Sigh. Haven't we been here before?

[Kber]

On the eve of World War II, a bill that would have admitted Jewish refugee children above the regular quota limits was introduced in Congress. President Roosevelt took no position on the bill, and it died in committee in the summer of 1939. Polls at the time indicated that two-thirds of Americans opposed taking in Jewish refugee children.

http://crfimmigrationed.org/index.php/lessons-for-teachers/144-hl5

Kber comment: generally this is not usually considered one of our prouder moments as a nation.

[randys1]

1. I watched that filthy disgusting excuse for a human being Labrador on tv today

saying we should not let the kids in, etc

I wish I could send him away, I wish I could deport every single american who is against immigration reform

this would be a very popular place then, way more than now...

Eventually the hate seething from these assholes will spill over and something will happen

[customerserviceguy]

2. Would we have been able to assimilate all the Jews of Europe?

I think it's a fair question. And I don't think Hitler would have stopped at the borders of continental Europe in order to get rid of the Jews that had emigrated to the US.

Anything that sends the message that this is OK will just accelerate the influx of women and children to the US. I don't see a single thing in any of the immigration reform laws that have been proposed in the last several years that would have stopped it, had they passed.

[COLGATE4]

3. No serious historian would ever suggest that all of

the Jews of Europe were seeking to flee Hitler in 1939. In fact, one of the great tragedies of the Jewish people was many believing that it 'couldn't happen to them'. Particularly in Germany, most Jews thought of themselves first as Germans. They were sadly proved wrong. But the U.S. could have and should have opened its doors to the relatively small number of prescient European Jews who saw the writing on the wall. Unfortunately, antisemitism was alive and well in the US (particularly within our State Department) at that time so they were left to twist in the wind, to our everlasting shame.

[customerserviceguy]

4. We have no way of knowing

Had the US flung its arms open wide, who knows how many would have come?

Similarly in this case, if 90% of the women and children crossing the US border are allowed to stay here and write back home that it all went well for them, how many more would seek to make the trek?

[Kber]

5. Huh

Maybe more lives would have been saved.

[customerserviceguy]

6. At this point

it's all pure speculation as to what would have happened some 75-80 years ago had the US had different policies regarding immigration.

Here and now, we have to decide how to strike a balance between compassion on one hand, and incentivizing the movement of mothers and children across vast areas of dangerous territory on the other. The immigration reform bills that have been proposed in Congress did not have any provisions that would have dealt with this situation.

[cali]

9. no, it's not. not at all. you don't know the history. it's that simple.

[COLGATE4]

7. We do know that no number near "all the European Jews" would

have emigrated to the US had they been given the chance. But, in any case, it's a false comparison. The vast majority of these new Latin American immigrants are availing themselves of the protective policy Bush put in place, granting people from those countries special status in the US. The first solution to the problem is getting legislation to undo the preferred Protected Status given to certain Central American countries by the Congress under Bush, and still in effect today. Until that's changed nothing is going to make much of a dent in the flow of immigrants.

[customerserviceguy]

8. Agreed

But while I can see the GOP eager to move in that direction, they sure wouldn't do so publicly without some statements to that effect on the Democratic side. And I just can't imagine our side being willing to take the heat from immigration groups over that.