It's Not Civil Rights Again
Juan Williams tried desparately to paint the recent protests and marches by hispanics as the second coming of the Civil Rights movement of the 1950's and 60's. Unfortunately, he keeps coming close to the truth, only to hide and ignore it.
There is a major difference between what's going on in the US concerning the current immigration debate, and what was happening during the heyday of the civil rights era. That difference is citizenship. What the blacks from the civil rights era protested; and in some cases still have a legitimate gripe about; was that our Constitution recognized them as equal citizens, but our laws didn't.
What the Hispanics who'll be marching on the (United States) National Mall today will be protesting is that we are threatening to enforce the laws to prevent illegal entry into the country.
What this type of entry does is reduce services available to the legitimate and legal residents of the US. Whether it's overburdening the reduced price lunch programs, or driving up hospital costs by using those services and not paying, the folks here legally and on the books pay for those, and pay a higher price based on those who broke the law to get here.
While Juan tries to disguise parts of the issue, or turn it into a strictly racist one (it is in some cases, but not most) he also fudges some facts:
You see Juan, if they are paying taxes, that means they are probably here legally. Sure, they are paying sales taxes, but those aren't what funds the Medicaid programs in most states to fund their trips to the hospital. They don't fund schools, property taxes and ownership does that in most states. They don't fund unemployment benefits for those displaced from work. Those come out of income taxes that illegals don't pay.
Border control and enforcement has to be part of any immigration package, no matter how much some folks dislike the idea. Everytime we've done anything that amounted to basically amnesty and nothing else it didn't curb the tide of illegals, it draws more.
The folks who should be marching on the Mall today are the ones who've come here legally as immigrants, and have had to wait years to become citizens because they did the right thing. If anyone truly believes that an amnesty program is going to get folks to suddenly turn honest and say "Ooops, only been here two years, I'll head home" they are delusional. The folks who broke the law in the first place to get here will lie about when they did.
Maybe we do need a new civil rights movement though, by legal residences and citizens of the US, to protect our rights, and our services from those who would break the law to get here, and take them without earning them.
Technorati Tags: Visa, jobs and labor, amnesty, congress, immigration, mexico, guest workers, illegal aliens, undocumented immigrants, Juan Williams
There is a major difference between what's going on in the US concerning the current immigration debate, and what was happening during the heyday of the civil rights era. That difference is citizenship. What the blacks from the civil rights era protested; and in some cases still have a legitimate gripe about; was that our Constitution recognized them as equal citizens, but our laws didn't.
What the Hispanics who'll be marching on the (United States) National Mall today will be protesting is that we are threatening to enforce the laws to prevent illegal entry into the country.
What this type of entry does is reduce services available to the legitimate and legal residents of the US. Whether it's overburdening the reduced price lunch programs, or driving up hospital costs by using those services and not paying, the folks here legally and on the books pay for those, and pay a higher price based on those who broke the law to get here.
While Juan tries to disguise parts of the issue, or turn it into a strictly racist one (it is in some cases, but not most) he also fudges some facts:
Of course, the angriest voices are still heard on the far right, asking, "Whose country is this anyway?" and denouncing "amnesty" for immigrants. Sometimes it's a thin cover, with strong racial overtones, for opposing any rational approach to letting people who are already here, holding jobs and paying taxes, become legal.
You see Juan, if they are paying taxes, that means they are probably here legally. Sure, they are paying sales taxes, but those aren't what funds the Medicaid programs in most states to fund their trips to the hospital. They don't fund schools, property taxes and ownership does that in most states. They don't fund unemployment benefits for those displaced from work. Those come out of income taxes that illegals don't pay.
Border control and enforcement has to be part of any immigration package, no matter how much some folks dislike the idea. Everytime we've done anything that amounted to basically amnesty and nothing else it didn't curb the tide of illegals, it draws more.
The folks who should be marching on the Mall today are the ones who've come here legally as immigrants, and have had to wait years to become citizens because they did the right thing. If anyone truly believes that an amnesty program is going to get folks to suddenly turn honest and say "Ooops, only been here two years, I'll head home" they are delusional. The folks who broke the law in the first place to get here will lie about when they did.
Maybe we do need a new civil rights movement though, by legal residences and citizens of the US, to protect our rights, and our services from those who would break the law to get here, and take them without earning them.
Technorati Tags: Visa, jobs and labor, amnesty, congress, immigration, mexico, guest workers, illegal aliens, undocumented immigrants, Juan Williams
posted by Crazy Politico at 4:49 AM
9Comments:
Is this a civil rights case?
Territorial Filipinos are Filipinos born during the American territorial period (11 April 1899 to 04 July 1946) in the U.S. territory of the Philippine Islands.
The U.S. Supreme Court in Barber v. Gonzalez stated that Territorial Filipinos were "American nationals" AT BIRTH.
But the Philippine Independence Act of 1934 declared them to be "aliens" without affording them the opportunity to renounce or preserve their nationality AT BIRTH.
That same Act subjected U.S. nationals AT BIRTH to U.S. immigration laws, even thought such laws apply only the persons ("aliens") AFTER BIRTH.
Yesterday was the commemoration of the FALL OF BATAAN and the DEATH MARCH that followed 09 April 1941, a solemn day Territorial Filipinos commemorate each year to remember how they--American Nationals at birth--defended American Territory from the onslaught of invaders from the Land of the Rising Sun, obedient to orders from their Commander-in-Chief, President Roosevelt, but after WWII was disowned by Congress of the United States under the Rescission Act (1946).
Except for Territorial Filipinos, very few American Nationals have been given the privilege, the opportunity of defending American Territory against an invading army.
As it is now, Territorial Filipinos are technically STATELESS AT BIRTH since they were all born before the Republic of the Philippines became a separate nation only on 04 July 1946 and the sovereign at their place of nativity disowned them as unwanted "aliens."
The circumstances of birth--date of birth and place of birth are indelible; better still, "a Gift of the Creator," unless the U.S. Congress now claims to possess the power to create a new set of circumstances at birth, having commanded Territorial Filipinos to be BORN AGAIN in the Republic of the Philippines.
"Nationality" is a precious possession. The UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS proclaimed by the United Nations General Assembly on December 10, 1948 provides the following, among others, under Article 15:
"(1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.
"(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality."
"Good Night, and Good Luck" to what America now calls "illegal" immigrants.
Immigration would not have been a problem in America had the aboriginals (Indians, Mexicans, Alaskans, Aleuts, and other indigenous tribes) decided early on to restrict immigration of Anglo-Saxons (see what the term "saxon" is derived from, and you won't be surprised why).
Domingo T. Arong
a Territorial Filipino, an American National at birth America disowned
somebody explain this to me, I still understand why they want in this country, when all of our jobs went to theirs? perhaps were paying too much for picking fruit, or cleaning Wal-Marts?
This is what I see happening if our government gives amnesty to the some 11 million illegal aliens:
These illegal aliens will now demand fair pay and benifits that legal citizens demand because they are now legal. The employeers will, instead of giving fair pay to these now legal citizens, look for more illegal aliens to do the job for slave wages and in another 10 years this country will be right back to where we are now...giving 11 million more illegal aliens amnesty. It's just a vicious cycle that will keep repeating itself until this country becomes as bad as Mexico is now.
The only way to fix this is to enforce our borders and pass laws that would financially devistate any company that is caught hiring illegals.
04 10 06
Corie makes sense. The thing about Territorial Filipinos was interesting but somewhat irrelevant to the discussion. The Filipinos in that situation are closer to the Puerto Ricans who are a commonwealth and can travel freely between PR and the US. Anyway, we have to consider the source of the article CP. Obviously he can not be objective with this topic because he is too close to it. I was disgusted when I read a piece by so called conservative Linda Chavez on townhall.com. Here is the link from Patrick's site. Basically she is a LIAR and so is Mr. Juan Williams.
Why can't people be honest and admit that illegal immigrants are a stain that need to be cleansed away from our society? All they do is take take take take and take. One only has to read Larry Elders or Michelle Malkin to see how Mexico treats its immigrant population...Excellent post CP!
Today's protests are doing a good job alienating anybody who might have had sympathy before.
Oddly enough, virtually all the Mexican-Americans I know consider themselves Americans first and Mexican is somewhere down from there. Of course most of the ones I know were born and raised here.
I finally came up with a way to paint this picture so any liberal can clearly get the message. I have been working at it for days.
I know I have offered some rather heated points on the subject but give this a try.
http://ablursspot.blogspot.com/2006/04/where-do-you-live.html
Ablur, that was an outstanding way of putting thing, great job!
Domingo, it might be, but it's defintely off the actual topic.
Neo, how do you really feel about it :)
Rev.- A lot of them come here because Mexico has a level of discrimination that reminds me of the 1950's here. Darker skinned mexicans, and those of "native" ancestory are definitely placed on a lower scale there. They are the one's who migrate to the US illegally for the most part.
Tobalito, you solution is interesting, but unworkable. There are a lot of reasons we bring legal immigrants to the US. I wouldn't mind a shutdown on the illegals though.
Corie, you are dead on, and it's what's happened in the past. The last wave of amensty was approximately 3 million people in the 1990's. Now it's grown to 11 million illegals.
Mahndisa, you're right, the illegal folks need to be removed, not rewarded. The whole idea of the amnesty crowd is to keep confusing people on who's who in the immigration puzzle.
Patrick, I noticed that a lot of my local news only focused on stuff like the groups saying the pledge of allegiance, etc. I guess they didn't want to point out the rest of the folks.
Hi, I enjoyed your article on immigration, I think this is a very important dialogue to have and that Bloggers are making the climate very democratic. Feel free to look at some of my posts on the issue at my blog www.debaterelatepontificate.blogspot.com
Post a Comment
<< Home