Somehow the entire question seems to look different when it is attached to a darling little face.
As the presidents addressed those in the rose garden, the 2 first ladies went to a nearby school to talk to school children. One little girl asked the show-stoppers of all show-stoppers. Hats off to Mrs. Obama for thinking fast on her feet. And good for the little girl…she was NOT going to let the first lady off the hook.
The text, from the Huffington Post:
While the two Presidents spoke about the need for immigration reformand about concerns over Arizona’s harsh new law — without saying anything new or different — down the road in Silver Spring, Maryland, First Lady Michele Obama and Mexico’s First Lady Margarita Zavala visited an elementary school to speak with a class of second graders.
ABC News’ Karen Travers reports what happened when a young girl spoke up:
The student shyly raised her hand and said, “My mom … she says that Barack Obama is taking everybody away that doesn’t have papers.”Mrs. Obama replied: “Yeah, well that’s something that we have to work on, right? To make sure that people can be here with the right kind of papers, right? That’s exactly right.”
The girl then said quietly, “But my mom doesn’t have any …” and trailed off.
Mrs. Obama replied: “Well, we have to work on that. We have to fix that, and everybody’s got to work together in Congress to make sure that happens. That’s right.”
Wonder what will happen now. Will the mama go into hiding? Be sent “back home”?
My heart aches.
I’m curious because I really don’t know. If a child is born here in the US of foreign parents the kid obviously is an American. Now, if the parents are seized (later) and a deportation hearing is held.. Can the parents stay to take care of the American citizen? Is the American forced to be deported along with the parents (holy crap!)? Or, is the child warded to the State and the parents sent back to the country of origin — with the Government taking charge of the child until s/he’s 18 and the parents can be granted visitors visa’s?
My mom got legal not too long after I was born so it was never an issue to me but now I’m curious. What would happen?
No, they would not be allowed to stay. The child would stay here or could go with the parents.
I doubt that anyone would try to track the mother down through the kid. Also, the kid is afforded privacy through the school. My opinion of course…
Marin, the good thing is that your mother was allowed to change her status. That isn’t being allowed now. The rules have changed.
Twinad has been married for almost 10 years to her husband. No status adjustment. She is an American citizen. Their child is an American citizen.
And what if the mom was a thief or dope dealer or any other law breaker where they would be locked up away from even seeing their child. It happens all the time to legal citizens, and no one sheds a tear, so don’t expect a lot of sympathy from those in that situation for sure. Even if this mom was deported she still has the ability to take her child with her and enjoy the freedoms of her home country, and has the ability to reenter legally. Should we then not lock up criminals who have children? What precedent would that set? Have a child, get out of jail free, or stay in the country free?
The mother should be long gone. I guess she’s holding out for the Aunt Zetuni deal – the longer you break the law, the beter the chance of becoming a citizen.
Ideally the mother’s identity will become known and she will be deported.
Mrs. Obama’s answer was god-awful. I lost respect for her, certainly.
Moon has part of it right and part of it wrong. The parents leave – that is right. The child can stay at the parants option if the child can be placed with legal guardians, otherwise ICE transports all of them home for free. This of course is causing problems because ICE must now provide more and more services (medical, and educational $$$ ) throught its temporary detention system. The part that is wrong is that legal immigrants – those who entered legally can certainly change their immigration status and always have been allowed to. If, for exemple, they came here with a visa (student, tourist, worker) they can certainly extend and apply for citizenship. Marrige used to be a slam dunk to citizenship – and pretty much still is unless there is no proof of legal entry and some proof that it is not a marrige of convieniance for immigration purposes. You have to show you have been married a while and lived together a while after the marrige. Any criminal activity found in the background search and they are out.
The real problem with deportation lies in the home country. You can imagine the culprits that do not want them back, China, Cuba, Mexico, Venesula, Columbia and others have refused to let them off-load and we cannot just dump them off just anywhere. It is a State Dept. level “negotiation.” That is why it is so important to control the border. Dealing with those that are here is gonna take time and money.
@marinm
I think the courts have been fairly arbitrary. I’ve heard from a couple of lawyers that some of the kids are sent to foster homes, some get taken in by family members, some have to go back to the parents’ country to avoid going into foster care even if they have lived here most of their lives.
SA and Rick, to say “go back where you came from” to any child is heartless. Uprooting a family and sending them into poverty because they don’t have paperwork is not right in my value system. And please stop confusing criminals with immigrants who are not here legally. There must be a way to make this right without ruining lives–anyone’s life, even yours.
Let’s remember that for every child whose life is ruined, we live in our world community with that same child. Never think you can hand off inconveniences or problems to someone else without feeling the ramifications yourself.
@Posting As Pinko
I was with you until you said, “And please stop confusing criminals with immigrants who are not here legally.”
Let’s see: We would consider a poor person (or any adjective you wish to use to describe the person) who robs a bank to be a “criminal”. They have done something against the law and, therefor, they have committed a “crime”.
A person who enters a country without that country’s permission has done so illegally or against the law. As I understand the terms “illegal” or “against the law”, they have committed a crime. It is a matter of degree and reminds me of an old story variably attributed to George Bernard Shaw and Winston Churchill.
British statesman and Prime Minister Winston Churchill, noted for his wit, at a party, talking with a socialite:
Churchill: Madam, would you sleep with me for five million pounds?
Socialite: My goodness, Mr. Churchill! Well, I suppose – we would have to discuss terms, naturally.
Churchill: Would you sleep with me for five pounds?
Socialite: Mr. Churchill, what kind of woman do you think I am?!
Churchill: Madam, we’ve already established that. Now we are haggling about the price.
We have established the fact that both people are “criminals”, we’re just haggling about the price. 😎
SA, understood and you have a valid point. You see it on COPS all the time…screaming kids while the parents are hauled away.
I just wanted to know if an American child would be forced deported because as a child they don’t have the capability to take care of themselves without the (illegal) parental support.
To that last point I’m against the idea that the government would force the deportation of the American child. I have no issue with the deportation of the parents. I think its good that the parents can have the child stay with a guardian but as a taxpayer have mixed feelings about the child being turned over to the govt until the parents can return with legal status.
MH/PWC thank you for the info.
“out of the mouths of babes” is all I can say.
Like many of the carefully handled encounters that the Obamas have with the “public,” this kid’s question sounds a little rehearsed, more as if she is reciting than asking a spontaneous question. You can’t always believe what you see.
@marinm
Children can be forcabley deported – absent arrangement for legal guardians – usually relatives or close legal friends – yes – and social services is directly involved in checking that arrangement out. I don’t think there are any cases of the government taking legal guardianship. That is not an option – unless you are talking about abandonment, where the parent(s) run and leave the kids. That certainly happens and results in foster care. There are children in detention with the parents, but that is not really guardianship and the assumption is that they are going with the parent(s). DHS does not break up families – unless the kid turns 18 while in detention – which also must have happened and then I suspect it is the kid’s choice.
@Emma
Very interesting perspective — hmm — suspicion. I missed that. It does make sense given the political response of “We need to fix that.” Ok, hold your breath…. I am actually hoping that is not the case here.
I am waiting to see where I am wrong. Kids who are citizens can be placed with relatives or a guardian selected by the parents if that is the parents’ wishes.
I never commented on people who entered legally. Students and guest workers may not necessarily stay. In fact, assume they cannot. Extension is not guaranteed. Marriage is not a shoe in, regardless of how long the marriage has been.
Additionally, deportations can only be ordered by a federal deportation judge. Most people, at least in this area, are not kept in detention centers. They have ankle bracelets unless they have committed major crimes.
Citizen children certainly have right of return since they are citizens.
As for the little girl, who know what motivated her to speak. I doubt the first lady had time to prep her, if that is what is being suggested.
Kids say some very personal things related to their parents’ immigration status. Why should this child be any different?
Interesting that she thinks Barack Obama is going to send her Momma away because she doesn’t have papers.
PWC,
“Children can be forcabley deported – absent arrangement for legal guardians” that’s where I feel uncomfortable. Not for the parents – they’re not Americans so I’m ok with the idea of deporting them, but force deporting an American because his/her parents are illegal just doesn’t sit well with me. I may be looking at this with more of a libertarian bend but I don’t like the idea of giving the govt the power to expel a citizen. I’m ok with the idea of leaving the child to another guardian OR even leaving the child with the government (foster care but this stretches thin with my fiscal conservative creds and if I saw it abused I might have a change of heart) but forced deportation really does leave a bad taste in my mouth.
Now, of course in this hypothetical we’re looking at a child that is an American. If the kid wasn’t an American I would have no issue with deportation of the child as well.
To the conspiracy theory thread — maybe she was forced to say the scripted question in exchange for a green card? 😉
I think I am going to throw up, yes, lets deport children eff-um if they aren’t American, what a compassionate perspective……
Sounds like eff-um even if they are American.
Just wondering, if you get a speeding ticket, are you also a “criminal” ? If yes, call me a criminal, if no, I think that you also cannot call other people accused of “misdemeanors” criminals either. When I think of using the word criminal, the label has to fit the offense.
Can we focus a bit on the First Lady’s stupid, brain-dead, lilly-livered response?
This could have been a “teachable moment” as her pompous husband likes to intone to white America every time HE f***s up. I would have told the girl her mother should go home at this point, because she’s not a citizen and should be deported.
Anyway, Michelle’s stammering stupid answer will undoubtably anger everyone, on both sides of the “issue”. I’m glad though that this issue is staying in the news. Come out to talk about childhood obesity, end up stammering about illegal immigration. The issue’s not going away. Maybe Obama will actually have to DO SOMETHING instead of his default plan of leaving the status quo and mining the issue for Latino votes in 2012. (“Leadership”. “Change”. Give me a break).
Rick, I thought she had a good response, as good as one gets in a horribly awkward moment like that.
I would have never forgiven her if she had said what you suggest to that child.
How many kids have you talked to whose parents don’t have the right ‘creds?’ I have talked to hundreds. I don’t think you would feel the way you do if you coujld somehow personalize it.
“I think that you also cannot call other people accused of “misdemeanors” criminals either. When I think of using the word criminal, the label has to fit the offense.”
It is an offense, that is supposed to end in deportation. So let’s get on with it. Laws require punishments, otherwise they cease to be laws.
I try to play nice here and use the term “illegal immigrant”, but “identity theif”, “wage scab”, or “unchecked security threat” are probably each valid and more descriptive.
“Tell you mom that if we can just get the bad people in Congress to work together, everything’s going to be okay for your Mom” NO IT’S NOT, MICHELLE. And for the record, Congress is about as left-wing and liberal as it’s ever going to get, so I wouldn’t hold your breath for more change in that direction. Go back to the White House and keep your infantile sloganeering to yourself.
A good response? Maybe there is no good response in that situation that won’t hurt her husband (and his cynical, manipulative “position”) politically. But to suggest to the child that the problem is that the bad people in Congress won’t work together … as if that is the problem … is as Rahm Emmanuel would say … well, you know.
I strongly resent what she said. We have real problems in this nation and this world that won’t be solved by “voting more Democrats”.
Increasingly I see that Obama and his wife and his Attorney General really don’t represent me, at all. They don’t see the world as I do, and I don’t think they’re capable of any type of meaningful leadership or reasonable solution. They’re reactionary leftists with an imbalanced view of the world.
I don’t recall the word ‘bad’ being used.
Cheer up. You could have had McCain and Palin.
And for those of us who are independent…when you are an independent, you have NO control over who runs for office. I finally figured out I had no control either way.
——————————————————–
I just re-listened. There was no bad. She talked about fixing the problem. There are just too many people that I know personally that are on the gerbil wheel and are not allowed to do the right thing which is to become documented.
I am for giving the kid some hope.
Here’s the proper response :
“Well, sweetheart, we do have to have rules. If we let everybody in and never make them leave, then more and more people come here. And that does cause problems. It means that people make less and less money for jobs. Already it’s hard for most people in America to get by because jobs don’t pay as much as they did when there were less people here.
Do you know why your Mom came here? No? Well, ask her when you get home. She probably came here because she thought she could make more money here. But is it okay to do bad things to make more money? What do you all think, kids, is it? That’s right, no it’s not.
What we need to do is get the people where your Mom comes from to stop fighting and squabbling so they can build a better country, so people don’t have to all come here and get in trouble.
The country your Mom comes from is where she belongs. She should be able to work to make it a better place. But the problem is, when people just run away from problems instead of confonting them, will things get better kids? No, that’s right. You can’t just run away from problems. And instead things just get worse here. We only have a certain amount of money that we can afford to help people with. If too many people come here from other places, and don’t follow the rules, we aren’t able to help anyone the way we need to help people.
Honey, do you pay for lunch here at school? No? You get free lunches? Well you see that’s the kind of thing that we pay for. We pay for the teachers and the school buildings, and lunches for kids whose parents don’t have enough money. But we’re running out of money.
The people who built this school, and who pay the teachers, and who pay for your lunches are mad about how many people don’t follow the rules. Lots of them are mad at your mom. So honey, she might have to leave. But it’s important to know kids that rules need to be followed. Your mom broke a rule, and when you break a rule somebody has to punish you, otherwise there may as well not be a rule.
Ask your mom to explain about rules and punishment to you when you get home.”
“Cheer up. You could have had McCain and Palin”
Probably it’d be worse, but not much worse. Obama is a very ineffectual tool IMO.
Here’s what I hear Michelle saying :
“Oh, honey, bad people want to make your Mom go away. But if we just stand up and yell and maybe march in the streets we can make it stop and we can all be happy.
That’s what my husband Barack did before he was President! He would help people to stand up and yell and try to get things that they hadn’t worked for, that didn’t belong to them, given to them. We can all make that happen if we work together. Barack believes very much in that and wants to make it happen.
So tell your Mom that if she just stands up and yells loud enough, she won’t have to follow rules, and we’ll give things to her. This happens in America, and especially if you’re not white.”
Rick, LOL — I needed that. Shoulda, Woulda, Coulda. I think the response given was telling — none of of that is in their thinking or their agenda.
I’m not going to waste a lot of energy trying to figure out what she actually should have done or said. There was no good response. That’s the conundrum you’re in when you’re first lady, and your husband is a left-wing shill who fails to lead and whose positions are all phony nonsense and who actively divides people on the issue of immigration for personal gain.
What YOU hear is NOT what she SAID. She was talking to a 7 year old child. She handled the question kindly and as honestly as she could.
Rick, #27 makes a lot of sense and sounds well reasoned.
Elena/MH, I can feel compassion for the young girl and wish her situation could be better. But, that doesn’t erase the legal obligation that the government has for enforcing the current law.
If you feel strongly about her plight, fight to change the current law. Under current law her family could face deportation and I wouldn’t lose any sleep over it.
This to me is no different than the SEC investigating Wall Street or any number of commissions looking into the BP oil spill. If/when we put in government regulations we expect those laws, rules and regulations to be looked at to the letter.
Well here is the Webster definition of “criminal”–Where is the
Kiss of Death
In the Bible?
Main Entry: 1crim·i·nal
Pronunciation: \ˈkri-mə-nəl, ˈkrim-nəl\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French or Late Latin; Anglo-French criminal, from Late Latin criminalis, from Latin crimin-, crimen crime
Date: 15th century
1 : relating to, involving, or being a crime
2 : relating to crime or to the prosecution of suspects in a crime
3 : guilty of crime; also : of or befitting a criminal
4 : disgraceful
— crim·i·nal·ly adverb
It does differentiate as to the degree of the “crime” . Entering the country illegally is a crime–period. And again as Winston Churchill said to the socialite: “Madam, we’ve already established that. Now we are haggling about the price.”
Misdemeanor, illegal immigration, bank robbery, car jacking, etc.–all criminal acts, we’re just arguing about the degree. Illegal immigration must be pretty serious because it sure it taking up a lot of people’s time.
But no matter where a president or first lady is speaking, and regardless of the audience, the cameras are present and the ultimate audience is the American people. What they say is generally intended–and taken–as an official statement, unless they are willing to ban cameras and clearly state that an event is off the record.
Mrs. Obama cannot speak officially, other than for herself.
It sounds like some of you all are going to poke and gouge regardless of who it is about.
The cameras are present and I expect the most compelling comment made it past the editor’s floor.
And Marin, I do think the laws should change so that legal immigration isn’t impossible. And I hope I do my part.
Meanwhile, I am glad we didn’t elect someone who would take one look at the kid and say well tough sh!t kid, your mother is a criminal. Kiss it good bye. I doubt that Sarah Sacred Palin would have said that either. I doubt if McCain would have said that either. No one would say that to a kid.
It was interesting that yesterday CBP confirmed that the wall in California and the improvements (physical and electronic ) in Texas are working, such that the number of arrests of illegals overall have gone down by 9 percent. For those opposing the AZ law – where there has been more resitance to those improvements, the number of arrests over the same period is up 9 percent and that was before the new law. This will be a good test of the AZ law to see how it moves the problem along the border.
IMHO the racist profiling thing wiith the AZ law is a calculated political move to intimidate the law enforcement officers involved; their families, their departments and political leadership — as it was here – with the threat of lawsuits. I will not be a part of that effort.
Wait, the voices are starting in my head again, I hear her saying more.
“Barack wants to make sure that everybody gets what they need sweetie. If your mommy needs papers, we need to help her get them.
If she takes out a mortgage that’s too big for her, we need to pay that, too. That’s what our government’s here for.
Does your mommy speak English? No? Well then we need to make sure that everybody does things in Spanish so that she can understand them.
Just remember always that if you break a rule, we’re here to help. We just need to make the bad people give us more money to help the good people with.
As long as your mommy pulls the voting lever for Barack, everything’s going to work out great and we’re all going to get free health care and we’ll all have papers and we’ll all go to heaven and lick strawberry syrup from a big candy mountain.”.
Hmmm what would Palin have said? Probably would have tried to somehow blame the whole thing on Barack Hussien Obama in kiddie-talk.
@Moon-howler
Moon said, “I do think the laws should change so that legal immigration isn’t impossible. And I hope I do my part.”
With respect Moon, we legally permit about 1 million new legal immigrants per year. This is in addition to the official estimate (sic) of 11 million illegals already in the country and growing at the rate of almost 500,000 – to 700, 000 more per year.
@George S. Harris
It’s a civil offense to come here illegally, not a criminal offense. If a person was deported and THEN comes back, then it becomes a criminal offense.
It’s a sad day indeed when the US Government is deploying its resources to arrest and deport little girls who are United States citizens, and whose only crime was having been born in this country.
This country is on the fast-track to becoming the worst sort of a fascist, dictatorial police state when United States citizens can be deported.
starryflights, actually the government isn’t lifting a finger to identity the woman or to cause her any discomfort, much less the little girl.
I think we’re in much greater danger of becoming a land where rules don’t matter, everyone has excuses, and personal responsibility is passe.
Ahhh, but that’s the rub…..
Is she a US citizen? The 14th Amendment clause that is appropriate needs to be clarified.
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.
The phrase “subject tot he jurisdiction, thereof,” is the important clause. Are you subject the jurisdiction of the US because you were born here of foreign parents? Aren’t you subject to the jurisdiction of the home country? Wouldn’t automatic citizenship accrue to the children if tourists, ambassadors, etc., had children on US soil?
@Rick Bentley Yeah, just ask Auntie Zetuni.
Yes
No
No
Maybe Aunt Zetuni should be speaking to the kids. It’s an uplifting story of perseverance and not giving up hope.
RI has introduced the AZ law.
It’s the end of the world as we know it.
The ironic thing is that, if that little girl had been of foreign ethnic origin in a school in Mexico, if the First Lady involved in this vignette had been the First Lady of Mexico, the Mexican police would be looking for the girl’s mother right now. Jail time followed by deportation. We see you again around here, senora, and the jail time takes a quantum leap. Whoops. Let me take that back. With one or both parents illegal and undoubtedly hiding out from Mexican law, the girl wouldn’t have been in a Mexican school at all — no free education, no free lunch. And Heaven help that mother if she might be involved in something like “Gringos Sin Fronteras”!!! Of course, that involvement would have to be completely sub rosa, since participation by foreigners, legal or illegal, in Mexican political affairs is absolutely forbidden.
I just love it when Felipe Calderon comes here and tells us how terrible America is for mistreating illegal immigrants. And there’s the President standing beside Calderon, acting like it is just another day at the office. Suggestion Mr. President: Fix that border. Fix it now. Forget Calderon. Remember Robert Frost’s comments about how good fences make good neighbors. Then we can talk about that little girl and her mother.
Yep, Calderon does that. because he’s looking after the interests of his people, his citizens, first.
The crime, to me, is that Obama does not.
Starry,
You have hidden depths. I didn’t know that you were a member of the Supreme Court. I mean, the OTHER Supreme Court Justices haven’t ruled on that question.
At least we know what YOUR opinion is. Please explain how the children of illegal immigrants differ from those of tourists? Why aren’t the tourists’ children automatic citizens like an illegal immigrant’s?