Friday, February 24, 2017


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
While deporting the criminals known as illegal aliens now inspires protests, deporting from class teachers who express support for immigration law is often considered just — even when they express their opinions on their own time.
First there’s Collier County, Florida, elementary school teacher Veronica Fleming, who was reassigned to administrative duties after posting a Facebook message opposing last Thursday’s “Day Without Immigrants.” Then there’s an unnamed Prosser, Washington, elementary school teacher placed on leave after using Facebook to encourage people to boycott the event and report illegal aliens to authorities.
There are also teachers on leave in Jurupa Valley, California, for creating what have been described as “controversial social media posts.” tells us that Fleming “linked to a Chicago Tribune story about the nationwide protest and offered her take on the situation,” opining:
The funny part about immigrants staying home is the rest of us who pay for them are here at work like we’ve always been. Looks like less mouths to feed today. Have fun while you still can. So glad to hear about massive deportation. Let’s make America great again. Thanks Donald Trump!
This inspired complaints from some parents, according to Collier County Public Schools spokesman Greg Turchetta. In the school, writes the Naples Daily News, “96 percent of the students are minorities” — which, of course, means they’re the majority. Does this make Fleming a persecuted minority?
Moreover, in taking pains to point out the school’s demographics, are the mainstream media implying that illegal migration should be viewed as a minority issue? Or, are they saying minorities have a problem obeying the law?
And illegal migration is what’s addressed in the teacher’s comments and the protest to which she objected; after all, legal immigrants don’t have to worry about deportation.
This illegality was explicitly referenced in the case of the Prosser teacher, who taught at Keene-Riverview Elementary School. The Yakima Herald reports that she “provided information on how to contact the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency to ‘report illegal aliens.’”
The Herald continued, “They will need to know names, locations (either work place or residence) and any other specific information you can provide,’ the post said.”
“‘If this offended you in anyway [sic] do me a favor and unfriend my American a[**]!!!’ the post said.”

In a touch of unsurprising politically correct irony in the Florida case, spokesman Turchetta distanced the school district from Fleming’s opinion by issuing a statement which included, “This is a very tight-knit neighborhood school that stands for inclusion.”
Apparently, though, this inclusion excludes people who believe in robustly enforcing immigration law.
In both cases, critics played the bigotry card. The Prosser School District said that the Keene-Riverview teacher’s post “could be considered hostile or offensive on the basis of national origin,” as the Herald relates it.
As for Fleming’s alleged trespass, some parents labeled her post “racist.” EAGNews tells us, for instance, “‘I was mad. Really, really mad,’ said Gabriella Marquez, whose two children are in Fleming’s class. ‘I would consider it really to be racist.’”
It was not explained what “national origin” is indicated by the term “illegal alien” or “immigrants”; in reality, each group comprises many dozens of nationalities. And what “race” does “alien” denote? The human race? Perhaps Fleming is biased in favor of Martians.
(Strike that — that’s a planetary designation. “Little green men” perhaps? Strike that, too — that's referencing color.)
Moreover, while illegal migration is largely a Hispanic phenomenon, “Hispanic” not only refers to people from numerous countries; it’s also not a racial designation. It’s an ethnic one.
In the case of the teachers placed on leave in Jurupa Valley, California, the issue is that they noted that having certain students “play hooky” to attend the Day Without Immigrants protest had positive effects. As the Washington Times reported, in “now-deleted Facebook comments, at least five teachers and one counselor from Rubidoux High School reveled in the fact that their classes were smaller and more productive without the striking students.”
This makes sense, since youths who forgo school to attend protests often are ne’er-do-wells who’ll seize upon any opportunity to skip class.
The Press Enterprise tells us, “Social science teacher Geoffrey Greer started the [social media] thread Thursday afternoon by writing that having 50 percent fewer students proved ‘how much better things might be without all this overcrowding.’”
The Enterprise further informed that the “comments included statements that students were ‘lazy’ and ‘drunk’ and that the cafeteria was cleaner without them. Jurupa Unified School District Superintendent Elliott Duchon said the posts don’t represent the views of administrators and employees.” (Telling the truth is not district policy.)
And the truth is that being a patriot today can be hazardous to career health. In contrast, though, educators who supported the Day Without Immigrants apparently suffered no persecution. An example is teacher Erika Montes, 30, who participated in last Thursday’s protest, marching on the White House. She’s portrayed as just a good citizen, but one could wonder: Did she take the day off from work?
Presumably certain teachers did. In fact, Red Alert Politics tells us that some college students “expressed delight at classes being canceled for the day,” a whole “Spanish department shut down,” and that some “immigrant professors canceled classes.” (Were the conscientious students reimbursed a day’s tuition money?)
This presents a striking reality. While teacher Erika Montes said she was at her protest “to be the voice of those who can't speak,” it’s the teachers opposing her position who can’t speak — at least not without suffering persecution. In fact, teachers who skipped class to express a pro-criminality position during school time are applauded, while those who showed up for work and, at least in most cases, merely expressed a pro-immigration-law position on their own time are punished.
So today, everything has been turned on its head. It wasn’t considered controversial when President Dwight Eisenhower instituted mass deportations in the 1950s via his “Operation Wetback.” Now, a notable percentage of our population is so radically un-American that they consider it radical to enforce immigration law at all.
The one bit of good news is that, to an extent, anyway, the “Day Without Immigrants” backfired. Not only did it likely alienate many patriotic Americans, but, reports Red Alert Politics, “Some workers were fired for ditching work to participate in the strike, while others were laid off because their employers discovered they had been working for them for years without legal documentation. Twitter users expressed backlash by calling for the boycott of those employers.”
So with the protest having been somewhat of a failure, perhaps we should try a slightly different event: a Day without Citizens. How well would the nation function then?