L.A. City Council Approves Hiring 'Immigrant Advocate' (unemployment, minimum wage, generations)

[jm1982]

Originally Posted by highlanderfil

That's your opinion. Mine is that I do not know yet what it was created for.I don't think I've ever expressed an opinion on the matter one way or the other, so I'm not sure why you're bringing it up.OK. What's your point?
I'm really not sure how it's fear mongering, but OK. While Trump may not have said anything about LGBT, Mike Pence certainly has and it's a little disingenuous to think that he wields absolutely no power in the administration.

As for immigration, Trump has said plenty of things that weren't...let's just say graceful. He's a great populist - he is not a great diplomat.I don't disagree with Garcetti being a failure as mayor, but I'm not willing to dismiss wholesale things that actually do make sense simply because he screwed up elsewhere.

Regarding the immigrant advocate the timing seems to make it clear that it's a reaction to Trump .

It's kind of funny how quick city politicians can be when they are reacting to Trump would be nice if they could be that fast on other issues too .

You mentioned that hiring someone without a clearly set defined duties is a bad idea .
I could be wrong but I suspect this immigrant advocate will be for illegal immigrants .
Do you think it's possible that they aren't saying this though because they realize there might be more pushback from voters ? Even from Democrats ?

No doubt Obama has a smoother delivery style especially when he has a prepared speech . I'm more interested in results now . Trump has made a lot of promises too so expectations will be high for those that voted for him and expectations are low for those that did not vote for him

[highlanderfil]

Originally Posted by jm1982

Regarding the immigrant advocate the timing seems to make it clear that it's a reaction to Trump .

Be that as it may (and it may very well be the case, but so what?), it still does not de-legitimize the position in and of itself.

[jm1982]

Originally Posted by highlanderfil

Be that as it may (and it may very well be the case, but so what?), it still does not de-legitimize the position in and of itself.

The person will be working with the office of immigrant affairs which helps illegal aliens or undocumented or whatever you want to call them .
Maybe they all lost their paperwork and need help finding it ?

I'm not for supporting illegal immigration in that way . Perhaps you are.

What about the illegals with criminal records , the known gang members etc ?
Will the city be helping them too and "protecting them from Trump"? Lots of questions.

[highlanderfil]

Originally Posted by jm1982

The person will be working with the office of immigrant affairs which helps illegal aliens or undocumented or whatever you want to call them .
Maybe they all lost their paperwork and need help finding it ?

I'm not interested in conjecture. I'm interested in what this position will actually do. "Immigrants" does not 100% = "illegal immigrants". There are plenty of legals who need help.

I'm not for supporting illegal immigration in that way . Perhaps you are.

Yet more conjecture. Did I, at any point in time, say that I supported illegal immigration? In fact, I've done the exact opposite.

What about the illegals with criminal records , the known gang members etc ?
Will the city be helping them too and "protecting them from Trump"? Lots of questions.

What about them? IMO, they should be put on the first bus, plane or slow-moving boat out of here, but where is your evidence that this new position will help them avoid said fate?

[jm1982]

Originally Posted by highlanderfil

I'm not interested in conjecture. I'm interested in what this position will actually do. "Immigrants" does not 100% = "illegal immigrants". There are plenty of legals who need help. Yet more conjecture. Did I, at any point in time, say that I supported illegal immigration? In fact, I've done the exact opposite.What about them? IMO, they should be put on the first bus, plane or slow-moving boat out of here, but where is your evidence that this new position will help them avoid said fate?

The point of this is to protect these "immigrants " against deportation.
Legal immigrants don't fear deportation , only illegal ones .


As I mentioned before if helping legal immigrants was an issue why is the city coming up with this all of a sudden in 2017 ?

The LA Times article mentions

"It is the latest move by local and state politicians to shield immigrants from deportation by Trump. Last month, officials unveiled a $10-million city-county legal defense fund for immigrants. Several City Council members also announced plans to decriminalize sidewalk vending amid concerns that vendors could be arrested and deported."

So clearly this is the latest move in protecting illegals .
Is there an issue with legal immigrants randomly being deported ?

It's clear that "progressives " have stopped even using the term undocumented immigrants and just started calling them immigrants because they know there would be less support for efforts to help illegals .

Most just read headlines and sound bytes
"Oh they are helping immigrants that's great "
And then go on to updating their Facebook status or watching a movie on Netflix .

[highlanderfil]

Originally Posted by jm1982

The point of this is to protect these "immigrants " against deportation.

Really? Where in the job description does it state that? Moreover, where does it say that this is the only purpose of this position?

As I mentioned before if helping legal immigrants was an issue why is the city coming up with this all of a sudden in 2017 ?

Because if it is truly an issue and an overlooked one, it needed to happen sometime. Or would you rather it never happen at all?

So clearly this is the latest move in protecting illegals .

Among other things, sure. And I don't support that part.

It's clear that "progressives " have stopped even using the term undocumented immigrants and just started calling them immigrants because they know there would be less support for efforts to help illegals .

Actually, that's what conservatives, such as yourself, are doing. Many times in this thread, in fact.

[jm1982]

Originally Posted by highlanderfil

Really? Where in the job description does it state that? Moreover, where does it say that this is the only purpose of this position?Because if it is truly an issue and an overlooked one, it needed to happen sometime. Or would you rather it never happen at all?Among other things, sure. And I don't support that part.Actually, that's what conservatives, such as yourself, are doing. Many times in this thread, in fact.

I was just stating what the LA times mentioned . LA Times is far from a conservative publication .

I guess we can pretend this position won't be to help illegals , but that's not the reality .
As I mentioned the city doesn't use the term illegal or undocumented much anymore .
But when they say their efforts are to protect immigrants from Trump deporting them
It's pretty obvious to realize that means they are talking about illegal immigrants ..

Conservatives are doing what ? Not calling illegals immigrants illegals ?
Also not sure if I'd label myself a conservative.

I used to consider myself Democrat but they seem to have lost common sense and more focused on identity politics these days .. it's a shame .

[highlanderfil]

Originally Posted by jm1982

I was just stating what the LA times mentioned . LA Times is far from a conservative publication .

Mis-stating, more like.

I guess we can pretend this position won't be to help illegals , but that's not the reality .

I don't know what the reality is as I am not clairvoyant. Neither do or are you.

Conservatives are doing what ? Not calling illegals immigrants illegals ?

No, using the term "immigrants" to cover all of them, irrespective of status.

[jm1982]

Originally Posted by highlanderfil

Mis-stating, more like.I don't know what the reality is as I am not clairvoyant. Neither do or are you.
No, using the term "immigrants" to cover all of them, irrespective of status.

So you think after all the recent rushes to "protect undocumented immigrants "
Now all of a sudden they want to just focus on protecting legal immigrants .. sure maybe
But I'd bet you that's not what will happen .

I think you know this too but want to debate it for some reason .

Conservative never call them "immigrants " regardless of status . Not sure where you heard that ..

[highlanderfil]

Originally Posted by jm1982

So you think after all the recent rushes to "protect undocumented immigrants "
Now all of a sudden they want to just focus on protecting legal immigrants .. sure maybe
But I'd bet you that's not what will happen .

You can ask this question a hundred different ways, but I will not change my answer: until I have proof of this position being intended solely for the purpose of helping illegal immigrants, I do not have a problem with it.

Conservative never call them "immigrants " regardless of status . Not sure where you heard that ..

In this very thread; now, of course, if you don't class yourself as conservative (as I had assumed you did based on your views), that changes things.