Cuccinelli edits Statue of Liberty poem to masses 'who can stand on their own two feet

[cigaretteman]

Deplorable:

Ken Cuccinelli, acting director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, said Tuesday that the poem etched on the Statue of Liberty welcoming immigrants to America should include a line qualifying that they be able to "stand on their own two feet."

PHOTO GALLERY: See photos of the Statue of Liberty through the years in a gallery at the end of this story

Cuccinelli made the comments while defending the Trump administration's announcement Monday that the government would consider an immigrant's use of social safety net programs, like Medicaid or food stamps, when deciding their permanent legal status.

The famous words on the pedestal of the State of Liberty, "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free," were written by Emma Lazarus in 1883. In recent years, it's taken on new meaning as a rallying cry against President Donald Trump's immigration policies.

Cuccinelli, during an interview with NPR, argued it's the "American tradition" that immigrants welcomed into the country be those who are "self-sufficient, can pull themselves up from their bootstraps."

"Would you also agree that Emma Lazarus's words etched on the Statue of Liberty, 'Give me your tired, give me your poor,' are also a part of the American ethos?" NPR's Rachel Martin asked Cuccinelli.

"They certainly are: 'Give me your tired and your poor who can stand on their own two feet and who will not become a public charge,'" Cuccinelli said. "That plaque was put on the Statue of Liberty at almost the same time as the first public charge was passed - very interesting timing."

The public charge rule that Cuccinelli is referring to takes into account an immigrant's current or possible future reliance on the government when reviewing applications for permanent status. In its current form, officials take into account whether immigrants rely on the government for more than half of their income.


Since the early days of the Trump administration, officials have been working on broadening that law to include an immigrant's use of other public benefit services, such as subsidies for health care, food and housing, as reason to reject an immigrant's application for a green card.

On Monday, it made the regulation official, and it's set to go into effect Oct. 15.

https://www.nonpareilonline.com/new...e_f96967e9-09c5-5209-862a-17837b5dbe6b.html#1

 

[BelemNole]

Honestly, they're like Austin Powers villains.

 

[CarolinaHawkeye]

Honestly, they're like Austin Powers villains.

Only more deplorable!

 

[franklinman]

I didn't realize Cucch was still living on the govt teat, I shouldn't be surprised.

 

[torbee]

I listened to that interview live on NPR this morning.

It is astonishing how incredibly awful at articulating anything coherent members of this administration are.

Hell, I mostly AGREE with this policy! I do think incoming immigrants should have job skills and should not just be immediately enrolled into taxpayer-funded social safety net programs. Yet this dipshit can't even articulate why that can still be done in a thoughtful and compassionate manner (for example, by offering tax incentives to companies hiring immigrants in exchange for paying higher wages so they do not need social services).

It would be funny if it wasn't so sad.

 

[lucas80]

I listened to that interview live on NPR this morning.

It is astonishing how incredibly awful at articulating anything coherent members of this administration are.

Hell, I mostly AGREE with this policy! I do think incoming immigrants should have job skills and should not just be immediately enrolled into taxpayer-funded social safety net programs. Yet this dipshit can't even articulate why that can still be done in a thoughtful and compassionate manner (for example, by offering tax incentives to companies hiring immigrants in exchange for paying higher wages so they do not need social services).

It would be funny if it wasn't so sad.

Now you know why he is in the Trump Administration. He is incompetent. The only people in the TA are incompetents who incessantly flatter the boss, and comic book evil people who are intent on undoing government regulations in order to help the businesses they lobbied for, and will work for the day they leave their government jobs.

 

[lucas80]

What’s funny/sad about Cuccinelli’s comments were his attempts to tie in his own Italian and Irish heritage.
Yeah, dirty Italians and drunken Irish were popular targets in the 1890s to 1920s. They were the original catholic breeders that many warned about.

 

[ihhawk]

Why is the USA giving public assistance to non citizens?

 

[stout1]

He followed it up in another interview saying that the poem only applied to European immigrants and was more about the class system in place at the time the poem was written.

 

[markfromj]

Times change. At one time, we needed everyone. We don’t as much now.

 

[hawkedoff]

Times change. At one time, we needed everyone. We don’t as much now.

Not true

 

[JupiterHawk]

 

[Jerome Silberman]

Times change. At one time, we needed everyone. We don’t as much now.

With our aging population, you could argue we need new blood now more than ever.

 

[NorthernHawkeye]

I listened to that interview live on NPR this morning.

It is astonishing how incredibly awful at articulating anything coherent members of this administration are.

Hell, I mostly AGREE with this policy! I do think incoming immigrants should have job skills and should not just be immediately enrolled into taxpayer-funded social safety net programs. Yet this dipshit can't even articulate why that can still be done in a thoughtful and compassionate manner (for example, by offering tax incentives to companies hiring immigrants in exchange for paying higher wages so they do not need social services).

It would be funny if it wasn't so sad.

The Trump Administration is correct in this approach.

And your last part about “compassionate manner” is an emotional response void of any common sense.

Your saying they shouldn’t be “immediately enrolled in taxpayer-funded social safety net programs” but then you immediately turn around and say they should offer “tax incentives to companies hiring immigrants in exchange for paying higher wages so that they do not need social services.”

Do you even understand what your saying?

 

[hawkedoff]

I understand this guy is a tool that has zero comprehension of the history of our country especially when it comes to immigration.

We need to make it easier not harder to come to this country. Ellis island screened people to make sure they didn't have disease or weren't raving lunatics. It wasn't by the way the only Port of entry to the US. People back then simply walked across the border as well

Make it easier for the current immigrants to come and be productive members of society. Then hammer the hell out of business that employ people here illegally...because there would be zero reason for a person to be here illegally that wants to be here legally. If needed make a work visa that participates in things like taxes but allows for a contract on wages to do things like harvest at lower than minimum wage. If that is actually needed.

 

[ihhawk]

The immigration laws have always emphasized making sure that immigrants are not Wards of the State.

We need immigrants in this country. Period. We need to make sure that the immigrants receiving college degrees in the USA have an easy path to stay here.

We do NOT need to have immigration where the people are not able to support themselves and require Govt assistance.

Everyone likes to highlight how their ancestors came over as immigrants. Mine did as well from Scotland. The big difference is that when mine came over in the 1880s they were basically given a pat on the back and a good luck. No help from the govt.

 

[ihhawk]

I understand this guy is a tool that has zero comprehension of the history of our country especially when it comes to immigration.

We need to make it easier not harder to come to this country. Ellis island screened people to make sure they didn't have disease or weren't raving lunatics. It wasn't by the way the only Port of entry to the US. People back then simply walked across the border as well

Make it easier for the current immigrants to come and be productive members of society. Then hammer the hell out of business that employ people here illegally...because there would be zero reason for a person to be here illegally that wants to be here legally. If needed make a work visa that participates in things like taxes but allows for a contract on wages to do things like harvest at lower than minimum wage. If that is actually needed.

Ellis Island also screened to make sure that you were not going to be a Ward of the State. You left that part out

 

[joelbc1]

Times change. At one time, we needed everyone. We don’t as much now.

Times change...but our immigration laws don’t. That is the stupidity. If we don’t need everyone any more mark.....why do they keep coming and finding jobs? poultry, beef, pork, roofs, landscaping, housekeeping....anyone?

 

[Titanhawk2]

Not sure where "Liberty" became redefined as being dependent on the government

 

[joelbc1]

Not sure where "Liberty" became redefined as being dependent on the government

Government represses the repressive. The powerful dislike government as it infringes on their right to tell others what to do.

 

[MitchLL]

Another Trumpster with an audience of one.

Just incredible how unqualified most of the Trump appointees are.

This guy has a job at Fux waiting for him in 17 months.

 

[sober_teacher]

What’s funny/sad about Cuccinelli’s comments were his attempts to tie in his own Italian and Irish heritage.
Yeah, dirty Italians and drunken Irish were popular targets in the 1890s to 1920s. They were the original catholic breeders that many warned about.

I also enjoyed how he talked about that poem and mentioned some of the immigration laws that were passed but glossed over the Chinese Exclusion Act which specifically banned Chinese immigrants over decidedly racist reasons and was passed around the same time.

You can sell me on the need to reform our immigration system, legal or otherwise. Unfortunately, a lot of the proposals I've heard from Stephen Miller and other conservatives would have the consequences of ultimately excluding people from specific regions. I'll be generous and allow for that for some conservatives, that's an unintentional consequence. For people like Miller, I think it's deliberate.

 

[Rifler]

He followed it up in another interview saying that the poem WAS MAKING REFERENCE to European immigrants and was more about the class system in place at the time the poem was written.

Here,... I fixed this for you...

 

[hawkedoff]

Ellis Island also screened to make sure that you were not going to be a Ward of the State. You left that part out

No not really. If that were truly the case all those Irish, Italian, and other undesirable immigrants would have been sent back to the motherland.

 

[ihhawk]

No not really. If that were truly the case all those Irish, Italian, and other undesirable immigrants would have been sent back to the motherland.

Yes really. Take the tour of Ellis Island sometime.

Ward of the State was different back then though. You could be a dumb farmer from Dublin but be built like a brick poop house. Hard labor was needed back then as well as many were sent down south to kill confederates

 

[torbee]

The Trump Administration is correct in this approach.

And your last part about “compassionate manner” is an emotional response void of any common sense.

Your saying they shouldn’t be “immediately enrolled in taxpayer-funded social safety net programs” but then you immediately turn around and say they should offer “tax incentives to companies hiring immigrants in exchange for paying higher wages so that they do not need social services.”

Do you even understand what your saying?

I do, you don't.

Basic economics are supply and demand.

Many companies employ immigrant labor because they know they can pay less, demand longer hours, fewer benefits, etc., because for people from economically and socially distressed countries, even crap-paying jobs in the U.S. are a better situation than they have in their home countries. However, once they get here, that low pay means they often need rental assistance (U.S. housing much more expensive than in their home countries), food stamps (food costs much more expensive in the U.S. than their home countries) and other forms of assistance to provide for themselves and their families.

If the U.S. was serious about getting these immigrants off the roles of those programs, it would offer tax incentives to companies that utilize immigrants labor in exchange for higher wages and/or benefits. In the short-term, that might seem like just robbing Peter to pay Paul from a tax standpoint, but long-term, the higher wages and better benefits will result in those workers not needing social programs for years and years. This is a way to have people "pull themselves up by their bootstraps" - which used to be the conservative ideal.

 

[franklinman]

Times change. At one time, we needed everyone. We don’t as much now.

Correct, nobody dies in this country leaving jobs unfilled. Our birth rate is keeping up with the unfilled jobs. Is this correct markfromj ?

 

[goldmom]

No not really. If that were truly the case all those Irish, Italian, and other undesirable immigrants would have been sent back to the motherland.

Oh. So Irish and Italians are undesirables?
In that case, I'll have what Fredo's having.

 

[BioHawk]

I honestly thought this was a joke some left wing person made a meme out of when I first heard this. Unbelievable.

 

[goldmom]

Yes really. Take the tour of Ellis Island sometime.

Ward of the State was different back then though. You could be a dumb farmer from Dublin but be built like a brick poop house. Hard labor was needed back then as well as many were sent down south to kill confederates

Not quite. Irish have come to America all along. Waaay before the Civil War.
Some immigrants agreed to fight for the North for cash, most often paid to take the place of rich Northern pussies who were afraid to fight. But they weren't "sent" anywhere.

 

[ihhawk]

Not quite. Irish have come to America all along. Waaay before the Civil War.
Some immigrants agreed to fight for the North for cash, most often paid to take the place of rich Northern pussies who were afraid to fight. But they weren't "sent" anywhere.

This sounds like a time to fire up the google machine

 

[lucas80]

It seems odd that the GOP didn’t work on comprehensive immigration reform while they had the House and Senate, and the WH?

 

[ihhawk]

It seems odd that the GOP didn’t work on comprehensive immigration reform while they had the House and Senate, and the WH?

Would an immigration overhaul require 60 votes or a simply majority in the Senate?

Ill wait for the response

 

[hawkedoff]

Yes really. Take the tour of Ellis Island sometime.

Ward of the State was different back then though. You could be a dumb farmer from Dublin but be built like a brick poop house. Hard labor was needed back then as well as many were sent down south to kill confederates

I have taken the tour. You are quite simply wrong.

The sentiment against immigrants then was the same as it is now. If anything it was worse.

There wasn't a rejection on whether someone could stand on their own two feet. They didn't care at all back then about that. If they did the Irish would never have been allowed to set foot on US soil. All of the Irish were viewed like parasites

 

[ihhawk]

I have taken the tour. You are quite simply wrong.

The sentiment against immigrants then was the same as it is now. If anything it was worse.

There wasn't a rejection on whether someone could stand on their own two feet. They didn't care at all back then about that. If they did the Irish would never have been allowed to set foot on US soil. All of the Irish were viewed like parasites

Google is your friend you know. Here is a little snippet of the law at the time:


Immigration Act of 1882 for kids: Provisions of the Immigration ActWhat did the 1882 Immigration Act do? The provisions of the Act of 1882 were:

● To impose a 'head tax'. The Act of 1882 levied a tax of 50 cents on all immigrants landing at US ports to fund immigration officials The tax money was be collected by the collector of customs at each port paid into the United States Treasury to "constitute a fund called the immigration fund" and to pay the federal immigration agents throughout the United States
● The Immigration fund was also to be used for the care of immigrants in distress
● Immigration officials were given the authority to expel certain immigrants based on criteria laid out within the 1882 Immigration Act
● The 1882 Act provided that all convicted convicts (except those convicted for political crimes) should be returned to the country they had come from. The expense of returning convicts were to be borne by the owners of the vessels
● That an examination on the condition of passengers should be made on arrival
● If on examination any of the passengers were found to be any the following, a written report should be made to the collector at each port and such persons should not be permitted to land:
● ● A Convict (except political)
● ● A Lunatic
● ● A person unable to take care of himself or herself without becoming a public charge

The last item is a person unable to take care of himself or herself so that they wouldnt become a public charge. So when people read the Poem on the Statue, the tired and weak had better be able to take care of themselves

 

[joelbc1]

Would an immigration overhaul require 60 votes or a simply majority in the Senate?

Ill wait for the response

They couldn’t get the bill out of the House. That was the problem. The cons of the House pitched a hissey-fit and it cost the bartenders kid from Ohio his job.

 

[ihhawk]

They couldn’t get the bill out of the House. That was the problem. The cons of the House pitched a hissey-fit and it cost the bartenders kid from Ohio his job.

So if the house did pass something, would it have taken only 51 votes or 60?

 

[joelbc1]

So if the house did pass something, would it have taken only 51 votes or 60?

I don’t know...but there was sufficient Senate support (by partisan support) to pass it into law...I am thinking majority vote but not really sure.

 

[ihhawk]

I don’t know...but there was sufficient Senate support (by partisan support) to pass it into law...I am thinking majority vote but not really sure.

It would take 60 to end debate. Zero chance that would happen in today’s senate.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Why is the USA giving public assistance to non citizens?

Same reason we give it to people born here.

Because they need it.

For decent, civilized folks that's a sufficient answer.