(Regarding Sensenbrenner and immigration field hearings) The apparent goal of those hearings is to avoid negotiation and convince voters that illegal immigration is a national scourge, all the while bashing sensible immigration reform passed by the U.S. Senate. - Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Editorial Board
The editorial from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel opens with:
There has been for a while now a grand opportunity to talk about illegal immigration in reasoned, rational tones. Meaning in a way that doesn't demonize people who the economy welcomes with wide-open arms and big, wet kisses but who much of the body politic misunderstands and who, therefore, are easy targets.The bottom line is that the board of the paper does not agree with the enforcement first angle of the debate. They support the comprehensive reform, so therefore, those that do not are just looking for scapegoats.
The editorialists said of Sensenbrenner's recent remarks regarding a planned labor day rally:
(Sensenbrenner) decried planned demonstrations on Labor Day by immigrant advocates as unnecessarily divisive and not conducive to successful House-Senate negotiations on immigration reform.Which is followed by the original quote at the top of this post, calling the "field" hearings so much politics. Yet, are they truly ignorant of the fact that what Sensenbrenner said was actually true? What could be more divisive than demanding rights to which you are not eligible? What could be more divisive than rallying in the streets, proclaiming aloud and proudly that you are here illegally; daring authorities to do something about it?
As to the "field" hearings? Well, some fear it is just a political ploy to put off being held accountable for votes prior to November; of which I feel a certain concern about. But ultimately, putting off and not passing a "comprehensive" reform bill, one that promises a fix all approach is a good thing. What exactly is wrong with taking a piecemeal approach that actually addresses each issue rather than the usual "one size fits all" crap.
The editorial concerns itself with the demonization of "immigrants," and therefore, due to their categorization misses the point. The people of this country are concerned about "illegal" immigration, not immigration so much. We like rules, you follow them or you get caught not following them - the next logical step is some form of punishment. Allowing or ignoring people entering the country illegal does not follow the norms we are accustomed to and therefore is not looked upon kindly.
Practicing what they preach - the title of the editorial is "Tapping fear and division" by even writing on the subject aren't they in a sense doing the very same thing? Tapping into an imagined fear that politicians like Sensenbrenner are "bad" and doing a nasty thing? Saying on that he calls the "labor day" rally divisive as though there is no divisiveness whatsoever about it; then calling his actions divisive....gee, maybe the paper is wrong.
I can understand why people would want to enter this country and I would be lying if I said were I in their shoes that "I wouldn't do it." (Here comes the but-monkey), but that does not make breaking the law - OUR law ok. Even if that seems A-OK to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
**This was a production of The Coalition Against Illegal Immigration (CAII). If you would like to participate, please go to the above link to learn more. Afterwards, email the coalition and let me know at what level you would like to participate.**
