Set the children free

Matt Westerhold
Jul 5, 2014


Protestors and anti-protestors faced off last week as the U.S. Customs and Border Patrol transported busloads of immigrant children to temporary relocation centers in California.

The worked-up Americans stood with signs saying “Illegals out” and “Return to sender.” They stopped the buses and turned back the children in Murrieta, Calif.

The protestors sit atop a high horse declaring what's theirs is theirs and nobody else can have it. It doesn't seem, that turning away children, is an act of courage or cowardice.

Thankfully, enter the anti-protestors, carrying signs declaring their anti-protest and giving hope that the immigration debate is kept alive.

“We are one nation of immigrants;” “No one is illegal;” “We are all Americans;” and “We are all humans.”

If the slogans on the signs are the movement, the anti-protestors win — hands-down — with the message of Mandela, of Ghandi or Martin Luther King Jr. and RFK.

The message of the anti-protestors is 'we come in peace to defend the human rights of children to be protected and safe.'

The signs, slogans and messages from protestors, on the other hand, come designed to educate, to protect, to defend and to allege. The politically charged dialogue leads to a cacophony of misinformation designed to defeat compromise.

“What part of illegal don't you understand?” and “The U.S. is not responsible for supporting a failed nation: Mexico.”

The issue of immigration, so misunderstood and used as a political wedge and rhetorical tool to dissuade compromise, has always put roadblocks in the way of expanding freedom, at home and abroad.

It might be those Americans who must become enlightened, or become extinct over time and generations, before immigration issues get resolved. Only strong beliefs — as misguided as they might be — can energize someone to protest.

Giving energy to a cause against children is itself a cause, a cause for concern. The sloganeering and the message from that restricted viewpoint needs combating. It should trigger a community conversation about freedoms and the responsibilities a nation that perceives itself as free has to other nations and populations.

Those global responsibilities go at the very core of what it means to be free, and what it means to believe in the ideal of freedom, the American ideal.

The signs carried by protestors show a depth of understanding that anti-protestors see as shallow and lacking respect for human dignity, and for true support of that American ideal.

Some reaction to a recent column on that topic seemed to mirror that restating the protest, and the anti-protest, from the limited perspective and the wider one, respectively.


On June 23, 2014, 8:50 a.m. Thinkagain wrote, “OK, we won’t call children illegal. How about we call them unwanted? You know, like the godless liberals call the unborn, right before they maim and murder them. Hypocrisy, thy name is Liberal.

The reader wants to protect the unborn but is OK with sending living children away to face an uncertain future.


On June 23, 2014, 6 a.m. Mum-Of-One wrote, “The USA is a civilized nation with educated people. The lack of compassion is astounding. These children are victims of circumstance yet the comments refer to them as less human than any American and that is saddening. These children have the potential to be great citizens and they will understand compassion because of their struggle. Maybe they could teach that compassion one day if given the chance.”

She gets it.


On June 23, 2014, 1:37 p.m. Bottom Line writes, “I'm offended by Matt being offended by a commenter correctly labeling an illegal immigrant as an illegal immigrant.”

and, finally…

On June 21, 2014, 1:02 p.m. Bottom Line writes, “Of all the columns of Matt's I've read, this one is the worst. And that's really saying something.” 


Dr. Information

Here we go again. Illegal is illegal Matt. Clearly you do not understand that. Yet another trash article. Free the children......back to Mexico and come here the legal way.

Licorice Schtick

Re: "The protestors sit atop a high horse..."

Methinks the Managing Editor's horse is higher.

But, hey, if it gets the clicks, what's a little trolling among friends..


Dr. Misinformation: They aren't FROM Mexico, jackasp.
That's why the Bush Law signed December 23, 2008 says they must be placed in safe, least-restrictive environment by Childrens Services within 72 hours and given representation in an immigration hearing.


Mr. Westerhold:

You continue to not see this terrible situation as self-created.

1. Pres. Obama suspends the deportation of illegal immigrant juveniles who were brought here as children.

"Obama also created the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which gives a more formal reprieve from deportation to so-called Dreamers, undocumented young people who entered the U.S. as children."

2. This action becomes misconstrued in Central America in that the U.S. is not deporting children. They then began to arrive in droves (approx. 60,000 at last count).

NOW, Mr. Obama is taking action on the border to halt the influx.

Nothing quite like the quixotic activity of causing and attempting to solve his own self-made problems and then per usual blaming it on someone else.

Licorice Schtick

Yes, self-created, to a degree, but not entirely, and much of the blame lies with the stupidity of American voters and the resulting dysfunctional legislative branch that's now incapable of solving even trivial problems, much less formulating an effective response to this monumental one.

While you could argue that Obama's actions made things worse, you can make a better case that deporting fewer children and focusing on adults instead serves the interest of justice.

At the root is a matter of simple economics; in Mexico, many people, acting predictable in their own self-interest, find the low risk of illegally entering the U.S. well worth the potential reward.

Wars have been fought over smaller problems.


Another misinformed commentator (surprise surprise). These children come under a law quietly signd by GEORGE W. BUSH 23 December 08 as a last gasp. The law specifically speaks about illegal immigrant unescorted children from nations OTHER THAN MEXICO and Canada.


@ Mr. Westerhold:

I saw a report, which stated that the Murrieta Immigration Detention Center was originally built to house captured illegal drug offenders.

The facility is Spartan, i.e. five large holding pens with concrete floors. The conditions are not suitable for women and children.


And the Bush law (see above)^^^^ says they must be housed in the least restrictive environment within 72 hours and provided an attorney and a hearing. Children Services is required to find families or foster care. Again... it's a BUSH LAW originally intended to thwart child pornography.


Re: "The protestors sit atop a high horse declaring what's theirs is theirs and nobody else can have it."

@ Mr. Westerhold:

So in light of the above, would it be acceptable to you to have swarms of mothers with their children show up at your residence, whereby you would give them indefinite free room and board?



Bottom Line


That was exactly the question I proposed to Matt last time he wrote this journalistic garbage. And like me, you won't get a straight answer either. Here was my quote since Matt likes to point them out:

Move your daughter to one of those border counties that can't keep hospitals open and has out of control violent crime rates due to illegal immigrants. Are you going to volunteer to take them into your own home? Provide for them with YOUR own money? A bunch of illegals with bed bugs and other diseases. Gonna move them into the bed room next to your daughter? Since you care so much. No instead just have our tax dollars pay for everything. And never hold the failed state of Mexico accountable for the poverty that exists. Or any other country. We'll take everyone. Sure why not.

But no he just wants to pass them off and they can be someone else's problem. Typical.

It doesn't matter if they're 8 or 80. An ILLEGAL ALIEN is an illegal alien. And illegal alien is NOT an interchangeable term with legal immigrant no matter how much Matt wants them to be.


Again... read the BUSH LAW that provides for children services to place these children within 72 hours in a least-restrictive environment.

Anybody hear about the Orphan Trains that took refugee European children to the Plains states?


Why aren't any of you addressing the compassion issue? These kids are running for their lives. As a child didn't you want to grow up to be an adult? If an abused and scared child asked you for help would you help or ask if they are illegal first? There is no easy answer and I definitely don't have the answers but the protesters are an embarrassment to America and the rest of the world. Is this what "exceptional" means?


Lets talk compassion. Children are dieing because Obama made a statement opening our borders for illegals to drag their kids across deserts to throw them across the border. If he would not have made the statement this flood would never have happened, So he is in effect responsible for not only the influx of illegals but also the deaths of those who die along the way.
What kind of monster would use children as a political ploy? Oh yeah Obama.


That was stupid.


I really cannot say i expect anything more from you. Insults and deflection is all you really have isn't it?
You do know they give out SS to retarded people?


Your statement WAS stupid. The kids are not here because of anything Obama did. This is a humanitarian crisis that has to be dealt with by logical, practical thinking people. You always troll around on here behind me with your ridiculous posts. Don' just GO AWAY, GO THE HELL AWAY!

Facts must actually be painful to you.
As for logical, practical people that is the last thing you liberals are. As for going away it is amusing to see you "Tolerant liberals" Show your true colors.



Do you really think that what you say is worth paying attention to ?

So retarded people get SS ?
How much do you get a month ?


WRONG AGAIN Donut! These children rushed to the US because of a law signed by GEORGE W. BUSH 23 December 2008 providing that immigrant children from nations EXCEPT MEXICO AND CANADA would be protected, placed with families or in foster care within 72 hours and provided attorneys and hearings. Might wanna do some research BEFORE you spew... oh, but that's not your style, huh?


The children finally got the memo about a law signed 5 1/2 years ago in a country 1200 miles away and all decided to come to the US now? Seems someone is grasping at straws to put blame somewhere.


How did all of these children get from El Salavador, Guatamala, and Honduras to the U.S./Mexican border? You can bet they didn't get there all by themselves. Someone had to be helping them. And then the president of El Salvador wants to come here and make sure they are being taken care of properly? How about she takes care of them properly at home so they wouldn't have to come here! Cut off all foreign aid to these countries and use it to secure our borders and take care of our poor, disabled and seniors that are already citizens.


The low information types are a clear and present danger to our nation.

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

Deer, I understand your concern for compassion and assisting a child. I share it too. However, we aren't talking about one child that has somehow made it across the border as an anomaly. We are talking about thousands and thousands of purposeful crossings. These children ("children" in some cases as I believe the President wanted to exempt those into their early 30s from deportation) that have no idea about our culture, values, language (with them being illiterate in their own language let alone English), laws, are carrying diseases such as TB, have been used by adult illegals as a free(r) pass to cross, have been raped, injured (or think how many never get to cross because they are dead for various reasons), sold into various nefarious services of which being a drug mule is the kindest, etc.

The problem here is that these kids may very well be seeking refuge, but if we allow this to happen there will be an unending tide of children always doing it. Into perpetuity. For all future Congresses and Presidents to come. Yes, this President is partly to blame with a flippant attitude toward immigration and all the things he said about not deporting minors. But it isn't his burden alone, he just hasn't helped things.

We need to address the source of what is causing the kids to flee. In this case it seems to be garbage governments in Central America. But are we to overtake, annex them to make them not armpits of the world? Or are we to leave those governments to figure themselves out through civility (or revolution) and build our southern border up to prevent these tragedies from happening?

Deporting them back is fair to the citizens who are already here and under-served by our own government and resources as well as sends the message to the populations in other countries that you can't just expect to be taken care of here.

I made this comparison before: If there was a puppy mill next door to you, deer, would you continually try to find homes for the sick and poorly adjusted dogs? Or, would you attempt to shut down the puppy mill that is the source of the inhumane, public health problem? Does your love for puppies get to usurp the rest of the neighborhood who doesn't want that to affect it? It's amazing how the EPA will shut down roads and power plants (for public good let alone private development) for mice and turtles, but if a city doesn't want thousands of possibly diseased, illiterate, criminal, and needy non-citizens? THEY are the bad people?

(As an aside, many of these questions are rhetorical and not implying you are making statements against which I lodge questions.)

One big group (as a minority, if that makes them special in some way) that seem to have had nobody pay attention to them or get their attention are those who have come here legally as immigrants. They have gone through the system, paid the fines, attended court and classes, and did everything by the book including swearing the vows of naturalization.

This isn't just old, fat white people holding signs and going "we don't take kindly to those what don't take kindly - 'MURRICA!" These are Asians, Europeans, those from the same countries who churn out these children too who are asking, "Why did we even bother then?"

Who is being represented? Who gets the priority here? This isn't a petty bickering over wild dogs vying for the last scrap. This is the fact that U.S. citizens (by birth or legal naturalization) are being told their concerns, need for service, and tax money aren't as important as those who aren't citizens and broke the law in coming here let alone have no investment yet in the country - just imaginary potential. Citixens are seeing those they sent to represent them in D.C. are more interested in representing those who didn't and can't even legally vote for said representation.

The U.S. may be a "nation of immigrants" but it isn't a free-for-all buffet to the world where we are legally nor morally obliged to be the "crazy cat lady/hoarder" of the undeveloped world. If those who cross say they are fleeing crime, what of our own citizens who live in crime-infested pockets of the U.S.? Who can't get enough to eat? Who live in filth and poverty?

So what are the answers?

Turn them back. It is a humane way to respect the citizenry and send a message to those governments that it isn't we don't want to take in their own, but that we just can't. Train/educate those governments in how they can legally recommend immigration to their citizens to do things the right way as many have and still do. Then, set up a hard border on the south. Where do we get the money for that?

It will be cheaper than caring for all these kids in the long run (at least if we draw a parallel to what those say who are in favor of preventing conception/aborting unwanted children - a separate discussion not necessary to have here). Besides, with the military as supposedly bloated with cash as many claim, call it a national security project and use military money to establish the physical barriers. Why physical? Because moral nor legal barriers seem to have an effect and have been tried and failed for many years now.

I truly appreciate the chance at discussion (as long-winded as I may be), deer. Please take any of the above as suggestions to answer your own question about solutions, morality, and exceptionalism. You know, too, you can always call out the things that I say if you want to counter-point them or continue the discussion!

EDIT: Also, deer, you may want to look into this movement for additional answers to what we can do with our immigration system: FAIR - Federation for American Immigration Reform.

seriously 1137

I completely agree with everything you stated. ALSO, why do people think the poverty, crime, horrid living conditions and abuse ends when the kids get to America. What about HUMAN TRAFFICING? These poor families are promised their kids and family members can be smuggled in safely. Once here, they'll just have to work a year or a few month cleaning houses or in restaurants until the debt (of transport to the US) is paid off. ..When many of these people are being traded and or extorted in prostitution, and other dangerous crime rings. Family's believe they are being taken care of when I can guarantee there is a larger number anyone could guess of "missing" illegal immigrants who are sadly lost in a system much worse than what they came from. Promoted or forgiving illegal immigrants has nasty side effects for ALL involved


Herozone.... YOU might want to check the law signed by GEORGE W. BUSH in December 2008.

It specifies that children from countries other than Mexico would be admitted without question. The law was signed because Central American children were being brought in illegally for CHILD PORNOGRAPHY. The law is very specific and is tying the hands of anyone who wants to deport the children without hearing.
REGISTER. what happened to the policy about unreasonably long posts.
HEROZONE... as you can see, it doesn't take much to 'cull' as opposed to 'call' out your points.
Just read the law.

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

Report me if you don't like me, Ann. It's that little button called "Alert Us". Meanwhile you spam the boards with the same thing over and over again and I've not said a word about it because, like me, you are putting yourself on display for others to read and judge.

Which of my points have you culled/called out? Over which mound do you stand triumphant with your flag planted and flapping in the breeze? Perhaps in my lengthy reply to deertracker you completely missed the context of the entire paragraphs-long reply that indicated looking at long-term solutions and long-term humane ways to prevent this from happening. Each paragraph, mind you, written with that context in mind.

Have a wonderfully fantastic day. Remember, if you want to report me all you have to do is hit that button a bunch of times. That's all it takes. Yup. Just report someone who doesn't call others names, cites his sources, calls for civil discourse, and makes as complete a thought as possible instead of dropping bombastic one-liners. After all, you seem to be forced to read what I write and it just isn't fair is it that I use more words than other people?

P.S. - Capital letters are not cruise control for cool.


Anyone who believes all of these kids are running for their lives is naive to the largest degree possible. They are sent here first so they get established and then their families can follow them in time and again, shortcut the system.


SPEW AWAY. Many already have families here.


Set them free! Across the boarder in Mexico!


If they want citizenship, fine let them do it the legal way. There is a way to do it properly, legally and laws just for that purpose. There are MILLIONS of Americans that have done it. I know some of them. Yes American is a nation of Immigrants that came here for a better life. But they do it legally. Until the US does something to stop this, it will only get worse. Mexico, Central America, where ever they are coming from will continue to send them. Send more of them. When does it stop? Illegal is illegal.


Don't you guys get it? This is about survival not just the quest for a better life. It is wrong to deny someone something your ancestors sought for you!


Our ancestors became citizens, they learned English, they followed the law and did it the legal way. Last I knew most did not just come here by the bus (boat) load and get free housing, food, medical care, etc. They were made to work, learn English and support themselves. Become citizens. Our ancestors were PROUD to become Americans. Back then the government didn't bend to accommodate every language or culture, you were made to learn the American way. Not press one for Spanish. Yes I get it. My ancestors wanted a better life and to be AMERICAN, not to be known as German-Americans. When was the last time you saw a box on any kind of form that said German-American, under the ethnicity heading?


The nation was founded by illegal immigrants.


The Indians had laws that had an immigration policy? The early years of this country had immigration laws? Care to link them? I know it sounds good to SAY that all Europeans coming to this country beofore 1875 were illegals, but I don't know what those were. The first restrictive immigration laws were in 1875, at least from my searching. When there were no laws restricting immigration, how can there be illegal immigrants?


The country was founded by people (many of them criminals and other misfits) who were here based upon authority of England to establish "colonies" on land that did not belong to them but to the indigenous people of the "Americas". They then rebelled against England and continued to take by force land that did not belong to them.

Most of these refugees from the drug war created by us, are likely ethnically related to the native people of North and Central America that we displaced and therefore have a higher claim to this land than the rest of us.


Sorry but I don't believe anyone has a debt to pay for what their ancestors did. Nor do I think anyone has a claim for anything that happened generations ago. That way leads to revenge for things that happened so long ago no one can claim to not have had some ancestor somewhere was bad and all others should pay. It leads nowhere.

If you wish to make reperations on your own you are free to do so. You are not free to do so for others who don't agree with your premise.


You asked me in what way the founders were illegal immigrants. I don't believe they had permission from the original land owners to move here and thus they were "illegal".

In any event these women and children are not illegal immigrants but refugees under international law.


"You asked me in what way the founders were illegal immigrants. I don't believe they had permission from the original land owners to move here and thus they were "illegal"."

Legality is not based on what someone hundreds of years after the fact "believes". Ileagal is something that should be able to be proved.


Nonsense. Did the colonists obtain permission from the people who inhabited this land to live on their land? No. The colonists were trespassers on land they did not own and simply took it.

Almost every nation is based on the illegal taking of somebody else's land and wars are fought over land to this day based on historical claims to land, i.e. the Middle East.

Again, my point is these women and children are not illegal immigrants but refugees from tyranny seeking a better life.


"Again, my point is these women and children are not illegal immigrants but refugees from tyranny seeking a better life."

So it would be alright for anyone who claims to seek a better life can come into your home and stay?

Laws of this country need only be obeyed sometimes? If they come into this country illegally they are illegal immigrants. Unless you think laws have no meaning and don't need to be obeyed... except those you agree with. There are immigration laws that have been passed.


If a child is a refugee from some threat to their safety that was created by the USA such as the child pornography or drug industries and that child showed up on my doorstep; yes I would take that child into my home and provide for that child under the laws of this country including seeking asylum for that child.

As Contrary Ann has repeatedly posted the law of this country signed by President GW Bush does not allow us to deport these children but to provide for them. We also have responsibilities under International law to treat them as refugees.


The Indians had no laws about immigration nor land ownership. So the settlers broke no law. They were not illegal immigrants.

As for asylum seekers Most are turned down, and many don't show up for court. Hence most will be illegal immigrants. This article is a year old and before the currnt surge of illegal immigrants. I doubt kids will have any better luck at asylum than those from a year ago as they have not lived long enough to be targeted by whatever groups from their countries. If just living in those countries was enough to grant asylum all seekers would have been granted it instead of the low percentage of those who have been granted it.

The U.S. granted asylum to 23% of Guatemalans and 14% of El Salvadorans in the total pool of asylum seekers—including people here legally—from 2002 through 2011, according to federal data released to The Wall Street Journal under the Freedom of Information Act. There aren't data on the success rates among illegal crossers alone, but immigration lawyers say rates are roughly the same for all categories.

Others choose not to. After granting credible-fear passes, many courts release claimants on bail or on their own recognizance until the next hearing date—due in part to insufficient detention facilities, immigration officials say.

That is the last authorities see of some. There aren't official data on how many asylum seekers go on the lam. In fiscal 2012, over 8,000 migrants that U.S. authorities detained and released failed to appear for their subsequent court dates, Justice Department data show; that likely includes many who were released from detention after expressing a credible fear of harm, immigration officials say.


How do you know any of what you typed is true? Where's the proof? There were plenty that came here by boat aka slaves. Were they legal? How legal were the slave owners? BTW, that free food, housing, and medical care definitely was not free. They worked or died.

Times have changed. The past is just that, the past. America has to deal with the problems of now.

Why put a box for German-American when the Germans did not want to be known as Germans?


The low information types are a clear and present danger to our nation.


That would be you.


Didja see the poster saying "This isn't Ellis Island"? Is that how your ancestors entered?
Didja know refugees from Cuba only have to touch American soil to be protected and put into the system?
Didja see the part where GEORGE W. BUSH signed the law that protects these immigrant children?
Oh... but you have to be able to research and read.


At first, all I could see was children and heartbreak, but what concerns me now is there are at least 1,000 illegals coming in daily. That's massive. 7,000 (a week) X's 4 (weeks in a month)= 28,000 illegals. That's massive. That's more than the population of Sandusky. Could Sandusky take in its population in a month without concern?
Since it's not happening here, yet, I guess it's someone else's problem right?

The real question is, why is this going on, I'm not buying the excuse of the parents wanting to keep their children safe from their country's violence. The massive amounts pouring in have help from someone/people with authority. Gotta dig a little more deeper.


It's easy for you to dismiss their safety concerns because you are not under threat. I agree, America just can't absorb the cost but something has to be done. I saw a report where a 14 year old boy refused to join a gang and was immediately shot dead in his home in front of his family. Keep digging!


Keep digging? Are you taking about a 14 year old boy in America? Can't escape violence in here either. Maybe Canada won't be as violent as the United States.

A 13 year old in New Orleans

A 16 year old in Chicago

Actually, any kid refusing to join a gang should keep away from Chicago. They have more killings about refusal of joining gangs.


Your point is noted but if your son was under the threat of either join or die would you or would you not seek refuge for him? You enjoy protection from the government here but you should still want to know your kid is safe/r which is something some of these do not enjoy. That was just one example. There's many instance of rape, child abduction and more. I just think we need to deal with this in a practical way as a united country.


My first instinct as a mother is protecting my children, and I will note I sympathize with these parents. I really do.
The government don't protect my kids though, I do. I am the responsible one. I monitor my children, I correct if they do wrong. Law enforcement will come if I ever needed help, true, but then will it be too late? The most the government will do is prosecute the killer (if found) provide legal service for free if needed for the murderer, then get sent to prison for years and years.

I agree with you in dealing with it in a practical way, but what's the practical way? Right now, the best way is to stop more from coming in like this. It's too overwhelming.


Don't matter what you thimk.... George W. Bush signed the law that says we have to provide for them.


Remember how Vito Corleone came here alone on the boat from Sicily, orphaned and fleeing from those who would murder him? These kids are in the same situation.


Re: "Vito Corleone,"

Fictional and he became a murderous gangster - 'great' example.

BTW: "The Godfather" is 'really' a book on Machiavellian mgmt.


My comment was written tongue in cheek. I am certainly aware the Godfather story was fiction.

It does strike me ironic how many claim we are a Christian nation, yet we exhibit such unChrist like behavior.

What would Jesus do? Protest with signs and shouts of ugly remarks or offer comfort to these children?


Re: "What would Jesus do?"

Outside of the Bible, there is no historical evidence that Jesus even existed, i.e. potentially another fictional character.

Re: "offer comfort to these children?"

So putting them in large holding pens like cattle would be comforting to them?


In reality "What would Jesus do?" Jesus would send them back from where they came. Switch out the illegals with Romans and see what i mean.


We as Americans are a very ugly spirited people at times.

We rub our hands at glee with stock market gains and cheap prices from our access to cheaply made imports, then look down on with scorn at those needing public assistance after the living wage factory jobs disappearred.

Some couples enjoy dual pensions and benefits from a major company and protest against the Affordable Care Act and the expansion of health care coverage to tens of millions of uninsured Americans.

And there are those who are enraged they might have to pay a nickel or a dime more for hamburgers or a pizza to allow the owners to pay a living wage or provide benefits to their employees.

And heaven forbid public employees enjoy a decent wage. No, many cry for crushing organized labor and let no one have a decent wage and benefit package.

Just something to think about......

Perkins Resident

Reader: Move to Cuba.


Perkins Resident-

Move to Mars.

Bottom Line


Make one intelligent comment. Ever.


Bottom Line-

You're a nobody.


To Perkins resident...

That's an intelligent response....not.

Rather than consider there might be ways to improve our country, you would give anyone offering a critical thought an invitation to leave.

Unamerican....or typical?


Bankrupt countries can help no one. Look at Detroit for the future you are asking for.
Something else to think about.....


The evidence consists of the results of His life i.e. establishment of the dominant religion (one branch alone has 1.2 billion adherents) in the world by followers who willingly embraced death rather than renounce Him.


Re: "The evidence,"

"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence."

- Christopher Hitchens

Christian churches are the largest and wealthiest landowners in the world.

"Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me." (LK 18:22)



"Outside of the Bible, there is no historical evidence that Jesus even existed, i.e. potentially another fictional character."

- That is a lie.

"There is overwhelming evidence for the existence of Jesus Christ, both in secular and biblical history.
Perhaps the greatest evidence that Jesus did exist is the fact that literally thousands of Christians in the first century A.D., including the twelve apostles, were willing to give their lives as martyrs for Jesus Christ.
People will die for what they believe to be true, but no one will die for what they know to be a lie."

Read more:


You want it both ways pooh. Either you care or you don't so how important is comfort? The only option to doing something is doing nothing! You complain about the holding pens as if any type of comfort is okay with you when in reality offering comfort is not even an option for you!


No holding pens. The law says they have to be placed - within 72 hours - in the least restrictive environment until they get immigration hearings. At the risk of being 'punished' for this, I have to remind you GEORGE W. BUSH signed the law.


The movie showed him going through Ellis Island.
Do we REALLY need more Vito Corleones?


When did your immigrant family arrive... and how? In the early 1700s mine arrived on ships in the colonial ports.

BTW... those of us who have been Americans since before there was an America are tired of you upstart IMMIGRANT REFUGEES taking such a hard line now.


Before 1875 there were no restictive immigration laws.

If you long time immigrants don't like those who came after you I suggest you get a law passed to kick us out. That would be the legal way to get it done. Good luck!


If the Internet would have existed during the Third Reich would Germans' comments have supported the carting off of refugee children based on economics and would receiving nations' people argued to send the children back because we can't afford them?

We aren't that different are we? Placing children in prison detention. God help us.

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

Babo I will have to respectfully disagree with you here.

Unless I missed something and you were being sarcastic, I am somewhat baffled at this comment. Especially as you come across as someone with some kind of legal background (which is why I usually enjoy reading your comments and explanations elsewhere). Whose rights and/or access to services, protection, and tax money is more important: the legal citizens' or the illegal non-citizens'?

The children are in detention presumably for quarantine purposes let alone to check if any have known criminal pasts or ties. I wouldn't want them wandering the streets, either. What's truly odd is that not even Congress members are allowed (or rather only certain ones are) to see into the camps and take tours. The children are being bused and flown secretly to undisclosed locations, and overall these actions seem very suspicious.

But beyond that, we can't afford them especially with so many of our own children who are already citizens living in poverty, facing illiteracy, having abusive/filthy homes, etc. What kind of message does it send to other nations that instead of fixing their own problems we'll just take their kids? That helps nobody and guarantees the inhumanity into perpetuity.

To invoke a comparison, how is this different than a storied gypsy throwing you his/her baby and running away saying "It's your problem now!" only to make more babies along the way without repentance for what they did before?

I'd argue it is more humane, moral, and economic to staunch the bleeding now than guarantee a lifelong hemorrhage.

But, if you wish to make comparisons to Nazis, I will go one step parallel when I invoke this summary of the dogs in Animal Farm who represent the NKVD (or, I suppose, "Hitler's Youth"):

= = = = =

Look, we know the dogs are brutal and vicious, but can you really blame them? Napoleon raises them specifically to be his own little private army: he takes them from their parents as puppies, says that he'll "make himself responsible for their education," and then raises them in isolation from the rest of the farm (3.12). No wonder they become little monsters.

They're first unleashed on Animal Farm right after Snowball has wowed everyone with his flashy speech. But Snowball doesn't get to bask in his glory for long: Napoleon lets out a whistle, and "there was a terrible baying sound outside, and nine enormous dogs, wearing brass-studded collars came bounding into the barn" (5.14).

From this point on, the dogs are the pigs' bodyguards—they intimidate and threaten the other animals to make sure that the pigs get their way in exchange for treats and cushy beds up at the farmhouse. That's not all: "It was noticed that they wagged their tails to him [Napoleon] in the same way as the other dogs had been used to do to Mr. Jones" (5.15). The narrator is already foreshadowing the novel's end—the pigs are going to be just as bad as the humans.

= = = = =

While whatever happens to these kids hopefully doesn't turn them into murderers, abusers, etc.; perhaps we can see some foreshadowing by who is hiding behind the wall of children and to what ends those kids will serve the pigs - er, politicians - in D.C.? For whom will their tails wag and will things actually be any different if they have their way?

Simply analogous things to ponder, Babo. Thanks for weathering my long comment.


"Whose rights and/or access to services, protection, and tax money is more important: the legal citizens' or the illegal non-citizens'?"

This is not an issue of American law but of international human rights and refugees of the drug war we created and sustain. My analogy to the German people during the Third Reich was meant to compel consideration of how did civilized, cultured and educated people stand down and allow others to be stripped of their humanity and dignity. Also, any nation at that time that would have refused women and children safe harbor would have been branded immoral and evil.

IMO, our nation's reaction to this refugee problem will cause us to lose whatever moral authority the nation retains.

The Dow is over 17,000 and all is well.


Re: "how did civilized, cultured and educated people stand down and allow others to be stripped of their humanity and dignity."

FDR did much the same.

See: Executive Order 9066.


Sure, thus proving that Americans will stand down as did the Germans to human rights atrocities with the right propaganda directed at the "bogeymen" du jour.


Re: "Americans will stand down as did the Germans,

An enlightening book if you care to read it:

"They Thought They Were Free; The Germans, 1933-45"

In Nazi Germany, one could go along with the program or be imprisoned or worse - your choice.

Most of the atrocities occurred in Poland and outside the purview of most Germans citizens.

The Nazi had the Jews, American socialists rail against the 1%.

Also, see Stanley Milgram's experiments:

Most people tend to obey those whom they perceive to be in authority.


Case in point.

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

Sorry for the late reply Babo.

Our country has no moral authority. We wish we do, I'm sure. But morals and laws don't completely overlay nor are they mutually exclusive. Bringing morals into it is irrelevant as we are discussing who's morals exactly? The President certainly has different morals than other people. Look at all the members of Congress each with their own set of morals.

Moral relativism is, in my opinion, a very bad structure to support policy in this case.


Maybe we should build gas ovens disguised as showers.


Heck, out of "compassion," let's just 'invite' the entire populations of El Salvador (6,125,512), Honduras (8,598,561) and Guatemala (14,647,083) to come live in the U.S.

We wealthy Yankees can certainly clothe, feed, house and educate another 29.4 million people.

@ Mr. Westerhold:

Hire some buses, go pick up 'em up and bring 'em to Sandusky!

Think of all the new potential readers!!!!

The owners may have to invest in publishing a Spanish SR edition however.

Bottom Line

Great vacation spot to consider

Of course, this is obvious to anyone with a fully functioning brain.


Myth #1: Undocumented immigrants don’t pay taxes but still get benefits.

Undocumented immigrants pay taxes every time they buy gas, clothes or new appliances. They also contribute to property taxes—a main source of school funding—when they buy or rent a house, or rent an apartment. The Social Security Administration estimates that half to three-quarters of undocumented immigrants pay federal, state and local taxes, including $6 billion to $7 billion in Social Security taxes for benefits they will never get. They can receive schooling and emergency medical care, but not welfare or food stamps.


If undocumented, how are taxes taken out? If they do file, do they receive tax breaks if living here illegally?


While many Americans believe illegal immigrants don't pay taxes, billions of dollars deducted from paychecks issued to undocumented workers flow to the Social Security Administration (SSA) every year. Those workers almost certainly will never see that money again.

Social Security officials keep a record of wages that do not match up with real names and numbers in their system. The record is called the earnings suspense file.

In 2009, the last year for which figures are available, employers reported wages of $72.8 billion for 7.7 million workers who could not be matched to legal Social Security numbers.

There are no tax breaks.


Interesting. Thanks for the reply.

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

Mum-of-One, thank you for breaking things down. However I'd like to not that just because one pays taxes that does not make one a citizen. If so then I am a citizen of Canada, Mexico, and Japan as well as the United States. I paid into their systems for the things I bought.

Please don't forget that the IRS in 2012 alone payed out over $4B to illegal immigrants who shouldn't have gotten said money.

That number has not gone down.

"Illegal Aliens Who Pay Taxes May Claim Tax Credits (2013)

The CAP/IPC Campaign to Justify Amnesty

Organizations promoting the adoption of an amnesty for illegal aliens cite their payment of taxes as a justification of granting them legal status. A citation that regularly appears in support of that argument is a paper by the Immigration Policy Center (IPC) titled "Unauthorized Immigrants Pay Taxes, Too."1

The IPC paper asserts that the illegal alien population contributes $11.2 billion annually in state and local taxes and provides a breakdown by state. The data presented, however, are not calculations by the IPC, but rather are data taken from another organization, i.e., the Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP). That organization apparently has not published any study that led to the estimates of state and local taxes paid by illegal aliens by state, because no such study appears among the listing of publications on its website.2

Nevertheless, the limited information in the IPC paper about assumptions used in generating the cost estimates are sufficient to conclude that the reported estimates of tax collections are unrealistic...The credibility of the data presented by the IPC is immediately suspect when they include estimated sales tax collections from Delaware, New Hampshire, and Oregon — states that do not have sales taxes...It is clear that the illegal alien population that would benefit from the amnesty being advocated by CAP and IPC and others has very different characteristics from the general U.S. population. Those characteristics affect their present and future potential tax contribution profile regardless of whether they were granted amnesty. Rather than being a current or future significant tax revenue source, this population is a source of tax collections that are only a small fraction of the fiscal expenditures it absorbs, and that fiscal deficit would likely grow if an amnesty provided this population access to the social safety net not available to it at present."

The above is submitted respectfully, and with the open invitation to have a discussion about this topic. Thank you for your thoughts, Mum-of-One!


So you understand the meaning of 'brief comments'?


Re: "Those workers almost certainly will never see that money again."

Those Americans who die without a spouse or other heirs prior to achieving pay status; the contributions remain in the trust and no heirs see any of the results of the deceased's contributions either - legal theft.


Myth # 2: Anyone who enters the country illegally is a criminal:

Is someone who jaywalks or who doesn’t feed a parking meter a criminal? Only very serious misbehavior is generally considered “criminal” in our legal system. Violations of less serious laws are usually “civil” matters and are tried in civil courts. People accused of crimes are tried in criminal courts and can be imprisoned. Federal immigration law says that unlawful presence in the country is a civil offense and is, therefore, not a crime. The punishment is deportation. However, some states—like Arizona—are trying to criminalize an immigrant’s mere presence.


As non citizens they are not afforded the same rights as citizens. The constitution and rights pertain to citizens only. So being here undocumented is a crime and illegal.
Those that support this influx should be forced to take them in and be responsible for them.


The Bill of Rights applies to everyone, even illegal immigrants. So an immigrant, legal or illegal, prosecuted under the criminal code has the right to due process, a speedy and public trial, and other rights protected by the Fifth and Sixth Amendments. But immigration proceedings are matters of administrative law, not criminal law. (As a result, the consequence of violating your immigration status is not jail but deportation.), many members of the general public presume that non citizens do not deserve the same rights as citizens. But the presumption is wrong in many more respects than it is right.


Illegals are afforded the rights of their home country. The 14th amendment covers only NATURAL BORN CITIZENS, Not immigrants who are here illegally. Sorry your assumption is wrong. If what you say is true then they could vote, run for office ect, ect. Look it up facts are fun!
(Amendment XIV, Section 1, Clause 1:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.) The


While illegal aliens do not enjoy all of the rights granted to citizens by the Constitution, specifically the rights to vote or possess firearms, these rights can also be denied to U.S. citizens convicted of felonies. The courts have ruled that, while they are within the borders of the United States, illegal aliens are granted the same fundamental, undeniable constitutional rights granted to all Americans.


Illegals get deported, end of discussion. That is the law, Enforcing that law is up to the executive branch, They are failing miserably at it.
When Obama opened his trap and spoke about the ignoring the enforcement of the laws he created a humanitarian crises that is getting people hurt. Illegals are not citizens so instead of debating what rights they do or do not have just send them back.


Because these children are from non-contiguous countries (not Canada or Mexico), they cannot be immediately deported, but must first go before a judge. This is according to U.S. law, as well as international refugee treaties to which the U.S. is party.


AND WHO SIGNED that law.

yup! George W. Bush just before he left office.


Many people also accuse immigrants of having “anchor babies”—children who allow the whole family to stay. According to the U.S. Constitution, a child born on U.S. soil is automatically an American citizen. That is true. But immigration judges will not keep immigrant parents in the United States just because their children are U.S. citizens. Between 1998 and 2007, the federal government deported about 108,000 foreign-born parents whose children had been born here. These children must wait until they are 21 before they can petition to allow their parents to join them in the United States. That process is long and difficult. In reality, there is no such thing as an “anchor baby.”

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

Again, thank you for wishing to talk about this topic. However, this is a trend that I don't see continuing (deporting more and more parents). The date range you quoted is seven years old and a lot has happened in that time. Do you have current figures so that we can get a better view of things? The President as recently as 2012 has stated that he was going to make deporting parents a low priority, one of the reasons we are seeing the influx of people here today two years later.

This was an interesting article to read:

Though as you don't get the impression I am being contentious for the sake of it as I am hardly a xenophobe or against immigrants, what is your solution to ending the presumably inhumane way of doing things now? How do we stop the bleeding and begin the healing in a way that doesn't make current citizens' needs/contributions secondary to those who are not citizens?

The above is not a "gotcha" question nor an indignant challenge. I honestly have no idea what your idea is. I simply ask in civil curiosity what it is you would have us do?


2010 to 2012, a record-breaking 205,000 parents of U.S. citizen children were deported. I don't have the answer on how to fix the immigration. I wish I did. I am saddened by the comments on here. Each and every child is precious.

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

Thanks for the reply, Mum! I truly appreciate it. Don't be saddened by the comments. Children are indeed precious, but they are a problem that we can't do anything about in the aggregate (unless we overthrow their governments and/or install our own people in them) especially as they aren't citizens but neither can all of them be made to be.

If you are open to continuing the discussion, perhaps I can offer an idea or two? Humane ways to help prevent such tragedies as this?


Read the FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT. Be sure to read the comments in BIG LETTERS. "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive ANY PERSON of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to ANY PERSON within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

I'm sorry, are you still trying to be relevant to the points I was discussing with Mum? Don't you have other threads to spam this in while griping at the length of my comments? If you'd like to join the discussion, then here:

The children are an unfortunate problem. Because of the otherwise broad nature of how we treat them, we are being overwhelmed. Thus, preventing them from ever setting foot illegally in the U.S. at all is humane for all involved. Meanwhile we encourage LEGAL (I can use capital letters too) immigration to extend opportunity to those who will contribute to society and enjoy what it has to offer including things like what you posted. Just as my comment before, Ann, this is a long-term solution for the (hopefully) temporary and overwhelming flood of people that was not meant to occur - and wouldn't had we done what I suggested years before.


Matt Westerhold.........are you REALLY as stupid as you seem?


@Jizzbo and dearcrack..........since you seem to support what is happening, how many of these children can we mark you down for when they arrive? I know running your mouth is common in your world, but let's see if it's your mouth or you heart. Stretch your government checks a little and support a few of these children.


What I support is a practical solution. I do not support killing kids!


Send them back, they had no right to sneak in through the back door! If they want to go through the path to legal citizenship, fine, but not like this. We have tens of thousands of children already here that are living in poverty and they should be dealt with first and foremost. This joke of a president we have has caused this problem and enough is enough already.


Because these children are from non-contiguous countries (not Canada or Mexico), they cannot be immediately deported, but must first go before a judge. This is according to U.S. law, as well as international refugee treaties to which the U.S. is party.


No.. this joke of a Republican congressional contingent intent on keeping people poor and blaming it on the Black man in the White House built by Black men.

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

SUCCINCT EDIT this was disappointing.

thinkagain's picture

The author claims killing American babies is Ok, but would have you believe he cares for children. This is cruel, evil and glaring shameless hypocrisy.


As a Christian your comment deeply saddens me. I rejoice that Matt's eyes are opened to the humanity in these mothers and children and pray that the wisdom of the Holy Spirit will continue to enlighten him to a deeper understanding of the preciousness of life including the unborn.

thinkagain's picture

If indeed you were a Christian, you would see the hypocrisy of Matt’s condemnations, all the while supporting murder of the innocents. I rejoice that through the wisdom of the Holy Spirit, my eyes have been opened to the evil sin that is abortion. Perhaps you need to take self-inventory of your spiritual condition, because it is possible that calling yourself a Christian is unwarranted.


Who are you to judge Matt or me? You appear to condemn these innocent mothers and children, like Christ and His Holy Mother, refugees from tyranny. Take the log out of your eye.

thinkagain's picture

Yet hypocrite that you are, you have found fit to judge me.

if you insist on continuing to make assumptions about me, I’ll advise you only this: assume you will always be wrong.

Go ahead and continue to make all sorts of assumptions because you don't have the courage to ask questions.


I made no assumptions about you. I stated "You appear to condemn these innocent mothers and children". If you do not condemn these refugees and view them as children of God then clarify your position.

thinkagain's picture

I’ve made my position on abortion, both now and in the past, quite clear. No further elucidation is necessary. My point was simple enough, those that claim to care about children, yet support the killing of the unborn are hypocrites.

If that is still too difficult to understand, then make of it what you will. If you, like Matt, care to misinterpret that to mean “Hey kids, go home and die”, then have at it.

As a Christian I would have no choice but to help anyone in need, regardless of their legal status. I do this now, through my charitable support of many such causes.

If your question is what should this country do, I have no simple answers now. Because like yourself and Matt, I'm not looking for a bumper sticker answer on a difficult public policy strategy.

Since you appear to have all the answers on this dilemma, let me ask you a few questions.

What about when 50 million of your neighbors want to come here, as surveys of Mexicans suggest? Isn't an open Mexican border unfair to Africans and those from other impoverished nations who want to come? Why are you not proposing America take in all the World’s countless hungry and poor?


You've made the position of your sin free alias on abortion quite clear while assuming many things about known people. I certainly am not "looking for a bumper sticker answer on a difficult public policy strategy". Further, at no time did I suggest to have the answers to this humanitarian crisis as you claim.

thinkagain's picture

“…sin free alias…assuming many things about known people”

Instead of answering my questions or communicating in a rational manner, you’re content to cast aspersions through vague innuendo. Is this how you show you are a Christian?

As a Christian, your comment deeply saddens me.


So pray for me as I do for you.

thinkagain's picture

I will. Prayer has power. How good it is to hear someone say, “I am praying for you!”

Colossians 4:3


Pax tecum


Matt the word illegal has no hidden meaning. If you would like to sponsor - feed, cloth and educate these children and there families indefinitely please feel free to call immigration. If not I would suggest that you adhere to the laws of the land. My great, great grandparents immigrated to this country legally, learned to speak the language and made there own way without government assistance. They should do the same.


Read the FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT. Be sure to read the comments in BIG LETTERS. "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive ANY PERSON of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to ANY PERSON within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."


How did these kids get here from those far away countries? It's not like they walked a few blocks from south of our border and jumped over a garden fence. What parent would send a their child alone to travel that distance to an uncertain destination in the U.S.?


That's my query. Where's the money that has paid for these children to get here. It ain't free.
Someone in our government is corrupt. That's why we need to dig deeper.

Nancy Pelosi on this topic "This crisis that some call a crisis, we have to view as an opportunity,". She has either lost her one marble that she had left, or there's an agenda. Could be both though.


Take over Mexico.


It's tragic. I feel for these kids. If they are coming mostly for economic reasons, that means the parents are poor.

My question is, how can these poor Central Americans parents afford to have their children smuggled/trafficked into the United States? Who's flipping the bill in their end?


So Matt, if they "Set them free" then what? Where do they go? Do they get jobs? Go to school? Orphanages? Sweat Shops? Black Market Adoptions? What is your plan for after they set free? 20 Acres and a Mule? (I think that was in a movie). Do they start the legal paperwork, learn English and take the classes to become citizens? If they are underage children, are they wards of the state? What happens when their families show up too? Just set them free too? Where is the line drawn? Why have borders at all.


Under George Bush's law signed in December 2008, these children must - in 72 hours - be placed in least restrictive environments while Children Services is MANDATED to place with their families here or in appropriate foster care while they await an immigration hearing.
Do you miss GWB yet? Just caught you in his web didn't he?


Thank you for posting the above link.


You are welcome.

This one is better, I think


I was exposed to TB through an illegal. The man looked healthy until he had a stroke, he was so full of the mycobacterium it actually caused the stroke. He was from El Salvador. If you think you can tell who may be ill you're wrong. I endured 6 mos of ATB therapy. Luckily my immune system did what it should, walled off the bacteria in my lung.


Those kids are here because they were directed by adults to come here. The adults are either family members or operatives of the obama gov't. who are following his dictum to "overwhelm the system".... by causing more chaos.. When chaos becomes unbearable, citizens will accept ANY solution...

Obama wants to expand the underclass and this is a humanitarian appearing way of shoving social upheaval down our throats.

The kids are perfect scapegoats to dupe naive Americans including the many pro obama posters here.


Then why is the president taking steps to get cooperation from Congress to override the Bush Law?


Re: Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras.

These Central American countries have become the conduit for drugs on their way to the U.S.

The respective govts. are weak and corrupted.

This is one of the unintended consequences of the U.S.' drug prohibition policies.

The U.S. has numerous stringent laws against illegal drug usage, but it's also the world's largest consumer of them.


@ Mr. Westerhold:

You 'somewhat' addressed a couple blogger responses.

Why haven't you joined the present conversation?

Also, what's the tenor of the phone calls and emails that are you receiving regarding these nonsensical editorials?

It would appear predictably, that wrongheaded bleeding heart liberal benevolent policies are collapsing in bureaucratic chaos.

The dumbed-down BIG govt. socialist solution: More money.


Matt, I think they should send a bus load to the Westerhold house and at least 20 bus loads to the White House (because the WH is a much larger residence). Are you willing to open your doors to them?


Re: "willing to open your doors to them?"

Why wait for these illegals? There must be plenty of local homeless & destitute men, women and children that Mr. Westerhold could help out.

I would think that there's gotta be some spare offices at the SR & the NR to house 'em as well.

"Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me." (LK 18:22)

Obviously in contorted socialist thinking, the Christian God requires that advocates impoverish themselves for the benefit of others.

AJ Oliver

I am going to post this again - it's fun to quote oneself. "There would be FAR fewer refugees from Mexico and Central America if the US had not for years backed and sometimes installed really thugish governments there. If you are a small corn farmer in Mexico, and NAFTA rules flood your country with cheap (and subsidized) US corn, where are you going to go? It's high time that the US finally became the "good neighbor" to the region that FDR intended, but never implemented."
Not bragging or anything, but we have taken dozens of international kids into our home; and hundreds of Sandusky families have done the same.


Re: "It's high time that the US finally became the 'good neighbor'"

You're suggesting what?

"How US Aid to Central America's Rich Drives Its Poor to Our Borders":


New Colossus

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Sonnet by Emma Lazarus


Re: "Give me your tired, et al"

(Void where prohibited by law.)


Read the FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT. Be sure to read the comments in BIG LETTERS. "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive ANY PERSON of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to ANY PERSON within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The Constitution says we MUST protect them.


See: Article IV, Section 4.

"The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government, AND SHALL PROTECT EACH OF THEM AGAINST INVASION; (emphasis mine) and on application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence."