« | Home | Categories | »

Obama response to rescission of DACA

Posted on September 6th, 2017 at 9:05 by John Sinteur in category: News

Immigration can be a controversial topic. We all want safe, secure borders and a dynamic economy, and people of goodwill can have legitimate disagreements about how to fix our immigration system so that everybody plays by the rules.

But that’s not what the action that the White House took today is about. This is about young people who grew up in America – kids who study in our schools, young adults who are starting careers, patriots who pledge allegiance to our flag. These Dreamers are Americans in their hearts, in their minds, in every single way but one: on paper. They were brought to this country by their parents, sometimes even as infants. They may not know a country besides ours. They may not even know a language besides English. They often have no idea they’re undocumented until they apply for a job, or college, or a driver’s license.

Over the years, politicians of both parties have worked together to write legislation that would have told these young people – our young people – that if your parents brought you here as a child, if you’ve been here a certain number of years, and if you’re willing to go to college or serve in our military, then you’ll get a chance to stay and earn your citizenship. And for years while I was President, I asked Congress to send me such a bill.

That bill never came. And because it made no sense to expel talented, driven, patriotic young people from the only country they know solely because of the actions of their parents, my administration acted to lift the shadow of deportation from these young people, so that they could continue to contribute to our communities and our country. We did so based on the well-established legal principle of prosecutorial discretion, deployed by Democratic and Republican presidents alike, because our immigration enforcement agencies have limited resources, and it makes sense to focus those resources on those who come illegally to this country to do us harm. Deportations of criminals went up. Some 800,000 young people stepped forward, met rigorous requirements, and went through background checks. And America grew stronger as a result.

But today, that shadow has been cast over some of our best and brightest young people once again. To target these young people is wrong – because they have done nothing wrong. It is self-defeating – because they want to start new businesses, staff our labs, serve in our military, and otherwise contribute to the country we love. And it is cruel. What if our kid’s science teacher, or our friendly neighbor turns out to be a Dreamer? Where are we supposed to send her? To a country she doesn’t know or remember, with a language she may not even speak?

Let’s be clear: the action taken today isn’t required legally. It’s a political decision, and a moral question. Whatever concerns or complaints Americans may have about immigration in general, we shouldn’t threaten the future of this group of young people who are here through no fault of their own, who pose no threat, who are not taking away anything from the rest of us. They are that pitcher on our kid’s softball team, that first responder who helps out his community after a disaster, that cadet in ROTC who wants nothing more than to wear the uniform of the country that gave him a chance. Kicking them out won’t lower the unemployment rate, or lighten anyone’s taxes, or raise anybody’s wages.

It is precisely because this action is contrary to our spirit, and to common sense, that business leaders, faith leaders, economists, and Americans of all political stripes called on the administration not to do what it did today. And now that the White House has shifted its responsibility for these young people to Congress, it’s up to Members of Congress to protect these young people and our future. I’m heartened by those who’ve suggested that they should. And I join my voice with the majority of Americans who hope they step up and do it with a sense of moral urgency that matches the urgency these young people feel.

Ultimately, this is about basic decency. This is about whether we are a people who kick hopeful young strivers out of America, or whether we treat them the way we’d want our own kids to be treated. It’s about who we are as a people – and who we want to be.

What makes us American is not a question of what we look like, or where our names come from, or the way we pray. What makes us American is our fidelity to a set of ideals – that all of us are created equal; that all of us deserve the chance to make of our lives what we will; that all of us share an obligation to stand up, speak out, and secure our most cherished values for the next generation. That’s how America has traveled this far. That’s how, if we keep at it, we will ultimately reach that more perfect union”


Write a comment

Comments:

  1. A Canadian senator says that we should invite them to apply to come to Canada.
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-could-gain-from-daca-move-1.4276201

  2. Anyone missing a competent US President yet?

Why I’m Resigning From Trump’s Diversity Coalition

Posted on September 6th, 2017 at 8:32 by John Sinteur in category: News

[Quote:]

Over the past month, many corporate leaders have fled the councils and coalitions President Trump assembled at the beginning of his administration. I am proud to join them. While I will never cease advocating for policies that benefit America’s Hispanic-owned businesses, the moral costs of associating with this White House are simply too high. There is no place for a National Diversity Coalition in an administration that by its word and deed does not value diversity at all.


Write a comment

Current Events

Posted on September 6th, 2017 at 0:26 by John Sinteur in category: News


Write a comment

Comments:

  1. There’s porn everywhere now. Why didn’t you include Mohammed?

  2. Stop using the “whataboutism” fallacy will, it doesn’t suit you.

  3. @Will: Oh I dunno, because Mo is dead and isn’t contemporaneous with Kim and Trump?

  4. Game, set and match. Take a seat, Will.

  5. It’s in poor taste. There! Get it!

    Just because it’s two nimrods doesn’t mean you have to act like one.

  6. So primness and prudery as well as whataboutism, misdirection and false equivalence. All in the service of rightwing talking points, pursued as relentlessly as though written by a Macedonian teenager.

  7. Hey, we didn’t give the world Hitler or Stalin. Europe did.

    My view of history is that current events are a result of past event. Go back to the past if you want to know when events took a wrong turn. Democrats only have themselves to blame for Trump.

  8. “It’s all THEIR fault” doesn’t suit you either.

  9. Poor taste? Blimey, Will, that is expecting too much. I thought it was a hilarious cartoon.

    (I have news for you if you think that image is porn, btw. Admittedly depiction of male anatomy is normally a little more…erm…attractive.)

  10. OK, so I stand corrected. My SO says that it is gross and he doesn’t want to look at it. Poor taste then :-]

  11. Oh Sue’s SO. I looked at my anatomy (standing corrected or not) as you put it..thought it was attractive (at least to someone), but now NOW, I ashamed. Oh no, years of therapy are now in front of me. Oh woe is me. 🙂

    Regarding Cartoon — hilarious indeed! And @John — you are a bit harsh on Will. He is, at a high level, partially correct in blaming (implied) corruption and mismanagement of the democrats as one of the causes for Trump. Certainly not all. It is far more complex and cannot be “one” cause. Hillary was a flawed choice. Divisive, dynastic and with much baggage. Too bad Joe did not run. Too bad others like Bernie were run off the rails by the Hilary machine. We cannot ignore these events.

  12. Of course we can’t. But it’s a bit much to ask a single cartoon to address more than one, two at most, things on that long list of “stuff that got us here”. Dismissing something because “this or that happened a while a go and that helped get us in this situation and you’re not addressing that particular pet peeve” is unhelpful to say the least.

  13. Precisely. You don’t need to shoehorn Hillary into this cartoon when it’s clearly not about her.