Thursday, December 28, 2017

Some Facts about the Dreamers

If you follow the mainstream media you will learn that the Dreamers, illegal immigrants who came to America when they were children, now have productive lives in America. They are all rocket scientists with stable families, living in suburban communities. Thus, they should be allowed to stay in the country and must bring family members to the country… through chain migration.

The Democratic Party will go to the mat to save the Dreamers. They know that people who are barely literate and dysfunctional are more likely to be criminals. Thus they and their families will almost always vote Democratic.

To achieve their end Democrats have been trafficking in fictions, fantasies and lies. You are surely not surprised to hear this. You will also not be surprised to hear that very, very few of the Dreamers were ever vetted. It was a typical Obama deception.

Happily, Hans von Spakovsky offers a few facts about the Dreamers. Nothing like facts to light the way out of darkness.

He writes:

The Center for Immigration Studies estimates that “perhaps 24 percent of the DACA-eligible population fall into the functionally illiterate category and another 46 percent have only ‘basic’ English ability.”

Unfortunately, many Dreamers are poorly educated. Only 49 percent of DACA beneficiaries have a high school education, even though a majority are now adults. And while military service could also qualify an illegal alien for DACA, out of the current 690,000 DACA beneficiaries, only 900 are serving in the military.

This lack of basic English makes education nearly impossible. What do the Dreamers do? Of course, they contribute to America’s crime rate:

This may explain why, by August this year, more than 2,100 DACA beneficiaries had had their eligibility pulled because of criminal convictions and gang affiliation. Even if a random background investigation produced substantial evidence that an illegal alien might have committed multiple crimes, the alien would still be eligible for DACA if he wasn’t convicted.

Thus, it seems that a significant percentage of DACA beneficiaries have serious limitations in their education, work experience and English fluency. What’s the likelihood that they’ll be able to function in American society without being substantial burdens to U.S. taxpayers?

Hmmm… a few facts about the Dreamers… to brighten up your day.


Jack Fisher said...

My immigrant family, several generations ago, fit that description. This kind of immigration issue is not as simple as all-good or all-bad. The GOP is going to have to compromise on DACA-eligibility. Both sides are guilty of splitting, for the conservatives, illegals are a parade of horribles; for the demoncraps, they are saints-in-waiting. I might describe this as knocking down strawmen, but that cynical concept was unknown in the poor forest village of my forefathers.

For snowflake conservatives who can't distinguish between an illegal brought here as a one month old and an illegal who came here at age 17, this is a trigger warning. Much as we want to shoot I mean deport tens of millions of people (and who wouldn't), this would be the death knell of the GOP, which would never win another election, ever.

One kind of compromise could work along these lines:

For any illegal, if he or she commits the type of crime that would bar admissibility as a legal immigrant, that person should be removed (deported).

For an illegal brought here as a child who has an established record as a typical American (job, family, pays taxes, etc.), then green card with route to citizenship.

For an illegal arriving as a teenager, withhold (suspend) removal for a probationary period of 10 years from date of arrival (which might have already expired) and evaluate based on factors such as welfare or not, gang membership, work history, etc. and then deport or give a green card.

trigger warning said...

My forebears were immigrants to the US. In 1755. Things were a bit different back then, as they were "several generations" ago. But some folks just cant seem to note the passage of time and that century-old policies may not be appropriate today.

I was a non-Commonwealth immigrant to the UK in 1984. I had a dream. At that time, in order to possess a work permit, my employer (University of Nottingham) had to establish that I possessed a skill that benefited the citizens of the UK. I was also required to visit the local Notts constabulary semi-annually or be subject to arrest and deportation. I was pleased to do so, and not in the least offended. And yes, there is a Sheriff and I met him. Robin Hood was unavailable. Later on, I was offered a chance to become a permanent resident, but by then I dreamed of returning to Boston and central heating. I presume the laws are different now, but I fail to discern marked improvement.

Also, we owned a second residence in Central America and mi esposa, fluent in Spanish, is, among her other practice areas, an immigration lawyer. As a consequence of her practice and her love for the Spanish language and Meso-American culture, we socialize with several undocumented families. I know several English-fluent Dreamers. Their "dream", for the most part, was apparently to drop out of high school, listen nonstop to hip-hop via earbudded Obamaphones, smoke a little weed, and bitch nonstop about hateful, stingy gringoes. Kids these days.

Sam L. said...

Obama and the Democrats LIED to us?? For SHAME!! I am SOOOOO not surprised.

Jack Fisher said...

why would anyone in the US care about UK immigration policy?

cherry picking imaginary facts isn't a way to debate, kid.

Anonymous said...

My Mexican grandparents came during the Revolution of 1910. A decade of chaotic senseless slaughter.

Their 4 sons (including my Pa) served in WW2. One died (crashed)in the Pacific Ocean, one nearly did on Iwo Jima.

Several grandsons (me too) in VN. A few didn't make it.

Most descendants still in TX & LA. Doctors, nurses, medical specialists, historians, college professors, lawyers, military officers, et. al.

Solid folks. V patriotic.

They, like me, want tough immigration standards.

And if some come from the UK - so what? Good ideas can cross the Pond.

I met many old Mex couples in CO.

ALL had pix of US military g-sons & g-daughters on walls & tables.

The flood of immigrants, illegals, and worse is intolerable. Illegals and worse are myriad. -- Rich Lara

Ares Olympus said...

Stuart: They know that people who are barely literate and dysfunctional are more likely to be criminals. Thus they and their families will almost always vote Democratic.

That's a high charge against the Democrats. My experience says the opposite can also be true. My brother had dyslexia and dropped out of school in 8th grade, after being held back and when he voted, he proudly voted Republican, along with my dad, because he believed in entrepreneurism, along with various pyramid schemes. He had some book talking about how to get rich and how confidence is the doorway to wealth, written of course by confidence men. He told stories of the big hearts of these men, how after they got their first million they could have enough to give money to orphanages to help the disadvantaged, thus it was proof these men were not greedy, and you were not greedy either, since you also want to give millions to orphans, after your family is taken care of.

I don't think my brother was a criminal, or it mainly included him taking money and leaving IOU notes he believed he would someday repay, and various things disappeared from my house. So I did conclude people who get addicted to drugs do see the world different, and will cut corners, or at least the homeless friends he invited over did steal things, and that is what finally made me evict my own brother.

Anyway I don't think poverty and criminal behavior are always overlapping, but I do think Democrats try pretty hard to fund public institutions so all children will have a chance to make something of themselves, whatever their background, while its the Republicans who want to give up on public schools for failing to teach all students, punish them by taking away their funds, and redirect them to private schools vouchers who get to pick and choose which students they're willing to take. So that seems rather criminal in my mind, but its all a matter of perspective.