BPS student in ICE custody; fellow students raising money for him

Students and teachers at the Boston Community Leadership Academy in Hyde Park have started raising funds for an 18-year-old student who is now behind bars at a Suffolk County jail as ICE attempts to boot him from the country.

The money would go towards a bond to help free him while he fights deportation and for the lawyers he'd need.

His mother sent him to the U.S. to escape violence in his home country of Guatemala. Since his arrival in the U.S., Marvin has maintained excellent attendance in school and worked very hard to improve his English skills. He has built many great relationships with his peers and teachers in school. Marvin is also an active member of his church community.

He was detained last month at work, not school, a supporter says.

Separately, an MIT janitor who has been in ICE custody since July should be released Friday as he appeals his deportation order.

Ad:

Neighborhoods: 

Free tagging: 

Comments

We can't take them all

There are many countries that are poor and dangerous. In itself coming from such a country is not a reason to be allowed to immigrate to the USA.

up
Voting is closed. 75

Papers please

By on

Prove that your ancestors came here legally or STFU.

up
Voting is closed. 101

open borders?!

So all of our national borders are totally obsolete and we should just open up immigration to everyone? Would this actually work, even in theory?

up
Voting is closed. 45

Nations are obsolete

By on

So yes, we should eliminate a lot more than just the borders. The only border patrol we need is on the solar system's rim.

up
Voting is closed. 29

Because...

By on

...I'm not xenophobic or jingoistic like Republicans are [towards other humans].
I'm more worried about our long term future vs. some [yet to be contacted - despite the latest UFO woo woo] sentient, insectoid, hive mind than being worried about Guatemalans or Somalis who mostly just want economic and physical security.

up
Voting is closed. 32

Are you still working?

By on

You probably wouldn't say that if you were a retail clerk or a restaurant worker making $13 an hour and a flood of immigrants willing and competent enough to take your job for $10 an hour came rushing across the border.

To say nothing of the health care, public safety, education costs and more.

You are usually much more thoughtful than that.

up
Voting is closed. 29

Deus Ex Machina

By on

My job is far more at risk of replacement by AI than another human - even in this age of still-primitive AI. Or some of what I do could be performed in say India today. But we can all assure job security for the future regardless of what country we are in or are from by some simple measures:
Free or nearly free education [college or on the job apprenticeship programs]
Strong government regulations for minimum wages and standards of living
Weak government regulations for relocation and work visas

Regardless of the political or regulatory climate there will always be regions where economic opportunities are better than other regions. If not countries then cities vs. rural areas, North vs. South, temperate climates vs. hot climates, etc. etc. You need to allow people to move freely between regions as those opportunities flux and let people freely pursue those opportunities. Years from now we could all be trying to get into Canada or Denmark, or even places like Kenya or Nigeria, just like people are trying to come to the US now. Or to some orbital with better jobs than in any terrestrial location.

up
Voting is closed. 31

And how exactly

By on

do you propose to enforce a minimum wage law while at the same time having open borders and no immigration enforcement? Everybody and their mother will be working under the table for next to nothing because no one will be able to hire anyone at the legal rate if just a small fraction of their competitors can reduce their costs with creative labor practices.

Don't believe me? Try getting a job as a landscaper or housekeeper or short-order-cook. How the hell do you think any of these business stay open in the face of artificially high wage floors?

up
Voting is closed. 15

One little thing

By on

If anyone could come to the US to work legally, the market for exploited labor would go down, since anyone could sue their employer for underpaying them.

Not that I’m for unlimited immigration or against deporting people who aren’t here legally, but in theory open borders would mean less incentive to pay below what is legally required. Less motivation to pay people much if anything above minimum wage, but that’s why I support the immigration system we have.

up
Voting is closed. 19

It would stand up

By on

Since everyone would have legal standing.

The problem would be the billions that would be unemployed and their effect on the safety net.

up
Voting is closed. 16

You know

By on

You might hav a point there.

I guess it’s a good thing we limit intake to a million people a year than just make the limit how many people can get into the country.

up
Voting is closed. 12

since anyone could sue their

By on

since anyone could sue their employer for underpaying them.

That's the law in Massachusetts: undocumented immigration status is considered to be protected under wage and working condition labor protections.

It's how Upper Crust got shut down, the undocumented immigrants who were getting shafted by the company sued them and won. They did, however, opt to do so after repatriating to Brazil.

up
Voting is closed. 12

Sure

By on

And their employer could suddenly “discover” that their employees are not in the country legally and report them to ICE.

up
Voting is closed. 14

The Ultimate Protection

By on

Make the US a far worse shithole than it is now and POOF - no immigrants!

up
Voting is closed. 15

Immigrants put far more into

By on

Immigrants put far more into this country than they take. Also, blame corporations not the people that are willing to work even when they are being taken advantage of. The myth that they steal our jobs is so tired and overused.

What white folk will work for 12+ hours a day for peanuts usually doing the "worst" jobs? We have fruit and veg rotting bc no one is there to pick them. I don't see many white folk at 5am waiting in parking lots just to try and get a day labor job. Where are all of these amazing Americans that are so scared of brown ppl taking their jobs? Why aren't they lining up?

up
Voting is closed. 20

I see...

By on

So somewhere out there there might be aliens...thus the accomplishments of human civilization in bringing order to Hobbesian chaos don't matter...but from an enlightened, scientific perspective, aliens are woo woo...therefor: Republicans are bad and we should have open borders.

Tell me honestly, does that make sense to even you? Also, where did you learn the logical concept of 'therefor' exactly?

up
Voting is closed. 12

Don't talk about logic

By on

You just made a false choice argument. You don't get to act like you're adept at logic at all.

up
Voting is closed. 19

Even when the logic is correct

By on

... results are completely bogus if the input information being "logicked" on is fake, false, or a subject to false interpretation.

up
Voting is closed. 16

It's funny how survival of

By on

It's funny how survival of the fittest republicans are until it comes to brown people taking white jobs.

up
Voting is closed. 10

It's funny how racism is

By on

the go-to talking point to explain away anything a Republican says or does.

Tax cuts? Racist. Tax hikes? Racist. Free trade? Racist. Tighter borders? Racist. Censorship? Racist. Free speech? Racist.

up
Voting is closed. 16

It's not funny at all

By on

It's downright depressing that it's 2017 and we still have to talk about this shit

up
Voting is closed. 23

Stop doing racist shit and

By on

Stop doing racist shit and people will stop saying the shit you do is racist.

And if minorities vote against you en masse, there's a pretty good sign you do lots of racist shit.

up
Voting is closed. 12

That's a racist stereotype

By on

Not all Martians are green. Some are red. Some are jet-black but wear red flight suits and green helmets.

up
Voting is closed. 20

Meanwhile

By on

Labor is restricted from movement while capital crosses boundaries with wild abandon.

up
Voting is closed. 14

Used to be that way

By on

Until we went to the quota immigration system. Just hop on a boat and pass a health/basic test and in you go. Well, almost - as long as you weren't Asian/Chinese as we had an exclusion act for them (thanks for the railroad, though).

up
Voting is closed. 25

Not quite. My grandparents

By on

Not quite. My grandparents had to have a place to live, work and a sponsor. And - they weren't given any benefits! Not a single penny.

All the requirements had to be proved before being allowed to enter.

My family did do it the legal way.

up
Voting is closed. 16

OK

By on

My grandparents all hoped in a boot and didn't have TB when they got here. BTW, immigrants still can't get "benefits".

up
Voting is closed. 17

You must be old, then

By on

The federal government began requiring immigrants to have sponsors who would vouch for the people and ensure they wouldn’t become wards of the state starting in 1891. Quotas didn’t come into play until the 1920s.

This move created a market for brokers, especially in Italy. Companies sprang up to handle this legal change. If you’ve looked up your grandparents’ immigration records, check out all of the columns. There is one for their contact in the US. That person was responsible for the new arrival.

up
Voting is closed. 15

Patricia

By on

The legal way back then compared to now is apples to oranges, to put it kindly. So don't compare the two like they're the same thing. It's a tired, disingenuous argument and it looks bad on you.

up
Voting is closed. 20

But it wasn’t Patricia who

By on

But it wasn’t Patricia who brought up the ancestors topic. She was replying to someone else who did.

up
Voting is closed. 10

When we were a developing

By on

When we were a developing nation in the 19th century, that's true; that ended by the 1920s and immigration slowed to a crawl until the 1965 'reform' act. Historians generally agree this breathing period allowed immigrants here to assimilate. Since deindustrialization, globalization and neoliberal economics (think neocon, not liberal as most people associate that word), the flood gates have been opened. Business interests like the tight labor markets and cheap labor, other industries love the flood of 'entitlement' money which is spent on housing, retail, etc. The financial services and legal indusry love the regular increases in the number of people banking, taking out loans, going into debt, and finally, the 'progressives' and Democratic Party love the increases in needy people.

We are committing a form of suicide by 'open borders' and unregulated immigration.

up
Voting is closed. 20

I'm sorry, but that's bullshit

By on

The Irish didn't assimilate faster because people from China could mostly no longer immigrate here.

There was no "breather." There was a rather blatant attempt by the racists in charge then to block non-Christians and non-whites from "flooding" the country and so they changed immigration laws to make it harder for them to get in.

The change in immigration law then gave 70% of the available slots to residents of just three countries - the UK, Germany and Ireland. Two of those three arguably didn't have all that many citizens at that point clamoring for US residency. Ireland was included because, after decades of being treated like dirt, Irish-Americans had learned the power of the ballot box and were in positions of power here.

If you're going to argue for tightening immigration laws, you can at least try to do so without making crap up.

up
Voting is closed. 20

Blah blah blah

By on

Countries get to choose whom they let in. "Racism" (as defined by liberals to be anything they don't like) is as valid a motivation as any.

up
Voting is closed. 12

Explain how

By on

Are you trying to call me a hypocrite for not being for open borders because I crossed a border myself? How does that follow, exactly?

Please enlighten us all about this new mathematical proof you've discovered that says if someone is a legal immigrant they must be in favor of legalizing all illegal immigrants. You owe it to everyone to make sure it gets out. Surely once your argument is publicized, all opposition to immigration enforcement will melt away with the new light of truth you've brought into the world.

Now *that's* sarcasm.

up
Voting is closed. 11

Uh,

By on

To start I never said we needed completely open or no borders, nor immigration enforcement. So let's start there. Quote me saying that that's what I proposed, anywhere, ever. Here's a hint: you can't, because I never said that.

Everything else is just you ramming words onto me. Pure projection.

Now *that's* pure logical fallacy. Or, I'll reiterate, "blah, blah, blah."

up
Voting is closed. 15

Nope

By on

Not the same thing.

You are like a 4 year old with a mack truck - big words, don't know how to use them.

up
Voting is closed. 14

Of course they came here legally!

By on

Of course, when they came here, "legally" meant "show up at Ellis Island without TB or anarchist leanings*", but then the Chinese and Mexicans wanted to start coming here and suddenly this
vast vast country didn't have room anymore.

*or, if you predated my family by a few decades, "show up and kill/remove all the natives living there already"

up
Voting is closed. 39

And if you fast forward a century or two

By on

1. Go to the US embassy,
2. Apply for permission to immigrate
3. Wait to receive said permission
4. Hop on a plane to JFK
5. Reside in US for five years as an LPR with no criminal record
6. Apply for citizenship
7. Be interviewed, take exam
8. Receive citizenship

Different, yes, but the key part was step 3.

up
Voting is closed. 42

OK

By on

I liked the old way better

up
Voting is closed. 17

Step 3?

By on

Most likely going to be denied or wait for years/decades - making it completely different.

up
Voting is closed. 24

So what?

By on

I'm most likely going to be denied entry to your nice house in a low-crime good school district if I come knocking because I don't like my high crime inner city neighborhood and want me and my family to sleep somewhere else.

How would you feel if I set up a tent in your back yard and told you with a straight face I had a right to do it?

But more to the point, you're wrong.

As I recall, we had to wait about 8 or 9 months back in the early 90's. Foreign graduate students who get work here after graduation have H1-B visas earmarked for them (at least in theory--the whole lottery is a scam and ought to be replaced by an auction) and know pretty early whether they can stay. Same story for anyone else who comes in for work or school--you're either in or out, you're not in limbo for ages the way you imply.

Furthermore, right now we let in something like 1 million a year legally. If your metric for "being denied" is that 1 million out of 6.7 billion is a small number, then sure, you are mathematically correct. Congratulations. You've won the word game in which you defined the meanings of the words beforehand.

up
Voting is closed. 21

Lots of false equivalency there

By on

Not going to bother touching them. H1-Bs are also bullshit and don't allow adjustment to a permanent resident or anything else. Great talking points, though.

up
Voting is closed. 17

You forgot a few steps

1a: Make a long journey to the city where the U.S. embassy is located, because there isn't one anywhere near where you live. Lose a day of work doing so.

1b: When you get there, get told, "sorry, no more appointment slots today. No you cannot make an appointment in advance."

1c: Repeat 1a and 1b a few times, missing another day of work each time.

1d: Finally get an appointment. Get told by the clerk that one of your documents is missing a stamp. Ask, "Can you check the rest of my documents while I"m here, so that I know that's the only thing I need to correct?" Answer, "No. We won't look at documents 2, 3, 4, and 5 until document 1 is correct."

1e: Go home. Get document #1 fixed according to what the clerk has asked for.

1f: Repeat 1a and 1b several times, missing a day of work each time.

1g: Finally get your 2nd appointment. Clerk 2 looks at your documents, says, "Clerk 1 told you wrong. You need a green stamp, not a red one."

1h: Go home. Get the green stamp.

1i: Repeat 1a and 1b a few times, missing a day of work each time.

1j: Finally get your appointment. Clerk approves documents 1, 2, and 3, but says document 4 is missing a signature. Ask, "Can you also check Document 5 while I'm here?" Answer: "no."

1k Go home. Get the signature.

1l Repeat 1a and 1b a few times, missing a day of work each time.

1m Finally get your apointment. Clerk approves your application. At this point you've spent 6 months, missed a dozen days of work, and spent half a year's savings on train fare to and from the U.S. embassy. Clerk tells you it'll be a 3 year wait.

1n: Due to economic conditions, you move. Your village is pretty much abandoned.

1o: After 2 years, you visit the embassy (repeating steps 1a and 1b a few times, losing a day of work each time) to inquire as to your case. You get told that because you no longer live at the address from which you applied, and because mail sent to you was returned undelivered, you need to start over again.

up
Voting is closed. 25

That's a lovely story

By on

Do you have any evidence that it has actually happened to anyone?

More to the point: how do you explain all the people of all stripes and colors and nations to whom it has not happened?

Even more to the point: So What? Immigration to America is not a right.

up
Voting is closed. 22

It happens all the time

By on

Your parents probably went through a bit of that, too, until advocates took them on as refugees.

up
Voting is closed. 19

It's the rule of law thing

Even more to the point: So What? Immigration to America is not a right.

I'd like the barriers to immigration (and yes, I think there should be significant barriers to immigration) to be set by law. I think we should assess people who want to join our team by how likely they are to make a positive impact).

By law. Not arbitrary barriers put in place by low-level clerks at our immigration offices who think they're somehow keeping bad people out by making the experience unpleasant. Stupid shit like "no, there's no 'take a number' machine like even the deli counter or the post office has; you physically wait in line, in the rain, and if you leave to go to the bathroom you lose your place."

up
Voting is closed. 17

Agreed, but

By on

here's a question:

A law that says "show up to the embassy in person" is such a law, but going by your parable you seem to be of the opinion that it's dancing on the edge of "disparate impact" as the libs like to say.

Would you have us place our consulates in every city and village so that anyone can come apply on their lunch break? That's not practical, and that's not the norm internationally. For a quick example, when I applied for a visa to China a few years back, I had to either show up in person to the Chinese consulate in New York twice (once to apply, once to pick up), at the cost of train tickets and two working days, or pay a private company to do the legwork on my behalf.

up
Voting is closed. 13

Emotional responses

I'd like to let everybody in but it doesn't work.

When I get an emotional stfu response, I know there are millions or billions of dollars separating whatever I said from the respondent's agenda.

What I said was true, we can't let them all in. You can probably batter me down or liquidate me but it's still true.

up
Voting is closed. 31

Why not?

By on

Why can't we let them all in.

We seem to have no problem with money fleeing over the borders.

up
Voting is closed. 17

Let them all in

By on

"Let them all in" is not the battleground on which the debate is being conducted despite pubic opinion-- 77% of Americans favor renewing DACA and giving undocumented immigrants a conditional path to citizenship, 66% of Republicans favor that too.

The far right which includes Heritage and AG Jeff Sessions oppose that and want current immigration rates cut in half or more.

up
Voting is closed. 8

Off topic

DACA is not about letting everyone in. It is about a specific group of people that arrived here as children. And if you want to be ruthlessly self interested about then you want the DACA population. They are young healthy and have at least a high school education. These are the new citizens we need to fuel economic growth for the next millennium.

up
Voting is closed. 9

I can! And, who the hell are

By on

I can! And, who the hell are you to tell anyone to stfu?

up
Voting is closed. 12

Things were different over a

By on

Things were different over a hundred years ago. Times have change and we have to change with time. Come on you know that.

up
Voting is closed. 9

People come under the rules

By on

People come under the rules allowed and those sometimes change. You are not being realistic at all.

up
Voting is closed. 7

Gosh, you're right

I guess we can't have several billion people immigrate here.

Oh wait, that's not whats happening at all but hey good luck with all your 'economic insecurity', Pepe.

up
Voting is closed. 36

Ribbit ribbit

By on

Since we like to believe we're a country of laws and not men, we need to have laws that apply equally to everyone at all times. Our immigration laws are no different.

If you agree that we can't have several billion people trying to come here, we shouldn't have policies that would allow it. A policy of not having border controls would allow such a thing, and as proof that that statement is not wild hyperbole, I present the 12 million or so illegal immigrants who came to reside in this country under the assumption that our border controls would not be enforced against them.

If we then decide that we must have border controls, we must enforce them equally and uniformly. Which means that, yes, as fine and upstanding a member of his adopted community as this fellow is, if he's not eligible to stay under existing law, he's got to go. It isn't personal, and it isn't mean-spirited. If we want to have laws, we need to enforce all of them, or repeal the ones we don't believe reflect our values and/or serve our interests.

And by "law" and "repeal," I do mean "law" and "repeal." Being a country of laws and not men, we can't have presidents declaring that they will not enforce laws because reasons, the way Obama did with DACA.

up
Voting is closed. 34

I am with you 100%

However, it seems that asking for laws that mean what they say and say what they mean is too much for this country to handle right now. Instead, we pass laws against things that are 99.999% unenforceable and then just hope that when we throw the book at the 0.0001% that we do catch that it'll be sufficient deterrent.

The impending arrival of self-driving cars and other automation into daily life means that the era of gray area wiggle room laws will draw to a close; the roads will need actual meaningful, consistently enforced rules and so will other areas of life.

up
Voting is closed. 20

Let's Start With Enforcing The Emoluments Clause

By on

When those at the very top flout the law, how can you expect ordinary Americans to support cruel and strict law enforcement upon people who are less fortunate?

Breaking up families by deporting good people to places where they're likely to be killed is not the American way. It is evil. It builds resentment towards our United States government around the world, and also among our own citizens.

Such cruelty, if unchecked, will ultimately destroy our nation.

up
Voting is closed. 43

By all means, let's

By on

Let's also enforce executive orders on handling classified information, federal data retention and conflict-of-interest laws for politicians of all stripes.

up
Voting is closed. 28

BUT HER EMAILS!!!

By on

i knew you'd get around to it quick enough, dog-whistler. You're so tired, go lie down.

up
Voting is closed. 30

Email is a dog whistle?

By on

Let me guess...racist? No, scratch that--too easy.

Sexist? Can't be. Don Junior's emails were in the news too, and he's a dude.

Um....let's see email...dog whistle...email...dog whistle.

I've got it! It's a literal dog-whistle! Every time you send an email, Fido hears a high-pitched noise!

Edit: can't believe I missed it: And Fido is a racist dog that barks at black people slightly more often than he barks at white people. Latinos are somewhere in between. East Asians and South Asians? It's a toss-up. Gingers? Up to 11!

up
Voting is closed. 20

why don't you trade places with them, then

By on

I suggest you volunteer to trade places with people who just happened to be born in a "poor and violent" country, or to parents from such country.

I don't understand why people who just happened to be born in "rich and peaceful" countries feel ok about denying anyone else the chance to live that way.

Just luck of the draw and f* anyone who isn't lucky like you?

up
Voting is closed. 34

Yes. Precisely.

By on

It is naive to believe you can fix all that is wrong in the world. There will always be places that are worse-off. Hell, there are parts of Boston that are poor and violent. Fifty years of War on Poverty and hundreds of billions of federal dollars have not fixed it.

It is equally naive to believe that a policy of letting in anyone who wants to come in is sustainable or moral.

It isn't moral because there's no limiting principle in there. If you give money to Beggar A but not Beggar B, you're being capricious and arbitrary, and there's no morality in that. Letting in only the people who make it to the door leaves out a whole class of people who aren't capable of getting to the door at all. If there is a moral imperative to let in the ones who do because of where they come from, there is also a moral imperative to come and get the ones who can't. Either way it turns into military intervention or colonialism when taken to it's extreme. And if there's no limit, it will go to the extreme. We've done military interventions in Haiti and Panama and Libya, so it's not wild exaggeration.

It isn't sustainable because we can only assimilate so many people at a time. And if we let in everyone, well, then we'll be outnumbered and risk bringing in all the conditions that make life hell over there over here. This is what an ethnic ghetto can become. And it's not wild exaggeration either. It's happened, and good public policy will not encourage it to happen again by setting up circumstances that can invite it.

So in short: the greater good of keeping civilization here outweighs the anecdotal good of helping individual people escape the conditions of their birth there. You can't be governed by your emotions on this. You just can't.

up
Voting is closed. 37

A Refute

By on

Paragraph 1: Yes, you are correct. The poor will always be among us. However, there are many factors as to the why. In regards to your last statement regarding the "War on Poverty", two of the programs from that period, Medicaid and Medicare continue to help many people including children, elders and the disabled. I would hardly say that those two programs are failures.

Paragraph 2-3: I will counter that, in regards to moral imperatives, that if anyone is seeking to enter our country, we should allow them to join us, especially if they are fleeing places where we had a direct hand (i.e. our government) in creating the conditions they are fleeing (I'll start with El Salvador and Iraq but you can do your own research). Your argument to "get those you can't" is strange and really does not lessen my first point. Nor should it. And linking good immigration policies with military interventions and colonialism is also strange.

Paragraph 4: This is 2017. We have been assimilating people since the 17th century. We currently have over 22 million non citizens in this country, most of whom are productive members of our society. If the country is going to hell, it will be due to the GOP tax scam that will be voted into law not for the strange reasons you cite.

So in short, my friend: The greater good is helping those that seek solace. You can cut it every which way to Sunday with strange logic but the fact remains:

With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

up
Voting is closed. 35

You missed something

By on

Paragraph 0: Roman himself is an immigrant.

up
Voting is closed. 21

A reply

By on

Medicaid and Medicare continue to help many people including children, elders and the disabled. I would hardly say that those two programs are failures.

They may not be failures, per se, but I don't see how they have anything to do with reducing violence in poor neighborhoods. I'd go so far as to say that provision of healthcare is completely orthogonal to the reasons why poor and violent neighborhoods are poor and violent.

I was more specifically talking about federal housing dollars, and direct cash assistance programs for young and able-bodied people which have not made a dent in the problem, because they're bandaids that cost a lot but do nothing about the underlying disease.

I will counter that, in regards to moral imperatives, that if anyone is seeking to enter our country, we should allow them to join us, especially if they are fleeing places where we had a direct hand (i.e. our government) in creating the conditions they are fleeing (I'll start with El Salvador and Iraq but you can do your own research).

I'll agree with you part-way. We invaded Iraq. We hired locals. We put targets on their backs, and we owe them. But there's a spectrum of responsibility and where you put the cutoff is a value judgment.

That's where my point about getting at those who can't make it on their own and about colonialism comes from. If you decide that anyone who shows up from all the countries on the map you've decided we're responsible for is worthy, my point is that it's an arbitrary cutoff. The ones who can't make it are also in need, and if you decide that they're in need because of something we did to them, then we owe it to them to fly in and get them out or to make amends for what you believe we did to them.

This is 2017. We have been assimilating people since the 17th century. We currently have over 22 million non citizens in this country, most of whom are productive members of our society. If the country is going to hell, it will be due to the GOP tax scam that will be voted into law not for the strange reasons you cite.

We have, and we'd best remember that that's not something that falls from the sky. We've managed to pull that off because we've maintained the conditions necessary for it. Best to not upset that applecart. Human history has layed that golden egg only a few times. Make an omelet out of it now and you don't know how many centuries it'll take for it to happen again.

That "tax scam" is good policy on the whole. But I could see how you'd believe otherwise if you read the NYT on a Monday to learn how it's a giveaway to the rich and the WaPo on a Tuesday to learn how rich blue-staters would end up paying more taxes under this giveaway to the rich.

up
Voting is closed. 18

Nobody feels that way

By on

But there are laws and reality of constrained resources.

We let in several million immigrants a year LEGALLY.

don't like the rules, run for office and change them.

Good luck.

up
Voting is closed. 17

ABSOLUTELY. We're full!

By on

ABSOLUTELY. We're full! Turn them away! An especially salient point right now, the season all about the justifiable turning away of poor refugees (one of whom was pregnant). Maybe in the spirit of Christmas we can let these people hang out in barns while awaiting deportation. Right on.

up
Voting is closed. 23

Yah

By on

You're full of it alright. How is a nation this large "full" compared to India? China?

up
Voting is closed. 14

Poe's law is an adage of

By on

Poe's law is an adage of Internet culture stating that, without a clear indicator of the author's intent, it is impossible to create a parody of extreme views so obviously exaggerated that it cannot be mistaken by some readers or viewers as a sincere expression of the parodied views.

up
Voting is closed. 12

And what if it didn't

By on

People who are born, grow up, and live their entire lives in wealthy civilized countries would do well to remember that the it's not like that everywhere else. Past and recent history has shown that people the world over are plenty good at making messes for themselves without our assistance.

Maybe you can pin Iraq and Libya on us, but you can't pin Egypt or Syria or Somalia on anything the US did. Closer to home, maybe you can pin Nicaragua on us, but you can't pin all of it on us.

up
Voting is closed. 16

Hmm,

By on

does not refute my first point, Roman. You are trying to beat me around my own bush. My point being, and it is an important point, our government has had hands in creating messes in other countries. And we are not speaking about other countries messes of their own creations (although I do agree with you). The original post that I was answering was about whom our own country should "let in".

up
Voting is closed. 21

But it did, Blanche

By on

You may be ignorant of history, but anything in Central America is right down to the good ol' USA whether Pepe tells you so or not.

up
Voting is closed. 24

You need to study history a

By on

You need to study history a little more. All of those conflicts (Egypt or Syria or Somalia) can be traced back to western influence. Maybe not US, but definitely western Europe with the support of the U.S.

up
Voting is closed. 20

Ever read the bible?

By on

They've been fighting for many millennia, long before even the Romans showed up.

up
Voting is closed. 15

How Naive

By on

No. We gave them loans to fight each other while we took all their oil.

up
Voting is closed. 14

Loans?

By on

Outside of Venezuela, you are kidding I hope. Otherwise you are just ignorant.

up
Voting is closed. 15

Absurd false argument

By on

They've been fighting for many millennia, long before even the Romans showed up.

So, no modern nation has any responsibility whatsoever? Bullshit. We love to wave our hands, say "Oh they've been fighting each other forever" and absolve ourselves of any responsibility, but it's simply bullshit put forth by people whose understanding of the regions they're writing off (if they have any at all) is at an elementary level and completely leaves out the last two or three centuries.

If you want some good reading on the subject, take a look at "The Fighting Never Stopped" by Patrick Brogan. The latest edition is from 1990, but it still covers the most relevant years of history in the formation of modern conflicts. It also offers some predictors of future conflicts that have proven to be unfortunately quite accurate. And, it didn't even factor in climate change and global economic disruption.

up
Voting is closed. 15

Many counter are dangerous

By on

I agree. And also agree that we can’t take everyone in. However I’m pretty sure Guatemala has one of if not the highest murder rates in the W. hemisphere.

America is big enough to let in those from the worst of the worst. We always have been.

And undoubtably so for kids that have proven themselves as good citizens while here.

For fuck’s sake what do we stand for if not for principles?

Full disclosure: I’m pretty damn liberal but am willing to compromise. Can we tighten up border security and go after criminals and also make some room for good kids?

up
Voting is closed. 17

Another broken promise

By on

Trump was gonna target felons for deportation. In fact, his ICE thugs seem to be picking up an awful lot of harmless people who just want to get by. It's a lot easier to harass and detain people who are trying to hold down a job and live their lives, I guess.

up
Voting is closed. 16

This is terrible

By on

Oh my god this is heartbreaking. How dare ICE / the government go after students and people with no record. They are such racist pieces of sh**.

up
Voting is closed. 20

So he was caught at work, and

By on

So he was caught at work, and presumably has no work authorization.

Did he happen to get caught in a roundup, or was he targeted by ICE for a different reason?

up
Voting is closed. 14

How does a person entering

By on

How does a person entering the country illegally to escape his /her conditions differ from a person committing a crime, for example a non violent theft, to improve his/her conditions.
Both are illegal, the goal of the individual is the same, to escape their current conditions, yet they are treated very differently. In the first instance the person becomes a sympathetic victim of a cruel government in the second, a common criminal.
Either the laws mean something or they don't. If they don't it is anarchy.
Both parties have had the opportunity to address the immigration issue neither has done so. Thus we are left with decisions about if and how the law is enforced to the President, which many argue is an unconstitutional usurpation of the Legislative branch.
Additionally, these Executive actions only serve to further confuse the issue because they are frequently the subject of protracted lawsuits. You need only look at the suits filed by states when President Obama expanded DACA and those filed when President Trump reversed that policy.
The legislature has a responsibility to produce laws. They have not done their job. When the Democrats held the majority they did what they wanted and characterized the Republicans as obstructionists, now that the Republicans are in the majority the Democrats are the obstructionists. It is long past time for both sides to figure out how to work together

up
Voting is closed. 12

Well...

By on

How does a person entering the country illegally to escape his /her conditions differ from a person committing a crime, for example a non violent theft, to improve his/her conditions.

One is a civil violation, the other is not. I'm sure you can google and find out more if you actually do want to know.

The legislature has a responsibility to produce laws. They have not done their job. When the Democrats held the majority they did what they wanted and characterized the Republicans as obstructionists

No, in fact, they didn't do what they wanted because the Republicans were obstructionist.

up
Voting is closed. 14

When we have individuals with

By on

When we have individuals with known gang affiliations (MS-13) in the area, isn't there better places to spend ICE resources? It's not even that far of a drive.

up
Voting is closed. 20

Love to see how much the Trumpies

love this racist red meat thrown at them by Putin's puppet.

If there's one thing that scumbag didn't lie about was his promise to let those overpaid campus cops off their leashes to become the brown shirts he threatened us all with on the trail.

up
Voting is closed. 25

The gofundme page

By on

The gofundme page (understandably) doesn't include any unfavorable information about the kid. He might have gotten mixed up with the wrong crowd, which caused ICE to pick him up for having a gang affiliation.

That's pure speculation, I know, but it's soon to judge either innocence or guilty, beyond the fact that he's residing/working here without authorization.

up
Voting is closed. 17

Why is that such a wild assumption?

Just because you said so?

You do realize that MS-13 regularly forces (under penalty of death) high school age, particularly illegal, "good" kids to join, right?

There's no information that says it happened in this case, but it happens everywhere there's MS-13 and 18th Street gang. My suggestion would be to work with these kids in the community and hear their horror stories. Then, maybe you wouldn't equate their very common (and terrifying) situation with the smell of your farts.

up
Voting is closed. 24

Wild ass umption

By on

Because there is absolutely no evidence of that. The kid was both working and doing well in school - when would he have time? Also, undocumented people keep their heads down, dear.

Do you gangbang in your spare time and not want competition? Is that why you bring it up? I don't see any proof that you aren't involved in organized crime. It isn't an unreasonable assumption that someone of your age, ethnicity and gender would be.

See what I did there?

up
Voting is closed. 15

Because, dear, it's widely

By on

Because, dear, it's widely known that ICE gives extra focus to unauthorized immigrants in certain circles. A person facing deportation today has an elevated probability of being connected to illegal activity, compared to a peer not facing deportation.

Nothing is certain except that he is unauthorized. We don't know if he's avoided trouble, or if he's fallen into trouble. We do know that his advocates have not made a claim that he's upstanding / never been in trouble before. Instead they said he has good attendance.

Also, please stop making the assumption that a hypothesis != an assumption.

up
Voting is closed. 16

Did you read the comment, dear?

I literally said that "there's no information it happened in this case". I'm stating a fact that forced involvement happens frequently. If you want to keep you're head in the sand and not believe it, that's fine.

Also, I realize undocumented people keep their heads down - that's why they're easier to recruit, you smug shithead.

up
Voting is closed. 14

they are easier to recruit?

By on

WRONG!

Honey, undocumented people have LOWER rates of criminality.

Care to share some actual facts? Like, is your organized crime ring finding them easier to recruit darling? Even the freaking Cato Institute has that much figured out, child.

Meanwhile, ICE priorities seem to trend toward arresting children who need surgery. SUCH TOUGH GUYS!

up
Voting is closed. 13

Your reading comprehension sucks

I'm not arguing the fact that crimes rates are lower among undocumented immigrants, or that this kid was even a criminal. My argument is that gangs forcefully recruit those who wouldn't normally be in gangs. Why is it so hard for you to understand this?

And, yes, undocumented kids are easier to recruit BECAUSE THEY CAN'T GO TO THE POLICE!

Jesus, get your head out of your ass and try to understand what I'm saying, honey.

up
Voting is closed. 11

Lurid Paranoid Fantasies

By on

They are not evidence.

MS-13 is extremely limited. Your belief that gangs are everywhere all the time and every latin teen is involved is both racist and floridly imaginative.

I'm sincerely doubting that you are working with any kids. Not with the record you have to have as a male of a certain age ...

See?

up
Voting is closed. 18

Wut?

they are not evidence.

I never claimed it was evidence, just not a crazy assumption

MS-13 is extremely limited..

So are all gangs. That doesn't change the fact that gangs force kids to join in the neighborhoods they operate, it's another way to prey on the community. Many kids who are forced to join don't even actively participate in gang activity. They're used in certain situations - taking the fall for another member, drug running, etc.

Your belief that gangs are everywhere all the time and every latin teen is involved is both racist and floridly imaginative..

Where did I say this? Stop looking for racism everywhere.

up
Voting is closed. 13

And you might be a Russian troll bot

He might have gotten mixed up with the wrong crowd, which caused ICE to pick him up for having a gang affiliation.

That's pure speculation, I know, but it's soon to judge either innocence or guilty

And you might be a Russian troll bot. After all, we know they played a large part in influencing our elections and continue to post on social media to make it seem like more people support a certain agenda than actually do.

That's pure speculation, I know, but it's too soon to judge whether you're a Russian troll bot or not.

Nice variation of the old Fox News "Some people say" tactic.

up
Voting is closed. 16

Do you agree then that it's

By on

Do you agree then that it's also Foxnewish to assume/argue at this point that that the kid is completely innocent and is entitled to remain here without authorization?

up
Voting is closed. 10

Civil violations

By on

Aren't a matter of innocent or guilty. That's reserved for criminal cases.

up
Voting is closed. 10

Not sure about this

For instance should we only let smart people in? we admitted the Tsarnaev family and recognized their identity and culture. The result was they hated America. I don't trust those putting forward sentimental arguments to think through what they are saying. Perhaps if the undocumented were doing the jobs of teachers, lawyers, government employees, journalists and university professors then i would take the recommendations on what I need to think and believe more seriously.

up
Voting is closed. 18

The real question is...

By on

Was he just randomly snatched up & thrown into custody? Or did he commit a felony, hence them throwing him into custody? Because that makes a huge difference.

up
Voting is closed. 17

Not to ICE

By on

ICE is detaining a whole lot of people who are just trying to live their lives and hold down a job. Workplaces and children's schools are one of the easiest places to detain people -- also immigration offices and courthouses where undocumented people are reporting as ordered for proceedings, or even women who are applying for restraining orders against abusers. Don't be fooled -- ICE is going for the low-hanging fruit, not the "bad hombres".

up
Voting is closed. 17

Do we have any info

On this arrest from ICE?
A go fund me page is not really an information source for an arrest, nor is a Facebook posting by a friend.

up
Voting is closed. 16

ICE targeting Sanctuary Cities - only makes sense

By on

ICE has been more active targeting cities with gangs and cities not cooperating with ICE.

If local police are not reporting/holding bad hombres for ICE, its only natural that ICE steps up its activities in those cities. So, don't complain if some wheat gets included with the chaff.

up
Voting is closed. 16

Ah, another person who doesn't know what he's talking about

By on

BPD has been cooperating fully with federal officials to catch "bad hombres" - those 61 MS-13 members the feds indicted didn't all get caught by the FBI. Most of the police departments around here realize that not doing the feds' dirty work in going after people who have not committed violent or property crimes helps catch the real bad people because they're more likely to get help from people who are not afraid to talk to them.

up
Voting is closed. 10