« Mankato Free Press: Minnesota Republicans "preoccupied" with IP's Tom Horner | Main | More Emmer Mid-morning: vague answers on right to strike, clear anti-union legislative agenda »

Jun 10, 2010


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Ford Peterson

Thank you for bringing this important topic out of the shadows and into the light of reasonability.

My grandfather came from Sweden in 1917. He was legal. He had to disown his former allegence to the King of Sweden, provide documentation that coming here was OK with his parents, sign an affidavit that he was not a polygamist, or an anarchist. He had to have a sponsor, a destination, and $25. We have the paperwork from Ellis Island.

The administration of current policy selects the following important criteria: 1) you have to be willing to break the law, 2) strong enough to make the trip, 3) be willing to work with criminals to get you here, 4) once here, be willing to continually break the law to secure work. What a country!

Emmer's approach seems reasoned, guided by the principle that we want immigrants to come and be lively participants in our peaceful communities. Any rational state intervention to push the feds to enforce our laws would be welcomed. He's not running to be King. The legislature would need to develop suitable language for any action he would take as Governor.

I would welcome a side-by-side comparison of Emmer to Dayton-Kelliher-Entenza-Horner.

Sally Jo Sorensen

That suggestion sounds like a good project for you to take on at your own blog--please come back when you have completed the post and let readers know when you've performed that service.


I hope that every American, regardless of where he lives, will stop and examine his conscience about this and other related incidents. This Nation was founded by men of many nations and backgrounds. It was founded on the principle that all men are created equal, and that the rights of every man are diminished when the rights of one man are threatened. All of us ought to have the right to be treated as he would wish to be treated, as one would wish his children to be treated, but this is not the case.

I know the proponents of this law say that the majority approves of this law, but the majority is not always right. Would women or non-whites have the vote if we listen to the majority of the day, would the non-whites have equal rights (and equal access to churches, housing, restaurants, hotels, retail stores, schools, colleges and yes water fountains) if we listen to the majority of the day? We all know the answer, a resounding, NO!

Today we are committed to a worldwide struggle to promote and protect the rights of all who wish to be free. In a time of domestic crisis men of good will and generosity should be able to unite regardless of party or politics and do what is right, not what is just popular with the majority. Some men comprehend discrimination by never have experiencing it in their lives, but the majority will only understand after it happens to them.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Other Accounts

Important Information

  • All of the statements, opinions, and views expressed on this site by Sally Jo Sorensen are solely her own, save when she attributes them to other sources.

    The opinions, statements, and views of contributing writers are their own.

    Sorensen, editor and proprietor of Bluestem Prairie, serves clients in the business and nonprofit sectors. While progressive in outlook, she does not caucus with any political party.


  • StatCounter

Become a Fan

Bluestem Tweets

    follow me on Twitter
    Blog powered by Typepad