Thread: Obama disappoints on immigration but Hispanics aren’t talk

Obama disappoints on immigration but Hispanics aren’t talking about it

600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

I’ll give you a bit of insight into my world: I get a zillion crazy emails a day from anti- and pro- illegal immigrant interest groups.

"Stop deportations NOW!!!!!!!!, blah, blah, blah," and "Local Leaders call for REFORM, blah, blah, blah," sprinkled in with, "End Illegal Invasion NOW!!!!!, blah, blah, blah" and "If you ain't mad [about illegal immigration], you ain't payin' attention! blah, blah, blah."

But I have yet to get one that screams "Obama disappoints on immigration reform!!!"

That’s OK, that’s why I have subscriptions to actual newspapers and actually read them.

After getting heat from Latinos far and wide for daring to imply that Obama has been utterly flaccid on the issue of illegal immigration – my Tweet regarding Obama’s March 18 meeting with the Hispanic Congressional Caucus pretty much said it all: "Obama's 1hr "robust and strategic" meeting w/Congressional Hispanic Caucus yielded: we’ll work on [immigration] together…" pretty much said it all – someone else has finally noticed that Obama is not the Latino population’s great savior.

This is straight from today’s New York Times unsigned editorial:

March 24, 2009 Editorial - Obama Flinches on Immigration

In a little-noticed act of political faintheartedness, the Obama administration has pulled back from nominating Thomas Saenz, a highly regarded civil-rights lawyer and counsel to the mayor of Los Angeles, to run the Justice Department’s civil rights division.

Mr. Saenz, the former top litigator in Los Angeles for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, or Maldef, was privately offered the job in January. The floating of his name led to fierce outbursts from anti-immigrant groups and blogs, which detest him for being so good at what he does.

He was a leader of the successful fight to block California’s Proposition 187, an unconstitutional effort to deny social services and schooling to illegal immigrants. He has defended Latino day laborers who were targets of misguided local crackdowns, from illegal police stings to unconstitutional anti-solicitation ordinances. An editorial in Investor’s Business Daily slimed Mr. Saenz by calling him "an open-borders extremist" and said Maldef wanted to give California back to Mexico.

None of it was true, but it was apparently too much for the White House. Mr. Saenz was ditched in favor of Maryland’s labor secretary, Thomas Perez, who has a solid record but is not as closely tied to immigrant rights.

Immigrant advocates are stuck with the sinking feeling that Mr. Obama’s supposed enthusiasm for immigration reform will wilt under pressure and heat. Representative Luis Gutiérrez of Illinois, a member of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, found it sadly unsurprising that a lawyer could be rejected for the nation’s top civil-rights job because he had stood up for civil rights. "In what other position do you find that your life experience, your educational knowledge and commitment to an issue actually hurts you?" he asked.

Mr. Obama may have avoided a nasty fight this time. But if he is ever going to win the battle to put 12 million illegal immigrants on a path to citizenship, he will to have to confront and dismantle the core restrictionist argument: that being an illegal immigrant is an unpardonable crime, one that strips away fundamental protections and forgives all manner of indecent treatment.

The Constitution’s bedrock protections do not apply to just the native-born. The suffering that illegal immigrants endure — from raids to workplace exploitation to mistreatment in detention — is a civil-rights crisis. It cannot be left to fester while we wait for the big immigration bill that may or may not arrive under this president.

Mr. Saenz would have been an ideal candidate to reaffirm values that have been lost in the poisoned immigration debate, had Mr. Obama dared to nominate him.



I’m not here to hate on the prez, rather, I’m glad that I’m not the only one who was remotely excited about this new presidency who realizes the man doesn’t actually walk on water.

Rather than blow his cover, though, all the major Latino organizations have been comedically tepid in their reaction to his stunning silence on the matter. Exhibit A: the press release that probably spurred the NYTimes’ editorial which was released last Wednesday by the National Council of La Raza.

Titled: "NCLR EXPRESSES PROFOUND DISAPPOINTMENT WITH DECISION AGAINST SAENZ" it quoted their supreme leader Janet Murguia thusly:

"I am confident that at his confirmation hearing Mr. Saenz would have been able to address any questions related to his litigation work on immigration based on the facts of the cases he argued and the law. Unfortunately he will not be given that opportunity," MurguÃ*a said. "This action may lead some to question whether the White House is ready to fulfill its promise on immigration reform."

Oooooh, I’m sure that made the Obama administration quake in their boots. You just wait until some strident activist starts whipping out their standard "If it weren’t for Latinos, Obama wouldn’t have gotten elected" line – and the White House completely ignores it. That’ll be quite the "ouch" moment, just you wait and see.

I’ve been asked time and time again when the issue of reform for this country’s miserably ineffective immigration laws will be taken up by the Obama administration and I always answer the same way – and as of today see no reason to alter my initial prediction: "Don’t hold your breath!"


http://www.600words.com/2009/03/obama-d ... ut-it.html

that being an illegal immigrant is an unpardonable crime, one that strips away fundamental protections and forgives all manner of indecent treatment.

The Constitution’s bedrock protections do not apply to just the native-born.

The Consitution does not give anyone the right to receive (steal) services which they did not earn or pay into. It does not give illegal aliens the right to burden our society with being forced to support them, nor does it give them the right to commit crimes (stolen ID anyone?).

Making a better life for themselves should not come at the cost of hurting our hardworking, honest US citizens and legal immigrants.

Let's see how many illegal aliens stay if all handouts were cut off. I know no new illegal aliens will come just to work.

If illegals are to be completely pardoned for the crimes they commit, let's just open the gates to ALL prisons and pardon Americans for a change.

Originally Posted by ReggieMay

If illegals are to be completely pardoned for the crimes they commit, let's just open the gates to ALL prisons and pardon Americans for a change.

This is one of my biggest gripes against some of our Congressional members.

They talk about how horrible it is to seperate IA's from their families yet say nothing about the seperation of US Citizens and the harm to US Citizen children when their parent commits crimes or US service members who sometimes pay the ultimate price and whose families suffer horribly.

Some of these same IA Congressional defenders voted for the Iraqi war and sanctioned dropping bombs which klled thousands of innocent Iraqi women and children.Where is their compassion for Citizens or those in war zones ? Their thinking is warpped.