The editorial “Trump’s immigration deportation plans need compassion and a dose of humanity” (Nov. 17) makes some excellent points, but the Tribune Editorial Board forgot to mention some key past events.
It is so important to “(expand) the avenues for legal immigration,” which the board states should be job No. 1. One cannot overstate the need for more workers in certain industries. The board charges Kristi Noem, Stephen Miller and Tom Homan with this task. But have Miller and Noem ever sounded reasonable? Are these two the right people to do the serious work of coming up with real policy? Maybe Homan can be reasonable.
The board states that Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals recipients who came here as children should be looked after. Then it states that “most Americans, including most Republicans, oppose national cruelty.” Is that why Republicans sued to get DACA rescinded, taking their case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court?
The board starts its piece by stating that many voters were “sick and tired of America’s broken immigration system.” Then why did they vote for the man who killed a bipartisan bill that addressed most of the Republicans’ concerns? And to say that Kamala Harris said nothing about this issue is not correct. She repeatedly spoke of her support for this bill with all of its details. She correctly pointed out the fact that Republicans followed Trump’s orders to kill it so that they could use it as a campaign issue.
I wish I agreed with the editorial board that it was possible for the Republican Party to show compassion and humanity.. But past actions show it to be a party of neither.
— Jan Goldberg, Riverside
Editorial offers helpful context
I found impactful the editorial on Donald Trump’s deportation plans needing to be compassionate with a dose of humanity. It resonated with me because it not only describes our current immigration problem accurately but also includes some historical political context.
I have been critical of the Tribune Editorial Board in the past and even contemplated discontinuing my subscription, but editorials like this are the reason I will continue to be a subscriber. I just hope Trump will read this editorial and take it to heart.
— John R. Madera Sr., Bolingbrook
Deportations will elicit reactions
The editorial on the scorched-earth immigrant deportation policy Donald Trump intends to pursue seems to almost bend over backward to avoid being overly critical. There is only one passing reference to the likelihood of “families being ripped apart,” for example. Consider the implications of Stephen Miller’s threat to send National Guard troops from Republican-controlled states to enforce deportations in states with Democratic governors. Imagine Indiana and Iowa National Guardsmen going door to door in Chicago’s Pilsen neighborhood to round up anyone they think looks suspicious. At worst, this could lead to one or more Kent State-type incidents, with frightened Guardsmen in hostile, unfamiliar territory.
The leadership they would have, from Miller and Defense Secretary nominee Pete Hegseth on down, gives little reason for confidence.
Beyond that, picture the impact of troops hauling off “Dreamers” from college campuses and workers from construction sites, farms and packinghouses or maids from suburban homes. Miller has the stomach for that, but how will the students, workers and families who see this done to people they know react?
There’s a possible model we can find nearly 200 years ago, after the Fugitive Slave Act was passed in 1850. That law, as Trump and Miller hope to do now with immigrants in the country illegally, allowed slaveowners to press local authorities in free states to pursue and arrest escaped slaves.
What happened? In numerous Northern communities, mobs gathered to storm local jails where escaped enslaved people were being held and freed them.
Historians have also argued that this reaction helped bring on the Civil War. Before the Fugitive Slave Act, abolitionists were a small minority in free states. Residents of those states wanted no part of slavery but otherwise gave it little thought. But the capture of enslaved people in their own communities showed many Northerners the reality of slavery and drove them to demand its end.
In this light, the editorial board’s appeal to Trump, Miller, et al., to show heretofore-unseen compassion and humanity seems downright naive.
— Bill Kurtz, Milwaukee
Democrats should learn to yield
Opposing Donald Trump’s administration is not going to do the Democratic Party any good. With Trump garnering 312 electoral college votes and 76.7 million popular votes, the American people overwhelmingly voted for change. But Democratic governors are hell-bent on refusing to give voters what they want. For their own survival, they need to start listening to the voice of the people.
The intent to hold back the tide may cost Democrats big time in the midterm elections.
While change may be difficult to accept, this is how we grow as human beings and unite as a nation.
— JoAnn Lee Frank, Clearwater, Florida
How much hate can we tolerate?
Questions for Patrick T. Reardon (“17 questions about hate,” Nov. 16): When Donald Trump’s immigration officials deport people who have made a life here, how should they respond? With humility?
When women are denied abortions that they are seeking for their own good reasons, how should they respond? With humility?
When the president makes fun of the disabled, how should they respond? With humility?
When emboldened young men say, “Your body, my choice,” how should young women respond? With humility?
When the military is called because people had the temerity to oppose the president, how should I respond? With humility?
Yes, those who voted for Trump want to live a good life and want us to lighten their burdens. But who will lighten the burdens of those injured by his hate?
How much hate can a society tolerate before inalienable human rights are abridged?
— Mike Koetting, Chicago
Counter hate with education
Regarding Patrick T. Reardon’s op-ed, you don’t meet hate with humility. You fight it with intelligence and education. When people hate others, do they actually know them? Have they met any of those they hate? You don’t have to hate haters back, but you can try to educate them.
My concern today is that with inflation, unhappy people affected by it may turn their unhappiness into hating another group and scapegoating them. Fear can be a basis for some hate. Again, education is the answer.
So if you want to fight hate, be an advocate for the targets of that hate and support the organizations that fight the hatred out there.
— Alice Marcus Solovy, Highland Park
Do we allow haters to proceed?
Regarding Patrick T. Reardon’s op-ed: If we meet hate with humility, do we tacitly approve of hate?
If we meet hate with humility, do we allow haters to continue spreading hate?
If we meet hate with love, will we be rejected? If we allow haters to act on hate, do we resist or look the other way? If we decide to resist, when do we stand up to fight it, and if so, how soon?
— Joanne Hoffman, Highland Park
Giving Trump keys to a loaner
So the people have chosen to give Donald Trump the keys to the precious vehicle we call the USA, trusting that he will be careful with what is, after all, a loaner.
With unserious, incompetent Cabinet nominations such as Pete Hegseth, Matt Gaetz, Tulsi Gabbard and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the president-elect is telling us he plans to repay our trust by driving America through the mud.
Knowing his record, he’ll return it unwashed and expect the rest of us to foot the bill for cleaning up his mess.
— John Podulka, Wolverine, Michigan
Don’t let RFK guide public health
Given the opportunity, I would like to ask Donald Trump if any of his children suffered from polio, diphtheria, whooping cough, mumps or smallpox. If the answer is no, then I would assume that they escaped the ravages of these diseases by being vaccinated as children.
When Trump announced the nomination of Robert Kennedy Jr. to be the secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, I assumed that he was repaying a political debt. That being the case, let Kennedy be appointed as dogcatcher, but for God’s sake, don’t put him in charge of public health.
— Don Draganski, Evanston
Note to readers: As part of our annual holiday tradition, we’d like to hear from you about what is making you feel thankful this year. Sincere thoughts only, please. Email us a letter of no more than 400 words to letters@chicagotribune.com. Be sure to include your full name and your city or town.
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.