DISQUS

John_B Jason: Your original premise here: that “anchor babies…don’t pay for themselves” is patently false. As a percentage of the population, children born in the U.S. to illegal immigrant parents are no less productive or contributory to our society than those born to legal residents or citizens.

Lest you’ve forgotten, such children are, in point of fact, natural born United States citizens and just as deserving as you are of all of the rights and privileges offered by this greatest of nations.

In point of fact the children you mention provide a much-needed and extremely valuable link between our society and their immigrant parents and help the latter to acculturate far faster than they might otherwise.

Successful acculturation is key for such adult immigrants, regardless of legal status, because in accomplishing this they become far more productive and contributory to our society in their own right.

Argue that LBUSD just didn’t have the money to maintain its Special Use permit at Camp Hi Hill if you like. Argue that part of the reason LBUSD is cash-strapped is because our District serves a number of students who were born here to illegal immigrant parents if you must.

But to make a leap from those truths to a statement like “anchor babies…don’t pay for themselves” does everyone, especially yourself, a grave disservice and lends nothing intelligent to the dialog.

Your insistence upon repeatedly asserting such, and similar, fallacies speaks not only to what I feel is your ignorance but your bigotry as well.

I happen to join with Diana in her belief that LBUSD actually has all of the money it needs; it simply misspends a great deal of it. I lay the blame for this misfeasance squarely at the feet of our current LBUSD Board, which is charged with, among other things, the responsible fiscal management of our District.

Ultimately, however, we have no one to blame but ourselves for it is we, the electorate, that are ultimately responsible for the overall performance of all aspects of our government.

I_Come_In_Peace OK Jason,

If I may, let me momentarily take a page out of your playbook, aka. "Let's take great liberties in logic and common sense in order to sway the undecided folks."

According to our hereby ordained "Border Czar Jason", if you're poor, you're here illegally. If your folks cannot afford an apartment other than in the LB-DMZ, well, shucks, they must have walked here from El Salvador.

BCJ -- I'm abbreviating -- is that how it works?

If they (ie. inner city kids, regardless of their status) have a right to a publicly funded education, shouldn't they also have an equal right to have that education include a field trip to Camp Hi-Hill?

I'm thinking not, from a LBUSD perspective. I'm thinking that those underpriviliged folks have bigger fish to fry than to vent on websites or complain at Board of Education meetings.

Gee, I wonder whether the LBUSD Administrators know that all too well......

John_B Justin: Dave’s already sufficiently addressed that “anchor baby” nonsense on your part. So I won’t belabor it further.

I will say you seem to be stumbling all over yourself trying to justify, explain or rationalize the various hateful and presumptuous comments you made concerning Robert Garcia. It’s unfortunate that you feel the way that you do because it’s quite possible that you are permitting your clear prejudice where he is concerned to blind you to someone you might otherwise find to be worthy of your acceptance and support. I can’t say this for certain because I don’t know him myself, other than by reputation. We’ve been in the same rooms at various events a few times but I’ve never had the pleasure of making his acquaintance.

But I don’t have to know him to find him worthy, at the very least, of fair consideration. Just being a law abiding human being who appears to have accomplished much in his relatively young life makes Robert worthy of a fair hearing on the issues that concern me.

You presume to make a lot of assumptions about Robert and where he may or may not stand on many issues. You make these assumptions based on the very little you appear to know about him. One can only hope that you vote far more responsibly than this and with far more actual facts at hand whenever you enter a polling place.

You seem to feel that a 30 year old is somehow too young to think critically, to understand fully or to work with others cooperatively toward a common goal. That you believe this is most unfortunate for there are many talented people, Robert’s age and, in some cases, younger still, that have far more going for them and have contributed far more to improving their communities than many twice their age.

You seem to discount and dismiss people far too readily, Justin, and I submit that you do so to your ultimate detriment. You might consider offering people a little more basic respect and a little less derision.

Just a suggestion.

Dave Wielenga Hi Justin.... I assume that by "anchor baby" you are using what the dictionary defines as "a derogatory term for a child born in the United States to immigrants or other non-citizens, regardless of the immigration status of the parents. The term refers to the supposed role of the child, as a U.S. citizen, in facilitating immigration through family reunification under the provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. Besides the fact that it is derogatory, your use of the term is also wrong. Robert Garcia was five years old when he came to the United States with his family---which was escaping the Peruvian terrorist group Shining Path. Thus, he was not a citizen until granted amnesty by President Ronald Reagan.

John_B Wow, Justin, you almost hit a home-run in the Bigot's World Series of Discrimination there!

Let's see, in one brief sentence you covered Robert's: race/color/ethnicity/national origin...sexual orientation...and you tried for age too (although so far it's only unlawful to discriminate according to age against those *over* 40) and then presume to fault him for each.

Gee, Justin, the only one's you missed were his religion and his sex...but I'm sure those were just simple oversights on your part, and not omitted through any conscious effort (what little passes for actual consciousness in that cesspool of intolerance you call a brain, that is).

And of course Robert had a lot of input concerning, and control over, where he was born, to whom and under what circumstances, right?

Yes, I can certainly see why we should all pay very close attention your oh-so-insightful analysis of Robert's qualifications.

So much for being more concerned about the content of a person's character, ay?

John What a brilliant retort. I bet you spent all day coming up with it,

sickOfIt They are on the second and third floor too. Sheer luck.

Walter Winchell You got that right, I hear ya man.

godsdog I think that is Icahn