Skip to content

The latest …

23 June 2018
5 Comments leave one →
  1. roberb7 permalink
    24 June 2018 8:35 am

    More Laura Carlsen:

  2. 24 June 2018 3:49 pm

    Well, if Rachael Maddow cries, then it must surely be a bad policy. Or maybe she’s crying at the thought of such reckless parents putting their children unnecessarily into such danger.

    Unfortunately, we don’t have a responsible media. If we did, we’d get both sides of the story, sides that indicate that there is really no good solution to these familial law-breakers. Either we incarcerate the lot of them together, jailing children for the sins of their parents. Which was ruled unconstitutional by the 9th circuit and led (under the Bush II admin) to the policy of family separation. Or we carry out the current policy of separating kids from law-breaking parents, leaving the parents in jail, while the kids are in temporary holding facilities. And those facilities are doubtless WAY WAY WAY better than the hovels they used to live in in Central America.

    The other alternative, letting anyone accompanied by kids freely into the USA would be a mockery of law enforcement. It would also surely incentivize child trafficking whereby children were hauled against their wills into the USA as a free pass into the country.

    Unfortunately, we do not have either an adult nor truthful press. So instead of the kind of analysis I just presente, we have Rachael Maddow and her cohorts crying and moaning about how bad the policy is without presenting so much as a shred of an alternative.

    Rich, you know as well as I do, that most of those Central Americans would be far better off just staying in Mexico than attempting to cross into the USA. You know that they’d be able to fit in, get jobs, and easily live under the radar, certainly more easily than in the USA.

    Why do you suppose there’s so little attention on that?


    Kim G
    Redding, CA
    Where the lack of an honest discussion disturbs us more than anything.

    • CYNTHIA permalink
      27 June 2018 7:00 pm

      The assumptions here are mind-blowing. This expert might want to read United States Immigration law before making future uninformed comments. The last paragraph is laughable, as well. Kim obviously knows as little about Mexican law as she does about U.S. law.
      Cynthia in Texas

  3. 24 June 2018 4:51 pm

    Not seeing US television, I have no opinion on Rachel Maddow, though as Abby Martin pointed out, Maddow’s “crocodile tears” show a partisan bias. What is lacking in an “honest discussion” of the so-called “immigration crisis” is any acknowledgement by the United States that, as an imperial power, it has convinced itself that it is the “last, best hope of mankind” and can’t complain when the people they sought to dominate buy into the myth. Or, are simply seeking the protection of their bully.

    It has hardly been considered bad parenting to send one’s children out of a conflict zone. Lacking the support of organized relief efforts like those that sent British children to the United States during the Second World War, or Spanish children to Mexico and the Soviet Union during the Spanish Civil War, or “Operation Peter Pan” after the Cuban Revolution… and with their own (imposed) governments not willing to protect people, whether those children are so much “unescorted” by “coyotes” , as they are part of a “free market” refugee effort…. European Jews were known to pay bribes to complete strangers working illegally to get their kids out during the Nazi era as well.

    Actually, when I think about it, some of my ancestors came to the United States as unescorted minors themselves. My great-grandfather would have been 16 or 17 when he arrived in the United States on his own. Unlike most of the Central Americans, though, he didn’t have any relations here that were willing to take him in.

    WHile Mexico and its neighbors to the south share some cultural affinities (and by no means are all emigrants — or Mexicans —Spanish speakers… or Roman Catholics) whether emigrants from Central America would be “better off” in Mexico is something the emigrants would need to answer for themselves. Mexico has been at least honest in recognizing that conditions in much of the country mirror those that caused the migrants to leave their home, and for most of those seeking asylum or immigration, there already are ties to the United States. It also should be noted that Mexico, as a signatory to those 1948 and 1951 agreements, holds that people have the right to transit through a country and to travel.

    Bottom line: an “honest discussion” is not possible when people in the United States are reluctant to look at themselves, and to man up to their own past.

Leave a reply, but please stick to the topic

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: