Mediaboss Marketing

Based on what Im seeing daily in the mainstream media (and in some of our recent Super Bowl ads) it appears that it has now become racist/xenophobic (if not downright evil) to deny illegal immigrants U.S. residence including most of the benefits of citizenship. So, having spent the first 30 years of my life on the U.S./Mexican border (El Paso/Juarez), I thought Id share a couple of my hometown observations.

One of the first things one used to notice when crossing into Juarez (I say used to because very few El Pasoans now risk that very short drive) is that besides the poverty, all the homes have bars on all their windows. All of them.

Another was the pervasive culture of the mordida the bite. Rare was the Juarez official from traffic cops on up who couldnt be bribed, and such a culture pretty much guarantees highly dysfunctional government. Both of these observations could be blamed on the poverty, but there is a chicken or egg question here: Does the poverty create the culture or does the culture create the poverty? Quien sabe?

Either way, there seems to be a glaring dichotomy between how pleasant and hardworking our local illegal immigrants are and what disasters their countries of origin are. Those nations all seem to be crime-ridden, poverty-stricken, gang/cartel-infested and ruled by inept, corrupt governments. This Latin American commonality begs a question in my politically incorrect mind: Isnt there a distinct possibility if millions upon millions of illegal immigrants continue crossing the border that these same cultural dysfunctions will begin to manifest themselves here? Along that line, Lt. Governor Dan Patrick of Texas stated this week that between 2008 and 2012 Texas arrested 147,000 people identified as hardened criminals who were here illegally. They were charged with over 440,000 crimes.

Here in Greenport, at this point in time, there seems to be no question that the immigrant community is a blessing in many ways, and Im not for deporting anyone except criminals. But I am certain that if the left continues to indulge in its nave fantasy that open borders are good for America, and leftist judges and politicians continue to make it impossible to control the border, we are going to regret it deeply.

Sanctuary cities are not only in blatant defiance of federal law no less wrong than 1960s southerners defying school integration but are a disturbing example of a powerful and dangerous current now flowing through the left: that it is not our elected representatives who will determine what is legal or illegal, but rather it is ones own compassion, ones personal sentiments, that will make that determination.

The roots of this lawlessness are those two mean-spirited children of the late 1960s: Political Correctness and his twin sister Identity Politics. Their mischief, besides dividing America into separate tribes (often via activist judicial fiat), also tends to be quite harsh on dissenters, at best labeling them haters, and at worst attempting to destroy their livelihoods/careers.

Years ago I ran across a Peanuts cartoon strip with four panels. The first shows Lucy standing in a light sprinkle, smiling. The second has Lucy standing in a slightly heavier rain, saying Happiness is feeling the wind and rain in your hair. The third panel has Lucy standing in a heavy rain, looking unhappy. The last panel has her standing in a deluge, looking miserable, and saying sort of. So, perhaps its all simply a matter of degree. Too much of many good things alcohol, sun, water, etc. can kill you.

Ill close with this quote from the Manhattan Institutes Theodore Dalrymple: Societies fall apart when (among other causes) their ruling elites become persuaded that generosity of spirit and broad-mindedness are the only true virtues, even if they result in paralysis in the face of disorder, with all the accompanying miseries of those who suffer it.

P.S. Before any over-zealous readers rush to brand me as a hater, Id like to mention that both my children are married to Hispanics and I consequently have several Hispanic grandchildren all, Im happy to say, descended from a long line of legal immigrants.

Photo caption: Southold Town Police Chief Martin Flatley speaks at event titled Synergy Greenport late last month. (Credit: Krysten Massa)

Hugh Prestwood is an award-winning songwriter from Greenport.

comments

< Previous Post

Paw Print: Peter Waldner cartoon

Read more from the original source:
Equal Time: Slippery slope of illegal immigration - Suffolk Times

Over the past couple of days, immigration enforcement agents have round up almost 700 illegal aliens75 percent of which had criminal records. Rep. Nancy Pelosi disputed the claim, but Immigration and Customs Enforcement also confirmed the figure released by the Department of Homeland Security. IJ Reviews Joe Perticone had more:

[]

Independent Journal Review obtained a copy of the list of various criminal offenses provided to the members by [ActingICE]Director [Thomas]Homan, which shows that Kelly was correct in his assertion that the crimes were of a severe nature.

There were 161 DUIs, 47 cases of domestic violence, 15 assaults with an aggravated weapon, 15 cases of sex offense/fondling against a child and dozens of other cases of sexual and violent crimes.

In total, 507 of the 683 apprehended immigrants had criminal convictions, on par with Kelly's claim of 75 percent.

The raids have rattled immigration groups, noting that these appear to be harsher than usual. The wheels for these raids were set in motion during the Obama presidency, but it surely captured the spirit of President Trumps immigration agenda: criminal aliens have got to go. This isnt a controversial position, folks. Even Democrats agree that illegal aliens who commit violent crimes should go (or at least that's what they say to the press), though they appear to be a bit squishy when it comes to drunk driving.

Read more:
ICE: Yes, 75 Percent Of Illegal Immigrants We Arrested Have Criminal Records - Townhall

wivb.com

New information released on illegal immigration suspect wivb.com GRAND ISLAND, N.Y. (WIVB) The Justice Department has released new information related to the arrest of suspected illegal immigrants on Grand Island Wednesday. 20-year-old Armando Navarette-Dominguez of Mexico was one of the 9 suspected illegal ...

Read this article:
New information released on illegal immigration suspect - wivb.com

Restaurants closed, kids stayed home from school, workers didnt show up. It was a nationwide strike on Thursday, Feb. 16, billed as a day without immigrants.

Coming on the heels of roundups of undocumented immigrants nationwide, organizers urged legal residents as well as undocumented ones to participate in the boycott in response to President Trump's crackdown on immigration, USA Today reported Thursday.

Businesses survived this boycott. But here on the Shore, watermelon growers, chicken companies, and other businesses would be in real trouble if that day without immigrants stretched into a week, or became permanent.

For some, a crackdown on illegal immigrants is simple moral logic. Theyve broken the law. They should have gotten in line and done it the right way, as so many thousands of legal immigrants have.

This argument sounds like common sense, but it has a major flaw: It presupposes a fair and functional immigration system that gives people a realistic opportunity to come here.

The reality is more complicated.

RELATED OPINION: The shame of turning away refugees

According to the American Immigration Council, 675,000 people worldwide are allowed to come to the United States legally each year. There are also 140,000 employment visas.

That sounds like a lot of people. But it excludes a great many would-be immigrants. Only 7 percent of the total can come from any one country, according to the council, and family members of immigrants are given preference. Employment visas are temporary, restrictive, and require a company to sponsor the candidate.

How does that affect the waiting list? Again according to the American Immigration Council, as of May 2016, on average unmarried children of citizens must wait more than five years to come in, and siblings of citizens must wait more than 10 years. Depending on what country youre from, it could be a lot worse. Married children of citizens from Mexico must wait more than 20 years, and Filipino siblings wait about 25 years, the council says. These are people who are given preference.

Unauthorized immigrants who want to regularize their status in this country cannot just get in line, the council says on its website. There are lines, but a large number of aspiring immigrants are not eligible to be in any of them.

So yes, thousands of immigrants do it the right way, but many, many more, in practical terms, cant. So when a legal immigrant says, I did it the right way, so they should too, her feelings are understandable, but not reasonable. Its a little like saying I won the lottery, so you should too.

If it were practical to come legally, why would people risk rape, terrible conditions and death in the desert with human smugglers, then live here under the shadow of deportation?

MORE OPINION: Your vitriol and nastiness are hurting your cause

To make matters worse, weve had a wink, wink, nudge relationship with illegal immigration for decades. The government seems to be playing a cynical game in which it puts up with illegal immigration to help out the workforce, while refusing to deal with a political hot potato and actually reform the system. Our businesses have said to immigrants, in essence, if you can get here, well hire you. Now we want to make immigrants the only scapegoat.

Thats why telling immigrants just do it the right way in our current system is simplistic, flippantand ill-informed.

Militarizing the border and uprooting families who have been working here and contributing to our nation for decades is not a humane or moral solution, even though its painted as simply enforcing the laws.

The better, more compassionate solution is to open the way for many more people to come legally. Lets find a way to welcome immigrants.

Andrew Sharp is a producer at The Daily Times and delmarvanow.com. Email him at asharp@dmg.gannett.com. Find him on Twitter @buckeye_201 and on Facebook @andrewsharp201.

Read or Share this story: http://www.delmarvanow.com/story/opinion/columnists/2017/02/17/illegal-immigration-border-control-policy/98007800/

See the original post here:
Why illegal immigrants don't just 'get in line' - Delmarva Daily Times

WASHINGTON

The Trump administration considered a proposal to mobilize as many as 100,000 National Guard troops to round up unauthorized immigrants, including millions living nowhere near the Mexico border, according to a draft memo obtained by The Associated Press.

Staffers in the Department of Homeland Security said the proposal had been discussed as recently as Friday.

The 11-page document calls for the unprecedented militarization of immigration enforcement as far north as Portland, Oregon, and as far east as New Orleans, Louisiana.

Four states that border on Mexico were included in the proposal California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas but it also encompasses seven states contiguous to those four Oregon, Nevada, Utah, Colorado, Oklahoma, Arkansas and Louisiana.

White House spokesman Sean Spicer said Friday the document was "not a White House document."

"There is no effort to do what is potentially suggested," he said. Spicer called the AP report "100 percent not true, adding that there was "no effort at all to utilize the National Guard to round up unauthorized immigrants."

A DHS official described the document as a very early draft that was not seriously considered and never brought to the secretary for approval.

The AP had sought comment from the White House beginning Thursday and DHS earlier Friday and had not received a response from either.

Governors in the 11 states would have had a choice whether to have their guard troops participate, according to the memo, which bears the name of U.S. Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly, a retired four-star Marine general.

While National Guard personnel have been used to assist with immigration-related missions on the U.S.-Mexico border before, they have never been used as broadly or as far north.

The memo was addressed to the then-acting heads of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and U.S. Customs and Border Protection. It would have served as guidance to implement the wide-ranging executive order on immigration and border security that President Donald Trump signed Jan. 25. Such memos are routinely issued to supplement executive orders.

Also dated Jan. 25, the draft memo says participating troops would be authorized "to perform the functions of an immigration officer in relation to the investigation, apprehension and detention of aliens in the United States." It describes how the troops would be activated under a revived state-federal partnership program, and states that personnel would be authorized to conduct searches and identify and arrest any unauthorized immigrants.

If implemented, the impact could have been significant. Nearly one-half of the 11.1 million people residing in the U.S. without authorization live in the 11 states, according to Pew Research Center estimates based on 2014 Census data.

Use of National Guard troops would greatly increase the number of immigrants targeted in one of Trump's executive orders last month, which expanded the definition of who could be considered a criminal and therefore a potential target for deportation. That order also allows immigration agents to prioritize removing anyone who has "committed acts that constitute a chargeable criminal offense."

Under current rules, even if the proposal had been implemented, there would not be immediate mass deportations. Those with existing deportation orders could be sent back to their countries of origin without additional court proceedings. But deportation orders generally would be needed for most other unauthorized immigrants.

The troops would not be nationalized, remaining under state control.

Spokespeople for the governors of nine of the states either declined to comment or said it was premature to discuss whether they would participate. Representatives for Texas and Arkansas did not immediately respond to the AP.

The proposal would have extended the federal-local partnership program that President Barack Obama's administration began scaling back in 2012 to address complaints that it promoted racial profiling.

The 287(g) program, which Trump included in his immigration executive order, gives local police, sheriff's deputies and state troopers the authority to assist in the detection of immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally as a regular part of their law enforcement duties on the streets and in jails.

The draft memo also mentions other items included in Trump's executive order, including the hiring of an additional 5,000 border agents, which needs financing from Congress, and his campaign promise to build a wall between the U.S. and Mexico.

The signed order contained no mention of the possible use of state National Guard troops.

According to the draft memo, the militarization effort was to be proactive, specifically empowering Guard troops to solely carry out immigration enforcement, not as an add-on the way local law enforcement is used in the program.

Allowing Guard troops to operate inside non-border states also would go far beyond past deployments.

In addition to responding to natural or man-made disasters or for military protection of the population or critical infrastructure, state Guard forces have been used to assist with immigration-related tasks on the U.S.-Mexico border, including the construction of fences.

In the mid-2000s, President George W. Bush twice deployed Guard troops on the border to focus on non-law enforcement duties to help augment the Border Patrol as it bolstered its ranks. And in 2010, then-Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer announced a border security plan that included Guard reconnaissance, aerial patrolling and military exercises.

In July 2014, then-Texas Gov. Rick Perry ordered 1,000 National Guard troops to the border when the surge of migrant children fleeing violence in Central America overwhelmed U.S. officials responsible for their care. The Guard troops' stated role on the border at the time was to provide extra sets of eyes but not make arrests.

Bush initiated the federal 287(g) program named for a section of a 1996 immigration law to allow specially trained local law enforcement officials to participate in immigration enforcement on the streets and check whether people held in local jails were in the country illegally. ICE trained and certified roughly 1,600 officers to carry out those checks from 2006 to 2015.

The memo describes the program as a "highly successful force multiplier" that identified more than 402,000 "removable aliens."

But federal watchdogs were critical of how DHS ran the program, saying it was poorly supervised and provided insufficient training to officers, including on civil rights law. Obama phased out all the arrest power agreements in 2013 to instead focus on deporting recent border crossers and immigrants in the country illegally who posed a safety or national security threat.

Trump's immigration strategy emerges as detentions at the nation's southern border are down significantly from levels seen in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Last year, the arrest tally was the fifth-lowest since 1972. Deportations of people living in the U.S. illegally also increased under the Obama administration, though Republicans criticized Obama for setting prosecution guidelines that spared some groups from the threat of deportation, including those brought to the U.S. illegally as children.

Last week, ICE officers arrested more than 680 people around the country in what Kelly said were routine, targeted operations; advocates called the actions stepped-up enforcement under Trump.

See the rest here:
AP: Trump admin considered proposal that would use National Guard to round up illegal immigrants - WCVB Boston