CNN Documented x264 HDTV

documented

in 2011, pulitzer prize-winning journalist jose antonio vargas outed himself as an undocumented
immigrant in an essay published in the new york times magazine. documented chronicles his journey to
america from the philippines as a child; his journey through america as an immigration reform activist;
and his journey inward as he re-connects with his mother, whom he hasn't seen in person in over 20
years.

http://docuwiki.net/index.php?title=documented

this guy should be in jail and deported, this stupid country.

i do, and this particular fellow probably deserves to stay and may deserve to become a citizen
because it was his mother who was originally responsible for violating the law when he was still a
child. however, when it comes to the argument being made by the people behind this film - that all
11 million illegal immigrants should likewise stay and have the option to become citizens - i
probably agree with joekill162. such arguments are themselves based on unreflective knee jerk
emotional responses and not on rational consideration. there's too often an initial thought of, 'if
being able to live in the u.s. is a source of economic opportunities and benefits, then by what right
do i deny that benefit to someone worse off?' that's a fine impulse and generally what religious
groups who advocate for illegal immigrants say, but it's just an emotional impulse - no different
from a knee jerk response - and not a reasonable argument.

gallup's international polling arm has found that there are well over 150 million people who would
immigrate to the u.s. if that was an option. the current population is about 317 million - including
11 million here illegally. we can't possibly allow people to just come and live here because they're
worse off. we have a system for letting people come here which is flawed- it's too slow certainly
and not efficient in meeting the needs of employers - but it's among the most generous in the
world when it comes to the number of visas granted. after wwii, there was a campaign to
eliminate truly unfair immigration policies - strongly advocated by pres eisenhower - which treated
people's applications differently in a way that favored certain countries and ethnicities over others.
despite long wait times it's hard to make the argument that the selection process today is unfair

what would be patently unfair (and unwise) would be to do what vargas is urging. there will
always be more demand for people to come here than available visas. rewarding those who chose
(at least as adults) to violate the law because doing so was in their self-interest, especially when
so many others followed the rules and waited their turn, is about as unfair as you can get. there's
disagreement about whether the senate proposal should be considered 'amnesty' since it includes
fines and a waiting period. however, if someone 1) broke the law for economic benefit (here gallup,
pew, and all the others agree that the primary motivation is always economic) and profited as a
result, and then 2) despite the fact that if the law were enforced they would be deported (which
isn't a punishment despite what many say: overstaying doesn't have a criminal penalty but illegal
crossing does and the perpetrator can be punished with jail time), 3) they are not only granted
permanent residency but 4) are offered citizenship after paying fines that amount to far less than
the profit made as a result of their breaking the law: that constitutes rewarding people for
breaking the rules. such people clearly get a better deal than foreign nationals who followed the
rules, and that's not only unfair but because it creates a moral hazard, it's unwise.

it's also worth noting, that there's an element of this that harkens back to early 50's immigration
policy conflicts. the left will say that they're "on the right side of history" when it comes to that,
because the opponents of comprehensive immigration reform are like the mid-century proponents
of the quota system designed to 'stabilize american ethnic identity.' certainly there's some of that
at work. on the far right there certainly are awful groups like vdare that have influence, but
that's a fairly insignificant factor in the debate. there's significant resentment stirred up by the
issue in the base of the gop, but it's dishonest to label that as racism. it's resentment at the
notion that people should be able to flout the law. it may be that it is a resentment largely of
citizens against foreigners, but it's not nativist because it's not aimed at foreigners generally - just
those who argue that enforcing the law is unjust- and some of the most impassioned are actually
naturalized citizens.

i think the stronger parallel to the inequities of the old quota system is on the
political left. the knee jerk 'compassion' response of many americans offers broad cover, but the
political energy clearly comes from groups which would directly benefit from unfair policies.
western europeans once benefited from a quota system that favored them over eastern
european and non-european immigrants, a policy which had political support because americans
with western european heritage wanted an unfair advantage for people with whom they
empathized and identified based on a common ethnic heritage. in just the same way, today's
proposed unfair policy would benefit latin americans to a far far greater extent than any other
group (because overland illegal entry is the least expensive and most common form of illegal
immigration) and the political momentum and activism for this policy is concentrated within that
demographic of people who identify with those who'd benefit based on a common cultural or ethnic
identity.

sounds to me like an uneducated knee jerk response to a complex issue.
do you know the facts in his case, the details of his story?

well, that sounds fair enough to me 🙂

in retrospect i oughtn't to have written that to sound as much like a response to you. really, i'd
wanted to criticize vargas and the misguided arguments that he makes. i certainly don't want him
put in jail, but i have found some of his rhetoric - and that of people from his organization (define
american) and allied groups to be self-righteous and inflammatory. that may be what
joekill162was reacting to as well. immigration seems to me to be one of a handful of left/right
cultural fault lines like abortion, gun rights, affirmative action, voter id, etc., that can frequently
inflame passions and lead to rational discussions of the merits of both side's arguments much less
frequently.

personally. what i'm in favor of is: granting citizenship immediately to anyone who has been in the
armed forces, create a pathway for anyone brought here as a minor and to anyone who arrived
prior to 1991 (which is 1/3 the total), a path to permanent residency without an option for
citizenship for people prior to 2005 (more than half the total arrived after '91 but before '05),
and the remainder (between 8% and 13% depending on how you craft a 'dream act' provision)
would have access to limited duration but renewable work permits. then you can focus on what
should be easy stuff like e-verify, border security, streamlining application and approval, tracking
program for temporary visas, and eliminating enforcement discretion so that we don't end up
doing this yet again in another 25-30 yrs.

personally, i think that seems pretty reasonable, but i've actually had friends suggest that limiting
citizenship this way is racist (despite the fact that 22% eligibility could be achieved via the minors
provision and 34% through the pre-1991 provision) and an enforcement regime which would
require automatic deportation of any new illegal immigrants (unless they qualify for refugee status)
is "deeply inhumane and mean-spirited."



i've noticed that. something else i've noticed is that on occasion (maybe one time in eight) posts
just aren't getting added. i don't know if you or anyone else has found that to be the case. after
clicking the 'submit post' button everything behaves normally, but the new post just doesn't show
up. ?

i have not watched this show.
my reply was specific to joekill162's comment only, and not to the whole debate over immigration.
i'm not a 100% bleeding heart, nor am i a cold hearted bastard.
gather facts, analyze, and work towards rational solutions to problems.



ugh! again with the wrong timestamps.
our posts are not being time stamped and sorted correctly.