C.T. News Scan

Repeal of DACA will Kill Dreams

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, known as DACA, is a program that grants work permits to illegal immigrants who arrived in The United States as children. This policy was penned by the Obama Administration, without Congressional approval in 2012. It was created in response to legislators refusal to pass the DREAM Act which aimed to provide a path to citizenship for undocumented minors. In the past five years, nearly 800,000 people have been able to remain in the country they were born in, despite their parent’s country of origin because of DACA.

Now, it appears President Trump will be scrapping this program with a six-month delay. In my mind, there are two reasons why Trump would eliminate this program.

  1. Obama received much criticism for creating DACA, and his opponents claimed the President alone does not have the authority to create immigration policy. And some state attorneys general and other politicians have threatened Trump with legal challenges if he does not end the program. So on a maybe positive note, Trump might be signaling Congress to step up and create legislation to protect these minors as DACA was ‘illegally’ implemented.
  2. On a darker note, Trump might not care about anyone this policy effects. And he may just be playing to his far-right base.

If reason #1 is Trump’s true intentions, he is incredibly foolish given Congress’ inability to create any meaningful legislation since Trump took office. Reason #2 seems more in line with President Trump’s previous decisions.

Either way, Trump’s desire to eliminate DACA has spurred debate on the program’s validity.

Oklahoma’s Republican Senator James Lankford gave a powerful and logical argument in defense of DACA:

“It is right for there to be consequences for those who intentionally entered this country illegally … However, we as Americans do not hold children legally accountable for the actions of their parents.”

Simply put, children should not have to suffer for the actions of their parents. The kids that will be affected by this are ones that have grown up in the US and identify as Americans. We should not forget our history and position as a wealthy superpower by ignoring the needs of those that are disadvantaged or different than us.

Hashtag DACA

Photo Credit Espaillat House

17 replies »

  1. >> “[DACA] was created in response to legislators refusal to pass the DREAM Act…”

    I wonder if you will be so forgiving of Donald Trump if and when he attempts to usurp the power of congress when it refuses to pass the legislation he wants? I’m guessing you won’t be, since you seem to believe in double standards.

    >> “[Obama’s] opponents claimed the President alone does not have the authority to create immigration policy.”

    That’s like saying, with a sniffy attitude, that people “claim” to have the right to free speech.

    Section 8 – Powers of Congress
    To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization

    What part of that is unclear to you? Oops, I forgot. The Constitution gives the government the right to do whatever it pleases, according to you. But there’s a problem. Was Obama “the government” or was congress “the government” when DACA was done? And if Obama was the government and could do whatever he pleased, is Trump now the government and can he do whatever he pleases? Hmmm………

    I think there’s a third possibility as to why Trump is rescinding DACA. Maybe it’s because he understands that immigration policy is not his alone to decide. Maybe he thinks the rest of us ought to have a say, via our representatives in Congress, and that we shouldn’t be bullied into giving up our rights to have a say based upon someone else’s notions of compassion. What a nice change that would be.

    I sincerely sympathize with the children of illegal immigrants who were brought here by no fault of their own, and who now are in a sort of limbo. The difference between you and me, however, is that the people I hold responsible for this are the parents that brought them here, knowing that limbo was the price. They are the ones responsible for this mess and for the suffering of their children, not Trump or any other Republicans who swore an oath to uphold the laws of this land (that doesn’t mean as much to some, if it means anything at all).

    >>”…children should not have to suffer for the actions of their parents.”

    So do we allow our laws to be trampled upon in order to spare the suffering of these children, thus weakening the Constitution for our own children? The consequence of rewarding illegal behavior (or anything else) is that you get more of that behavior. It’s Human Nature 101. I’m glad, at least, to see that you acknowledge that the suffering of these children is a consequence of the actions of their own parents.

    >> “We should not forget our history and position as a wealthy superpower by ignoring the needs of those that are disadvantaged or different than us.”

    You’re entitled to your opinion, and to do what you can to persuade your congresspersons to see it your way as well. Will you acknowledge that every other American is equally entitled to their opinions on this matter and that they have the same right to weigh-in as you do?

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Thanks for commenting. I appreciate all opinions, especially those that are different than mine. Dialogue is a key to progress. We can either lock into our positions and become more polarized or we can listen.

    1. I am not an Obama apologist. I do not know what you believe my double standards are. The first half of my post was really supposed to be facts. Obama created DACA in response to Congress not passing the DREAM Act. Obama’s opponents DID claim the president does not have the authority to create immigration policy. Similar arguments were made after Trump tried his immigration ban that failed. I defended the policy, not Obama’s creation of it. It has benefited a lot of people, and tearing it away will hurt a lot of people. I gave Trump some benefit of the doubt in that he might add the 6-month delay which would allow our incompetent Congress to possibly create a half good policy to help undocumented minors.

    2. It is not a strong enough argument to say, “I feel bad for the kids, but screw em, it’s the parent’s fault for giving birth to their kid here”. Just because you place blame on the parents, that rids you of a conscience or the government’s role? Many of these people are productive members of society and identity as Americans. But forget about them being patriotic or a token for our economy, do you not have enough sympathy for a little kid that might be shipped back to a country they do not identify with or understand?

    3. I will again reference Senator Lankford who stated,

    “It is right for there to be consequences for those who intentionally entered this country illegally … However, we as Americans do not hold children legally accountable for the actions of their parents.”

    I agree our immigration system is a mess. I agree we need stronger borders and that our laws must be upheld. But I see a real darkness in blaming children for their parents bringing them to a better country. Children should NOT be held legally accountable for a brave act of their parents to better their families’ lives.

    I really think we agree on a lot more than you might realize. There is no need to be so adversarial and twist my words to make it seem like I don’t appreciate the Constitution or the rights the Founders gave us.

    I still appreciate your thoughts and comments.

    Liked by 3 people

  3. Daniel, I hope something is done by Congress on this measure. While I have little faith in Congress due to the health care debacle, many congressionals have spoken in favor for leaving DACA alone. The majority of Americans feel the same. Time will tell, my friend.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. >>”Obama created DACA in response to Congress not passing the DREAM Act.”
    You blithely state this as if Obama’s lack of authority to do what he did is irrelevant, then you keep saying that Obama’s opponents “claim” that he didn’t have the authority. It’s not a claim, it’s a FACT, and it matters because you say you’re trying to figure what Trump’s motive was in undoing DACA, and it’s right in front of you. He’s undoing something that Obama had no right to do, and for that he should be commended. Whether you liked DACA or not is entirely beside the point.

    >>”It is not a strong enough argument to say, “I feel bad for the kids, but screw em, it’s the parent’s fault for giving birth to their kid here.’”

    That statement smacks of tyranny, Daniel, as if you are the arbiter of whether or not my reasons for opposing DACA are worthy enough. Who are you to judge whether my argument is strong enough? I shared my reasons for purposes of discussion, not because I need your approval or because it’s any of your business. Your response suggests that, like many on the Left, you don’t acknowledge the right of EVERY American to have a vote on this issue, that only those who agree with you will be treated as legitimate. That’s not the American way.

    >>”Just because you place blame on the parents, that rids you of a conscience or the government’s role?”

    I’m tired of being scolded for my supposed lack of conscience while you say not a word about the conscience of a parent who would bring his or her child to a foreign country knowing they would never have the rights of a citizen. The brave thing would be to make their own country better so that their children would have a home. When someone wants to suggest a way for making those parents accountable for the mess they’ve created, I’m open to hearing it. Otherwise all you’re doing is rewarding bad behavior and GUARANTEEING that it will continue.

    >>”I will again reference Senator Lankford …..”

    Senator Lankford’s opinion is no more and no less important than my own, so I don’t understand the special significance to repeating his remarks. Furthermore he’s incorrect to suggest that we are holding dreamers “accountable” for the actions of their parents. They aren’t going to jail or paying fines. They are VICTIMS of their parents’ actions, just as millions of children are victims of their parents every day in a multitude of ways, but that’s much different than being held “accountable.”

    >>”There is no need to be so adversarial and twist my words to make it seem like I don’t appreciate the Constitution or the rights the Founders gave us.”

    I’m adversarial because I view the Constitution as a contract that says you will respect my rights just as I respect yours, and your flippant attitude with respect to how DACA came about along with your suggestion that Trump is wrong to restore the rightful power of congress on this matter implies that you see rights as a one-way street, as many liberals do. I’m also offended that you talk about the parents of dreamers – who created this mess – as if they’re heroes while acting as if Republicans are to blame for the dilemma facing their children. And you should talk about twisting words! “I feel bad for the kids, but screw em,…” I never said that.

    Like

  5. 1. My comment was not blithe. You are reading into it in order to twist my words. The first paragraph of my post until, “In my mind”, was supposed to be fact. I apologize if you misinterpreted my writing. And the statements of those who disagree with the creation of DACA are “claims” in my mind until a court rules on it. I AGREE that it is quite a stretch for the President to create policies pertaining to immigration. There have been and always will be disagreements on what the powers of each branch are and when overreaches occur. Our 3 branches of government have gained and lost power over time based on court rulings, legislative/presidential actions, and evolving interpretations of the Constitution.

    2. I did not say your opinion is invalid. I feel that your argument was weak, based on moral grounds as well as the legal culpability of minors. I genuinely respect opinions from across the aisle. And if you read some of my other posts, you’d see that I obviously lean left but criticize both sides.

    3. How is a single dad in Syria supposed to fix his country? Do you have a solution to the conflicts, dictators, plagues, diseases, etc around the world? I think it is incredibly brave to pack up and leave with little to nothing and move to a country for a better opportunity. It has to be absolutely terrifying to not be able to provide for your family, move to a new country with more opportunities, grow up there, and then be told you have to leave.

    4. I did not write that, “Trump is wrong to restore the rightful power of congress on this matter implies that you see rights as a one-way street”. I defended DACA as a humane policy. I gave him the benefit of the doubt that he may have always intended for Congress to replace the policy (he tweeted that this morning). However, I think this is foolish because Congress has been relatively inactive and has a lot on its plate.

    5. You wrote that you sympathize with the children and that it’s their parent’s fault. Effectively saying screw the children. Again, I appreciate your perspective and comments. I’d understand your position a bit more if you provided a solution other than revoking DACA and leaving these children in limbo.

    Like

  6. Before I respond let me say that, while we disagree, I also appreciate the dialog. Too many people these days shout at each other, speak in slogans and refuse to open their minds. An actual debate is refreshing.

    There are two issues in play when it comes to DACA:
    1. What to do; and
    2. Who gets to decide

    Let’s start with #2 first, because I think people are confused and/or misguided about the distinction.
    The Constitution says that Congress alone has the power/authority to make immigration policy. Congress represents the American people, ergo immigration policy is to be decided by the American People, and every citizen has a say whether you agree with them or not. You can state your case and argue about the facts, but it is dangerous territory to suggest that other people’s opinions don’t meet some arbitrary standard that you’ve unilaterally decided upon. The Left has been lurching in that direction for some time now, shouting others down, shutting down free speech and suggesting that there is a right opinion (theirs) and a wrong opinion (ours) which gives them alone the moral authority to decide what is supposed to be decided by all.

    The dilemma of the Dreamers brought about by the misdeeds of their own parents, tragic as it is, does not automatically create an obligation on the part of the American people to fix it by scuttling our own laws. We may CHOOSE to do so, but it is not our OBLIGATION to do so. Your writings seem to suggest that congress has neglected its duty by not changing the law to accommodate the Dreamers, and somehow this justifies the lawlessness of DACA. Whether or not that’s what you meant to imply, understand that if congress chooses not to act in the hopes that a state of limbo for their children will deter people from coming to this country illegally, that is a perfectly legitimate choice even if you disagree. Democracy allows for disagreement, except on those things which are law. When disagreement is no longer allowed, democracy no longer exists. This is what I am trying to impress upon you.

    With respect to #1, tell me how we fix this problem without encouraging other illegal immigrants to do the same thing once they see that their lawlessness is ultimately rewarded? You can never put a limit on the number of dreamers we must accommodate because, according to you, this would be immoral. But I am not an unreasonable gal, and I would be willing to entertain a path to citizenship for dreamers if we could deport a like number of lestists.

    “I apologize if you misinterpreted my writing.”

    Gee, it’s hard to know what to say to such backhanded generosity, Daniel.

    >>:How is a single dad in Syria supposed to fix his country?”

    I thought the subject here was Dreamers. Syrian refugees are a subject for another day.

    >>” You wrote that you sympathize with the children and that it’s their parent’s fault. Effectively saying screw the children.”

    Nice try but saying that I sympathize with the Dreamers and noting that the parents are at fault for their dilemma is not the same as saying “screw ‘em.” Try not to be a hypocrite and if you want to live up to the way you seem to see yourself be fair about the way you characterize other people’s arguments.

    >>”I’d understand your position a bit more if you provided a solution other than revoking DACA and leaving these children in limbo.”

    There’s a reason that the U.S. and many other government entities make it a policy not to negotiate with terrorists even when they have hostages, Daniel. Do you understand what that reason is? It’s because once you negotiate and give in to their demands, they are emboldened and there will ALWAYS be another group of hostages. Is this fair to the hostages? Of course not. But it’s the right thing to do to prevent the taking of more hostages. We are being emotionally blackmailed (“These poor innocent children!”), and what are the blackmailers offering in return? NOTHING. I sincerely feel for the Dreamers, but I know from experience that the leftists in this country will never be satisfied with this one ransom payment, because they get off on these power trips. There has NEVER been a circumstance when they’ve been given an inch and not then demanded a mile. So if you lean Left and want someone to blame for the nation’s cynicism on illegal immigration, look in the mirror my friend.

    Thanks for hearing me out.

    Like

  7. 1. I will concede that the Constitution prohibits the President from making immigration policy. However, we have a history of overreaches of power by different branches. This one is especially concerning given the fact that it is explicitly stated in the Constitution. That being said, it becomes difficult for me to completely bash Obama for it given Congress’ inaction on this important topic (the past few decades of congressional sessions have truly failed us by not reforming our immigration standards).

    2. I will also concede that the Left often has double standards when it comes to free speech. They often want safe spaces or to limit certain kinds of speech. I believe no argument is too dumb, wrong, or silly not to deserve a response. Whether you are a harsh racist or an anarchist, your ideas deserve a response. There is a reason individuals believe things. Our society is too often ostracizes people for beliefs that are not supported by the left-leaning media that dominate our airwaves. I believe this is a primary reason for Trump’s surprise victory. Many people felt left behind. While I strongly disagree with some of the sentiments held by some Trump supporters, their ideas were laughed at and ignored, thus leading to the election of Trump.

    >> “congress has neglected its duty by not changing the law to accommodate the Dreamers”

    3. We fundamentally agree on whether or not Congress has a responsibility to “accommodate Dreamers”. I feel that we should grant amnesty or easy pathways to illegals given the number of undocumented people in our country that. It seems morally wrong and fiscally irresponsible to remove all these people. We need comprehensive immigration reform, as well as a realistic way to deal with those already in our country. It is frustrating that current immigration debates center around current undocumented immigrants in our country. We’ll have this conversation forever until we make a change to our laws.

    4. My solution to the problem is reform immigration policy and strengthen our borders, while also accommodating those already in our nation. I realize they broke our laws, but I sympathize with their past struggles as well as those struggles that would be thrust upon them by forcing them to leave. It is also important to recognize the monetary costs of deporting millions.

    5. A Syrian father was a poor example. Let’s consider a single father in Venezuela who has been negatively affected by the civil unrest and the economic woes of the past years. If you were put in that situation, how would you fix an entire country? Or would you escape to a stable country with better opportunities to fix your families’ lives?

    6. I still do not feel that you have provided a solution. Emotional blackmail is an interesting way to look at the situation. I feel that it is a realistic view to support a way to help those in our country illegally and also strengthening our borders/policies to prevent the situation we’re in from happening again. I feel like we agree on this. Party politics aside. Do you not think it is an appropriate solution to aid those in our nation and then change laws to stop this from happening again? I do not think our Constitution will be any more damaged than it already has been by us failing to protect our borders.

    Like

    • “Do you not think it is an appropriate solution to aid those in our nation and then change laws to stop this from happening again?”

      How old are you, Daniel? Maybe you’re unaware of Ronald Reagan’s infamous amnesty debacle in which he agreed to sign legislation granting amnesty to 3 million illegal immigrants in exchange for the Democrats’ promise to strengthen the border etc to solve our illegal immigration problem. Guess what? We now have, if you believe the reports, 11 million illegals. I don’t believe the reports because they’ve been using the 11 million number for over a decade now. I would be astonished if it wasn’t more like 20 million. So how did that solution work out for us? Or are you one of those people who says we should learn from history, and then turns a blind eye to history when it doesn’t comport with your world view?

      >> “congress has neglected its duty by not changing the law to accommodate the Dreamers”

      You took me out of context. Shame on you. Here’s the whole quote:

      “Your writings seem to suggest that congress has neglected its duty by not changing the law to accommodate the Dreamers, and somehow this justifies the lawlessness of DACA…. understand that if congress chooses not to act in the hopes that a state of limbo for their children will deter people from coming to this country illegally, that is a perfectly legitimate choice even if you disagree.”

      Congress’ DUTY is to serve the interests of the American people, not the Dreamers. That is what they took an oath to do, and that is their first moral obligation, unless they were crossing their fingers behind their backs when they took the oath, which no doubt some of them were.

      >>”I still do not feel that you have provided a solution.”

      I make it a habit not to provide solutions that absolve people from the consequences of their actions because that prevents them from learning valuable lessons. What’s happened with the Dreamers was completely predictable and probably something that conservatives forewarned about long ago, but they were ignored. SOMEBODY has to face a consequence for the wrong that’s been done. You say it shouldn’t be the Dreamers. I say it shouldn’t be the American legal system. Perhaps the parents of the Dreamers could offer to self-deport in exchange for a path to citizenship for their children. That would be a TRUE show of bravery and sacrifice for their children, it would punish the actual wrong-doers as well as serve as a warning to others toying with the idea of bringing their children here illegally. Or perhaps Democrats would agree to amend the 14 Amendment to undo the absurd interpretation that makes American citizens out of children born to people here illegally. That would at least give Americans something in return for the sacrifice of accommodating law-breakers.

      I suspect what you want is to socialize the consequence to the American people, asking us to look the other way while trespassers disrespect our laws. No consequence for the trespassers who created this mess. No consequence for the Left that’s enabled this wrong-doing all along. That’s usually how it works, eh?

      Like

  8. 1. I believe Congres’ duty to serve citizens includes solving the situation that involves millions of undocumented people living here as their lives have affected ours. We do not always have to punish people for wrongdoing. Sometimes mercy can be a more powerful gesture than revenge.

    >> “Perhaps the parents of the Dreamers could offer to self-deport in exchange for a path to citizenship for their children.”
    >> “Or perhaps Democrats would agree to amend the 14 Amendment to undo the absurd interpretation that makes American citizens out of children born to people here illegally.”

    2. Thanks for these solutions. Arguments can be made for both.

    3. We have a fundamental disagreement on how to deal with the current illegal immigrants in the US. I can respect the position that amnesty has downsides and may affect the validity of our laws. However, the position I take is to help the people here and fix our laws at the same time. I do feel that there is a middle ground between our positions. It is unbelievably unrealistic to suggest that we deport or imprison millions. Back to consequences- how about a tax/fine based on each individual’s time illegally spent in the US? Surely, you can’t suggest we should exert money, time, and energy rounding up millions of families?

    Like

    • >>I believe Congres’ duty to serve citizens includes solving the situation that involves millions of undocumented people living here as their lives have affected ours.”

      “Solving the situation” is simply leftwing code for implementing DACA, or something similar. And BTW, it’s not about “revenge” (your argumentation is very self-serving), it’s about consequences and steering people towards doing the right things, such as respecting the law.

      >>”Sometimes mercy can be a more powerful gesture than revenge.”

      I already explained to you that we gave “mercy” to 3 million illegal aliens back in the 80’s, and our reward was to get 8 million more illegal aliens. Facts are stubborn things.

      >>”It is unbelievably unrealistic to suggest that we deport or imprison millions.”

      Pardon me but did I suggest that?

      It’s unbelievably unrealistic to suggest that we ticket all the millions of drivers who speed, and yet we still have laws against speeding. Why? Because we know that the POTENTIAL for getting a ticket/fine is sufficient to deter a large number of would-be speeders and this makes the roads safer even if not every single speeder gets a ticket. The very same logic applies to illegal immigrants. It isn’t necessary for the government to deport or imprison every one of them. The POSSIBILITY of being deported and/or jailed will encourage some (hopefully many) to self-deport and discourage newcomers. Some will get away with it, just as many speeders get away with it, but the simple act of enforcing the law will finally make the problem manageable again.

      >>”…how about a tax/fine based on each individual’s time illegally spent in the US?”

      There you are with the amnesty talk again. Amnesty can never work in a world where the Left has any influence, Daniel. We’ll strike a bargain, and before the ink is dry they’ll being scheming to see how they can get around it. That’s a tragedy for those who deserve a chance, but it’s the reality.

      Like

      • CW, you raise fair points. But I still don’t know what you would propose. Is there nothing we can do? Blaming the Left is not a solution. Congress has been bogged down by obstructionism for 8 years and it appears we may go that direction the next few years as well. Stubborn Congressmen and Congresswomen refused to develop policies, and instead only oppose the other party. What do you think we should do about the undocumented immigrants in our country? You obviously think it’s a problem. Therefore it deserves a solution.

        Like

  9. >>”CW, you raise fair points.”

    Thanks again for your open-mindedness. That’s a rare quality these days.

    The immigration debate, like every other major issue of our time, divides us along party lines pretty much. Don’t you find that intriguing? Why is EVERYTHING a partisan issue? At the risk of being accused of blaming the Left again, the answer is that the division serves the interests of the Left. All of us should agree, first and foremost, that our laws must be obeyed or changed in accordance with the process set out in the Constitution. The inability to change the Constitution doesn’t give you the right to circumvent it. It means that the will of the majority is not behind you, and you must accept that because that’s how Democracy works. This applies to me as well. I don’t agree with letting the creators of this mess get away with what they’ve done, but if congress in its infinite wisdom (note my sarcasm) chooses to do so, then I will accept it.

    I recognize that we’re a divided nation, for whatever the reasons may be. The Right (that includes me) wants to adhere to the Constitution and to manage immigration so that we invite law-abiding, self-supporting immigrants who will adopt American values. The Left wants to increase its Democrat voting base regardless of what that means for the population. I know that seems darkly cynical but it’s true. Take a look at which groups are fighting to remove the gang types and the criminal element and the freeloaders, and which groups are defending such people. The proof of what I’m saying is right there if you’re willing to see the truth. Would you at least agree that there’s something wrong with those who put the interests of such people ahead of their fellow citizens?

    So when you say, “Blaming the Left is not a solution,” I can’t separate the solution to this problem from the Left’s ulterior motives for tolerating ILLEGAL immigration. The Left is looking for political advantage, and the Right must respond in kind. That doesn’t fit your idealist ideas, I know, but that’s reality.

    >>Is there nothing we can do?”

    I offered some suggestions and I hope that Republicans will be astute enough not to compromise the U.S. legal system while getting nothing in return, but I’m not holding my breath because we have too many Democrats masquerading as Republicans. You’ll probably get your DACA, or something close to it, whether you persuade me or not, so congratulations in advance.

    >>”What do you think we should do about the undocumented immigrants in our country?”

    Why don’t you start by not referring to those who are here illegally as “undocumented immigrants?” That’s a leftist euphemism designed to soften your attitude towards people who trespass here. I’ve traveled to other countries. Never would it occur to me to disrespect the laws of those countries or be dismissive about their sovereignty. You saw the loud, in-your-face protests on the news today, some of which included people who are here illegally. Did their attitude suggest respect or entitlement? What will it take for leftists to consider the futures of their own children when they’re coddling the trespassers?

    I already told you what I think we should do with those here illegally. They should be subject to the law as decided by the American people, just as I am subject to the laws of Mexico if I decide to go there. No one will feel the least bit of sympathy for me if I flaunt their laws. I understand you think I have no heart, but you’re wrong. Last week I was visiting my disabled brother in Colorado, preparing to take him to the doctor but when I arrived there was a work crew digging up the road in front of his house. One of the crew saw me surveying the road as I tried to figure a way to bring my car in and he came to offer his assistance. Based upon his limited English I’m guessing he may be here illegally. He was very kind and helpful. It pains me greatly to think that this nice, hard-working man might be deported but this is the consequence of doing the wrong thing, and it’s the consequence of suborning the wrong thing as the Left has done despite the objections from the Right.

    Here is the great irony in all this, Daniel. People on both the Left and Right say we need the illegals, that they are central to our economy. I think that’s true, and if we had followed our laws and experienced the resulting labor shortages for ourselves the U.S., in all likelihood, would have relaxed its immigration standards to allow many more people to LEGALLY immigrate here, and we would not be facing the terrible decisions we face today. That’s the consequence of doing things the wrong way. So I am suggesting that we start doing things the right way for a change. What a novel idea.

    Like

  10. Both sides, Democrat and Republican, seek to improve their numbers. Both sides do shitty things that are borderline illegal/unconstitutional as they have done throughout history. I do not see the Leftist plot you describe, but perhaps that is because I lean left. Also, it would seem this Leftist strategy to divide us has failed given the conservative majority in Congress the past few sessions and the election of Trump. You paint a very rosy picture of Republican vanguards protecting the Constitution from evil lurking liberals. I suggest that you examine the Right as well. Republicans and Democrats in Congress are just different sides to the same dirty coin.

    The attitude of protesters I saw today in person, on tv, and on social media seemed afraid, but unified

    I agree we should,”start doing things the right way for a change”. I do not think you are heartless. I struggle to understand how subjecting illegals immigrants “to the law as decided by the American people” will solve our problems. Unless we quickly give Americans the option to decide what to do with their millions of neighbors here illegally. Deportation is not realistic.

    We obviously disagree on a lot, but I do think there is a middle ground that I hope our lawmakers reach. Thanks for your comments. I look forward to future dialogue.

    Like

    • >>“Republicans and Democrats in Congress are just different sides to the same dirty coin.”

      That phrase is getting to be trite, Daniel. Party politics may muddy the waters but there is zero moral equivalence between leftists and conservatives in this country. Just look at the outrage coming from the Left because Trump did the right thing and put immigration policy back where it rightfully belonged. One side stands for the Constitution and the rule of law. The other side just wants what it wants and doesn’t care how it gets it. That you would suggest these are equivalent shows a disappointing absence of objectivity on your part.

      >>”The attitude of protesters I saw today in person, on tv, and on social media seemed afraid, but unified.”

      We must have been watching different programs because the attitude I saw was angry and rejecting of the rule of law. Being unified in wrongness is nothing to be proud of.

      >>”I struggle to understand how subjecting illegals immigrants “to the law as decided by the American people” will solve our problems.”

      And I struggle to understand how you can’t see that allowing the laws of a nation of 330 million people to be co-opted by the actions of 11 million trespassers is a much bigger problem.

      >>”Unless we quickly give Americans the option to decide what to do with their millions of neighbors here illegally. Deportation is not realistic.”

      Looks at what’s happened with traffic at the border since Donald Trump was elected, Daniel. It’s gone down dramatically. Seems that people are less willing to come here illegally when the threat of deportation is real. How tragic is it that this is all it took, because had we been serious 20 years ago people wouldn’t be facing such tough choices today. On this I’ll agree with you, both Republicans and Democrats are to blame. But conservatives – TRUE conservatives – have not wavered on their allegiance to the rule of law, so don’t throw us in that pot.

      IMO, here’s what would have happened if we had done things the right way and followed our own laws.

      1. Illegal immigration would be drastically reduced.

      2. U.S. employers would complain about the shortage of low-cost labor, a phenomenon that leads to higher prices.

      3. Congress would decide that it needs to do something about high prices and the shortage of low-cost labor.

      4. Immigration policy would be adjusted to allow more non-citizens to come here LEGALLY, to work and/or live.

      5. Those people – new American CITIZENS – would have had the full benefit of American citizenship, as would the families they made. No more “hiding in the shadows.” No more worrying about whether or not they will be able to partake in things like Social Security and Medicare. No more resentment from those of us who think laws matter.

      Wouldn’t that have been nice? But instead too many people did the wrong thing, and as is always the case the liberals want to reward the wrong doers and hold themselves harmless for their part while disparaging those of us who wanted the right thing all along as “mean-spirited.” Who says no good deed goes unpunished?

      Liked by 1 person

Please leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s