and minor children, provided the U.S. citizens are at least 21 years of age. (65,000)

        Given your example of a brother and given that there is a cap on F4 of 65,000 and a per country quota, yes, that brother from Mexico might wait twenty years while the Austrian waits one, again notwithstanding that citizens of Mexico have dominated the system for decades now.

        But where is the racism? In other words, if there was some attempt to limit immigration from certain countries, wouldn't there be quotas and per country limits on all of the IR categories as well?

        Is the point that you are trying to make that there shouldn't be per country quotas on F4, or that there shouldn't be quotas on F4 to begin with? Simply put, I don't understand what your point is to begin with.

        Yes, the American immigration system is a system of castes in which your character gives you few avenues to escape honorably your caste of birth

        And exactly why is it America's responsibility to be the 'escape' valve in the first place?

        Furthermore, why is it America's responsibility to provide a citizenship to a brother of someone who might want them to immigrate to the U.S.?

        I won't be coming home tonight, my generation will put it right - Genesis 9:3

        by superscalar on Wed Jul 17, 2013 at 03:33:57 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Once again, read before answering (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          CcVenussPromise

          1. I have used the phrase "For example" repeatedly, does it ring a bell? The article is not about unequal treatment of brothers by the law. I put an example about brothers and you seem to find another avenue to try to discredit with it the whole article. What a pussy coward you are! The article is about activism to make immigration reform possible in terms that make us all proud and about how to make activism about Hispanic useful for other progressive causes of common interest. If you want to say something constructive, try saying something about that.
          2. You yourself admit how the unequal treatment for those located in the least favored castes would result in some people waiting one year while others, Mexicans in the example under discussion, twenty in the letter of the law (but about thirty in the reality about which you prefer not to speak).
          3. The moral thing in a country based on the notion of character should be to get rid of the national origin quotas (and the Senate bill made a lot of progress on that end) so your fate is not decided by your caste (country, family) of origin unless you have the contacts to go through the short cut of a sham marriage as if this were the damn Middle Ages. It is time a country based on the notion of CHARACTER has an immigration system based on the notion of CHARACTER too. So I am not blaming America, which from its very beginning condemned the manipulation of the immigration system by King George in its Declaration of Independence and abhorred so much the notion of caste to forbid nobility titles in the second article of its constitution. The current immigration system is not an original sin of the Republic, as slavery was. The different treatment for non white immigrants is the historical result of the mean tricks of conservatives since the Chinese Exclusion Act and of their minions of the left (maybe those like you, who cry about conservatives when you are in the losing end of the status quo but who join them with joy when it's about creating for them harder conditions than the ones faced by your ancestors when they came to America and who then, when those immigrants condemned to be pariahs came anyway defying the unfair law, join those conservatives with joy when it's about making the lives of those immigrants even more miserable, punishing them for not having stayed away how they were supposed to be).
          No, sir. I don't blame America. America is as victim as those brown immigrants for the cowardice of people like you who hide their racism behind the law.

          •  Okay, I Am A Pussy Coward Racist (0+ / 0-)

            And you are a victim. And now that we have that established.

            You yourself admit how the unequal treatment for those located in the least favored castes would result in some people waiting one year while others, Mexicans in the example under discussion, twenty in the letter of the law  

            Again, it has nothing to do with caste, and I 'admitted' nothing. If it did have something to do with caste then all of the F4's would be poor and from Mexico and all of the IR's would be rich and from somewhere else but Mexico.

            But that's not the case.

            Now, you have called me a pussy coward, a racist, and ignorant.

            But you still haven't shown how the U.S. immigration system is 'caste based' and 'racist' -- and here's a clue -- more attacks on me isn't going to get you there, 'cause it ain't about me.

            The moral thing in a country based on the notion of character should be to get rid of the national origin quotas

            Why? So Mexico can dominate the F1 thru F4 categories too?

            I won't be coming home tonight, my generation will put it right - Genesis 9:3

            by superscalar on Wed Jul 17, 2013 at 05:59:22 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Once again... (0+ / 0-)

              If you read before you attacked you would have realized that I am now advocating for a more favorable position for the caste of those born in Mexico but for the elimination of country of origin as a criterion to prefer one applicant to another.
              If the applicants, poor or not, have to demonstrate their caste of birth, whether it is family or country of origin, 'accidents of birth' in the words of JFK if you prefer, to apply for a visa, then that's a caste system. And that's what you defend.
              Maybe you think that caste is an acceptable criterion when it is about brown immigrants but unacceptable when it is about white ones. Then join your buddy from Heritage that thinks that brown immigrants genetically have low IQs and that if legalized they would contaminate the genes of the real Americans.
              If you don't have something useful to contribute to the core of the conversation, don't hide behind cheap excuses and go with your other buddy Scpato to speak about how brown immigrants are the origin of every thing that is wrong in America and how making them suffer will help the real Americans achieve a fairer status quo.
              Now, you're trying to create distractions so whoever reads your comment thinks that the article is about me advocating for giving preference to Mexicans or some other bizarre thing and dismiss reading the article. You don't attack the points about which the article is really about. You have to use these cheap tricks and yes, that's what makes you a pussy coward, racist and ignorant.

              •  That's Because I Can't Understand (0+ / 0-)

                You don't attack the points about which the article is really about

                What the article is about. By the way, the word 'caste' doesn't mean what you think it means.

                I won't be coming home tonight, my generation will put it right - Genesis 9:3

                by superscalar on Wed Jul 17, 2013 at 06:45:32 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  The More I Think About What You Have Written (0+ / 0-)

            The less sense it makes.

            Your premise is that that American immigration system is 'caste based' and 'racist'.

            Please post up what you mean by 'caste based' and 'racist'.

            For example, what type of 'castes' are you talking about and how is the current American immigration system favoring one 'caste' over another?

            And, as to your use of the term 'racist'. What 'race' are the 'racists' and what 'race' are the victims of their 'racism'?

            It seems that you are trying to state that the American immigration system somehow doing the bidding of white people and that people who are other than white are suffering disproportionately as a result of this system.

            If this is the statement that you are trying to make, it would make more sense if you could ... you know ... back it up with some facts showing that this is true.

            I won't be coming home tonight, my generation will put it right - Genesis 9:3

            by superscalar on Wed Jul 17, 2013 at 06:10:10 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  You need some remedial reading dude (0+ / 0-)

              1. If you prefer it in the words of JFK, when we talk about caste we are talking about 'accidents of birth', qualities that don't depend on your character. Thus, your place of birth or your family of origin are not things that result of your intelligence or hard work or of the lack of them (unless you have found in your research that brown people did actually something to deserve the families or countries of birth before they were born). You yourself accepted in the example I proposed before the very different treatment the Austrian brother receives with respect to the Mexican brother. Different caste of birth, different treatment. Do you want more?
              2. When most illegal immigrants, whose caste of birth gave them no avenue to come legally (different from the golden times of Ellis Island, when your ancestors probably came under very different rules than those brown immigrants have to face now), happen to be brown immigrants, then that is hardly a coincidence and then, even though not all illegal immigrants are brown, most of them are, and that makes the current system and those who knowingly defend it, racists. If you feel uncomfortable with the label, support an immigration reform that gets rid of preference due to country or family of birth, whose result is not 11 million illegal immigrants for whom there was not legal avenue, not matter what their character is, and we will be on the same page.
              3. If most Americans were racists you would not need to pick campaigns of misinformation against illegal brown immigrants. Most Americans know very little about an immigration system that even the American Bar Association considers more complicated than the tax law, designed to hide the racism of its authors, and are more worried about their mortgages, college for their kids or health insurance, work stability than they are about immigration. Unfortunately the immense mediocrity of the Hispanic leadership, which has never set the record straight on immigration, has helped people like you to plant all kind of misinformation for years.
              Nevertheless, those who knowingly spread misinformation to make of the lives of brown illegal immigrants a living hell, white or not, are racists indeed and not all the racists in that group have to be white (your buddy Michelle Malkin is not, for example) so don't try to put me as an advocate of a racial war against white people in another one of your cheap tricks to distract attention from the main subject of the article.
              Make yourself a favor. Go hang around with your buddies Scpato and Michelle Malking (You can invite Glenn Beck too) and leave this debate to more serious people. Don't keep embarrassing yourself.

              •  Would You Fucking Stop It (0+ / 0-)

                (different from the golden times of Ellis Island, when your ancestors probably came under very different rules than those brown immigrants have to face now)

                All the rules were different. You want to go back to the rules of Ellis Island, fine, let's start with the fact that there wasn't any fucking income tax.

                You want the modern welfare state of 21st century and the immigration laws of 19th century, well guess what, you ain't gonna' get what you want, and it isn't because I don't want you to have it.

                You think that because you've typed a lot of words, that means you've said something intelligent.

                Think again.

                I won't be coming home tonight, my generation will put it right - Genesis 9:3

                by superscalar on Wed Jul 17, 2013 at 08:11:08 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

    •  From what country did you try to (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      chambord

      file papers and pay fees for yourself or for a family member going through immigration?

      Japan, for me. And the one reason we believe we were able to get the help we needed to expedite our request and get a legal extended visa stay granted was when a nuclear disaster happened and Senator Akaka had people set up in his office to field calls and make calls for us to immigration offices on our behalf in an attempt to get paper work expedited with immigration services, because despite all the paperwork and fees which were going upwards of a $1000 and counting if it had not been Senator Akaka and a nuclear disaster the filed papers could have languished and the status asked for denied.

      Not only that Senator Akaka's office wrote on behalf of the child, born to one American parent, with the plea to let the mother come considering there was a nuclear disaster,  we had to pay filing fees at the U.S. embassy et al, two passports, one granted from Japan and one that the US required because one parent was American and this child was claimed as an American citizen born overseas, and all the costs of travel for the various in person filings. We had to be in person at the embassy here, etc.

      And immigration made us sign a document that we would agree to be financially responsible for or family member for 10 years.

      And our family member could not work legally for one year.

      One more thing, at the time out of curiosity I read the immigration laws for Mexicans. I saw higher fees per filings per doc for Mexicans - if I am not mistaken.

      A good horse is never a bad color.

      by CcVenussPromise on Wed Jul 17, 2013 at 02:31:20 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site