More Than 500,000 Rally in L.A. for Immigrants' Rights

Cellist Yo-Yo Ma to join US immigration debate

http://webcenters.netscape.compuser...f/story/7000/20060403/1535000001.htm&sc=ustop

04/03/2006 15:32

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Renowned Chinese-American cellist Yo-Yo Ma was to join a roiling debate on US immigration, testifying in Congress about the damage of increasingly strict entry regulations on international artists.

The 50-year old French-born musician was to testify Tuesday before the House of Representatives' Government Reform Committee about how delays in visa processing hurts artists visiting from overseas.

Ma is the artistic director of the non-profit "Silk Road Project" a multicultural collaboration that aims to illuminate the Silk Road's historical contribution to the diffusion of art and culture, and which draws on the talents of leading international artists.

Performing arts and cultural leaders have complained in recent years about canceled performances and events when international artists have been unable to obtain a visa in time.

The visa rules were tightened following the September 11, 2001 terror attacks, as a way to prevent the US homeland against the threat of terrorism.

 

Methinks we have bigger and better things to worry about than giving musicians visas to come to the US. We have plenty, thanks.

 

Tell me you are not like this hysterical biiatch:

http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=81229&highlight=musicians

al-Qaeda is laughing at you.

 

Well said man. I hate when people come over here and always say how it was better "back home". Being an immigrant myself I dont understand what the fuss is about. I mean if you came to America embrace it , love it. Dont come over here and ask special favors. If one comes over here it is they who should adjust not the other way around.

 

I am curious if any of those upset that the immigrans wave Mexican flags instead of United States one, used the 'heritage not hate debate' about people waving the Confederate "Stars and Bars" flag.

Couldn't people of Mexican heritage wave a Mexican flag and have it be about Heritage? Can't they want to live in the U.S. and still love Mexico?

Are people so jealous and insecure that if someone dares to show any feelings another nation, that it is something bad?

 

I think you are missing the point, FB. I think people who are upset about the Mexican flag waving during the rallies feel these immigrants are exhibiting an attitude of "this is our land, we come as we wish," you know, the not too subtle variation of Aztlan Movement. To me, a national flag signifies foremost the sovereignty of an independent state. The flag display/waving is misguided, IMO, at least.

 

Like high-school girls hanging Super Mario power ups in trees.

 

Maybe there are some who feel that way. I only know my experience. I live in LA and work in a school with 98% latino population. The families of my students were at those marches and rallies, and many are eager to talk about it. The folks that I have talked to mainly want themselves and family members to be able to work, to participate in elections, go to doctors, meetings, without being in fear. A lot of it has to do with two things. They feel the immigrants legal or illegal in some cases have put a lot of work into making the community what it is, and they want a say in how it is run, and don't want to have to feel like they are hiding. The other thing is that they have family that wants come here and be reunited, work together, live together, and all of that.

As for flags representing a sovereign nation, I agree. Mexico is an independent sovereign nation, and their flag represents that. So I don't understand why that should mean people shouldn't wave that flag.

I live in CA, and before that in NY. I had shirts, and stickers with the Texas flag. I love Texas, and will one day retire there. That doesn't mean I am not happy living in the state I live in now. Texas are where my roots come from. I will always hold it in a special place. I have never waived a Texas flag around, but I do have the image various places. I don't think that is any disrespect to CA, nor does it mean I should move back to TX. It is just me connecting to my roots.

 

What if the person breaking into the house has been invited?

The fact that employers are giving illegal aliens jobs implies that there is a tacit invitation for them to come.

 

See that's the problem.

When Chinese students waved the flag of PRC in demonstrations in US after the bombing of the Chinese Embassy by NATO in former Yugoslavia's capital Belgrade, they were protesting the gross encroachment on sovereignty of China. That's the right way to convey a message.

On the other hand, it would be a misplaced loyalty if Chinese fans in US waved the flag of PRC in a Rockets game to cheer for Yao Ming. The much better venue would be in an Olympic game.

In yet another hypothetical demonstration, the Chinese American fans would be completely out of whack if they waved PRC national flag when they confronted Shaq for his racially insensitive mockery of Chinese language.

Until the immigrants become naturalized citizens (or minimally, legal resident alliens), this is not their land. Whether you entered the US legally or not, you are the guests here. You don't wave your own national flag to convey the message that you are the owner here.

 

I actually agree with wnes here, waving flags at different venues means different things, waving Mexican flags at a boxing match, you are supporting your heritage and the Mexican boxer.

But the march was for Immigrant rights, i.e. the right to join the American society, become part of Unite States. Do you show your desire to be part of USA by waving Mexican flags? or does that just re-enforce the views that these people are only here to take advantage of the jobs/health care/living standards, but will not consider themselves Americans.

 

Interesting point, wnes. The massive demonstrations were perfectly understandable, given the bill passed by the House, but the huge number of Mexican flags sends a confusing message to average Americans, in my opinion, which doesn't help the message Americans need to hear.



Keep D&D Civil.

 

If Chinese immigrants waved a PRC flag while Shaq was shooting free-throws after he made those comments that would've been fine with me.

I see your point more than I did before after this post, but I guess I just disagree. Whether or not one has permanent status in the U.S. or not, shouldn't really change their pride in the homeland. I think one can want to be a citizen and still love their country of origen. I don't think it hurts anyone.

 

I remember seeing PRC flags flown when Yao played at the Target Center. Of course PRC colors are also Rocket colors.

I've also seen fans of Brazillian players like Carl Herrera waving Brazillian flags at Rocket games and Argentinian flags for Manu Ginobli at Spurs games.

 

So if a kid sneaks into you house. . .to sex up your daughter because she wanted it

You don't think it is a problem . . . SHE INVITED HIM!

Rocket River

 

^ Well I suppose I would be upset but I don't run my house like a democracy or my family relations as a capitalistic economy. Anyway if my daughter, and I don't have a daughter, were to date someone who was going to add something positive economically to my family I might reconsider her dating him.

At the same time if I had a daughter and I found out she had invited someone who as hungry and fed them or got them medical care I wouldn't want to punish her but praise her for being a humanitarian unlike this legislation that would criminalize feeding, clothing and even providing medical care to illegals.

 

The only thing is, if your daughter invited hundreds or thousands of hungry people to your home, you might think differently then. Just like you can feel generous and give a beggar some change, but if hundreds of beggar came after you for money, you might not want to be so generous.

 

But if the hundreds of thousands of people who came weren't beggars but were working at least one, and in many cases, more than one job, then you might want to let them stay.

Working in a poor latino community in LA I see some immigrants who don't work, but many more who are working, and many who work more than one job.

 

I really do not know where I stand on this issue. I can see both sides and think they both have valid points. I was just picking on Sishir.

 

Immigration 'Nirvana,' Lost
Thanks largely to Democrats, the Senate missed an opportunity.

Saturday, April 8, 2006; A22

THE SENATE COULD have left town yesterday with a workable, if imperfect, immigration bill that would have let millions of people living here illegally come out of the shadows. It had before it a deal that could have attracted 70 votes; it had the backing of the White House and the support of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), despite his previous, enforcement-only stance.

But after two weeks of slogging toward compromise, the deal blew up over a procedural standoff on whether to move forward with voting for amendments, as Republicans were demanding, and if so, for how many. Republicans blamed Democratic obstructionism aimed at keeping voters' attention focused on the punitive, Republican-sponsored House bill.

"It's not gone forward because there's a political advantage for Democrats not to have an immigration bill," said Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.). Democrats blamed Republican bad faith and said Republicans refused to impose a reasonable limit on amendments. "The amendments were being offered by people who didn't want the bill," said Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.).

Both of those assertions contain elements of truth. But Democrats -- whether their motive was partisan advantage or legitimate fear of a bad bill emerging from conference with the House -- are the ones who refused, in the end, to proceed with debate on amendments, which is, after all, how legislation gets made. The unfortunate result is that momentum toward balanced reform may be lost. "The Democratic leadership played politics with the prospect of 10 million immigrants getting on a path to citizenship," said Frank Sharry, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, a pro-immigration group. "It seems that Democratic leaders wanted an issue, not a bill."

Too bad, because, as Sen. John McCain

(R-Ariz.) described the measure, "compared with the status quo, it's nirvana." The compromise was a slightly tweaked version of a bill produced by the Senate Judiciary Committee and modeled on the proposal by Mr. McCain and Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.). As retooled by Sens. Mel Martinez (R-Fla.) and Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.), the bill still would have entitled almost all of the nation's 11 million or more illegal immigrants to legal status and, ultimately, citizenship. Moreover, it would have reduced incentives for future illegal immigration by creating a significant supply of legal guest worker permits -- a new program that would, as well, give foreign workers the chance to become permanent residents and ultimately citizens.

The measure wasn't perfect, and certainly there are risks in going to conference with the House and its enforcement-only approach. But Democrats putting political self-interest over solving a serious policy problem ought to worry that their actions will backfire with the very people whose interests they are purporting to protect.
© 2006 The Washington Post Company

Overhauling the path to citizenship would've been a huge step towards unraveling this mess.