Quantcast

Comments about ‘Most Americans believe the U.S. should offer more support to children at the border’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, July 30 2014 6:15 a.m. MDT

Updated: Wednesday, July 30 2014 4:53 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
ordinaryfolks
seattle, WA

No wonder the Republican/Tea Party is against a law or an appropriation to deal with the children at the border. The majority of Americans want to see something done constructive. Therefore, the RTP'ers are against it. Rather like everything else the RTP supports. Democracy in action!

CynicJim
Taylorsville, UT

Ths article appears to be propaganda,other studies say 77% of Americans want the illegals returned ASAP and to secure the borders against such mass crossings.

GaryO
Virginia Beach, VA

“42 percent of Republicans surveyed believe the children should be treated as illegal immigrants.”

Huh . . . Interesting . . . The latest Rasmussen Presidential Approval poll shows that 42 percent of Americans strongly disapprove of the way Obama is doing his job.

“The latest figures include . . . 42% who Strongly Disapprove . . . of the way Obama is performing as president .”

What do you want to bet these 42 percent are not the same people?

This is most likely the same group. The 42 percent of Americans who are so hard-hearted as to think that little children seeking refuge should instead be treated as criminals . . . are most likely the same 42 percent who are so undiscerning as to “strongly disapprove” of Obama’s job performance.

. . . Right/Wrong-Wingers.

mohokat
Ogden, UT

I personally do not believe this poll or survey. I personally believe that like the trail boss would say head em up and move em out. This refugee scam is just another way to game our system. If we send that message we better be prepared for the onslaught that will follow. As far as Obama and the Dems are concerned this is a beautiful way to increase their voting base.

lost in DC
West Jordan, UT

if this pool is accurate, it just proves that you can fool a lot of people some of the time.

I M LDS 2
Provo, UT

Americans are not having children at rates like we used to, so why not import the next generation? That's a win win!

JimInSLC
Salt Lake City, UT

The attempt to label illegal immigrants as refugees only opens the door for the UN to intervene on their behalf. Many of the relocation centers have been renamed refugee centers.

Don't treat these people as illegal immigrants, or as refugees; Treat them as humans, as children, care for them then reunite them with their families in their home countries as quickly as possible.

The Kansas City Group that own/operates the train, "la beastie", should be fined for the transport of these people to the southern border. Operation of the train should be halted immediately. The Mexican Government should be sanctioned for allowing them passage through Mexico.

Copacetic
Logan, UT

Just a few weeks ago, a poll taken from the minors themselves found about 96% of them said the primary reason they came to the United States was because they heard if they came now, they wouldn't be sent back. Only a few mentioned things that would qualify them as refugees.

As has been reported multiple times before, the biggest problem is South American media and religions pushing of the idea that Obama is soft on immigration when it comes to minors 16 and under, which was derived from his controversial executive order 2 years ago. The original intent was that only those who were already in the USA at that time could qualify. But human smugglers made and still make big money by convincing South Americans that it was also applicable to children still coming.

Had Obama not created that change in immigration laws after his Dream-Act failed in Congress, none of this would've happened. That's the bottom line reason why South American parents are flooding the USA with their kids. Then once those minors eventually become citizens, the intent is to "legally" bring the rest of their families here.

Deserthiker
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

Multiple sources report that the vast majority of these kids are fleeing not just poverty but gang and drug cartel violence that has consumed their communities. Local government and police won't protect them because they have been corrupted by the drug runners. Many face a literal choice between joining the gangs and death. The girls often face being forced into prostitution and sexual servitude. One report estimates that 70% of these girls are sexually assaulted during their journey to the US borders. The money fueling the drug cartels, and thus fueling the violence comes from the US drug trade. Ultimately our nation's appetite for illegal drugs is responsible for the awful situation these kids are in. The misery, and thus the flow of refugees will continue as long as the money continues to flow from our borders. So it's our fault. The question is, what are we as a society going to do about it. No easy answers here- but it's a mess of our own making. I believe these children deserve to be treated as victims rather than criminals. They deserve our compassion and our help.

intervention
slc, UT

This poll does a heart good.

@red corvette

We do take in many many refugees from not only those but other countries as refugees every year. Google UN refugee committee or US refugee program there is a lot of good information out there on these programs and why the exisit.

Say No to BO
Mapleton, UT

The poll doesn't really say what the article implies.
The option was: Offer shelter and support while beginning a process to determine whether they should be deported or allowed to stay in the US.

And 70% agreed with that statement.

It DOES NOT mean that 70% want them to stay.
It DOES NOT mean we want them to be placed around the country with nothing more than a Notice ot Appear as an incentive to see the judge.
It means that 70% want them sheltered and fed while government figures out what to do with them.
And as other polls suggest, we want the matter settled ASAP.
Stop twisting data to say something the survey does not!

Tators
Logan, UT

@ I M LDS 2:

It's definitely not a win-win situation as stated in your comment. Most of these minors don't speak any English and have very little schooling. When the feds keep arbitrarily dumping them off to various communities, it over-burdens their local schools and other programs.

Obviously, they don't pay any taxes to offset their schooling costs. It holds back the learning rate of American kids since their teachers have to devote so much extra time teaching basic English to the illegals. That is not "win-win".

None of these kids have health insurance. Yet they are bringing in a host of medical conditions including some with tuberculosis, pneumonia, lice, etc., and they have no immunization shots that local school systems require. Needing free health care places an additional burden on local hospitals and medical establishments.

Most qualify for food stamps and multiple other welfare programs which in turn stretches our national and state welfare and social programs.

It would seem that many advocates haven't thought through the ramifications. Either that or they just don't care. Many seem to think, "Not to worry. It's not in my backyard".

Third try screen name
Mapleton, UT

I would expect that the Deseret News would immediately call for all missionaries to be sent home from Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala.
If these places are as violent as some people suggest, we should not be putting American missionaries in harms way.
Of course, we know that this is a false narrative foisted on us to justify the current situation.
The El Paso Intelligence Center, a federal office charged with gathering data on border issues, issued a report on July 7th. According to their report, the main driver of this surge in illegal alien children ISN'T violence. They are coming because they are being told they will be allowed into the country. After that, enforcement is so lax that they think they can live here indefinitely and probably take advantage of Obama's DREAM Act.

carman
Wasatch Front, UT

There are 3 to 4 Billion (with a "B") people who live in impoverished and/or violent places with little opportunity. Women in India and Africa face violence daily. Much of Mexico, Central America and South America as well. Much of Asia Minor, the Middle East, much of Russia and the former Eastern block countries are also difficult places to live economically and locals often face daily violence. If the criteria is that they are from lousy places, then we should be ready to accept about 3.5 billion people.

Great argument.

RSL*
Why, AZ

If your a true Libertarian wouldn't you want an open border? Economics teaches that with an open border it will significantly strengthen the economy. But there will be negative affects to the lazy workers that will lose their jobs to a new labor force that is willing to work harder.

Loconic
Alpine, UT

@ intervention:

You keep ambiguously referring to reports that say this and that. Do you have any verifiable sources for these reports?

People often hear something and then automatically accept that it must've come from some report someplace. But that often isn't the case. Many times rumors get propagated and expanded. They sometimes might include some half-truths. But that doesn't mean they should be accepted as gospel truth.

The gangs you and some others refer to have actually been in existence in South America for multiple decades. Yes, there are some deaths and pressures. But nothing new in their situation has suddenly taken place to create swarms of refugees.

The best way to effect needed change in any area is for good families to stay and unite for what they believe in. That way they actually have a voice in what happens takes place in their communities. It does work.

If individuals evacuate each time there are problems in their countries, most of the people in the world would now be living in the USA and most of the other countries would be taken over by gangs and other bad groups of people.

intervention
slc, UT

@loconic

I think you have me confused with another poster. The two organizations I site above are the United States Refugee Admissions Program and the United Nations High Commission on Refugees, both easily found with a quick search, hope that helps.

Loconic
Alpine, UT

@ intervention:

You are correct. I did confuse you with another person. My bad and my apologies.

@ deserthiker:

My original post at 9:57 A.M. was intended for you. If you would address and answer the requests in that comment, it would be much appreciated.
It mostly had to do with if you have any verifiable sources to back up your contentions in your comment posted at 8:43 this morning.

intervention
slc, UT

@loconic
No problem, it happens.

SCfan
clearfield, UT

RSL. You said that open borders will strengthen the economy. The only economy it will strengthen is the drug pushers, and human trafficking economy. It will run down the American economy because so much tax money will be needed to provide basic services to this huge influx of uneducated, non English speaking, and unskilled mass of people. And if any American loses their job to the aforementioned, it will likely be because the immigrant will do the same job for less money.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments