The New York Times has published an editorial about Alabama’s attack on immigrants. Here are its last two paragraphs:
Alabama has seized from the federal government the job of controlling immigration within its borders. The law’s architects and supporters proclaim that their goal is to catastrophically disrupt the lives of illegal immigrants and their families. With reports of harassment and panic, and of a mass exodus of immigrants fleeing the state, the potential for civil rights abuses is acutely obvious.
That Alabama’s attorney general would not welcome a federal inquiry, but bristle instead, with an implicit appeal to state’s rights — with all the defiant history of intolerance and minority oppression those words suggest — says volumes. All Americans should feel ashamed.
I’m adding it to The Best Resources To Learn About Alabama’s Awful Immigration Law (& Its Impact On Schools).
Dear Sir:
With all respect one can possibly muster for you and your organization, I wish to express my well-wishes for your site and all the people who participate with its production.
However, I would be remorseful if during the day I read something along the lines of “What every America should read…and be ashamed;” simply because of the first part I am a proud American; of the second part I alone will be the one who determines whether or not something I’ve done or a matter that concerns me warrants being ashamed.
Please understand how biased and left leaning the two paragraphs you elected to publish from the The New York Times:
Alabama has seized from the federal government the job of controlling immigration within its borders. The law’s architects and supporters proclaim that their goal is to catastrophically disrupt the lives of illegal immigrants and their families. With reports of harassment and panic, and of a mass exodus of immigrants fleeing the state, the potential for civil rights abuses is acutely obvious.
That Alabama’s attorney general would not welcome a federal inquiry, but bristle instead, with an implicit appeal to state’s rights — with all the defiant history of intolerance and minority oppression those words suggest — says volumes. All Americans should feel ashamed.
The portions you chose to publish as well as the lack of citation, references, and the like alert me to the notion of your overwhelming support of this type of reporting.
Well, I on the other hand wish to look at both sides of any issue before making a comment either for and/or against the issue in question.
Therefore, if you’ll indulge me for just a minute or two I do have some questions pursuant to your position. Have you read the actual State of Alabama’s legislation with regard to their new policy? Have you read anything other than this New York Times article?
Those two questions are as basic and fundamental as any “informed” person would want to know predicated upon this issue.
I personally have heard President Obama state: “…yes, with regards to immigration, the federal government is inactive.” It looks as though the writer of the Times article as well as yourself somehow–and as insignificant–as it is have forgotten about the 10th Amendment to our Constitution.
Then to bring on “civil rights abuses” one need ask themselves, what about civil rights? I have found over the years that when an issue is published and filtered through the masses, the information passes along like the proverbial little secret (a small exercise about story-telling we’ve all used in our classrooms at one time or another). If one mentions for example, “Racial profiling” please explain what that means in a coherent way when dealing with folks from south of the border, inscribed with tattoo’s as if it was war paint, driving without a license or proof of insurance…please tell me sir, is this racial profiling or the observation of reality?
In my 35 plus years of journalism and other writing I commit myself to the position of allowing my readers both sides so that, they are able to produce an informed decision. Thank you,
Kindest regards,
Paul A. Schilling, Esq.