Do you support sanctuary Cities?

[Robson]

Do you support "sanctuary" cities where illegal immigrants and those involved in felony identity theft are given a pass by local law enforcement on identity fraud and enforcement of federal immigration laws.

[-..__...]

1. Nope.

If I were a cop and had reasonable belief that someone was in the country illeagly... I'd report the offenders to the proper agencies and let them handle it accordingly.

In fairness though I think the way you worded the question is a bit overboard.

[noamnety]

2. abstaining

because of wording.

[blondeatlast]

15. Exactly. Talk about a push-poll. nt

[liberalmuse]

3. Yes. I also support "Free Speech Zones"

"Sanctuary Cities"? WTF kind of shit jargon is that? This is AMERICA. We beg for your tired, your poor... I'm all for shipping out the bigots to make room.

[Gregorian]

4. Thanks. I was trying to figure out how to say that.

But I am tired, and angry, and one step away from trying to find another universe. Hey, it's nice to know there are others. It sounds like you understand. Thanks.

[liberalmuse]

7. If you find one, don't be stingy. Let me know!

I want off this godforsaken planet. War with Iran. Congress telling MoveOn they are baaaaad. The General Petreaus slobbering love/perv fest. Men sexually abusing toddlers. The Dems rolling over whenever the 'pubs want to fillibuster. People saying it's okay to taser students and the NRA calling for the tasering of a woman. Larry Craig. And if I hear one more stupid catch phrase like 'Sanctuary Cities', I'm going to blow my lid. Jesus, I was at my limit 7 years ago. October HAS to be better!

[Gregorian]

11. This is what I do every day.

But I'm a perfectionist. Plus I remember when things were quieter. I really really hate cars. And to get to this ride I have to go through a gauntlet. But it's worth it. I'm sorry I am so pessimistic. I am very lucky to be free enough to even go to this place. I just got a new book called Happier. The author was recently on the Daily Show. I'll crack it open tomorrow. But I'm afraid that my upsets are external. I'm a very happy person. But it's what is going on around me that I don't like. I'm unhappy with American society. Cats and bikes and redwood trees make me happy. And nice people.

[renie408]

9. Yeah...that was what I was what I always thought. n/t

[blondeatlast]

16. "I'm all for shipping out the bigots to make room." Amen!

[DefenseLawyer]

5. The better question would be

should local law enforcement take time out from their jobs to be volunteers for INS?

[madeline_con]

6. Or, how about, should law enforcement agencies share info?

That should be clear enough.

[-..__...]

8. A even better question would be...

should local law enforcement involved in a routine of their normal duties or investigation report suspected illegal aliens to the proper agencies.

[DefenseLawyer]

10. And just how does one find a "suspected illegal alien"?

without some investigation, i.e taking time out of their regular jobs to be volunteers for INS. It is a question of priorities. I would rather have police catching bank robbers and wife beaters than checking the i.d. of every brown person they encounter.

[mark414]

12. federal immigration laws are a federal issue and shouldn't be handled by local enforcement

and what kind of loaded question is this?

[Robson]

13. Russert asked Democratic candidates the same question

and it really pissed me off to hear every one of them say that they support sanctuary cities.

Our candidates for President are apparently interested only in the welfare of every big institutions such as the Big Two political Parties, big business, big religion, and racist ethnocentric organizations.

They overlook the welfare of US workers who have a legal right to earn a market based living competing only with legal workers in this country. And lest we forget, while wages are being suppressed through competition with illegal labor, our taxes are raised to subsidize the high social costs of these same illegal workers and their families.

[LanternWaste]

14. What are

What are "racist ethnocentric organizations"? I've never come across that term before...

[pampango]

19. NAACP, La Raza? I haven't seen that term before either. n/t

[Robson]

22. Exactly

I'll hijack my own thread.

When groups organize to advance their own ethnic interests over others, (such as LaRaza, White Power, NAACP, CAIR, AIPAC, etc) my belief is that by default it is racist.

The purpose of assimilation is to consolidate our cultural leanings into one to advance the greater good.

Our politicians cater to some of these groups, thus dividing instead of uniting us.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnocentrism

Ethnocentrism is the tendency to look at the world primarily from the perspective of one's own culture. It is defined as the viewpoint that “one’s own group is the center of everything,” against which all other groups are judged. Ethnocentrism often entails the belief that one's own race or ethnic group is the most important and/or that some or all aspects of its culture are superior to those of other groups. Within this ideology, individuals will judge other groups in relation to their own particular ethnic group or culture, especially with concern to language, behavior, customs, and religion. These ethnic distinctions and sub-divisions serve to define each ethnicity's unique cultural identity.

[LanternWaste]

39. So that I am certain I am not misunderstanding you...

So that I am certain I am not misunderstanding you...

You believe the NAACP is a racist organization?

[Robson]

44. You could say that

any group that organizes to advance its own ethnic agenda is racist and divisive by definition .... in the purest sense.

[LanternWaste]

51. Do you consider 'protection' the same as 'advancing an agenda

Do you consider 'protection' the same as 'advancing an agenda'? I don't, and I happen to feel the NAACP is in place more to protect the African-American community from the inherent racism already in place than it is to "promote an agenda".

[LeftishBrit]

57. Wow. I'm not familiar with the first two...

but assume that White Power is something equivalent to the KKK, or National Front-type organizations in Europe. Ugh to it.

But surely the NAACP is there to protect non-white people *against* white racism? Not to make them top-dogs (as if that's going to happen in the near future), but to protect them against discrimination. They are not setting their ethnic interests *over* others; they are protecting themselves from being discriminated against *by* ethnicity.

If discrimination ceases to exist, then organizations like the NAACP and other civil rights organizations throughout the world will become redundant. Sadly, that time still seems some way off.

I have learned through participation on DU what AIPAC and CAIR are, and I simply don't see how either organization is *racist*. Neither of them is concerned with a race. AIPAC is concerned with relations between the USA and Israel: a country, not a race. Some people seem to think that AIPAC = Jews, but it doesn't. And CAIR is about a religion, not a race (probably equivalent to the British Council of Muslims). Again, how is that racist?

[PDenton]

41. that's astounding

None of them were oppossed to sanctuary cities? I guess I'll have to dig up the debate. Is it on Youtube?

In fairness the lead Republican candidate, Giuliani, isn't oppossed to sanctuary cities, either. He ran one, after all.

[porphyrian]

17. I don't have much of a problem with illegal immigrants, but I do have a problem with identity theft.

So, if you separate the issues, I'd vote yes on the former and no on the latter.

[ecstatic]

20. But don't most illegal immigrants use fake identities?

:shrug:

[La Lioness Priyanka]

23. do they usen stolen identities though?

[Robson]

29. LOL....you might ask them if they've stolen any IDs lately

They (the illegals) either get a job using stolen identities and pay minimal taxes, or they get paid under the table and don't pay their taxes. Either way you and I get screwed while the businesses that hire them get off the hook on paying taxes and get rich on the backs of cheap labor.

The use of "Sanctuary Cities" is just another way for local politicians to make points with certain ethnic groups while shafting the rest of us and circumventing the rule of law. The only way for the illegal immigration crisis to be solved is to enforce the law on the borders and in the interior of our country. As a overburdened taxpaying citizen to an indebted nation, I'm all for using our law enforcement in the most efficient way possible.....including using them to investigate and prosecute any business that employs illegal immigrants.

[Hamlette]

59. It's pretty obvious you don't "get it"

"illegals" come here because there are jobs.

We know who they are and we know where they work.

They DO pay taxes. The do NOT get unemployment benefits or welfare.

Identity theft is a pretty loaded phrase. While many illegals are using someone else's social security number, they are not running up debts on credit cards or other problems associated with "identity theft".

If you don't offer sanctuary, you have a lawlessness problem where people are afraid to report crimes and are preyed on. You don't want that because then employers wouldn't have cheap labor.

There is an easy fix. Go after the employers who hire them. We have tried that a few times in the last 20 years. If you've noticed, there will be big news of illegal alien busts and charges against the employers then the news dies down. That's because the employers put pressure on the politicians to stop the prosecutions. Happens every time, or the employer gets such a small fine it doesn't matter.

I've worked on this problem professionally for 10 years. It is easily solved...if we really had the will. We don't. So why punish those who we lure here with the promise of a better life? How chickensh*t is that?

[EFerrari]

69. Look at that poll. Not very many people seem to get it.

What the OP is calling "identity theft" is some economic refugee from one of our catastrophes in Latin America who is paying into a Social Security fund she can never collect on.

[Robson]

72. May I address your concerns?

May I address your concerns and issues?

Only the illegals that are paying payroll tax under false SSNs are known. It's impossible to know how many are in the country, let alone how many don't pay any taxes. How do you prove a negative? I would assume that the numbers estimated in the country are vastly underestimated as that's the politically expedient way that Bush's corrupt government would play it. I would think 30-40 million illegals wouldn't be out of line, and many are European and Asian and not Hispanic.

Many illegals do not pay any taxes (income or payroll) and of course neither do their employers. But we citizens with our ever declining inflation adjusted income MUST pay more taxes to cover all their social costs (education, healthcare,etc)

When it comes to enforcement I wouldn't go after the illegals. But I'd make a coordinated sweep of every state in the country and every owner/CEO of a business that is found to employ illegals as more than 1% of their workforce would face felony charges and jail time. I'd use those KBR detention centers for the employers. Employment opportunities for illegals would dry up immediately.

I would guarantee that this is what would follow:
1/ the US stock market would fall temporarily
2/ many businesses would immediately offer higher wages to get US or legally eligible workers
3/ Wal-Mart would immediately offer healthcare and higher wages to every employee in order to keep workers
4/ many illegals would immediately return to their home countries and start political changes that would force leaders in Mexico and other countries to improve the system and opportunities there to avoid civil unrest.
5/ after a period of adjustment the USA could open doors to legal immigration if true labor shortages existed
6/ labor shortages would spur innovation for automated systems that would reduce the need for manual labor
7/ the USA working class would finally start to make economic headway and the country would be better able to help other countries economically

[ieoeja]

73. I don't believe your guarantees are worth much.

Don't suppose mine are either, but history will at least back up my guarantee:

1/ There will be an immediate rise in organized crime.

When "Irish Need Not Apply", they created organized crime syndicates.
When Italians were excluded from jobs, they created organized crime syndicates.
When Blacks were refused employment, they created organized crime syndicates.

What none of these people did was "go away".

History says you are wrong. Those here are not going to just pack up and leave. Which is why the only viable solution is to legalize those already here AND crack down on the employers. Legalization only does nothing about the problem. Enforcement only creates a bloodbath.

[pampango]

77. It interests me that little attention is paid to the possible consequences

of creating large numbers of unemployed Hispanics. In Europe there is a lot of concern with illegal immigration from countries in North Africa and the Middle East, but there is sensitivity to the ramifications of large numbers of unemployed Muslims in these countries. Perhaps it is a credit to our perception of Hispanics as hard-working and law-abiding, but there seems to be little sensitivity to the consequences of large numbers of unemployed Hispanics.

Here most seem to believe that Mexican immigrants will self-deport, if we crack down on employers hard enough. The fact that the Mexican economy is worse now than before NAFTA means that job opportunities are not going to be there. The border is more militarized than it was years ago and is harder to cross going in either direction. As you say, most will choose to stay, believing that there will still be more opportunities here than in Mexico, but what will they do?

Legalization and enforcement should be done together. Kennedy had the right idea.

[LanternWaste]

84. we'd simply find a new scapegoat.

The only thing I'd safely guarantee is that if there were no illegal immigrants in the U.S., we'd simply find a new scapegoat for the same old problems...

[Hamlette]

85. good luck

every time law enforcement has tried to go after employer they scream like stuck pigs and the government backs down.

It's been going on for 20 years.

The dirty little secret is employer LIKE the system the way it is and in many ways, so does the government.

(BTW, the only medical bills you, as a tax payer pay are emergency services. And, if you don't like paying for education, try ignorance.)

[LanternWaste]

83. Well, my girlfriend doesn't....

Well, my girlfriend doesn't. However, I'm the first to say she's not 'most' illegal immigrants...

[EFerrari]

18. Yes, for a lot of reasons but mostly, if local law enforcement

get involved in immigration matters, the whole community is put at risk because people stop reporting crimes or coming forward as witnesses. That's just dangerous.

[TahitiNut]

21. A "sanctuary city" is the equivalent of a "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

It's NOT a solution.

What I fail to see in ANY of the discourse is any collaboration whatsoever that addresses the enforcement of ANY immigration policy of any kind. Unless and until I see SOME kind of enforcement, all I'm seeing is a continued retreat from the same forces of coorporatist exploitation that we failed to address twenty years ago when the same interests (La Raza, etc.) propelled the "Immigration Reform" through Congress in the mid-80s.

Fool me once ... :eyes:

[EFerrari]

26. No, it's not a solution but in fact, has the opposite effect

from DADT. The former allows law enforcement to do their job with community cooperation. The latter prevents gay folk from reporting assault and so on. :(

[TahitiNut]

28. Mirror images are easily recognizable as ethically identical.

I don't know why this must be repeated so often on DU, but THE ENDS DON'T JUSTIFY THE MEANS!

Why would anyone regard it as a 'surprise' (or even 'wrong') that people breaking the laws don't have the right to continue breaking those laws while simultaneously attempting to claim protection UNDER those laws???

D'oh!?!

[EFerrari]

35. I agree about ends and means.

Sanctuary is at best a stop gap -- until we get some in office who has the political will to enforce federal law and / or pass a workable immigration reform bill.

And, sanctuary isn't an appeal to federal law, but to a social tradition, right? So, they aren't the same laws. :)

Someone claimed that Bill Clinton put 5k more border guards on duty during his tenure, and that Junior defunded them. I haven't checked it out, but who'd be surprised?

/tense

[CTyankee]

55. I don't know if New Haven qualifies to be called a "sanctuary city," because it now offers municipal

ID cards (the first American city to do so) to anyone who can prove residency, regardless of their immigration status.

Here is a brief description of what our city has created: http://www.newhavenindependent.org/archives/2007/06/city_id_plan_ap.php

Everyone who lives in New Haven is encouraged to get the ID card. I was in the hospital for several months when they came out but I am going to get mine shortly. Two banks and several local merchants have signed on to recognize the cards.

Guess who our most vocal opponents to the cards are: a local group which is a redux of the John Birch Society!

There are real safety concerns about people who can only exist in a cash economy e.g. theft, violent crime. Also, the police need to be doing their municipal duties, i.e. drug trafficking, control of gangs, etc., and not federal immigration duties.

I have worked with Literacy Volunteers in New Haven and have personal interaction with people needing help in learning English. They work long hours at hard jobs and then show up in class at night to learn English.

We're dealing with a situation "on the ground" in New Haven. I believe the card is a compassionate response to a real need. I'm proud of my city.

[EFerrari]

60. What a great idea. Everyone is safer that way until

the idiots running our government straighten out their policy.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

24. Wow! That poll question sure was...

loaded. :eyes:

I live in one. Do you know the history of sanctuary cities?

San Francisco became a sanctuary city in the 80s when Central Americans were fleeing the American-sponsored violence in places like El Salvador and Nicaragua. We felt that we had an obligation to help the victims of our country's foreign policy.

We remain a sanctuary city today. I've worked with undocumented immigrants. I've gone to their weddings. I've gone to the baptisms of their US-born children. San Francisco's "illegals" come in all groups -- they are from China, Ireland, England, Russia, and, yes, Mexico and Central America.

I do not want to make them criminials.

I want to see American immigration policy change so that these people can gain some sort of legal status, and eventual citizenship if they choose. Until that happens, I am perfectly happy having them as my co-workers, friends, and neighbors.

[Tian Zhuangzhuang]

48. And yet these undocumented workers under cut the working class.

A lot of skilled trades people haven't seen a raise in years. And before you get visions of rednecks in your head minorities are often hardest hit by these sanctuary cities. In fact San Francisco Black working class population has almost been completely displaced.

I guess when you all need work on your 800k house it's easier to pay $10 an hour and ask no questions than pay a minority a living wage.

Sanctuary cities threaten to become the new plantations of America.

[EFerrari]

62. The Latinos who came to San Francisco came because

our illegal interventions in their countries displaced THEM. Goes around, comes around.

[Tian Zhuangzhuang]

65. Yes in 1985

We are talking over 20 years ago.

[EFerrari]

66. The fallout is ongoing. Honduras is more or less a landing strip

for us. Also, don't forget NAFTA. And we just helped screw Mexico out of a progressive president.

[Robson]

76. Yes and illegal immigration is why Mexico now has Calderon instead of Obrador

Thoughtful people need to look beyond the propaganda that the globalist corporate media throws at us daily to the benefit of their masters and owners.

Lou Dobbs is one of the few in the corporate media that actually provides some un-glossed information as to what is going on economic issues that will eventually destroy the middle class in America.

Instead most left leaning talking heads in the media reinforce and manipulate left leaning voters with propaganda that illegal immigration/amnesty is the compassionate position. That's BS. It's screwed the poor in Mexico and now will make us poor in the USA. What they and some party leaders are doing are doing is leading us around by the nose to advance an agenda of ultimately cheaper labor.

The capitalist elite wanted illegal immigration because......

1/ It removed tens of millions of potential left leaning voters from Mexico that would have opposed Calderon in the last presidential election.
2/ It greases the skids for the Security and Prosperity Partnership and North American Union. Had Calderon not been elected the SPP and NAU would have been stopped in its tracks in Mexico by Obrador.

[EFerrari]

79. I believe that's backwards. BushCo helped Calderon steal it

and that ensures more people will be starved out of the home they love.

The globalist corporate media pretended that Calderon WON, remember? It was only the Indy Media and the tubes that put out what really happened.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

64. San Francisco's working class...

has been undercut from my City not because of undocumented workers, but by a decision in the late 70s by Mayors like George Moscone and Diane Feinstein that the future of the City lay in white collar and not blue collar jobs. Sadly, that attitude continues today with Gavin Newsom.

For 30 years there has been a very active move to rid SF of plants, shipping, light industrial, and other traditionally blue collar jobs. The incredibly high costs of land today have meant that the only growth consists of mega office buildings and luxury housing. I have lived here all my life, and every single day I see the land being sold out from under small blue collar businesses to make way for luxury condos, chain restaurants/stores, and office space. I work in one of the last industrial neighborhoods left in the city -- it will last perhaps another ten years before it is gone. The half-million dollar condos, wine bars, and chi-chi restaurants are creeping down 3rd Street towards Bayview Hunters Point -- one of the last black neighborhoods in the City. That too will be gone within 15 years.

And none of it, NONE OF IT, was due to undocumented workers. Blame this one on rich City leaders who sold out the working class like myself.

[Tian Zhuangzhuang]

67. Actually I agree... to a point

But when someone in San Francisco gets carpet installed is it an American worker making a living wage installing that carpet or is it an illegal taking advantage of lax law enforcement.

Should San Francisco allow skilled tradesman of any color to make a living within it's city limits?

Shouldn't we encourage diversity of jobs and races.

If a southern American city drove it's black population out it would be described as racist on this board.

San Francisco drives out it's black middle class and working class population and no one seems to care.

It's much easier to go to a party and celebrate your sanctuary city status with a few token refugees from El Salvador then realize that the illegal immigrants took the jobs of the Americans that used to live there.

edit spelling

[Hell Hath No Fury]

71. It has been a constant battle in SF....

since the early 80s to keep the City from being overrun with white yuppies. There are plenty of us who care a great deal about an ethnically and economically diverse San Francisco, and there have been people fighting the good fight for decades.

I'll be honest -- we are losing. We are facing a financial and political jaggernuat that seems unstoppable. We are seeing the Manhattanization of San Francisco -- the rich and white, and those who serve them. As more of the rich/white/white collar move into town and the face of the City is transformed, the politics are moving even further from consideration for the working class and ethnic diversity.

I grew up in the City when it was a hardcore, blue collar town. My Grandpa worked at the Hunters Point Naval Station. My neighbors -- including African Americans -- worked at the Hamm's brewery and the Hostess bakery and were longshoreman for the Port. What I see happening to San Francisco quite literally breaks my heart. There are entire neighborhoods I don't go into anymore because they have nothing to do with how I live my life.

And I still lay the blame squarely at the feet of my City leaders who long ago determined that, if you weren't white collar, you had no future in the San Francisco.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

70. When I need work on my $650,000 home...

I generally do it myself, because I am working class and can't afford to pay anyone to work on my house. I live in the house I grew up in -- my Mom bought it 1964 for $22,000. On the rare occassions I need help, I pay $15 an hour to the workers -- almost six dollars over the SF minimum wage -- because that is all I can afford to pay. Most of the people I went to high school with are in the very same boat -- working class and living in their family home.

[Richard Steele]

25. Since I'm told that I live in one, my answer to your ridiculously biased question is "yes".

Given a pass on Identity Fraud? :rofl: Yeah, just another one
of those "special privileges" the RW keeps complaining about.
As if it actually happens. :eyes:

And enforcing FEDERAL IMMIGRATION LAWS is the duty of the INS,
not local PDs.

[Robson]

36. Odd - Russert asked it last night and they all said yes.

Is this poll is just another indicator that the candidates are out of sync with the people.

Perhaps that's why Congress and the POTUS both have approval numbers that are at historic lows.

Could it be that Congress nor the political parties nor Bush cares what the people think and want? As examples many of us want the Iraq war ended now, we wanted Bush/Cheney impeached and held accountable under oath, and we do not want a war fought with Iran. Yet our leaders seem intent on marching us towards another war.

Perhaps manipulative e-voting machines have made citizens obsolete commodities.

[mdmc]

27. yes

world citizenship.
rule by international morality.

[LanternWaste]

30. Yup. I support them

Yup. I support them. I'd support sanctuary states, countries, and even sanctuary planets if there was such a thing.

My support has nothing to do with fraudulent papers though-- it's based on something Victor Hugo once wrote to the effect of, 'Which to you is more important-- imginary red and blue lines that exist only on paper maps, or human beings?'

Because how we treat the least and the weakness among us...

[La Lioness Priyanka]

31. beautiful

[Zookeeper]

34. Yes, that's a beautiful sentiment, but...

it leaves out the fact that we already have plenty of "the least and the weakest" that are American citizens or legal residents. 12 to 20 million people willing to undercut wages on low skill jobs, doesn't hurt the middle and upper middle class the way it hurts the people who are still finding their way out of institutionalized poverty and/or racism.

It's easy for some of us to give away other people's jobs.

[LanternWaste]

37. You read that on a bumpersticker somewhere

"It's easy for some of us to give away other people's jobs."

You read that on a bumpersticker somewhere? Because that's all it's worth.

Guess what, chief-- I'm IN institutionalized poverty.

[Zookeeper]

45. I can see why you would think that considering the amount...

of rhetoric and talking points that pass for discussion on this subject, but no, I see many DUers who appear limit their idealism to one particular "needy" group.

[LanternWaste]

53. If "humanity" is one particular group,

If "humanity" is one particular group, count me in along with many DUers, too.

[pampango]

40. Beautiful sentiments don't deserve a "Yes,....but.... " response.

Is that the response that "world peace", "racial equality", "equal rights" deserve?

Here's another good bumper sticker idea: "People who live on the other side of imaginary red and blue lines that exist only on paper maps, don't count!" (I know that would be a tough fit.)

[Zookeeper]

46. Do you think that having 12-20 million citizens of other...

countries, living and working here illegally is in any way beneficial to our citizens who have suffered from racial INequality, have been underserved by our educational system and have lived with generational poverty?

Here's another good bumper sticker idea for you: "People who live on this side of imaginary red and blue lines that exist only on paper, don't have a home country to fall back on if things don't work out for them."

[pampango]

49. I believe that those 12-20 million people are an asset to our society,

but then I think the same thing about earlier waves of immigrants from Ireland, Italy, Asia, Central and South America, Eastern Europe, and Africa.

Each group of immigrants was resisted by people who already lived here in fear of their effect they would have on jobs and wages (with a little racism and xenophobia thrown in). Each group and their descendants have to be valuable and productive members of our society. I see no reason why current Hispanic immigrants and their descendants won't be the same.

[Robson]

50. Too bad they came here illegally or I might agree

When someone breaks into my house rarely is the outcome one of respect or acceptance of that individual ....unless they are firemen or those that came to aid and rescue my family.

These illegals broke into our country enabled by greedy businesses, not to help rescue anyone, but to get what they can and take it back home. The earlier immigrants came here to assimilate and stay and most importantly we invited them. Sorry (no on 2nd thought I'm not ever going to apologize for my view on this) because I see both the unsecure border, the illegal acts involved and their business enablers as a serious additional problem for this country, and not part of a solution.

You may accept uninvited guests into your home, but most Americans don't.

[pampango]

54. If your reason for opposing them is that they are here illegally, I can respect that.

I would argue that they do not break into the country to steal things and take them back home. Most stay here and raise their families and contribute to society as much as any other group of immigrants ever has.

There were no immigration laws prior to the Civil War, so the Irish, Germans, Scandinavians, and other immigrants were not "invited", they came here because they wanted to for economic opportunity or personal freedom. Historically there was plenty of domestic resistance here to these waves of immigrants for many of the same reasons as the opposition to Hispanic immigration now. It did not matter that there was no immigration law to base that resistance on, many Americans just didn't like the fact that the Irish, and others, would work for less, which threatened citizens' jobs and wages. Anger at and opposition to immigration goes back in our history much further than the "rule of law" argument goes.

Many posters (not you) oppose illegal immigration on "rule of law" grounds which, as I said, I can respect. Then when the discussion shifts to "legal" Mexican truck drivers, suddenly the fact that they are legal is not as important as other things. (They remind me of my Repub father who always said he was not a racist. He just didn't want Blacks to move into the neighborhood because it would hurt property values - in other words for economic reasons. He never did understand the moral reasons supporting the integration of neighborhoods. With respect to Mexicans, it's not that we are xenophobic, we just don't want them in our country for economic reasons.)

[EFerrari]

63. I'm sure the citizens of El Salvador, Nicaragua, Argentina,

Honduras, Guatemala and Mexico agree with you about uninvited guests.

Edit: I forgot Haiti, Cuba and Viet Nam.

[Zookeeper]

78. If they don't, they should. n/t

[EFerrari]

80. They do. That's why that whole region is going to the left.

They're tired of Marines offshore threatening to land, proxy wars and US backed efforts to subvert democracy and being stripmined by corporatists. They want to stay home and they want their children to be able to stay home.

If most Americans realized that only a very few immigrants wanted to come here in the first place, I think they'd be amazed. Latinos (if I can generalize for a minute) are bonded not only to their extended families but also to their communities and to the land. I've met a lot of undocumented workers. And the one who is very excited about being here and not at home has been the exception, in my experience.

Oh, and I also forgot Panama. :(

[Zookeeper]

81. We are in agreement both of those points.

The sense I have from the people I have known who are here illegally, is that they would rather live and work at home if they could make a decent living. (Especially when winter sets in.) It's sad for them and it would be better to have people immigrate to the U.S. because they want to, instead of feeling like they have to.

The situation as it stands doesn't truly benefit anyone except corporatists.

:hi:

[EFerrari]

82. As a mommy, I think our government and their cronies

need to be put on a time out!

lol

tgif!

[LanternWaste]

74. For, in the final analysis, our most basic common...

"For, in the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children's future. And we are all mortal."

Which sums it up for me.


Sentiments, huh?

Well then, thank God for sentiment and sentimental people. For without them, we all suffer at the hands of the merely practical, and the "us versus them" fallacy.

[Bluebear]

32. Care to load that push poll any more?

[mainegreen]

33. Thank you Napalm Jesus.

The flames!
They burn!
THEY BURN!

[ceile]

38. Loaded question. n/t

[Lone_Star_Dem]

42. I thought you were kidding by your wording

Then I read the thread an realized you're not.

Don't underestimate the ability of DUers (or any one else for that matter) to think for themselves. It's insulting.

[depakid]

43. What a loaded poll!

If anyone ever needed (another) reason to frown on cheap media polls, all one would have to do is look at the way these questions are phrased!

[BlooInBloo]

47. Why yes, yes I do support making the baby jesus cry.

[AngryAmish]

52. I pay an awful lot of taxes to support a sanctuary city

So my support is literal.

[backscatter712]

56. Yes - the immigration system in this country is broken.

What are their crimes? Oh, they crossed a line on a map, then got some fake papers so they could get a job and make a living, at $8/hr, that's an order of magnitude higher than they can get in their home countries.

Some of them were brought over as babies, raised nearly their entire lives here in the U.S., but are still illegal and face forceful deportation any time.

The system was rigged this way on purpose - keeping an entire class of people "illegal" ensures we have an endless supply of serfs.

[Robson]

58. Yeah the system was rigged, but now we're all becoming serfs

I agree that the system has been rigged and propose that both political parties have been hijacked to the benefit of rich elitists. The Repubs have become solidly pro corporatists without any of their former fiscal restraint. The Democratic Party used to be solidly a pro-labor party. There are many indications that the Party under Clinton has become a free trade, pro-capitalist financier elite, screw American labor party under the false liberal guise that we must have open borders and free trade to be compassionate.....when really what both parties want bottom line is disposable cheap labor. I'm very concerned where this merging of common interests in the big two parties that seems to favor the elitists leaves most of the people of the USA. A lot depends upon whom we Democrats nominate in 2008.

[Tian Zhuangzhuang]

61. Now thats what I'm talking about.

In this post right here http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1924187&mesg_id=1924187

[Robson]

68. Does the American worker class have a political choice that aligns with their economic interests?

Excellent post and thread btw. I just rec'd it. The Democratic Party that I've supported has been hijacked by the moneyed interests. FDR would roll over in his grave at what the Party has become and what it has allowed to happen to the working class in this country.

Support for illegal immigration and for sanctuary cities are one of the methods that have been used by the new party elite/leaders to advance the wishes of special interests at the expense of the former party base. I've seen repeated polls on DU that have indicated 75% of real world Democrats and DU members oppose amnesty, illegal immigration, sanctuary cities, etc. while the disconnected Democratic leaders almost unanimously support their big money sponsors.

It is very questionable to me if the worker class individual in America has a political choice that correlates with their economic interests.

[Romulox]

75. Agreed. Illegal Immigration is economic warfare on the working class

under the cover of identity politics.