Hey, there! Log in / Register

Rally to save DACA kids

There's a rally at the State House on Wednesday at 6 p.m.

Neighborhoods: 
Topics: 
Free tagging: 
Ad:

Comments

What the average age of a DACA "child."

Also not a big Trump guy, but he's right that this is congress's responsibility, Obama overreached.

up
Voting closed 0

25

up
Voting closed 0

slate:

How Republicans are extorting Trump into deporting 800,000 young people..phasing out DACA wasn’t Trump’s idea. Rather, the bulk of the blame for killing DACA will fall on the Republican Party.

President Barack Obama introduced DACA, or Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, in 2012 after Congress failed to pass the DREAM (Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors) Act. DACA-eligible individuals receive a two-year renewable deportation deferral and are permitted to live and work in the United States. The policy reflected Obama’s interpretation of current federal law, which directs the executive branch to establish “national immigration enforcement policies and priorities”—a reasonable grant of power since the government cannot deport everyone at once. With DACA, Obama simply deprioritized the deportation of one group of immigrants.

DACA has not been litigated by any high court. It is an unsubstantiated to claim to say it is illegal but it is a good talking point for those creating a sense of urgency to end the program.

up
Voting closed 0

Senator Elizabeth Warren speaks on the Senate floor about the Trump Administration's decision to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program and about the importance of passing the Dream Act, today, September 6, 2017.

up
Voting closed 0

up
Voting closed 0

Congress didn't act in 2010, because the bill was filibustered in the Senate by the Republicans.

up
Voting closed 0

If Congress "doesn't act" that doesn't give the president cart blanche to do what he wants.

up
Voting closed 0

Yes, let's blame congress for following the legislative process according to the constitution instead of a president for overstepping their delegated powers.

I find it sad how some people are all for tearing up the separation of powers and abolishing federalism until their party loses control of the White House. They suddenly they develop an appreciation for checks and balances as soon as the shoe is on the other foot and potentially coming down on their necks rather than those of their opposition.

up
Voting closed 0

You swarm of anonymice keep saying that, yet I don't think you know what that means. The constitution is still in effect, as is the principle of judicial review.

up
Voting closed 0

unconstitutional, then why wasn't it challenged as such when it was enacted?

up
Voting closed 0

McConnell's inaction justifies a constitution overreach, by a president with a degree in constitutional law.

That called a dictatorship.

up
Voting closed 0

Y'all are acting like there's not a judicial branch to the US government. They can review executive orders too, anonymouse.

up
Voting closed 0

What if he had just pardoned them all? The current executive branch seems to think the pardon power is unlimited.

up
Voting closed 0

Can't pardon what technically isn't a crime.

up
Voting closed 0

Can't pardon what technically isn't a crime.

Since you're such a legal whiz, please explain how you can pardon someone who hasn't been sentenced. Oh wait, Gerry Ford, another upstanding example of the rule of law...

up
Voting closed 0

So apparently it can be done.

up
Voting closed 0

That's the sound of the point flying by your head.

up
Voting closed 0

Pretty sure Obama is the one who implemented DACA in 2012.

up
Voting closed 0

Embedded links are highlighted in blue, as in ckd's post.

up
Voting closed 6

If that answers your question.

It really shouldn't matter - they were raised here, their parents paid taxes here, they were educated here, and their contributions to our society as law abiding, taxpaying residents are hampered only by this ongoing grandstanding bullcrap that damages ALL of us.

up
Voting closed 0

if parents were illegal, how did they pay taxes? They couldn't hold a legitimate job, most are under the table - cash jobs.

How did they pay taxes? Forget sales tax since that's not assumed...

up
Voting closed 0

Pretty sure this has all been explained to you before, but I don't expect that will stop you from playing dumb next time either.

up
Voting closed 0

Not surprising.....

up
Voting closed 0

If you'd kept reading, you would have gotten to the part of the article that explains how fake SS numbers are no longer necessary to pay Federal taxes, and that undocumented workers are opting to apply for ITINs with which to pay their taxes precisely to start a paper-trail that helps with becoming documented.

https://www.irs.gov/individuals/individual-taxpayer-identification-number

up
Voting closed 0

Should we ignore the theft of fake SS numbers by people who are here illegally or should that matter somewhere? You quickly swept that under the rug - by the way, the ITIN commentary appears 6 paragraphs after speaking of how illegals present fake SS cards to their employers.....maybe the ITIN discussion offsets stealing SS numbers though...not sure.

up
Voting closed 0

Can you point to any harm done by these fake SSN numbers? Oh wait, it means that people that you think are undeserving and that you label as "illegals" can't get jobs and pay taxes, and you HATE that. All good then!

up
Voting closed 0

Why don't you go around and give your SSN out to people who need it? People who don't have one would greatly appreciate the gesture, what harm would it do, right?

It's not that they're bad people, it's that they came here illegally. Is there a legal/illegal way to come into the country or did I make that up?

Your approach is confusing. Let's pick and choose which laws to obey then, Mr. Law and Order....sound good?

up
Voting closed 0

Just saw this on my newsfeed.....should be cause for a celebration, right? Think of all the dreamers that will be positively affected! Do you want to meet for a few beers before the Patriots game tonight or maybe after work tomorrow?

Let me know - I'm around

#BREAKING: Credit monitoring company Equifax says breach exposed social security numbers and other data from 143 million Americans.

up
Voting closed 3

ya, what you linked to is actually worse.

Great, your kid goes to buy a first car, rent an apartment, buy a house, take out a student loan and viola! Your social has already been used!

Happened to someone I know whose son was 5.

Ya, that's not helping your argument.

up
Voting closed 0

Next time READ THE ARTICLE.

You are a real hateful and spiteful piece of work, aren't you? If your kids can't compete with DACA kids, well, it ain't their legal status but bad genes.

up
Voting closed 0

Why the quotes around the word child?

up
Voting closed 0

Because they might have come to the US as children, that doesn't mean they are children now. Some have college degrees. Some are even doing postgrad work.

I will always be my mother's child, as my son will always be my child, but I am no longer a child by any stretch of the imagination to the bigger world, being the father of a 4 year old being proof of that.

up
Voting closed 0

It's politics, and though I am personally opposed to DACA, it makes perfect sense that Obama declared it with a Republican congress opposed to passing any change to immigration law, also because of politics.

Anti-Trumpers, though, ought to recognize that Trump pulling the trigger on the issue is a good thing. If he didn't, and Democrats win the House or Senate in 2018, then real reform of immigration law and policy would be a lot less likely to happen, and we'd have several more years of limbo.

up
Voting closed 4

The mayor of Lynn, Mass. says that some of the illegal aliens from Guatemala who are enrolled in her city’s public schools are adults with graying hair and “more wrinkles than I have.”

When men in leather jackets with mustaches and graying hair are signing up for kindergarten, there's a problem. Unfortunately under Obama, the schools were forbidden to ask their age.

up
Voting closed 0

We are all dying to hear about it.

Hopefully you will be invited to keep an eye on the place this coming weekend?

up
Voting closed 0

And you know that.

Those are asylum seekers, who I will agree should probably have been vetted better.

up
Voting closed 0

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dana-milbankan-anti-immigration-...

But upon closer inspection, Kennedy’s tale of woe doesn’t quite add up. Those kids with wrinkles and gray hair? She admitted she hadn’t seen them herself. And the “surge” of unaccompanied minors Kennedy has felt? It predates the actual surge at the border, which has been building for a couple of years but exploded only in 2014.

CNSNews is not a trustable news source. I hope you choose better in the future.

up
Voting closed 0

average age they arrived in the US: 6 yrs old. So some DACA recipients have no memory of any other place than here.

up
Voting closed 0

On this site aren't from Boston, did that scare them away from gentrifying every neighborhood? People move out of town, state and country EVERYDAY its not that scary.

up
Voting closed 0

How can "limousine liberals" gentrify neighborhoods they don't live in? Do you people even stop to think before typing in the phrases you have scrawled on the slips of paper taped to your monitor?

up
Voting closed 6

We had forewarning in the news about Trump making a decision on DACA repeal. Do you think an anon was assigned to post on universalhub to shape the debate? Can you tell from their IP where they work?

up
Voting closed 0

Which gang took over your neighborhood, killed your family, and threatened you.

And how it's not scary.

Educate yourself and find some humanity and empathy along the way.

up
Voting closed 0

And that's not the point. The reason most people (at least those with a heart) sympathize with them is that they were brought to this country as children, many as young children. It's what they know. Sending people "home" to a place where they may not even speak the language, or be familiar with the culture, would be disconcerting and difficult. Imagine being sent back to a country that is foreign to you when you were in your 20's, raised and educated in the U.S.

up
Voting closed 0

This is the right way to look at it. And consider this: many of the immigrants here (your neighbors, coworkers, friends) fled perilous situations in their home countries out of fear for their safety and the safety of their young children. The prospect of these now-grown children being sent back is far more dire than just confusion over language and local customs, especially for immigrants from many parts of Central America.

up
Voting closed 0

only goes so far, and having a sitting president violate the constitution is well beyond that point.

up
Voting closed 0

It will take millions of dollars to replace these people - because the labor market for the things many of them do for a living is so tight that we have a special visa category for people who do that work.

https://www.marketplace.org/shows/marketplace/09052017, scroll down to "Dreamers Aren't Taking Jobs"

up
Voting closed 0

Larry Ellison, Mark Zuckerberg, Tim Cook, Jeff Bezos?

In a word: NO.

up
Voting closed 0

Again, you moronically repeat the talking point that DACA is somehow unconstitutional. It has not been ruled so. If it was unconstitutional, it would've been overturned sometime in the past five years. Don't be an idiotic talking point spouting anonymouse. Use your brain, make a valid argument, and stand behind it. Otherwise, you're just another worthless internet troll.

up
Voting closed 0

...with an executive order banning Muslims, and a pardon of a completely unrepentant criminal who has not served a day in prison?

up
Voting closed 0

Isn't that exactly what their parents did only in reverse?

I have sympathy for these kids. Not their fault.

But serious slippery slope giving every parent the hope that if they can hide long enough, their kids get to stay here.

Hopefully there's a middle ground, but effective amnesty raises serious issues of moral hazard.

And as someone who lived in foreign countries much of my 20s and 30s, not that big a deal. They may have other problems, but they'll get over the language and culture.

up
Voting closed 0

Because you got to choose to be a privileged expat, you know exactly what its like, right?

Getting shipped off to a country you dont know, with no support network, no knowledge of the language or the various threats to your life and livelihood (or did you think their parents gave up everything to come here just for the fun of it and "back home" is just a super place to be?) is real different than backpacking gap years.

They shouldn't have to "get over" the language and culture (ps, huge things, weird that you would be so glib about them), they're Americans. Period. For way too many of them, this is equivalent to shipping them off to die. It's unfortunate that.you're OK with that.

up
Voting closed 0

Seriously overdramatic Anonawhackjob?

Their parents did a stupid thing and put their kids in jeopardy of this. Not the kids' fault, but not acceptable either.

If they are in true danger, apply for asylum.

And yes, get over it. Don't want to go where your parents came from, go to Canada and reapply (one avenue where we can give preferential treatment perhaps).

Blame their parents, not our govt (who should start enforcing these laws mor rigorously)

This is not rocket science. I would venture that 100% of the parents knew what they were doing.

And PS - they're not Americans until they get citizenship.

up
Voting closed 0

Blame their parents?

Sorry, that boat has sailed. I blame you for being an uncaring asshole.

Did they win the amnesty lottery by being brought here as a child and become a useful member of our society? Maybe. Is that fair? Nope, but you don't make it any more fair by trying to shove water uphill in sending them out of the country now. Maybe your focus should be on making it easier for people to come here in the first place. That would be more fair.

up
Voting closed 0

So by your legal eagle analysis, if some mafiosas kid turns up with the paintings stolen from the Gardner museum, s/he gets to keep them or the proceeds of selling them.

It's not about caring. It's about the law and until it changes they are now illegal immigrants.

Period. There is no debate.

up
Voting closed 0

If I wanted a turd sandwich, I'd ask your opinion on school funding. Don't stuff shit into my mouth and tell me what my argument is.

Until overstaying a visa or crossing the border is a criminal offense, there's a huge difference between Grand Theft Arto and a DACA recipient.

It is ALWAYS about caring. The law is a tool not a weapon. You think you'd be more familiar given that you're a tool as well.

Also, people that say things like "no debate" need to have a come to Jesus moment with why they then choose to participate in an open forum.

up
Voting closed 0

I'll avoid digression by simply saying that even per Richard Stutman, head of the BTU, Boston's schools have been overfunded for almost 10 years.

thank you for your lovely ad hominems. Considering the source, it's a compliment.

If we cared that much, we'd just open the borders. And I've said repeatedly, I get the empathy here - as you said, it's not fair. But you are in dangerous waters permitting someone to benefit as a result of someone else breaking the law. there are LONG, LONG waiting lines to get into this country - and if you can sneak in and avoid detection and then at least your kid gets to jump to the front of the line - how is that fair? How is that caring for the people playing by the rules?

I agree - I think Congress should do something to consider the situation. No idea what that is and I don't really get a say (like they'd care about some email I sent). You can't run the country on emotion. There are rules. As of right now these kids are breaking the rules and there are consequences for that until they change those rules. Exactly how do I come to Jesus over something that is a logical impossibility. According to believers, Jesus was God, but even God can't make a square circle. Even in an open forum.

up
Voting closed 0

Ask your wealthy businessy budddies you seem to pretend you know a lot of being a rich businessy boy yourself how much this will cost them.

These aren't auto workers - they are taking jobs that shithole places that gutted their schools can't produce enough Americans to do - as in H1B jobs, darling.

up
Voting closed 0

They'd probably say the same as you. If the costsvof their labor goes up, they'll just charge you morevto buy their stuff.

That's why they are rich.

up
Voting closed 0

.. Because they were abandoning everything to get their family to safety. Do you not understand why people migrate? They didn't do it for fun or because it's easy, they did it because they needed to.

"Eh just apply for asylum" doesn't quite cut it when USCIS is now not likely to grant asylum in even well-documented cases.

And yes, many are likely to die and/or be forced into collaborating with ms13 and related groups (saying "no" is not an option, by the way). Calling me a whackjob might give you some intellectual distance from that fact but it doesn't change it, sorry.

up
Voting closed 0

You could say the exact same thing about the millions standing in line to get in legally. No jumping.

Residency is a finite resource. Europe needs lots more people as most of their poulations are shrinking. Or Japan or Australia or New Zealnd or Canada. We are not the only option. Just the best.

up
Voting closed 0

Residency is a finite resource

.

Counterpoint: No, it's not. Residency is a concept that affords legal protections, which are also neither tangible nor finite.

And I'd add that most people didn't know/have much of a problem with dreamers before they started getting threatened with deportation. They weren't taking anything away, they were perfectly productive everyday American youths, and not one of them was eating your slice of the pie, but now all of a sudden, you're filled with indignation at their presence.

up
Voting closed 0

If you ain't Native American, then somebody immigrated somehow.

Please do some research on that - what were the conditions they left, how minimal were the requirements when they just showed up on a boat, etc.

Looks like your plan to gut schools started with your own education.

up
Voting closed 3

You could say the exact same thing about the millions standing in line to get in legally. No jumping.

Despite the fact that you're displaying a level of moral reasoning that would be appropriate for a five-year-old, this isn't kindergarten and there is no "line". Do some research on the current visa situation and then come back and blow your hot air.

up
Voting closed 0

Haven't you ever seen the boatloads of people arriving and then being forced to leave at Ellis Island every day?

*whisspsspsspsspssper*

I'm sorry, I'm just now being informed that those are tourists.

up
Voting closed 0

Ever been to an embassy?

There are millions of people trying sometimes for years to get into this country. There are rules. You shouldn't get to skip over all that because your parents hid you under the radar. It's not the compassionate thing. I agree, especially when our govt winks and nods at the people here illegally. But it's the rules. Breaking rules has consequences. Don't blame Trump for this one. Blame their parents.

Don't like it, Europe is to the right, Canada straight ahead and Australia down to the left. Try breaking the rules in a place like Singapore or worse and see what happens.

Want a personal real world example? May your kid get waitlisted and ultimately rejected from their school of choice because they made room for the child of an illegal immigrant. You'll never know if that's the reason, but why should legal residents be on the outside looking in at someone that's not even supposed to be there, save for the fact mummy and poppy broke the law. If you don't find something wrong with that, there's something wrong with you.

up
Voting closed 0

Maybe your kid should have been smarter.

up
Voting closed 0

Any kid.

Maybe you should be smarter. You'd start thinking with your head instead of other body parts.

up
Voting closed 0

Obama famously said: "I have a pen..."

So does Trump.

Obama was lazy and impatient on this one, and went for the easy swerve. We're seeing the result.

And sorry snowflakes, Trump is actually doing the right thing by giving Congress a chance (which they'll blow) to address this the right way over the next six months, rather than ruling by pronouncement.

up
Voting closed 5

Obama acted only because the Republicans in Congress refused to.

up
Voting closed 0

For Obama to overreach his constitution limits. Why because you like him or his position a said issue.

up
Voting closed 0

Please cite which parts of the Constitution Obama violated with the parts of DACA Dear Leader overturned today.

up
Voting closed 0

But it's on the Daily Caller.....would the source need to be Mother Jones or what source would stand up to your unbiased scrutiny?

up
Voting closed 0

New York Times
Washington Post
San Francisco Chronicle

etc.

In other words A News Source with Fact Checkers, not a Propaganda Rag founded for the sole purpose of spewing lies and distortions, which is the Daily Caller's calling card.

up
Voting closed 0

On what planet are the NY Times and Washington Post unbiased? Are you feeling well today or do you have amnesia? Their "fact checkers" must have been drugged or on vacation throughout the election - maybe they employ the same people that Mother Jones do.

Those lovely left wing/Sanctuary cities you named have other publications too - why are we excluding those? NY Post and maybe Washington Examiner for example - do they not employ fact-checkers or they don't spew enough left-wing lies and distortions for you?

This list will have to be a work in progress it seems. Your delusions were entertaining though.

up
Voting closed 4

Journalistic integrity?
Fact checking?
Logic?
Reality?
Scientific Evidence?

Obviously not.

up
Voting closed 0

That's why I ridiculed the selections of NY Times and Washington Post as unbiased.

up
Voting closed 0

Congress makes the laws. The President enforces them. Congress said no to legal residency. Even the esteemed law professor who occupied the Oval Office last year would see the writing on the wall when states start suing over the President making law by decree.

At least the guy before him tried via the constitutional route. Perhaps our President now can get Congress to do their jobs.

up
Voting closed 0

Explain.

High school is only the start of understanding things like this. There is much gray area in the world beyond School House Rock, which is why we are hearing differing opinions on this from different lawyers, such as yourself.

up
Voting closed 0

Because people from the Pacific Northwest sure don't understand separation of powers.

Article 1 of the US Constitution gave Congress power to create laws.

Article 2 of the US Constitution gave the Presidency power to execute the law.

Article 3 of the US Constitution created a judiciary, which evolved to have the power to adjudicate the Constitutionality of laws and actions of the Presidency.

The idea was to prevent concentration of power in a single branch. My guy is that it would have been tough even for a HRC Presidency to explain the flouting of immigration law via executive orders in the face of the impending lawsuits. Trump is pushing the issue. I do hope that the DACA folk can get some kind of permanent residency, but that takes an act of Congress, not the action of a President.

Or are you contending that a President can alter immigration law through Executive Orders.

up
Voting closed 0

We learned a whole lot that went way beyond your recitation of poems.

My public high school taught us in college prep level courses that written laws required interpretation to be operationalized - this is known as judicial review.

We also learned, through studying the Nixon fiasco, what the working limits on executive privilege are and how executive privilege emerged through the years and how it was tempered NOT by reciting words on a piece of paper at complicated situations but through the JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION of those words on that paper.

We also learned that the real world wasn't so neat, cut and dried as what was written (see judicial interpretation, review, precedent, executive privilege), and that the world was much bigger than the walls of our school, parish, or neighborhood; and that we needed to be ready for the grownup messiness of things in order to be grownups, not kids reciting words that need interpretation in the real messy grown up world of real life.

up
Voting closed 6

So at least you and I are on the same page with the separation of powers.

up
Voting closed 0

Do you know what judicial review and interpretation are or not?

Explain using Nixon and FDR as examples.

up
Voting closed 0

Are you really asking for an example of judicial review of FDR's actions. Where to start? The NRA? Internment of Japanese Americans? Jeez, imagine if Trump's response to Supreme Court decisions was like what Trump did with the New Deal- declare my actions constitutional or I'll start appointing more justices until I get a majority.

up
Voting closed 0

Funny I remember Trump saying the President has great leeway in regards to enforcing immigration laws. I think Obama had the same leeway. Trump was brought to court and lost.Why didn't anybody bring DACA to court?

up
Voting closed 0

Some have spent the past 8 months going on about overreach on the part of the President in regards to immigration. States have sued the federal government about executive overreach using executive orders. Now the tables suddenly have turned. Often Trump looks like an idiot, but then somehow things turn like they have now.

up
Voting closed 0

That these states waited five years, and for Obama to be out of office to sue? Given that no court ruled against it, it wasn't unconstitutional, and, given Texas et co only sued when they had their guy in the White House, I don't see that as any measure of its constitutionality - in fact, if it was unconstitutional, they would have sued years ago when Obama was still in office. This is just political theater, as the states know that Trump does not want to be forced to defend it in any way.

up
Voting closed 0

Have any states actually gotten to court yet? If not, shouldn't the Supes be the deciders here?

up
Voting closed 0

Or the Americans with Disabilities Act...

Or the Civil Rights Act of 1964...

If I have my history and civics correct, none of those were overturned by the following hostile executive with a mere signature.

There's a reason for that.

I'll say it again. Obama was lazy and went for the easy swerve on this. Sorry if passing laws and working within the framework layed down by the founders is hard.

Obama owns this as much as Trump.

up
Voting closed 0

Back in the day, Republicans were willing to negotiate with Democrats. That trend started to collapse when Clinton was president and then failed completely when the black guy occupied the White House (and yes, I say that deliberately). Obama's fault, if any, was that he entered the presidency believing in all the stuff he'd been teaching about how the system was supposed to work and it took him too long to realize the Republicans had moved to a different game, one they were able to do even in the first few years thanks to the "supermajority" stuff in the Senate.

up
Voting closed 0

why didn't the dems do this when they had the house and all?

up
Voting closed 0

Remember that supermajority crap that went out the window on Jan. 20? Yeah, that.

up
Voting closed 0

about how pushing people for violations of the law their parents committed, that they were in no reasonable way responsible for, is "doing the right thing".

up
Voting closed 0

"Save" are they dying? "Kids" most are in their mid-20's.

up
Voting closed 0

Getting sent back to certain places will be tantamount to death, so yes.

up
Voting closed 0

What does it stand for?

up
Voting closed 0

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals

up
Voting closed 0

The chief executive has the authority to set priorities for enforcing law like deportations. That was the basis for Obama executive order on DACA. It was clearly spelled out--the criteria for qualifying for deferred action.

The Constitutionality wasn't tested in court.

Trump repeal of the EO was instigated by AGs from red states who threatened to sue if Trump didn't repeal it. Neither McConnell nor Ryan wanted Trump to do it.

up
Voting closed 0

The Facebook event says it's been rescheduled for 4-5pm.

up
Voting closed 0

Punishing children for the actions of their parents is some serious PaPa Doc-Mao-Stasi shit. It is what totalitarian dictators do to have leverage over their populace.

In the United States, if an adult robs banks, and brings the 5 year old son along in the getaway car, the son is not imprisoned when the crime is solved-- not if it's one year later and the child is 6, or twenty years later and the child is 25. Not even if the 5 year old is actively involved in the robbery, and told to hide money in his Spider Man backpack during the getaway.

If the money from the bank robbery is used to pay the child's college tuition, the child is not forced to return his diploma and give up his degree. Boats, vacation houses, sports cars may be seized, but the innocent family members are not forced to become destitute or punished for activity over which they had no control, even if they were fed and clothed as a result of that activity.

To pick up on something closer to home & more recent: when Bernie Madoff was finally busted, his wife was allowed to keep one of the homes, even though it was purchased with ill-gotten money, because she was not involved in his criminal activity, and would have been homeless without it. Even though she benefited materially during the time of his scamming, she was-- rightly-- not held responsible for his actions, nor was she punished.

up
Voting closed 0

there will be more of it tomorrow.

If you're OK with that, then you're OK with amnesty. If you believe national borders are there for (admittedly self-serving) good reasons, then you can't be OK with any form of amnesty.

While I sympathize with these people, I cannot empathize with them. Territorial integrity, the most basic form of national security, needs to rank higher than emotions. Otherwise we may as well not have borders, or government for that matter, if anyone can come here and act like they own the place with no respect to the people who are already here. The astute observer will note that this is process would be called invasion and conquest if it were us doing it to them.

up
Voting closed 0

in some cases, we did literally invade and remove territory. in others, we meddled so much - either directly through government agents or through corporate entities - that we permanently destabilized their socioeconomic system to the point that organized crime is more powerful than the government. it's not just "Mexico's problem" or "El Salvador's problem" its our problem too because we helped create it. And we keep making it worse.

There are no jobs, there is nothing, all the while we say "Murica is the best! everyone loves us! land of opportunity!" And yet when, out of desperation they come, we say NO NOT YOU. WHY DO THEY COME HERE. its illogical.

Amnesty is forgiving the transgressor. The kids werent the transgressors. This is not amnesty. This is taking a broader view of the issue, reconizing its roots and trying to do the right thing. I agree that large scale immigration reform is necessary, but no one gains anything by putting a bunch of American youths on planes to places they dont know where they run known and significant risks. Everyone who wants to end DACA says "well you cant run a country on emotions", but thats exactly what theyre doing, this is purely vindictive, out of nativist spite for people who didnt break the law.

up
Voting closed 0