| get this badge |
Be the first on your block to sport one of our stylish new Sanctuary badges, designed by XOLAGRAFIK.
With two different slogans available, in three tasty color schemes, even the most discerning blogger should find a Sanctuary badge just right for their little patch of Blogtopia™
Here's just a little taste of what we're talking about:
To get one of these fine peices of graphic art to display with pride in your little corner of the blogosphere, simply go to:
Sanctuary badge page
and copy the little snippet of code provided.
Then paste it anywhere you want to display your solidarity with the cause and pride of being a member of the Pro-Migrant SanctuarySphere
|
Code Words of Hate:
Watch Video
|
 BreakthroughTV
9500LIBERTY
|
GOP 
Wed May 27, 2009 at 11:30:29 AM EDT
|
 By Roberto Lovato
As she faces what is already expected to be a host of hostile questions from the Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee in her confirmation hearings, Judge Sonia Sotomayor, President Obama's first nominee to the Supreme Court, should remember one thing: that it is not she who will be on trial, but the Republican Party.
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 695 words in story)
|
|
Fri Jan 30, 2009 at 02:15:37 AM EST
|
|
BREAKING: SCHIP just passed out of the U.S. Senate. Thanks to all of your faxes and phone calls, the kids health bill now moves on to be signed into law with the provisions for lawfully-present immigrant children firmly intact. All four hard-line immigration amendments were voted down by a voice vote this week.
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 289 words in story)
|
|
Mon Jan 12, 2009 at 00:23:44 AM EST
|
|
This editorial is notable because it comes from the bastion of right-wing thinking, The National Review. In his article, Mark Krikorian argues that the Republican party needs to shift its tone and rethink its stance on immigration.
From the article-
For too long the Republican story line has been "Too Much Lawbreaking," when instead the real problem is "Too Much Immigration" - only one part of which involves lawbreaking. This exclusive focus on illegal immigration - opposing amnesty and pushing for more enforcement - is both incomplete and counterproductive. Incomplete because the effects of illegal immigration aren't that different from those of legal immigration - an illiterate Central American farmer with a green card is just as unsuited for a 21st-century economy as an illiterate Central American farmer without a green card. And it's counterproductive because the focus on criminality can seem punitive and serve to polarize the debate, potentially aliening not just immigrant voters, who really aren't that numerous, but the native-born, who want less immigration but don't want to feel bad about themselves for holding such a view.
A new approach would retain the widely popular, and morally compelling, support for more consistent application of immigration laws and opposition to legalization - but make them part of a broader push for a more moderate level of future immigration overall. If the debate focuses solely on legality, ultimately there's no real argument against amnesty and open borders. You just legalize the whole thing and the issue goes away - no illegals, no problem. In the appropriately larger context, amnesty is bad not only because it rewards lawbreaking (which it does), but also for the same reason that the Visa lottery is bad: it leads to excessive immigration.
A new GOP approach to immigration would also recognize that there are two components to the debate - immigration policy and immigrant policy, the first governing who and how many we take, the second how we treat people once they're here.
If you think of these two elements as axes on a graph, immigration levels are the x axis and treatment of immigrants the y axis. That gives rise to four general approaches, one for each quadrant. The first is a pro-immigrant policy of mass immigration - what Kennedy and McCain and Bush and Obama imagine themselves supporting, though it's questionable whether tomorrow's mass immigration helps yesterday's immigrants.
READ COMPLETE ARTICLE
http://matt.org/english/blog/1...
|
|
Discuss
:: (0
Comments)
|
|
Tue May 13, 2008 at 13:46:37 PM EDT
|
|
Originally posted on AlterNet, with a local focus story on Progress Illinois, Joshua Hoyt explores his secret love of demographers in the afterglow of this year's May Day Marches. More Than Marches: Growing Latino Power is all About the Demographics By Joshua Hoyt, AlterNet. Posted May 12, 2008. "62 percent of the recent growth in the Latino population has been through births, not immigration." Most of the people who know me think of me as a fiery activist for immigrant rights, but I would like to confess that I have a secret, quiet quirk.I love demographers. Doug Massey of Princeton; Audrey Singer of Brookings; Dowell Myers of the University of Southern California; and Chicago's own Rob Paral of Notre Dame: Wow! Superstars and heroes, one and all! I know that these demographers are an understated, tweedy sort of crew, and I doubt that they will ever make the cover of Rolling Stone. But I have discovered that they have a wondrous ability to shine a light on the future and, just as usefully for advocates and activists, they also can paint a road map for political extermination campaigns.
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 689 words in story)
|
|
|
|
|
Receive information on the latest action items, media campaigns, and legislative initiatives from ProMigrant
No spam or press release dumps from DC advocacy groups, lobbyists, or politicos. No requests for donations, or re-directs to astroturf groups looking to harvest your e-mail information.
Just real action for real change from real grassroots activists.
|
| featured videos |
Suspect Spokespeople
Hate Speech
Fear Politics
Janet Murguia vs Lou Dobbs:
|
|
