Trump Adm: Statute of Liberty for Whites Only

[RiverDog]

To be fair, Trump himself didn't say it, at least not in this statement but his Administration is saying it, that the verse we've all learned in grade school refers only to Europeans. The poem, written in 1883, reads as follows:

"Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore."

Now we have this interpretation from the Trump Administration:

Cuccinelli said in an interview with CNN on Tuesday night that the Emma Lazarus poem emblazoned on the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty referred to "people coming from Europe where they had class based societies where people were considered wretched if they weren't in the right class."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... ar-AAFLdLX


Perhaps Trump will add some sort of exception to the poem regarding shithole countries.

[Aseahawkfan]

Wouldn't that be something is Trump changed the poem on the Statue of Liberty. That would be awful.

[RiverDog]

Here's an opinion by Ron Charles from Idahawkman's favorite publication, the Washington Post, that captures my feelings on the subject:

There’s something obscene about Cuccinelli’s efforts to contort (Emma) Lazarus’s words of welcome into a litmus test of economic self-sufficiency. Over the decades, “The New Colossus” has acquired a patina of universality. Its phrases are as familiar to us as “The Star-Spangled Banner” or the opening lines of the Declaration of Independence. Staining “The New Colossus” with the bile of discrimination is a shameful act of cultural defilement.

It's pretty clear that when the Declaration of Independence was written that the Founding Fathers did not mean for the phrase "all men are created equal" to include blacks as many of them were slave holders and would be judged as the most hideous, hypocritical lot to have ever penned their names to a document. But over time, the definition of "men" changed, to include women and people of all races, religions, creeds, sexual orientation, national origin, etc. It would make no sense to slander the Founding Fathers and criticize them for their hypocrisy, rather we should applaud them for creating a document that was ahead of its time.

The same thing holds true with the Statute of Liberty poem.

[Aseahawkfan]

Here's an opinion by Ron Charles from Idahawkman's favorite publication, the Washington Post, that captures my feelings on the subject:

There’s something obscene about Cuccinelli’s efforts to contort (Emma) Lazarus’s words of welcome into a litmus test of economic self-sufficiency. Over the decades, “The New Colossus” has acquired a patina of universality. Its phrases are as familiar to us as “The Star-Spangled Banner” or the opening lines of the Declaration of Independence. Staining “The New Colossus” with the bile of discrimination is a shameful act of cultural defilement.

It's pretty clear that when the Declaration of Independence was written that the Founding Fathers did not mean for the phrase "all men are created equal" to include blacks as many of them were slave holders and would be judged as the most hideous, hypocritical lot to have ever penned their names to a document. But over time, the definition of "men" changed, to include women and people of all races, religions, creeds, sexual orientation, national origin, etc. It would make no sense to slander the Founding Fathers and criticize them for their hypocrisy, rather we should applaud them for creating a document that was ahead of its time.

The same thing holds true with the Statute of Liberty poem.

I don't agree with that. Jefferson penned the Declaration of Independence. I think he meant it for all men. I think he wanted to lay the ground work for the destruction of the evils he saw and participated in. This assumption that as a man you approve of how you were raised or the state of your society is a false one. I think you can indeed from the wells of the subconscious intertwined with the conscious lay down the ground work for a better world in the future. Just because Jefferson could not in his time make the world he may have believed was right due to social pressure, does not mean he did not desire it to be so.

I know many will not agree, but to me the Constitution and Declaration of Independence were moments of divine inspiration. A moment when God or that force that stands above man that we all attempt to rise to laid his hand upon the mind of man to guide him to the creation of a better world, even though the men themselves were trapped in evil. It is often how men advance socially with these small moments of divine inspiration that lead to the dismantling of the status quo and the advancement of society.

You see it in religion, politics, and philosophy often. This inspiration becomes the guiding conscience of a nation and people that they may become better people than their ancestors.

I believe Jefferson and our founders successfully laid the groundwork for a successful and and extraordinary nation that all men have paid the price in blood and suffering to become a part of. American influence from all our people has been historically significant. Though I know the modern liberals will push to bring down The Founders of this nation eventually for their crimes, I hope their philosophy never dies. It is an extraordinary philosophy to believe all men should have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I cannot think of another nation that has made such words the foundational philosophy of their nation.

[RiverDog]

I don't agree with that. Jefferson penned the Declaration of Independence. I think he meant it for all men. I think he wanted to lay the ground work for the destruction of the evils he saw and participated in. This assumption that as a man you approve of how you were raised or the state of your society is a false one. I think you can indeed from the wells of the subconscious intertwined with the conscious lay down the ground work for a better world in the future. Just because Jefferson could not in his time make the world he may have believed was right due to social pressure, does not mean he did not desire it to be so.

I know many will not agree, but to me the Constitution and Declaration of Independence were moments of divine inspiration. A moment when God or that force that stands above man that we all attempt to rise to laid his hand upon the mind of man to guide him to the creation of a better world, even though the men themselves were trapped in evil. It is often how men advance socially with these small moments of divine inspiration that lead to the dismantling of the status quo and the advancement of society.

You see it in religion, politics, and philosophy often. This inspiration becomes the guiding conscience of a nation and people that they may become better people than their ancestors.

I believe Jefferson and our founders successfully laid the groundwork for a successful and and extraordinary nation that all men have paid the price in blood and suffering to become a part of. American influence from all our people has been historically significant. Though I know the modern liberals will push to bring down The Founders of this nation eventually for their crimes, I hope their philosophy never dies. It is an extraordinary philosophy to believe all men should have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I cannot think of another nation that has made such words the foundational philosophy of their nation.

There were 54 others that signed the Declaration of Independence besides Jefferson. The only way that many signees to rationalize their signature, and to get the rest of the colonists to go along with it, was to make the assumption that the "are all created equal" statement applied to white males only.

[idhawkman]

Back when the declaration was penned and signed, only land owners were allowed to vote. Only men were allowed to own land, too. Times change.

Cuccinelli I can't speak for but when that poem was written it said nothing about people wanting to be beholden to the government for a hand out either. It only referred to them wanting to breathe free which I interpret as to allowing them to make their own way in life without oppression from the govt.

The legal immigration laws are very clear and have been since 1882 which states you must be able to sustain yourself and not be a burden on the people of the United States. That doesn't mean that you have to be rich to immigrate either. I know the dems and MSM are trying to paint it that only rich can immigrate - that's not the case. You have to show that you can earn your way if you immigrate. You must want to assimilate also. And just for the record because I see many dems trying to paint that economic strife in a country is justification to claim asylum in the US, economic strife is not a valid reason to claim asylum in the US. Those cases will be and have been denied when they finally go to court and those people must return to their country of origin.

Its all pretty clear in the laws that have been written. Just because some people want to look the other way and ignore the laws that are written and on the books, doesn't make it illegal to enforce the laws. I have said it so many times on this forum that it is CONGRESS that must change the laws, not the branch charged with enforcing the laws that are written.