Posts tagged Barack Obama
Change You Can Believe In: Mass Deportation Edition
(Via k. gallagher.)
I should mention that even if the Obama administration’s mass deportations had really been mass deportations of criminals
or gang bangers
that could not possibly have made his horrible record on immigration any more O.K. by me. Most of the crimes
that immigrants (documented or undocumented) get deported over are bullshit beefs and things that should not have been crimes in the first place — victimless social offenses,
drug possession and the like. The only appropriate punishment for such crimes
is no punishment at all and people who are caught doing it should be left free to go on their way, regardless of immigration status. But, moreover, even if someone is caught doing a harm that invades the rights of some other person in the community — if someone is stealing, or beating people up, or threatening people, and the person doing it happens to be an immigrant — then there are already ways of dealing with that that also have nothing to do with immigration status. A crime against person or property doesn’t somehow become worse because the person doing it was born on the other side of an arbitrary political border. And the fact that they were born on the other side of an arbitrary political border doesn’t mean that it’s appropriate to, say, punish petty theft or extortion by forcibly exiling the person who did it from the country. That’s not how a criminal or a gang-banger born in Laredo ought to be treated, and to treat a criminal or a gang-banger born in Nuevo Laredo that way, just because of her birth nationality, is both discriminatory and wildly disproportionate. Nevertheless, it is worth noting that, on this issue, what the Obama administration has been saying about its border-segregation policies is, once again, a smiling promise stretched over a massive lie. In fact the Obama administration has massively escalated aggression against immigrants, and its dragnets have become broader, not narrower, than those under his Democratic and Republican predecessors. Emphasis added.
President Obama used a new word during the presidential debate on Tuesday night to describe the masses of immigrants he's deported during his tenure. He called them "gangbangers," as in:
What I've also said is if we're going to go after folks who are here illegally, we should do it smartly and go after folks who are criminals, gang bangers, people who are hurting the community, not after students, not after folks who are here just because they're trying to figure out how to feed their families. And that's what we've done.
The line was a curious one, given the reality of Obama's deportation record, which has been marked by mass deportations to the tune of nearly 400,000 every year carried out at a clip unseen by any prior president. The Obama administration has defended its "smart" enforcement tactics by, as Obama did on Tuesday night, pointing out that it makes a point to deport those who have committed serious crimes and are a threat to their communities and national security. And yet, data collected over Obama's tenure show that among the close to 400,000 people who are deported annually, far from being "gangbangers," the vast majority have no criminal record whatsoever.
In preliminary data for the January-March 2012 quarter collected by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, for example, just 14 percent of those deported had any criminal record. (Immigration violations are typically considered civil violations, and do not constitute a criminal offense.) But, a closer look at the data shows that just 4 percent of those deported had a so-called "aggravated felony" on their record, an immigration court-specific designation of crimes that can include crimes as serious as rape and murder, but has also been expanded to include violations like theft or non-violent drug offenses.
And as the Obama administration struggles to keep up with it do-they-or-don-they-have-it deportation quota, immigration officials seem to be tapping out the numbers of deportable immigrants with criminal records. In the last four years, the percent of those deported with any kind of criminal history has dropped from 17.5 to 14 percent, while those with "aggravated felonies" made up 5.2 percent of those deported in 2008. This year they're 3.6 percent. That is, while the Obama administration continues to deport roughly the same record-breaking number of people annually, it's grabbing up everyday people whose deportations the Obama administration has said it has protections in place to prevent, including those who would otherwise be eligible for the federal DREAM Act,[1] parents with U.S. citizen kids in the country who have lived quiet lives, students and fathers who have communities and dreams in the U.S.—people who are hardly the "gangbangers" Obama wants you to think he's kicking out of the country.
— Julianne Hing, Who Are Those
GangbangersObama’s So Proud of Deporting? ColorLines.
I had a joke I used to run in these features that played off our Progressive Peace President’s 2008 campaign slogan, which was to close off these posts with some variation on The more things Change….
It was funny to me at the time. It’s not as funny to me anymore. Because in fact things have not stayed the same, at least not on this front. While campaigning as an alleged supporter of immigrant rights, and making grandstanding lies one after another, Obama’s government has actively made the situation far worse for immigrants than it was when he entered office. By any standard of individual liberty, social equality, or plain old humanitarian compassion, his record in office has been appalling.
Also.
- GT 2011-10-22: Change You Can Believe In (Vol. III, No. 10): Record-breaking deportations
- GT 2012-08-06: Free Alfonso Perez
- GT 2012-08-18: U.S. Commission on Civil Rights holds hearings on Arizona and Alabama apartheid bills
- [1][See for example this story. Obama promised that he would unilaterally halt deportation proceedings against DREAM-eligible immigrants, in the last few months before the election, in a particularly cynical And Now They Bring Up You move. But the promise was a lie, and was broken within weeks of when he made it. –Ed.]↩
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights holds hearings on Arizona and Alabama apartheid bills
This was on the front page of to-day’s OA News (front page, continued on p. 8A). The online copy is a bit longer than what appeared in print (there are a couple paragraphs at the end that the OA News cut from the printed edition). The U.S. Civil Rights Commission recently held a meeting in Birmingham to discuss SB 1070 and HB 56, the international apartheid police-state bills in Arizona and Alabama. Demonstrators showed up to inject some reality into the proceedings.
From the Associated Press.
Quarrelsome commission
Civil rights panel has first meeting to discuss laws
BIRMINGHAM — A quarrelsome U.S. Commission on Civil Rights held its first hearing on state laws that target illegal immigration, with Republican backers arguing Friday that the measures are vital to protecting American jobs and fighting crime.
Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who helped write similar immigration laws in Arizona and Alabama, said unemployment in Alabama has dropped three times faster than the national average since parts of the state's law took effect last fall — a change he credited at least in part to the act.
Attempting to head off claims that the laws lead to racial profiling by police, Kobach said the immigration enforcement specifically bars officers from making stops or arrests based on appearance.
As he spoke, four Hispanic women and a girl stood in the audience with their backs toward Kobach. Demonstrators, some speaking Spanish, stood up holding signs that said
Undocumentedand shouted at Kobach.
These laws are based on hate,said one man.The meeting room quieted after officers escorted protesters away, but the commissioners still bickered among themselves. . . . Congressional appointee Todd Gaziano, legal director of the conservative Heritage Foundation, accused the demonstrators of
hateful speech. . . . Gaziano and chairman Martin R. Castro, appointed by President Barack Obama, exchanged sharp words throughout the opening session. Members even disagreed over who should be allowed to testify, with organizations accusing each other of being hate groups.The commission will issue a report within months on the findings of the hearing, which focused on whether the state laws foster discrimination and run counter to civil rights laws. But the panel doesn't have any enforcement power, and it can't make states alter their laws.
The U.S. Supreme Court struck down three parts of Arizona's law in June, but it upheld a section that requires police to check the status of people who might appear to be in the country illegally. The ruling was closely watched because Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, Indiana and Utah have approved similar laws.
Courts have blocked all or parts of the laws in each state, and legal challenges are now moving forward since the justices ruled on the Arizona statute . . . .
Law opponent Tammy Besherse, an attorney with South Carolina Appleseed Legal Justice Center, accused law officers of destroying immigrants' legal documents and of playing computer games in which participants kill Mexican immigrants.
GOP state Sen. Scott Beason, a key sponsor of Alabama's law, said opponents of the laws and the media place more value on the rights of illegal immigrants than the plight of legal U.S. citizens who can't find work because of people living in the country unlawfully.
We cannot solve the world's problems, but we can make sure we don't import some problems,Beason said. Responding to a question about a U.S. Chamber of Commerce that cast immigration in a positive light, Beason said the business organization ispretty slantedbecause some of its members employ illegal immigrants.[1]Castro said the Alabama hearing was the commission's first outside Washington, D.C., in years. The panel's first-ever was held in Birmingham in 1958, when state and local laws mandated racial segregation.
— Jay Reeves, Associated Press, Quarrelsome commission: Civil rights panel has first meeting to discuss laws. Opelika-Auburn News, 18 August 2012.
The article goes to some effort to make it out that the fights amongst the panel members were signs of a clear divide
between Republicans and Democrats, conservatives and liberals.
Of course the notion that the Democratic Party appointees maintain any divide,
or have any quarrel,
other than a purely rhetorical one, from the Republicans, is absurd. In 2008, presidential candidate Obama promised comprehensive immigration reform, paths out of the shadows
for undocumented immigrants, and promised that immigration reform would be a top priority in my first year as President
. In 2012, four years later, Liberal Democratic President Barack Obama has accomplished nothing at all towards comprehensive reform or towards paths to citizenship. The claim that it would be a top priority in his first year in office was a lie; he abandoned it as soon as he sat down in the Oval Office, concentrated on pushing stimulus bills and fighting wars and bailing out failed capitalists — and then he radically escalated the militarization of the border, and he presided over the largest mass deportations of peaceful immigrants in the history of the United States. Even his weakest, latest-coming promises have been lies, broken as soon as they were made. But there is a real divide here. It’s not a divide on the panel; it’s the divide between the panel, and the protesters who courageously stood up to challenge them. I am glad to see people calling out Kobach, and challenging this kind of political palavering over the lives and livelihoods of immigrant families. More power to them.
Also.
- GT 2012-08-06: Free Alfonso Perez
- GT 2011-10-24: Letter to the Editor of the Opelika-Auburn News, October 10, 2011
- GT 2011-10-22: Change You Can Believe In (Vol. III, No. 10)
- [1][I-word and xenophobia sic. –RG.]↩
Free Alfonso Perez
Remember back when Barack Obama made a big announcement that his Immigrations and Custom Enforcement agency wasn’t going to be detaining or deporting undocumented immigrants who were brought to the United States as children? When he made the announcement, I was happy, but very cautiously so — as long as it holds up, that will at least help some people out. But I wondered whether the promise would last even a few months after election season, or whether it would promptly go the same way as his promises about Guantanamo and his promises about ending DEA raids on medical marijuana dispensaries. This was too optimistic of me. The answer is that it never even lasted through campaign season, and was broken within weeks.
This is appalling. From my friend Evelyn in Las Vegas:
Another DREAMer Detained! Alfonso Is Being Denied Shoes While In Detention. Let Him Free!
President Obama stated that, as of June 15, DREAMers[1] will no longer be detained or deported. Alfonso was detained one month after the announcement and he has yet to be released! Why is DREAMer Alfonso still being detained?
On July 26 at 6 a.m., Alfonso was walking out of his apartment to head to work when ICE officials detained him. He has been held at Henderson Detention Center in Nevada ever since. Alfonso has a 14-month old baby and a fiancee who need him home! Please call and sign the petition so he can be released.
Make a Phone Call
- Call ICE – John Morton (202.732.3000)
Sample Script: “I am calling to urge you to release DREAMer Alfonso Perez (A# 205-151-137) from Henderson Detention Center in Nevada and stop his deportation. Alfonso has been living in the U.S. for 20 years. **He has a 14-month old daughter and a fiancee who are suffering without him. Alfonso is a DREAM Act youth and, according to President Obama, should have never been detained. Release Alfonso from detention!”
Please help us raise funds with your contribution to help Alfonso and his family: Help Free DREAMer Alfonso Perez!
Please:
- Share this story with your friends, family and compa?@c3;b1;er@s.
- Call ICE to demand Alfonso Perez’s release. Every call helps.
- Sign a petition to John Morton and Janet Napolitano at Dream Activist.org, also calling for his release.
- If you can, you can also make a donation to Alfonmso Perez’s legal defense at IndieGoGo.com.
Alfonso Perez was brought to the United States by his grandmother at four years of age (when his parents abandoned him in Mexico). After twenty years of living in this country, he was detained by I.C.E. on Thursday, July 26th, 2012 at 6:00 a.m. when he walked outside of his apartment to go to work.
He is currently detained at the Henderson Detention Center and has not been provided with shoes, nor has our family been allowed to provide any for him. We need your help to release him, reunite our family, apply for Obama's DREAM deferred action, and fulfill his dream of attending college.
His lifetime calling is to become a Registered Nurse and help heal his community. In fact, he has a track record of working with elderly and disabled people since the age of sixteen. He DREAMs of finishing college and dedicate his life to provide for his family and care for those people who are most in need.
Alfonso is a dedicated father to his fourteen month old baby and a loving partner to his fiancé. He is the sole financial provider for his family and works 10 hours a day, 6 days a week as a landscaper in Las Vegas, Nevada. His family is distraught by his incarceration and his baby misses him a lot.
- [1][Undocumented immigrants who would have been eligible for a path to citizenship under the DREAM Act — i.e., people who were brought to the United States as children and have lived and gone to school within the U.S. –CJ.]↩
Funding? More like, Is.
Dear The Nation Magazine,
I’ve just received your e-mail of May 24, headlined: Why Is Obama Funding A Murderous Regime?
And I have to ask: Seriously?
I am glad that you have discovered U.S. foreign aid to the Honduran government,[1] and that you have realized that this is a problem. I’m glad that you have chosen to publish Dana Frank’s timely and important article on this. But I have no idea why you as editors are acting so surprised. Of course the Obama administration is funding a murderous government in Honduras. Mr. Obama’s administration has no reason to hesitate at backing murderous regimes; his own administration has after all killed thousands of people every year by perpetuating wars, escalating wars, and starting new wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya and throughout the world. And the Obama administration’s military and police aid policies in Honduras are in absolutely no significant respect any different from the U.S. government’s foreign policy, in literally every single President’s administration, of military and monetary support for the forces of repressive regimes in Honduras, as well as in Guatemala, Nicaragua, Mexico, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Colombia, Argentina, Chile, etc., etc. etc., for more than 100 years running.
Does it really take that much to figure this out? Barack Obama is many things. But first and foremost Barack Obama is the President of the United States. The headline of your article asked, Which Side Is the US On?
Of course the answer is that the U.S. government is on the side of the government in power, not on the side of the people they murder and oppress. Your e-mail asks why Obama is funding a murderous regime. The answer is that he is funding a murderous regime because he is the head of a murderous regime, and the first loyalty of murderous governments is to other murderous governments.
Sincerely,
Charles W. Johnson
Also.
- [1]Which, like more or less all U.S. foreign aid, means aid first and foremost to the military and police forces that tyrannize and murder the people of Honduras.↩