Letter: Anger vs. hate on immigration
Last week the confessed shooter of Kate Steinle on a San Francisco pier was acquitted of first-and second-degree murder as well as involuntary manslaughter. He was convicted of possession of a fire arm. This verdict has spared outrage nationwide regarding immigration and more specifically sanctuary cities. The liberal progressive left has backed this verdict and anyone disagreeing with them are guilty of continuing the war of hatred against immigrants.
I don’t believe most Americans “hate” the immigrant. They probably sympathize with them. What they hate is the fact that they are allowed to totally disregard U.S. law and just waltz on in to our country. If hate is to be reserved anywhere, it’s toward these self-righteous, self-serving politicians who put politics and vote-getting above public safety.
We all know that America is a nation of immigrants. Yet those original immigrants didn’t just hop off the boat in New York harbor and beeline it to the Upper West Side. They were processed, documented and even quarantined on Ellis Island until America saw fit to release them. By today’s standards, Ellis Island must be a symbol of racism, bigotry, hatred and discrimination. I’m surprised the place is still standing.
Hate does not guide the immigration debate. It’s guided by anger, frustration and aggravation. The progressive left can say what they want about what is happening and why. The First Amendment (free speech) allows it. I just wish more people knew what they were talking about before exercising it.
— Allan Gilmour