According to a poll conducted by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life released Thursday, nearly one in five Americans believe Obama is a Muslim. There was also a strong linkage between those who wrongly believe Obama is a Muslim and those who disapprove of the job he is doing as president. Not surprisingly, the sharpest rise in those who say Obama is a Muslim is among Republicans (up 14 points) since 2009.
This issue at hand is not the fact that Republicans are making false accusations about the president but, more importantly, that they are fabricating stories about someone’s faith to win political points. What does a person’s religion have anything to do with his/her performance?
When Republicans say they disapprove of Obama because he is a Muslim, they make it shameful to be an American. But to be an American is to appreciate those that you may not necessarily agree with it or even understand. To be an American is to practice religious tolerance and promote diversity. That is why Obama has made strides to repeal Don’t Ask Don’t Tell and grant gay couples the same rights as every other American. That’s why Obama supports the First Amendment right of freedom of religion.
Neither Obama nor I are Muslim. But I ask you: so what if we were Muslim? Since when is that a bad thing? Maybe we should look back at Obama’s Cairo Speech in 2009, when he said, “as long as our relationship is defined by our differences, we will empower those who sow hatred rather than peace, those who promote conflict rather than the cooperation that can help all of our people achieve justice and prosperity."
When Republicans say a mosque near Ground Zero would “defile sacred ground”, they start to make the religion of Islam a criticism of American values. Since Muslims are every bit of Americans than those that make up the Republican Party, it does not matter whether the mosque will actually be more of a community center than a religious shrine; or that it will not physically be located on Ground Zero, but more than a few miles away from it. What matters is that those who have lost loved ones during the 9/11 attacks, including Muslims, have a right to build a place of worship near the site.
Republicans are also endangering Americans' national security by legitimizing the claims of Al Qaeda that wants Muslims around the world to believe the U.S. is at war with all of Islam, not just the extremists.
We, as a nation, have already witnessed the horrors and tragedies that accompany segregation and intolerance of those that are different from us. It seems, however, that the civil rights movement is in full swing again. When will Republicans learn from the past? When will Republicans start acting like Americans?
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Monday, August 16, 2010
United We Stand, Divided We Fall
“We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility…promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty.”
This is the America that the Constitution talks about. This is the America where everyone is free to worship what they want, when they want, and how they want. This is the America that promotes freedom of language, freedom of thought, and yes, freedom of religion. This is the America I live in. Recently, however, this America has been called into question.
There has been an increasing debate as to whether or not there should an Islamic mosque built near Ground Zero in New York. Many on both sides of the political aisle have issued concerns, yet some have seemed to forgotten the true meaning of what it is to be an American.
Some have argued that the building of a mosque would be insensitive to those who lost loved ones in the September 11 attacks. But as President Obama mentioned, “it is only insensitive if you regard Islam as the culprit as opposed to al Qaeda as the culprit. We were not attacked by all Muslims…There were Muslims killed there [Ground Zero]. There were Muslims who ran in as first responders to help.” We must never forget this.
For those that have criticized Obama for meddling in such an issue, let me remind you that the president, regardless of his party affiliation or political views, has a duty to protect the citizens he serves and defend the Constitution. The First Amendment guarantees the freedom of religion for everyone, including millions of American-Muslims. By preventing the construction of the mosque, we would not only be violating the Constitution, but would be equating the entire religion of Islam with violence and terrorism. This would make our nation more prone to violence and hatred at the home-front and abroad.
But would we be having this same conversation if a church or a synagogue were to be built? If the answer is no, then how can we progress as a society? How can we stand up for what we believe in and prove to the world that Americans are not prone to the same injustices we have fought against?
There is no better place for healing, reconciliation and understanding than Ground Zero. There is no better place to understand the basic principle of being an American:
United we stand, and divided we fall.
This is the America that the Constitution talks about. This is the America where everyone is free to worship what they want, when they want, and how they want. This is the America that promotes freedom of language, freedom of thought, and yes, freedom of religion. This is the America I live in. Recently, however, this America has been called into question.
There has been an increasing debate as to whether or not there should an Islamic mosque built near Ground Zero in New York. Many on both sides of the political aisle have issued concerns, yet some have seemed to forgotten the true meaning of what it is to be an American.
Some have argued that the building of a mosque would be insensitive to those who lost loved ones in the September 11 attacks. But as President Obama mentioned, “it is only insensitive if you regard Islam as the culprit as opposed to al Qaeda as the culprit. We were not attacked by all Muslims…There were Muslims killed there [Ground Zero]. There were Muslims who ran in as first responders to help.” We must never forget this.
For those that have criticized Obama for meddling in such an issue, let me remind you that the president, regardless of his party affiliation or political views, has a duty to protect the citizens he serves and defend the Constitution. The First Amendment guarantees the freedom of religion for everyone, including millions of American-Muslims. By preventing the construction of the mosque, we would not only be violating the Constitution, but would be equating the entire religion of Islam with violence and terrorism. This would make our nation more prone to violence and hatred at the home-front and abroad.
But would we be having this same conversation if a church or a synagogue were to be built? If the answer is no, then how can we progress as a society? How can we stand up for what we believe in and prove to the world that Americans are not prone to the same injustices we have fought against?
There is no better place for healing, reconciliation and understanding than Ground Zero. There is no better place to understand the basic principle of being an American:
United we stand, and divided we fall.
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
Navigating to Success
In the last two days, President Obama has made even more strides to recover this nation from its recession.
First, he signed the Emergency Jobs bill, which will provide $26 billion to help states avoid a budget crunch that would force them to lay off teachers, firefighters, police and other public workers. It would also help these states pay Medicaid payments to doctors. By providing this much needed assistance, states are better able to meet other priorities, including keeping more than 150,000 teachers, police officers and other public workers on the payroll.
Second, Obama also signed into law the Emergency Homeowner Loan Program, making $3 billion in additional funds available to help troubled homeowners avoid foreclosures.
Third, he strengthened U.S. manufacturing by signing into law an act that reduces tariffs paid by American companies on certain imports needed to manufacture their products.
Irrespective of the benefits these new laws will provide, Republicans have further labeled themselves as the “Party of No” through their constant filibustering and opposition. However, what they fail to understand is that, in order to grow this economy and provide long term sustainability, we need to put aside politics and offer real solutions. We need to keep jobs, strengthen our companies, continue educating our youth, and keep people off the streets. It may also be noted that to further ensure that these new measures are fully paid for, Obama has closed tax loopholes that encourage corporations to send American jobs overseas.
If we lay off thousands of workers, outsource manufacturing jobs, and stop providing the basic necessities of shelter and education for our citizens, how can we, as a nation, compete globally? The answer is we cannot.
Thus far, the Obama administration, with the help of Democrats, has been successfully steering us into recovery. But when will Republicans help us navigate? Hopefully November will wake them up.
First, he signed the Emergency Jobs bill, which will provide $26 billion to help states avoid a budget crunch that would force them to lay off teachers, firefighters, police and other public workers. It would also help these states pay Medicaid payments to doctors. By providing this much needed assistance, states are better able to meet other priorities, including keeping more than 150,000 teachers, police officers and other public workers on the payroll.
Second, Obama also signed into law the Emergency Homeowner Loan Program, making $3 billion in additional funds available to help troubled homeowners avoid foreclosures.
Third, he strengthened U.S. manufacturing by signing into law an act that reduces tariffs paid by American companies on certain imports needed to manufacture their products.
Irrespective of the benefits these new laws will provide, Republicans have further labeled themselves as the “Party of No” through their constant filibustering and opposition. However, what they fail to understand is that, in order to grow this economy and provide long term sustainability, we need to put aside politics and offer real solutions. We need to keep jobs, strengthen our companies, continue educating our youth, and keep people off the streets. It may also be noted that to further ensure that these new measures are fully paid for, Obama has closed tax loopholes that encourage corporations to send American jobs overseas.
If we lay off thousands of workers, outsource manufacturing jobs, and stop providing the basic necessities of shelter and education for our citizens, how can we, as a nation, compete globally? The answer is we cannot.
Thus far, the Obama administration, with the help of Democrats, has been successfully steering us into recovery. But when will Republicans help us navigate? Hopefully November will wake them up.
Sunday, August 8, 2010
America In the Driver's Seat
President Obama wants the Bush tax cuts to expire, thus ending tax breaks for the wealthiest two percent of Americans. Republican leaders, however, argue that these tax cuts would encourage small businesses, stimulate the economy, and create jobs. They are wrong for several key reasons.
First, the average small business income is around $40,000, and therefore, extending the tax cuts for rich individuals making more than $250,000 isn't going to do much for small businesses. Instead, Obama has proposed the Small Business Jobs and Credit Act, which would offer tax incentives for these businesses (who create more than half of all new jobs in America) and save taxpayers $1 billion over the next 10 years. However, the constant filibustering by Republicans has made it difficult for the Senate to pass such a job creating measure. Strike #1
Second, to truly stimulate the economy, you need to provide benefits to those who are out of work and looking for a job. Long-term growth requires widely spread prosperity, not an ever increasing concentration of wealth at the top and an increasing gap between the rich and poor. That’s why Obama has extended unemployment benefits for millions of Americans. As I mentioned in my blog post “Unconstructive Criticism”, just as the Bush tax cut puts more money in the pockets of the wealthy, unemployment insurance gives more money to the unemployed (who are likelier to spend it). But again, Republicans have argued against it. Strike #2.
Third, Republicans argue that by transferring more money to the wealthiest, we would entice them to invest more in the economy. But let us not forget that the rich have had this tax cut since 2003 and, instead of investing and creating jobs, they paid large corporate bonuses, laid-off millions of workers, and outsourced manufacturing jobs. Strike #3.
By allowing these unnecessary tax cuts to expire, the tax rate for the wealthiest will go back to Clinton-era levels. During the Clinton administration, the rich paid a high individual income tax rate of 39%. However, the economy still created more than 23 million jobs (about 90% in the private sector) in less than eight years -- the most jobs ever created under a single administration. He also left office with a huge surplus.
When Bush took office, he lowered the top individual tax rate down to 35%. But, compared to the prior administration, he only created about 3 million jobs during his 8 years in office. In addition, Bush took a $230 billion surplus and turned it into a $1.4 trillion deficit. If the tax cuts are not left to expire, they will cost us an additional $3 trillion in the next 10 years through lost revenue.
Compare that to Obama administration, which has already created and/or saved more jobs in his first two years as president than Bush did in 8 years! By investing in our future, Obama has created jobs in almost every major sector of our economy, including construction, education, healthcare, clean energy, and the auto-industry.
As the Democratic leadership has put it: when you are driving a car, you push “D” to go forward, and “R” to go backward. So, where do you want to go?
First, the average small business income is around $40,000, and therefore, extending the tax cuts for rich individuals making more than $250,000 isn't going to do much for small businesses. Instead, Obama has proposed the Small Business Jobs and Credit Act, which would offer tax incentives for these businesses (who create more than half of all new jobs in America) and save taxpayers $1 billion over the next 10 years. However, the constant filibustering by Republicans has made it difficult for the Senate to pass such a job creating measure. Strike #1
Second, to truly stimulate the economy, you need to provide benefits to those who are out of work and looking for a job. Long-term growth requires widely spread prosperity, not an ever increasing concentration of wealth at the top and an increasing gap between the rich and poor. That’s why Obama has extended unemployment benefits for millions of Americans. As I mentioned in my blog post “Unconstructive Criticism”, just as the Bush tax cut puts more money in the pockets of the wealthy, unemployment insurance gives more money to the unemployed (who are likelier to spend it). But again, Republicans have argued against it. Strike #2.
Third, Republicans argue that by transferring more money to the wealthiest, we would entice them to invest more in the economy. But let us not forget that the rich have had this tax cut since 2003 and, instead of investing and creating jobs, they paid large corporate bonuses, laid-off millions of workers, and outsourced manufacturing jobs. Strike #3.
By allowing these unnecessary tax cuts to expire, the tax rate for the wealthiest will go back to Clinton-era levels. During the Clinton administration, the rich paid a high individual income tax rate of 39%. However, the economy still created more than 23 million jobs (about 90% in the private sector) in less than eight years -- the most jobs ever created under a single administration. He also left office with a huge surplus.
When Bush took office, he lowered the top individual tax rate down to 35%. But, compared to the prior administration, he only created about 3 million jobs during his 8 years in office. In addition, Bush took a $230 billion surplus and turned it into a $1.4 trillion deficit. If the tax cuts are not left to expire, they will cost us an additional $3 trillion in the next 10 years through lost revenue.
Compare that to Obama administration, which has already created and/or saved more jobs in his first two years as president than Bush did in 8 years! By investing in our future, Obama has created jobs in almost every major sector of our economy, including construction, education, healthcare, clean energy, and the auto-industry.
As the Democratic leadership has put it: when you are driving a car, you push “D” to go forward, and “R” to go backward. So, where do you want to go?
Saturday, July 31, 2010
Do Your Jobs
As yet more proof that his economic policies are working, President Obama recently highlighted his success with the auto industry and pressed for passage of the Small Business Jobs Act, a measure which Senate Republicans are blocking.
First and foremost, Republicans should not criticize the President for not creating jobs, as they were the folks that adamantly opposed the auto industry bailout. Today, however, that very action taken by Democrats not only saved and created a lot of jobs, but it saved an entire industry.
In the year prior to Obama’s administration, American auto companies were losing hundreds of thousands of jobs. However, instead of making political calculations and shying away from the problem, Obama decided to invest in American businesses and save them from bankruptcy. Now, for the first time since 2004, GM, Ford, and Chrysler are making profits and creating thousands of jobs in communities, such as Detroit, which desperately need them. If Obama had not stepped in and taken such measures, many analysts claim at least one million more Americans would have lost their jobs.
Not only did Obama save and create jobs on American shores, but he also maintained American competitiveness in the world. Allowing the industry to fail would have cost the government billions of dollars in lost tax revenues and millions of out-of-work employees. Our companies cannot compete on a global level if this is the situation.
For this very reason, the President has also emphasized the need to create a $30 billion government fund to help open up lending for credit-starved small businesses. It’s these small businesses which create a majority of all new jobs in America, and it’s these small businesses which need our help. Therefore, the proposed bill would give additional tax breaks and badly-needed lending assistance to America’s small business owners so they can grow and hire, and yes, create more jobs!
However, time and time again, Republicans are using parliamentary procedures to block it from even coming up for a vote in the Senate. It seems to me that they do not care about the welfare of our nation, but instead, for garnering as many political points as possible. They have done everything in their power to stop Obama at every turn because, simply put, they want him to fail. They want to show the American people that the Democratic Party is not fit to lead. They want to enter the November elections and tell the American people, “I told you so.”
But how much more pain and suffering are they willing to cause the American people before they realize you cannot win an election as a party of “NO”? You cannot gain the trust of the voters if you have failed to offer any real solutions, make false accusations of noteworthy proposals, increase hatred for your opponents, and hope for the leader of your own nation to fail. It does not create a “more perfect union”, and it certainly does not help win elections.
So, while GOP leaders wait for Obama’s next “waterloo”, the administration will continue fighting for Americans by doing the one thing Democrats are best at:
doing their jobs.
First and foremost, Republicans should not criticize the President for not creating jobs, as they were the folks that adamantly opposed the auto industry bailout. Today, however, that very action taken by Democrats not only saved and created a lot of jobs, but it saved an entire industry.
In the year prior to Obama’s administration, American auto companies were losing hundreds of thousands of jobs. However, instead of making political calculations and shying away from the problem, Obama decided to invest in American businesses and save them from bankruptcy. Now, for the first time since 2004, GM, Ford, and Chrysler are making profits and creating thousands of jobs in communities, such as Detroit, which desperately need them. If Obama had not stepped in and taken such measures, many analysts claim at least one million more Americans would have lost their jobs.
Not only did Obama save and create jobs on American shores, but he also maintained American competitiveness in the world. Allowing the industry to fail would have cost the government billions of dollars in lost tax revenues and millions of out-of-work employees. Our companies cannot compete on a global level if this is the situation.
For this very reason, the President has also emphasized the need to create a $30 billion government fund to help open up lending for credit-starved small businesses. It’s these small businesses which create a majority of all new jobs in America, and it’s these small businesses which need our help. Therefore, the proposed bill would give additional tax breaks and badly-needed lending assistance to America’s small business owners so they can grow and hire, and yes, create more jobs!
However, time and time again, Republicans are using parliamentary procedures to block it from even coming up for a vote in the Senate. It seems to me that they do not care about the welfare of our nation, but instead, for garnering as many political points as possible. They have done everything in their power to stop Obama at every turn because, simply put, they want him to fail. They want to show the American people that the Democratic Party is not fit to lead. They want to enter the November elections and tell the American people, “I told you so.”
But how much more pain and suffering are they willing to cause the American people before they realize you cannot win an election as a party of “NO”? You cannot gain the trust of the voters if you have failed to offer any real solutions, make false accusations of noteworthy proposals, increase hatred for your opponents, and hope for the leader of your own nation to fail. It does not create a “more perfect union”, and it certainly does not help win elections.
So, while GOP leaders wait for Obama’s next “waterloo”, the administration will continue fighting for Americans by doing the one thing Democrats are best at:
doing their jobs.
Thursday, July 15, 2010
Unconstructive Criticism
Conservatives and critics of President Obama have slammed the administration’s handling of almost every major issue confronting our nation. Many of these critics are prematurely making judgments, and in most cases, failing to look at the facts.
GOP leaders claim the president has “neglected” to focus on job creation. In their opinions, the most effective way to create jobs is through tax cuts for the wealthy. The Obama administration, however, has focused on stimulus and spending to create jobs. This approach proves to be a more sustainable solution.
When Obama took office in January 2009, over 700,000 Americans lost their jobs (a direct result of the previous administration’s failures; and the biggest rate of job loss since Obama took over). To provide immediate relief and jump start our economy, he passed a $787 billion stimulus package that allocated much needed spending to improve our infrastructure, which creates better long-term employment; gave tax cuts and lending approvals to small businesses, which employ half of America's working population; and has now proved to have saved or created about 3 million jobs.
In addition, Obama has extended unemployment benefits for the 9.5% unemployment rate we currently face (which is down from a 10% rate just a few months ago). Just as a tax cut puts more money in the pockets of the wealthy, unemployment insurance puts more money in an unemployed person's pocket. The difference is that the unemployed person is likelier to spend that money, which will generate more taxable economic activity than if that money is saved.
Conservatives also argue that unemployment payments are a disincentive to taking a new job, as many will become lazy and unmotivated to find a job. But let me ask you this: Could you live on less than $300 a week? If the average unemployment check in the U.S. is $293, how could any person make their mortgage payments, their car payments, and feed their family? If a majority of your unemployment insurance check is paying for the rising costs of healthcare, is it realistic to expect you will still have money left for food and rent and utilities and other necessities? The answer is you cannot.
It seems as if many on the right are either insensitive to this fact or they are simply out of touch with reality. It seems as if they are only making political calculations, and not considering the human calculations.
Third, and more recently, Obama has decided to tackle Wall Street and end an era of irresponsibility that led to the “loss of 8 million jobs and trillions of dollars of wealth. This reform is good for families; it's good for businesses; it's good for the entire economy." With more accountability and transparency for the financial sector, the measure will only help us in the future.
Unlike President Bush, who inherited a $230 billion surplus when he took office, President Obama inherited a $1.4 trillion deficit, along with 2 wars and a failing economy. Taking this into major consideration, Obama has done extraordinary to prevent another Great Depression. Although our situation is bad, it would have been much worse if the administration had not taken such actions. The only way he can do more is if he stops trying to reach over the isle to find bipartisan support and focuses strictly on his liberal base, an argument that many Democrats have been proposing.
Yes we need to hold our leaders at a higher standard, and yes opposition is always needed to improve any solution. Republicans have tried their solutions for the last 8years and could not meet the situation. GOP leaders now need to focus on constructive criticism rather than being a party that out-rightly rejects any solution Obama offers, promotes unprofessional conduct, allows racism to flourish, and advocates that our leader fails at every possible turn.
We need real debate, not political games. That is how we, as a country, can progress.
GOP leaders claim the president has “neglected” to focus on job creation. In their opinions, the most effective way to create jobs is through tax cuts for the wealthy. The Obama administration, however, has focused on stimulus and spending to create jobs. This approach proves to be a more sustainable solution.
When Obama took office in January 2009, over 700,000 Americans lost their jobs (a direct result of the previous administration’s failures; and the biggest rate of job loss since Obama took over). To provide immediate relief and jump start our economy, he passed a $787 billion stimulus package that allocated much needed spending to improve our infrastructure, which creates better long-term employment; gave tax cuts and lending approvals to small businesses, which employ half of America's working population; and has now proved to have saved or created about 3 million jobs.
In addition, Obama has extended unemployment benefits for the 9.5% unemployment rate we currently face (which is down from a 10% rate just a few months ago). Just as a tax cut puts more money in the pockets of the wealthy, unemployment insurance puts more money in an unemployed person's pocket. The difference is that the unemployed person is likelier to spend that money, which will generate more taxable economic activity than if that money is saved.
Conservatives also argue that unemployment payments are a disincentive to taking a new job, as many will become lazy and unmotivated to find a job. But let me ask you this: Could you live on less than $300 a week? If the average unemployment check in the U.S. is $293, how could any person make their mortgage payments, their car payments, and feed their family? If a majority of your unemployment insurance check is paying for the rising costs of healthcare, is it realistic to expect you will still have money left for food and rent and utilities and other necessities? The answer is you cannot.
It seems as if many on the right are either insensitive to this fact or they are simply out of touch with reality. It seems as if they are only making political calculations, and not considering the human calculations.
Third, and more recently, Obama has decided to tackle Wall Street and end an era of irresponsibility that led to the “loss of 8 million jobs and trillions of dollars of wealth. This reform is good for families; it's good for businesses; it's good for the entire economy." With more accountability and transparency for the financial sector, the measure will only help us in the future.
Unlike President Bush, who inherited a $230 billion surplus when he took office, President Obama inherited a $1.4 trillion deficit, along with 2 wars and a failing economy. Taking this into major consideration, Obama has done extraordinary to prevent another Great Depression. Although our situation is bad, it would have been much worse if the administration had not taken such actions. The only way he can do more is if he stops trying to reach over the isle to find bipartisan support and focuses strictly on his liberal base, an argument that many Democrats have been proposing.
Yes we need to hold our leaders at a higher standard, and yes opposition is always needed to improve any solution. Republicans have tried their solutions for the last 8years and could not meet the situation. GOP leaders now need to focus on constructive criticism rather than being a party that out-rightly rejects any solution Obama offers, promotes unprofessional conduct, allows racism to flourish, and advocates that our leader fails at every possible turn.
We need real debate, not political games. That is how we, as a country, can progress.
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
Liberty and Justice for All?
Since the early days of kindergarten, children in the United States have learned to recite the Pledge of Allegiance. However, until recently, I could not truly appreciate the meaning behind the words “with liberty and justice for all”. What made me understand these words more clearly was not my love and passion for this country, but President Obama’s decision to file a lawsuit against Arizona’s new immigration law this past Tuesday.
The new law, which would order immigrants to carry their alien registration documents at all times and requires police to question people if there's reason to suspect they're in the United States illegally, is not only unjust, but is also unconstitutional.
I completely understand the need for stricter immigration reform. I am in full support of our American workers and those that obey the laws, and agree that people who break our laws should be punished. But at what cost?
We need to ensure that we, first and foremost, uphold our American values of equality, liberty, and justice for all. America is a nation comprised of immigrants. We pride ourselves on our multiculturalism, yet we decide to act in ways that prohibit and restrict those very ideals we preach throughout the world. The new law invites racial profiling against people of color by law enforcement, thus harming people’s civil rights and opening doors to police harassment of U.S. citizens and foreigners. If you do not think this new law would invite such hardships, ask yourself this question: How would you determine who looks like an “illegal immigrant?” Chances are you’re not thinking of a white male. Where’s the justice in this?
Not to mention that Arizona’s new law unconstitutionally interferes with federal power and authority over immigration matters. Enforcing immigration laws is a federal responsibility, not a state’s. Immigration law, policy, and enforcement priorities are affected by and have impacts on U.S. foreign policy, and are themselves the subject of diplomatic arrangements. For the same reason we do not allow states to have their own foreign policies, we should not allow states to conduct their own immigration laws.
Some opponents are making it a point to emphasize the fact that a majority of Arizona’s residents actually support the new law. However, the fact that a majority of people support it does not make it just. If the civil rights movement was based on popularity, then surely it would not have been passed, and we would be living in a very different America.
And for those that argue we should simply put the illegal immigrants on a boat and deport them, consider this-we have over 11 million undocumented and illegal workers living in the country. It is unrealistic and unfeasible to ask them all to leave. Instead, as Obama and other democrats have argued, create a legal pathway to citizenship. They will still have to pay a fine, learn English, and wait at the back of the line for those that apply for citizenship legally, but will provide us with greater prosperity. Just imagine adding over 11 million new workers who pay taxes and add to our economic well-being.
Republicans these days are sounding much like those very same people who persecuted, racially profiled, and drove out the Jewish people in Eastern Europe a little more than a century ago- “foreigners must carry identification cards with them at all times, and if not, they should all be forced to leave the country.” This is not the America I was taught about in school. This is not the America I want to leave for my children and grandchildren. This is not the America that preaches “liberty and justice for all”.
And as Obama mentioned in his speech at American University last week, we should all remember the words written by Emma Lazarus in describing our Statue of Liberty:
“Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand,” she wrote,
A mighty woman with a torch…
From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome…
“Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!”…
“Give me your tired, and your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to be free…
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”
The new law, which would order immigrants to carry their alien registration documents at all times and requires police to question people if there's reason to suspect they're in the United States illegally, is not only unjust, but is also unconstitutional.
I completely understand the need for stricter immigration reform. I am in full support of our American workers and those that obey the laws, and agree that people who break our laws should be punished. But at what cost?
We need to ensure that we, first and foremost, uphold our American values of equality, liberty, and justice for all. America is a nation comprised of immigrants. We pride ourselves on our multiculturalism, yet we decide to act in ways that prohibit and restrict those very ideals we preach throughout the world. The new law invites racial profiling against people of color by law enforcement, thus harming people’s civil rights and opening doors to police harassment of U.S. citizens and foreigners. If you do not think this new law would invite such hardships, ask yourself this question: How would you determine who looks like an “illegal immigrant?” Chances are you’re not thinking of a white male. Where’s the justice in this?
Not to mention that Arizona’s new law unconstitutionally interferes with federal power and authority over immigration matters. Enforcing immigration laws is a federal responsibility, not a state’s. Immigration law, policy, and enforcement priorities are affected by and have impacts on U.S. foreign policy, and are themselves the subject of diplomatic arrangements. For the same reason we do not allow states to have their own foreign policies, we should not allow states to conduct their own immigration laws.
Some opponents are making it a point to emphasize the fact that a majority of Arizona’s residents actually support the new law. However, the fact that a majority of people support it does not make it just. If the civil rights movement was based on popularity, then surely it would not have been passed, and we would be living in a very different America.
And for those that argue we should simply put the illegal immigrants on a boat and deport them, consider this-we have over 11 million undocumented and illegal workers living in the country. It is unrealistic and unfeasible to ask them all to leave. Instead, as Obama and other democrats have argued, create a legal pathway to citizenship. They will still have to pay a fine, learn English, and wait at the back of the line for those that apply for citizenship legally, but will provide us with greater prosperity. Just imagine adding over 11 million new workers who pay taxes and add to our economic well-being.
Republicans these days are sounding much like those very same people who persecuted, racially profiled, and drove out the Jewish people in Eastern Europe a little more than a century ago- “foreigners must carry identification cards with them at all times, and if not, they should all be forced to leave the country.” This is not the America I was taught about in school. This is not the America I want to leave for my children and grandchildren. This is not the America that preaches “liberty and justice for all”.
And as Obama mentioned in his speech at American University last week, we should all remember the words written by Emma Lazarus in describing our Statue of Liberty:
“Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand,” she wrote,
A mighty woman with a torch…
From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome…
“Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!”…
“Give me your tired, and your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to be free…
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)