Thursday, August 23, 2007

Ms. Arellano vs what the Majority of PROs believe

I vowed to myself not to post about Ms. Arellano, the fugitive who has been deported to MX, but now, based on some of the responses I am seeing on other websites, I have a need to respond.

I´m reading one of her supporter´s website: While this website appears to be more extreme than some I have seen, it is not representative of the view of majority of PROs.

Remember, all PROs and all ANTIs do not have the same agenda. It is obvious there are a small minority of PROs that support the “SomosUnPueblo” (SUP)agenda.

There is also a group of ANTIs who support the Nativist, Xenophobe, KKK view.

Based on my studies, I believe their numbers far outweigh the SUP supporters.

The majority of PRO supporters support:

Comprehensive Immigration Reform:
A. Secure Borders. Increased number of trained Border Patrol agents. Physical and virtual fencing using the latest technology.B. Employer Sanctions. Criminalization and Severe Penalties for abusive employers.C. Out of the Shadows: Bring the 12M out of the shadows through a registration, ID process for all head of households. Temporary Guest Worker status with return to country of origin to begin legal process. Sponsorship by employers as applicable.

Logic will prevail in this discussion and we do discuss this issue civilly on my blog.


ultima said...

The Republican base is for family values but it is also for the rule of law, national sovereignty,and secure borders. The bond of love between a mother and her child is noticeably lacking in Arellano's case. She has shown no interest in taking her child with her so as not to sever that bond. What mother would do that if she really loves her child? The Republican base oppose divorce and abortion, as do all devout Catholics, and they do not demand the separation of any families. They demand and expect that any responsible parent will assure that her family goes with her wherever she goes and that they are not punished for her transgressions by leaving them behind. Clearly, there is something else at work here than a simple family separation which is easily avoided.

It's like any other lawbreaker taking and holding a hostage, perhaps even worse because in this case it is the person's own child that she is making a pawn in the immigration debate.

ultima said...

We should all roundly condemn all extremist organizations at every opportunity. I condemn the actions of the KKK et al and hope they get their justice sooner rather than later.

Joel Rios said...

Hey guys! Nice to see ya'll again!

ultima said...

I note in the news today some members of the KKK got several life terms. Maybe there is some hope that those who preach sedition and disloyalty will get what they deserve.

ultima said...

Welcome back, Joel. Where have you been? My URL is:

if you are interested.

Dee said...

Hey Joel. Welcome and good to see you. I started a blog and so did Ulty. I think we should all start one, post on each others´ blogs and stay in touch. Maybe you can post the book you´ve written. I´d love to read it.

Dee said...

Ulty I agree. We should all roundly condemn the extremists on both sides.

Bob said...

I see that you use ad-hominem attacks, negative loaded characterizations of Americans, and other racist and prejudiced remarks to shout down disagreement. Calling people who support positive limits on immigration as "KKK" or "Xenophobic" or other 3rd grade name calling serves to demonstrate the hypocricy in your claim to invite discussion without racism and bigotry.

patriot said...

Irregardless of bob's other opinions, he was right on with you. I guess this goes along with your theory of guilty by association? Is that why you associate Americans who are opposed to illegal immigration with the KKK erroneously?

Page Hits