Skip to comments.Tengo un Dream ( I have a Dream )
Posted on 09/27/2011 6:25:09 PM PDT by moonshinner_09
On August 26, just three blocks from San Franciscos iconic City Hall, the veil was lowered from a 100-foot-wide, 30-foot-tall mural on the wall of the citys Quaker Meetinghouse. Declaring No Human Being is Illegal, y Cada Uno Tiene un Sueño (and each one has a dream), the piece is the work of an immigrant-rights youth group called 67 Sueños (67 Dreams) whose mission is to raise awareness of the plight faced by the estimated 67 percent of migrant youth who would not benefit from the provisions of the DREAM Act.
The center of the mural portrays three young migrant figures saying, 67% of migrant youth: are pushed out of high school; are ignored by the media; are excluded from immigration reform. To their left are symbolic indigenous figures and animals who have gathered, dream-like, before rolling green fields. Moving to the right, a grey cityscape overtakes the green fields, the sky turns dark, and the nightmarish realities of migrant life take shape. A desert graveyard bears the names of some of the many who have died on the journey north or in custody of U.S. law enforcement. Looming behind is the image of the separation wall. One youth is pictured climbing over the fence, while an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent arrests another .
The mural evokes the dichotomy between dream and reality the latter more akin to a waking nightmare. This dichotomy also captures the tensions around the DREAM Act itself.
Only Some Can Dream
Officially called the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act, the proposed DREAM Act would create a path to citizenship for undocumented youth under the age of 35 who entered the country before turning 16.
(Excerpt) Read more at guatemala-times.com ...
I thought it was “Tengo un Deram”.
Simple: either we end up with a Quebec problem (two languages and cultures)
or we mainstream these youth, teaching them not just English, but all about the reasons behind the Bill of Rights, the American constitution, the heritage which the Founders inherited (learned) from the British experience.
Yes, it will cost; but it will cost the nation MUCH MORE if we allow a Quebec to develop.
(I know some people will say “send them home”. Nice.
But what if they aren’t going anywhere? )
“the migrant youths themselves were never given the opportunity to voice their concerns” (sniff)
Man, yer breaking my heart, the children ...
Oh I almost forgot—I don’t have a heart.
Yo Tengo un Sueno
“youth under the age of 35”
Anything other than zero tolerance for illegal immigration is taking a crap on the rule of law and pissing all over what it means to be a USC.
That’s Spanish for “I aint got a creative bone in my body, so I plagarize”
“undocumented youth under the age of 35 ... “
I almost missed this, what the f...?! Yutes?
When I was 35 I had a wife, family, job and mortgage.
Are we talking here about the type of French and English `youths’ who like to set cars on fire? Yeah, we definitely need more of those.
At thirty five I was divorced, two kids, had not lived with parents in 18 years and if you ask a liberal, 35 is a child.
In Central and South America, on the rare occasion that these parasites are allowed to vote for their leadership, do they more often support left wing socialists or Jeffersonian Constitutionalists and how do you think that will translate in a positive way here?
My sister goes down there, to Guatemala, on church missions.
If you want to see a really “heartless” immigration policy, check into how Mexico treats its neighbors to the south. There is no welfare system, no `safe houses,’ no Guatemalan gangs or peasants willing to work for nothing, no demonstrations, court appeals, public denunciations of Mexicans angry because their tax dollars are going to feed, house and clothe the “immigrants,” or tear-jerking articles, at least that I’ve seen here.
The federales catch them, give them a beat-down and dump them across the border. I suppose that’s our fault too, though. Author Noah Gimble can bite me.
lol and lol.
Why can’t a special deal be worked with just San Francisco. If Mexico catches a Guatemalan, they get a choice: go home or go to San Francisco. Soon San Francisco is teeming with tens of thousands of Guatemalans trying to live in that choked socialist parody. Quick karma?
I would agree to the dream act only if part of the qualification process is that the parents must be deported with no possibility of return.
Paint remover or a sandblaster needed to remove the graffiti.
Deport ALL illegals, NO exceptions!
And I DO mean NONE, deport the Cubans too.
Let all of them use their U.S. experience to clean up their own country.
You might have other posts, and even this one, where you make good points. However, this one is just plain stupid, sorry. Cuban refugees are not the same as Illegal immigrants, they just aren't. You can't say "Come here" and then send them home. With the illegals, they were NEVER told to come here and were never given haven. C'mon, THINK man...
“or we mainstream these youth, teaching them not just English, but all about the reasons behind the Bill of Rights, the American constitution, the heritage which the Founders inherited (learned) from the British experience.”
That would be a bit difficult; they are Catholic.
But our leaders did, explicitly. The Cubans are not, therefore, illegals.
Perhaps there is a misunderstanding here, are you talking about deporting the Cubans that are already here, and have been for a couple of generations now?
youth under the age of 35
Just like the muslim “youths” who riot and rampage.
We currently have an F’d up policy on Cuban illegals.
“Wet foot” = Deported.
But “Dry foot”, having managed to reach our shore, = Get to stay.
This is inconsistent with our stated immigration policy for every other country.
It is ridiculous to have a split policy for any country, “Dry foot” should be deported too, they are just as illegal, but luckier to have reached shore before being caught.
So Cuba gets to use us as their safety valve, no real change will come to Cuba as those who get truly fed up leave, or are allowed to leave, even occasionally encouraged to leave.
The “safety valve” aspect is similar to Mexico.
We must have a simple and consistent policy, no favoritism for any reason.
Illegal = illegal = deported, NO exceptions for any reason.
If their country is crap, then THEY need to fix it, that might not be easy, too bad, they should not have let it get so foul to begin with.
We had our revolution, it was not painless.
They should not be allowed to take the easy way out and exploit our forefathers sacrifices at no cost to themselves.
I have reached the point that I would like to see a moratorium on ALL “immigration” for at least ten years, we need a breather to catch up with all the “Immigrants” legal and not, who are already here.
We have enough unemployed, stop importing more!
So you mean the new immigrants, I thought you mean all the Cubans who came here years ago. Sorry for the misunderstanding.