WaPo Can't Seem to Find Anti-Illegal Immigration 'Family Destroyer' Groups in Deportation Story
Tuesday's Washington Post reported that immigration-amnesty advocates are upset that Maryland's Prince George's County is deporting more non-criminals than criminals under the federal government's Secure Communities initiative. Team Obama promised to focus its deportation efforts on criminals. Reporter Shankar Vedantam relayed the concerns of the left (classified only as "immigration rights groups"), but there was no spot in this story for advocates for increased deportations of illegals:
Immigration rights groups say the program has led to the removal of tens of thousands of illegal immigrants who have committed far less serious crimes or none at all.
"The numbers out of Prince George's are absurd," said Gustavo Andrade, organizing director of CASA of Maryland, an immigrant rights group that is active in the county. "Even one family destroyed because of this kind of program makes it unacceptable."
People enforcing the immigration laws are "family destroyers"? The Post just allowed that wild-eyed accusation to hang there in black and white. The only debate was between the CASA people and the liberal government types in Prince George's and the Obama administration. Conservatives are smeared without rebuttal. The Post tried to explain away the obvious point that every illegal immigrant is a law-breaker -- whether they crossed the border illegally or stayed after a visa expired:
(Although being in the country without papers can sometimes be a crime - especially when the person is a repeat offender - undocumented immigration is usually an administrative violation.)
Vedantam also claimed the Obama team has "record deportations" on its resume.
The Obama administration has sought to demonstrate that it is serious about enforcement even as it has pushed for an overhaul of U.S. immigration laws. But reform has stalled despite a record number of deportations over the past two years.
That links to another Vedantam story touting Team Obama that included only its critics on the "immigrants rights" groups of the left. Does Vedantam realize that border-control lobbying groups exist? James Antle in The American Spectator reported that the Obama folks are cooking the "record" books on deportations -- based on a report on the Washington Post website. Vedantam and his editors can't even seem to read their own site before boosting Obama "records."
- Tim Graham's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
You break the law
Submitted by hbnolikeee on Tue, 12/21/2010 - 9:52am.
You pay the fine. Don't point at someone else and say hey he's a worse criminal get him and leave me alone. Get real raza boy.
How is one
Submitted by theduck6 on Tue, 12/21/2010 - 10:37am.
an illegal alien and not having broken any law at the same time?
La Raza and CAIR can KMA!
The 'even one person/family'
Submitted by eaglewingz08 on Tue, 12/21/2010 - 10:00am.
The 'even one person/family' meme of socialists is ridiculous. How about 'even one person killed by an auto is too much', so let's ban motor vehicles. Or how about 'even one family torn apart by divorce is too much', so lets ban divorce. Or 'even one fetus killed in the womb is too much' so lets ban abortions. Or, 'even one American killed by an illegal immigrant is too much, so lets apprehend and deport all illegal immigrants'.
You're right, it is
Submitted by ant on Tue, 12/21/2010 - 10:28am.
You're right, it is ridiculous. That statement could be easily turned around to suggest that even one family destroyed by a rape, murder, or DUI accident commited by an illegal alien is unacceptable and if the border is not secured those crimes fall squarely on the shoulders of our elected officials. Check out the FBI's most wanted fugitives website and see if you can guess the origins of 98% of the violent criminals that have avoided capture probably BECAUSE of the fact that they are foreigners with no papertrail, many aliases, and a huge porous border that acts as a sanctuary when things get too hot. Only in America would a people tolerate this BS.
http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/mur
Submitted by ant on Tue, 12/21/2010 - 10:33am.
http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/murders
No crime at all?
Submitted by Red Jeep on Tue, 12/21/2010 - 10:00am.
"Immigration rights groups say the program has led to the removal of tens of thousands of illegal immigrants who have committed far less serious crimes or none at all."
Say what? Their first crime was coming here illegally.
illegal immigrants who have
Submitted by Ron_servative on Tue, 12/21/2010 - 10:01am.
illegal immigrants who have committed far less serious crimes or none at all.Hmm, so how can you be here illegally but have commited no crime?
Using this logic, criminals
Submitted by Bruzilla on Tue, 12/21/2010 - 10:07am.
Using this logic, criminals are in prison because of the evil prison and justice systems, not because they committed any crimes.
The assumption
Submitted by KC Mulville on Tue, 12/21/2010 - 10:13am.
It bears repeating now and then: the reason why this "report" is objectionable is because we assume that a report from a "mainstream" news outlet will tell the story from all sides. That assumption is where we go wrong.
No one would be disturbed if you were told ahead of time that this report was simply an internal memo of the lobbyist group. Then, you wouldn't be upset that they only tell one side of the story. But when this report appears in a major news outlet, you're assuming that the news outlet is telling the story for everyone, and reports the whole story.
As always, caveat emptor. Abandon the myth that the media is telling the whole story (or the more foolish assumption, that they know the whole story). When the media tells you that they are the Guardians of Objective Truth, you should experience nausea instead of assurance.
KC...
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 12/21/2010 - 12:02pm.
Had the purpose of the article been to present a comprehensive analysis of immigration policy, then it may be properly criticized for failing to provide an ample airing of all social, ideological and legal dimensions of the issue. But it appears the objective of this relatively brief item in the Post was far less ambitious, and within that limited scope the reportorial obligations were reasonably fulfilled.
The central point raised in this particular piece can be distilled to the distinction between criminal vs. non-criminal deportation of illegal aliens. And while it is true the views of the immigration activist groups were printed, it is likewise true that a counterargument and explanation was offered via statements (or summarizations) attributable to two spokespersons on behalf of ICE.
I don't have a problem with your caveat emptor advice as a general rule for media consumption; But in this instance, I don't believe the reader was badly served.
Jer
OK
Submitted by KC Mulville on Tue, 12/21/2010 - 12:17pm.
I accept your distinction. However, I will quibble with it, on a small point. The ICE spokesmen did offer explanations for why non-criminals were being deported. But the article also carried the assumption that we shouldn't be deporting non-criminals, and that was never rebutted.
That assumption comes, not from any specific statements within the article, but from the fact that the discrepancy was considered news. The whole article trades on the idea that the administration should be deporting illegals only if they're convicted of crimes, as if that was the political trade-off for pursuing stronger enforcement policies. That's the assumption in the article, and while the quotes from the ICE are included, they don't address that assumption.
These immigration "rights" groups also do not consider
Submitted by SickofLibs on Tue, 12/21/2010 - 10:24am.
multiple DUIs as serious crime.
Even when they drive around uninsured with no license, in uninspected, unsafe vehicles... they're just getting picked on.
In 2007
Submitted by Model850 on Tue, 12/21/2010 - 10:38am.
As many likely recall back in 2007 two teenage girls were killed in Virginia Beach by a drunk driving illegal immigrant. Coincidentally this illegal had a history of three alcohol-related convictions.
So if "even one family destroyed" is "unacceptable" are two families destroyed by the carelessness of a drunken illegal immigrant likewise unacceptable?
No sympathy
Submitted by owr084 on Tue, 12/21/2010 - 10:55am.
To all the illegal aliens who were hoping to get amnesty through the DREAM (nightmare) Act - sucks to be you. What part of ILLEGAL don't you understand?
You should not be taking away a spot in a college from a legal citizen. You should not be getting in-state tuition rates when legal citizens have to pay out of state rates. You should not be getting any sort of assistance to attend school.
And as for the argument that you can contribute to this country if you get a college degree, wrong. If you are getting the typical liberal arts degree, you are not that employable here or in your home country. If you are getting a desireable degree such as engineering, then you can make even a bigger impact in your home country.
It's amazing those folks over
Submitted by Barack_must_go..... on Tue, 12/21/2010 - 11:39am.
It's amazing those folks over at the Washington Post ever see anything considering most of their time is spent on their knees, head buried in the Ass Clown's crotch.
One thing's for sure, although conspicuously misguided, they are a very devoted lot, some even bordering on a cult like obsession.
Barack_Must_Go.....