Page 1 of 1 pages
This year is 1928, after Congress repealed, rightly or wrongly, essentially open immigration. The relevancy of the article is dubious.
Nice people can be illegal aliens. Of course they can be. That is not why nations regulate borders and immigration. The implication of publication of the article is that this family turned out to be a great addition to america, so all illegal immigrants should be let in.
Absurd. A systematic policy is required to allow immigration. we don’t have that now. we have the right to decide that some people are wanted and others aren’t. nice people will thus be excluded. the naiton also has to be ready to deport illegally residing people. the nation needs to be prepared to severely punish employers who break the law.
If we can’t agree on who immigrates, then no immigration at all until we decide. I think the value of many immigrants would pressure us into fair, enforceable regulations.
Posted by edith on Oct 22, 2006 at 9:09 AM
Technically we are all immigrants. Even the “Native Americans”. Pre-Siberian American Aborigines were the first “Americans” . I am glad someone is preserving historical sites. I wonder if a comparison between the tenements and the type of housing the people had lived in before immigration to America is offered? It would offer a historical perspective most museums would be afraid to show for fear of offending someone.
We put the Statue of Liberty up and complain when people take us up on the offer. Walls will never work to keep people out, but we need to know who we invite in. Guest worker programs have worked in other countries. It allows legal protection for the workers but still provides taxes and security for citizens. If someone wants citizenship follow the legal path. Democracy works.
Posted by texasindependent on Oct 22, 2006 at 6:55 PM
where are we now in 2010 with this discussion?
Posted by D.Mellin on Dec 12, 2010 at 7:33 AM
The museum is becoming a neighborhood institution and there is a fine line between museum work and social service advocacy, no wonder therefore that the Tenement Museum felt isolated from the larger museum and public history wooden blinds community for years.
Posted by chris moore on Dec 14, 2010 at 4:28 AM
In August, MoveOn.org, and the 5 million Americans who rally to its banner, tried to defend the body politic. To no avail. MoveOn.org set out to buy commercial testking 642-357 time on MSNBC to target Target for its decision to fund Minnesota Tea Party gubernatorial hopeful Tom Emmer. (See “Targeting Soft Money” on page 7.) MSNBC (soon to be a seed of Comcast—bye-bye Maddow?) explained that it could not air the MoveOn.org commercial because it violated network policy that prohibits ads attacking testking 642-515 an individual corporation (potential advertiser?).
In other words, Target is welcome to fill MSNBC coffers by paying a right-wing testking 000-152 homophobe to slander Mark Dayton, the candidate for Minnesota governor of the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party. But any counter effort that might expose the political machinations of testking 000-105 Corporate America to supplant the popular will with Tea Party populism will not be permitted. That is what the Roberts Court means by freedom of speech.
Posted by Clark Anderson on Dec 15, 2010 at 2:53 AM
Do you have any other link or page here that discuss this sir? I am helping out my son who has a term paper about this which is due this week.
Thanks,
Karen of Fat Burning Furnace Review Site
Posted by Karen Guz on Dec 21, 2010 at 7:57 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages
SAVE 53% OFFTHE NEWSSTAND PRICE!
Reader Comments
This year is 1928, after Congress repealed, rightly or wrongly, essentially open immigration. The relevancy of the article is dubious.
Nice people can be illegal aliens. Of course they can be. That is not why nations regulate borders and immigration. The implication of publication of the article is that this family turned out to be a great addition to america, so all illegal immigrants should be let in.
Absurd. A systematic policy is required to allow immigration. we don’t have that now. we have the right to decide that some people are wanted and others aren’t. nice people will thus be excluded. the naiton also has to be ready to deport illegally residing people. the nation needs to be prepared to severely punish employers who break the law.
If we can’t agree on who immigrates, then no immigration at all until we decide. I think the value of many immigrants would pressure us into fair, enforceable regulations.
Technically we are all immigrants. Even the “Native Americans”. Pre-Siberian American Aborigines were the first “Americans” . I am glad someone is preserving historical sites. I wonder if a comparison between the tenements and the type of housing the people had lived in before immigration to America is offered? It would offer a historical perspective most museums would be afraid to show for fear of offending someone.
We put the Statue of Liberty up and complain when people take us up on the offer. Walls will never work to keep people out, but we need to know who we invite in. Guest worker programs have worked in other countries. It allows legal protection for the workers but still provides taxes and security for citizens. If someone wants citizenship follow the legal path. Democracy works.
where are we now in 2010 with this discussion?
The museum is becoming a neighborhood institution and there is a fine line between museum work and social service advocacy, no wonder therefore that the Tenement Museum felt isolated from the larger museum and public history wooden blinds community for years.
In August, MoveOn.org, and the 5 million Americans who rally to its banner, tried to defend the body politic. To no avail. MoveOn.org set out to buy commercial testking 642-357 time on MSNBC to target Target for its decision to fund Minnesota Tea Party gubernatorial hopeful Tom Emmer. (See “Targeting Soft Money” on page 7.) MSNBC (soon to be a seed of Comcast—bye-bye Maddow?) explained that it could not air the MoveOn.org commercial because it violated network policy that prohibits ads attacking testking 642-515 an individual corporation (potential advertiser?).
In other words, Target is welcome to fill MSNBC coffers by paying a right-wing testking 000-152 homophobe to slander Mark Dayton, the candidate for Minnesota governor of the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party. But any counter effort that might expose the political machinations of testking 000-105 Corporate America to supplant the popular will with Tea Party populism will not be permitted. That is what the Roberts Court means by freedom of speech.
Do you have any other link or page here that discuss this sir? I am helping out my son who has a term paper about this which is due this week.
Thanks,
Karen of Fat Burning Furnace Review Site
register a new account »Posting Security