-
The View From the Other Side
May 17, 2013 | 23 comments
-
Cyprus Uber Alles
May 10, 2013 | 9 comments
-
After Hugo
May 3, 2013 | 16 comments
-
Theory and Practice of Terrorism
April 26, 2013 | 24 comments
-
Border Security Games
April 19, 2013 | 26 comments
The Nation's Pulse
The Great Arizona Shootout
Thanks to the signing of SB 1070 into law, the lines in the immigration wars are becoming clearer.
It is not politically correct, but it has to be said. The impetus to furious objections to the new Arizona law that makes it a state crime to be in the United States illegally is primarily an effort by the organized Latino community to expand its political base and thus power. In this intense effort the Hispanic leaders have enlisted the support of elements in the Democrat party that enjoy an expanded and dependable voting bloc, and those in the Republican Party who seek to maintain an ever ready pool of cheap and/or seasonal labor.
What is behind the claims of expected civil rights abuses based on the need for people to carry some form of documentation that shows they are legally in the U.S.? The answer is to be found in a desire to protect those who are in the country illegally from being expelled.
The position of the majority of the Latino community in Arizona, and perhaps throughout the United States, is that no laws should be passed or enforced that restrict illegal immigrants once they have successfully crossed the border escaping capture. In brief, the belief of the Latino community is that while undocumented border crossing may be against the law, the results of doing so are not to be challenged.
While such a concept is convenient for those people who have entered the U.S. without going through the correct legal procedures, the underlying logic is that immigration by people of Latin heritage (primarily from Mexico and Central America) who enter the U.S. through its border with Mexico deserve treatment different from that accorded other immigrants.
The various Latino organizations along with their left-liberal supporters argue vehemently against this interpretation. They point to support from other immigrant groups including, but not limited to, Korean and Chinese associations. The next step in their argument is to note that “this country was built by immigrants” — as if any immigrant-related action precludes illegality.
As all of us have discovered in the past 230-plus years, the status of being an “immigrant” does not endow one with any special privilege. It’s what you accomplish after arriving here legally and becoming a citizen that creates an American’s unique status.
By attempting to broaden the issue of illegal immigrant invasion of Arizona into a national civil rights matter, the Latino groups and their backers have obfuscated facts. State, county, and local law enforcement in Arizona under SB 1070 clearly must follow federal guidelines. The language in the law is quite clear and it follows exactly the same federal wording. And 70% of the residents of Arizona polled by Rasmussen agree with the bill and its intent.
Perhaps the most purposeful mischaracterization of the bill has been made by some of Arizona’s Latino politicians. One of the most opinionated and articulate is Congressman Raul Grijalva (D), who has repeatedly called for a boycott of his own state. Aside from the basic disloyalty to his home, Grijalva, as other extreme leftists have done, attempts to shift the issue to how hard it will be to pursue the aim of the bill — as if that were not a problem with much of law enforcement on all levels. Every device in fallacious argumentation has been used.
How can it be “racial profiling” when the fact of speaking Spanish or having a “Spanish” accent is not an element of “race”? Obviously the powerful Latino group, La Raza, believes otherwise, as does the other major Hispanic association Chicanos por La Causa. If such incorrect use of the term were legitimate, every person whose family came to the United States from a non-English speaking country would have to be considered a member of a separate race.
So why go to all this trouble of establishing a separate identity when supposedly the aim of all immigrants is to assimilate into the American political, economic, and social body? The answer is unfortunate. The leaders of most of these Latino groups want to maintain a separate identity while gaining all the advantages of the physical existence of the United States. Ordinary Latinos, whether or not born in the United States, have been exploited by their own political leaders to believe that separating themselves and increasing their numbers by any method available is the only way to be respected and influential on the American scene.
Frankly, the disproportionate number of Latinos serving in the elite services of the military is adequate evidence of their community’s commitment to the preservation of the structure and tradition of the United States. Why is this not adequate recognition for the self-aggrandizing political echelon of the Hispanic establishment and their Anglo-opportunist fellow travelers? It’s certainly recognized by the Marine Corps and U.S. Army Airborne.
The answer lies in the greed and ambition of people, elected officials and political operatives who seek to manipulate the Latino presence in the United States for their own purposes, political and economic. It is outrageous that the highest levels of the American government have been willing to participate in this exploitation. They know full well that the police of Arizona are professional enough to discern possible criminals from others. They don’t need facial hair clues or skin color to guide them. On the other hand, it is not sure that Rahm Emanuel wouldn’t be picked up and have his documents checked out on the streets of Apache Junction. There’s something very shifty about him….
About the Author
George H. Wittman writes a weekly column on international affairs for The American Spectator online. He was the founding chairman of the National Institute for Public Policy.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (85) | Leave a comment
More Articles by George H. Wittman
More Articles From The Nation's Pulse
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/04/26/the-great-arizona-shootout
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Downton’s Class System — and Ours
- The Great Train Robbery
- The Vast and the Tiny
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Wayang Kulit| 4.26.10 @ 6:48AM
Wittman is absolutely right. Illegals need to be deported along with their U.S.-born children, if any, to get in the back of the line to come here legally. Moreover, they should have to pay back the costs of their deportation, along with any social welfare benefits they received while here, should be paid back to the Treasury before they can be considered for re-entry on the same criteria as any other legal immigrant.
What ever happened to the "Brain Drain"? Let's get that working for us again instead. There isn't much of a space between that and a Mullah Krekar, so let's be sure about it.
Alan Brooks| 4.26.10 @ 10:01AM
Will's posts are so good they ought to be reposted until (if nothing else) the message seeps into the public's awareness.
by George F. Will
A simple reform would drain some scalding steam from immigration arguments that may soon again be at a roiling boil. It would bring the interpretation of the 14th Amendment into conformity with what the authors of its text intended, and with common sense, thereby removing an incentive for illegal immigration.
To end the practice of "birthright citizenship," all that is required is to correct the misinterpretation of that amendment's first sentence: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside." From these words has flowed the practice of conferring citizenship on children born here to illegal immigrants.
A parent from a poor country, writes professor Lino Graglia of the University of Texas law school, "can hardly do more for a child than make him or her an American citizen, entitled to all the advantages of the American welfare state." Therefore, "It is difficult to imagine a more irrational and self-defeating legal system than one which makes unauthorized entry into this country a criminal offense and simultaneously provides perhaps the greatest possible inducement to illegal entry."
Writing in the Texas Review of Law and Politics, Graglia says this irrationality is rooted in a misunderstanding of the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof." What was this intended or understood to mean by those who wrote it in 1866 and ratified it in 1868? The authors and ratifiers could not have intended birthright citizenship for illegal immigrants because in 1868 there were and never had been any illegal immigrants because no law ever had restricted immigration.
If those who wrote and ratified the 14th Amendment had imagined laws restricting immigration -- and had anticipated huge waves of illegal immigration -- is it reasonable to presume they would have wanted to provide the reward of citizenship to the children of the violators of those laws? Surely not.
The Civil Rights Act of 1866 begins with language from which the 14th Amendment's Citizenship Clause is derived: "All persons born in the United States, and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States." (Emphasis added.) The explicit exclusion of Indians from birthright citizenship was not repeated in the 14th Amendment because it was considered unnecessary. Although Indians were at least partially subject to U.S. jurisdiction, they owed allegiance to their tribes, not the United States. This reasoning -- divided allegiance -- applies equally to exclude the children of resident aliens, legal as well as illegal, from birthright citizenship. Indeed, today's regulations issued by the departments of Homeland Security and Justice stipulate:
"A person born in the United States to a foreign diplomatic officer accredited to the United States, as a matter of international law, is not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. That person is not a United States citizen under the 14th Amendment."
Sen. Lyman Trumbull of Illinois was, Graglia writes, one of two "principal authors of the citizenship clauses in 1866 act and the 14th Amendment." He said that "subject to the jurisdiction of the United States" meant subject to its "complete" jurisdiction, meaning "not owing allegiance to anybody else." Hence children whose Indian parents had tribal allegiances were excluded from birthright citizenship.
Appropriately, in 1884 the Supreme Court held that children born to Indian parents were not born "subject to" U.S. jurisdiction because, among other reasons, the person so born could not change his status by his "own will without the action or assent of the United States." And "no one can become a citizen of a nation without its consent." Graglia says this decision "seemed to establish" that U.S. citizenship is "a consensual relation, requiring the consent of the United States." So: "This would clearly settle the question of birthright citizenship for children of illegal aliens. There cannot be a more total or forceful denial of consent to a person's citizenship than to make the source of that person's presence in the nation illegal."
Congress has heard testimony estimating that more than two-thirds of all births in Los Angeles public hospitals, and more than half of all births in that city, and nearly 10 percent of all births in the nation in recent years, have been to illegal immigrant mothers. Graglia seems to establish that there is no constitutional impediment to Congress ending the granting of birthright citizenship to persons whose presence here is "not only without the government's consent but in violation of its law."
brutus6| 4.26.10 @ 5:35PM
Rarely do I agree with Brooks, but this time I do, or at least with George Will.
UT School of Law prof Graglia makes an excellent point. So why haven't any anti-amnesty groups yet pushed a case to SCOTUS, forcing them to resolve the conflict between the 1884 decision, and the current interpretation of the 14th Amendment that has created this anchor-baby mess?
Brooks, thank you for bringing this to our attention.
Mel Torme| 4.26.10 @ 9:18PM
On that rare occasion when Alan Brooks puts the crack pipe down for a coupla' hours, he can be quite erudite.
I guess I could say the same about George Will. For others, like Nancy Pelosi, it doesn't seem to help one bit. Funny, that.
Alan Brooks| 4.27.10 @ 9:36PM
"On that rare occasion when Alan Brooks puts the crack pipe down ..."
Worse, I took LSD, the worst drug for judgment calls; naturally, everything is a judgment call-- unfortunately.
Alan Brooks| 4.27.10 @ 9:42PM
BTW, are you THE Mel Torme?
DaveS| 4.26.10 @ 8:05PM
They just haven't learned to beat the system as our sitting chief executive has.
Sam| 4.27.10 @ 12:51PM
Let me tell you why me and people on the left are upset about this bill.
The bill authorizes police to demand proof of citizenship from anyone whom they "reasonably suspect" to be in the country illegally.
On its face, the bill sounds reasonable. Except how can you tell whether or not someone is illegally in the country simply by looking at them? Or hearing them speak Spanish? Many Americans speak Spanish. Many legal Latino-Americans speak Spanish. I speak Spanish and I'm very very white.
So how will police tell? By stopping anyone with brown skin who looks Mexican? Considering how vague this bill is and how much discretion it gives to cops, this is a reasonable fear.
A better law would go something like this:
"Police may look into the immigration status of anyone who they've ALREADY STOPPED for a crime or violation."
And plus who carries around proof of citizenship anyway? I don't. My driver's license does not prove citizenship, but I doubt I will ever have to worry since I am a very tall white man who fits the image of the "typical American."
Jon| 4.27.10 @ 2:13PM
Sam,
While I share some of your concerns with this bill, acceptable forms of proof of citizenship are spelled out within it. While I don't have time to find the exact wording from the legislation, it is my understanding that a State issued driver's license (or non-operating id card), issued by AZ, or any state which requires proof of citizenship for issuance of a license / ID, is acceptable... as is a passport / Birth Cert / etc. Again, while I cannot provide specifics at this point, I believe the majority of states require a birth certificate in order to receive a license... might want to check before crusing the Mojave though.
Quartermaster| 4.27.10 @ 6:02PM
I believe the law excludes driver's licenses from states that will issue to illegal aliens. Otherwise, a DL is adequate proof of citizenship.
Wittman is certainly right about the leftist demagogues being out in force. People like Grijalva are simply idiots that care only about their own power, and nothing for their "people" and certainly not their country.
Pingback| 4.26.10 @ 6:53AM
Arizona Clears Strict Immigration Bill - Page 2 - PennJersey.info Forums links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Richard Baker| 4.26.10 @ 7:20AM
So much for the Rule of Law from this Representative. Special rules are not equal treatment under the Law. This fool seems to think that the laws of the land should be ignored. Enforce the border AND the laws pertaining.
Alan Brooks| 4.26.10 @ 10:11AM
What clinched it for me was that leftists were saying "Al, Mexican women are so pretty"-- in other words their hormones are overruling their better judgment. So let's tell them that after too many Mexican illegals get into America they wont seem so pretty any more
Alan Brooks| 4.26.10 @ 10:14AM
...that is, illegals from ANY country-- not merely Mexico.
Whew, that was a close one.
Quartermaster| 4.27.10 @ 6:04PM
Those who think Mexicanas are so pretty should come where I live. Most of the ones I've seen here are ugly as original sin.
Ken in People's Republic of MD| 4.26.10 @ 7:52AM
Lax border enforcement has caused this. These criminal invaders treat the borders of our sovereign country like Swiss cheese. They do not respect us or our country, they come here and demand that we kowtow to them, that we change our ways, and demand rights reserved for natural born citizens of the United States. They have no rights here. Frankly, it is about time someone in this country has stood up to these people and said enough is enough.
The gall of these invaders is beyond belief. They think it’s OK to break our laws and then complain when we say something. And for the government of Mexico to say anything about us enforcing our borders defies explanation. Maybe if the Mexican government did something to make their country more habitable, these invaders wouldn’t feel the need to some here under the cover of darkness.
The comments coming out of the White House and from the left side of the aisle once again show the disconnect between them and the American people.
Good job, Arizona.
Melvin| 4.26.10 @ 7:53AM
This is what is so confounding. The state makes the laws the state should enforce the laws. As some of have eluded to, it all rolls back to that, "Rule of Law" thing, which conveniently gets pushed back into the shadows.
Even legal immigrants in this Country support that if you are here illegally your but gets deported, not welcomed to five star rated social services.
But when we have a President who swore an oath to defend this Country and carry out the duties of the Office of the Presidency openly tell the State of AZ, "I don't care what you passed, and I'm going to fight you in the Courts."
Right then he basically violated the oath of office. But of course the anti-Constitutionalists will swear up and down that Obama didn't.
Melvin| 4.26.10 @ 8:00AM
If the illegal aliens, thumb their noses at our laws, and we have a President telling these people that he is OK with that, then why in the hell should the rest of us adhere to the law?
Why should we pay income taxes, why should we pay any taxes? Why should we obey the speed limits, fishing with a license, and all the other millions upon millions of regulations that we the law abiding have to contend with every single moment of our lives?
Persons who are in this Country illegally don't follow the law and have the blessing of the federal government then neither should we. And I don't give a damn in whether or not Barracks OK with that either.
Leonard| 4.26.10 @ 3:12PM
Precisely to your point. They don't seem to think our laws apply to them. They over fish our lakes and rivers so that the legal angler doesn't have a chance, and they poach deer out of our wildlife managment areas and National Forests for their black market meat market in Gainesville, Ga. Sportsmen here are fed up.
Curly Smith| 4.26.10 @ 8:22AM
Has anyone contacted the SEIU for comments? Perhaps some union official could opine on the likely outcome on wages if we were to add another 30 million to the ranks of the "official" unemployed?
Oh, I get it... it took me a while but the CFL bulbs takes longer to reach illumination... Obama intends to save GM and Chrysler by bringing down wages in the US to match those in Mexico and China. It's brilliant! Maybe that's why Andy Stern left?
Jim O'Brien| 4.26.10 @ 8:33AM
If the Arizona legislation is unconstitutional, then it must also be unconstitutional for the TSA to require us to show documentation or identification at the airports. My rights are being violated !!!
Most seem to assume that the illegals coming over the border from Mexico are all would-be, honest crop pickers. We don't really know how many are terrorists from various countries, quietly plotting attacks.
But Obama says immigration law should be ignored. He thinks the U.S. should look the other way, and do nothing about the fact that millions live here illegally. Obama breeds contempt for the law, which comes naturally for him.
Pingback| 4.26.10 @ 8:48AM
Washington’s stampede over American citizens continues links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Melvin| 4.26.10 @ 8:56AM
Didn't this poltician swear an oath to this Country?
By declaring that the National Government openly defy AZ law, does this mean that the National Government is openly being seditious?
If this guy has no intention of fulfilling is oath of office then he should be impeached.
"U.S. Rep. Raul Grijalva, a Democrat, and civil rights activists spoke on Sunday to thousands of people gathered at the state Capitol and called on President Barack Obama to fight the law, promising to march in the streets and invite arrest by refusing to comply."
Melvin| 4.26.10 @ 9:07AM
The above in quotes was taken from the Wash. Post. Fingers were faster than the brain.
Al Adab| 4.26.10 @ 4:24PM
Interesting reports from national news say that most protesters were bused into Arizona from Calif. and Tex. If that's true who does this Grijalva think he represents?
Arizona went through boycotts before over the MLK holiday. The voters there turned it down twice and the NFL removed the Superbowl from the state. Apparently it's not PC to stand up for state sovereignty or Federalism.
Cris Worth| 4.26.10 @ 9:15AM
It's about damn time somebody did something to stop the bleeding. The constitution gives the federal government responsibility to control the border but since they have passed the buck for decades it's up to the states and the people to save the union.
JimH| 4.26.10 @ 9:24AM
While the Feds should control the US border, under the Constitution do states have any authority over their own borders?
Pingback| 4.26.10 @ 9:56AM
Bill Clinton Said Protests Might Become Violent….And He Was RIGHT « Nice Deb links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Majito| 4.26.10 @ 10:15AM
Let me provide my fellow AS readers the following. First, my dad was a legal immigrant from Colombia back in 1947. What was his goal? Learn English and that he did at Queens College in NYC. Once completed his courses, he went back to Colombia, met a young beautiful French woman, married her and both came back to the US in 1951. They lived in Queens and later purchased a home in Central Islip. In a957, with three male boys (one of them me), they went back to Colombia where I remained until 1973. I came to the US, now knowing more English than 'my name is', $30, lots of dreams and a US passport. So in essence, my dad provided a better way for me to enter the US legally. Stayed in a basement and from them I went up the ladder until my current position of sr software developer. However along the way I helped my mother, older and younger brother and little sister to legally come to the US. All of them are US citizens. We do not take kindly the illegal barrage of immigrants. As a matter of fact, there aren't many Latino friends that arrived legally here to view kindly the illegal invasion. We won't vote for any rep that wants to give a green card to whomever just 'coz they may get their vote. A little secret is that about 1/3 of Latinos that can legally vote do so. Does anybody remember when the maquiladoras were built at the border back in the 70's and 80's? All that US taxpayer money used to pay for companies to locate there? Was not the main reason to provide jobs for Mexicans in Mexico? What happened to that experiment? American lower and lower-middle classes that depended on those jobs got screwed. Then politicans and greedy financiers not happy with that began the chinese experiment. Does anybody remember Bill Clinton separating the chinese trade from human rights considerations? He did so and gave chine most favored trade status apart from human costs. how's that experiment doing? Now Arizona take charge of something the whores in DC don't want and all this whining. Like a choruses of pigs...which is what they're. Any given day, one could be walking the streets of any city, village or hamlet in Latin America and a police of soldier could walk up to you and request your id. If you can't produce one, straight to the local jail. If you are a foreigner, must provide visa status. Can't do that? the just sit in jail until whenever...now is that a double standard or what? when you tell a mexican official that the US is going to handle illegal immigration just like the do in mexico, he replied: 'but one expects better from the US'...meaning the know the difference but are playing the bleeding heart liberal card...
Melvin| 4.26.10 @ 10:37AM
Very good post, too bad a US Citizen or legal immigrant's opinion is lost in the din of, "It's racism."
fred| 4.26.10 @ 10:37AM
I live in Arizona. I have worked for many years with native born legal Americans of Hispanic descent. They have graciously invited me into their families and their lives. ( my wife is from Mexico ( legally).
Contrary to the MSM, my anecdotal evidence
convinces me that native born Arizonans of Hisp-anic descent, do not support illegal immigration.
A survey/poll of this segment of the population in Arizona would reveal the fact that illegals do not have the support of this segment of our citizens.
Our schools are crowded with illigals, our jails are filled with them, the constant news barrage of violent crime inevitably points to illegals and the drug trade. Home invasions in Tucson and Phoenix are astronomical and are in fact a result of the drug trade .
The list of negative consequences of illegal immigration is long.
My friends in the legal-citizen/ Hispanic community do not support illigal immigration. You'll never hear their stories.
fred| 4.26.10 @ 10:42AM
Caesar Chavez ( Farm Workers Union) is always claimed by the Pro-illegal groups as being their Martin Luther King.
Caesar Chavez was thoroughly opposed to illegal immigration because it took away jobs from legal citizens in the farming sector. The irony of it all.
fred| 4.26.10 @ 10:51AM
Dr. Martin Luther King was a Republican.
The irony of it all.
Gr0w1er| 4.26.10 @ 2:41PM
The Left always ignores 'inconvenient truths'.
Vern Crisler| 4.26.10 @ 10:56AM
As an Arizona resident, I can also attest to the harm that illegal immigration causes. Nobody care about it if it stays in slums, but a lot of it is spilling over into middle-class neighborhoods. Just the other day, the police arrested some human smugglers (coyotes) who were detaining dozens of illegals in a safe house. It was a couple of houses down from where my parents live.
My father had hitherto expressed himself as a sort of liberal, but now on the immigration issue he's squarely conservative, especially when students cut school to march in pro-immigration rallies.
Gr0w1er| 4.26.10 @ 3:03PM
Well put, Majito. My deceased father, who came here over 85 years ago when the Philippines were a U.S. Territory, was vehemently opposed to those 'lawbreakers' (as he used to say). He taught us the value of honest, law-abiding hard work and sacrifice. From his marriage came a lawyer (my brother), and a Naval Aviator (me). Such is the result when you do things the legal way.
Tim*| 4.26.10 @ 10:27AM
Opposing Illegal Invaders is a winning election issue.
Americans are quite upset about this arrogant "In Your Face " breech of law and want it stopped.
If The Federal Government can't stop Illegal Invaders from crossing into and taking up residence in These United States ,then Homeland Security and National Defense are a Constitutional Joke.
Arizona is doing for itself ,what a pathetic sell out Federal Government has failed miserably and pitifully to do.
The Tea Party Rebellion Escalates .
Remember In November !
Al Adab| 4.26.10 @ 11:19AM
Arizona is fully justified in taking this action. Approximately 10% of their population and about 25% of their jail and prison population comprise those in this country illegally.
ICE for the most part refuses to accept those arrested by local law enforcement for other crimes. This bill makes it a misdemeanot to be in the state illegally. That allows for those found in other violations to be held and hopefully deported, for their status.
My bet is that the Feds, ICE, will continue to refuse to accept detainees for deportation. If this isn't a Federalism issue, I can't imagine what might be.
Good luck Arizona. Maybe your governor will call the militia to the border under National Guard direction and stop the invasion.
Oldefarte| 4.26.10 @ 12:02PM
Let me be brief! This, like every thing else political in a Democrat Party perspective, is about same OBTAINING POTENTIAL VOTES. Whether it be exploitation of blacks [for centuries] , hispanics, career criminals/flelons/rapists/murderers,etc; the desired result is the SAME. Just throw government mania/government benefits/crumbs,etc at their feet so that they will vote Democrat in the process. No matter if these individuals BREAK THE """"LAWS"""" in the process, and hurt/injure the law abiding citizens [some of whom are black, hispanic, etc. We're not a country/system of LAWS, but of [Democrat] political expediency and opportunism!!!!!
Margie| 4.26.10 @ 12:24PM
God bless Arizona and Sheriff Joe Arpaio. I'm hoping this crackdown on the illegals spreads throughout the nation.
Right now I'm wanting to move to Arizona. Go Arizona!
Tatiana Goldenberg| 4.26.10 @ 9:24PM
Please, Margie, do NOT come to Arizona. I've read many of your kooky posts, and we don't want any more unhinged members of the Religious Right settling in our beautiful state.
We've got enough religious crackpots out here already.
darcy| 4.27.10 @ 3:17AM
I sometimes disagree with Margie, Tatiana, but I find your comment reveals more about your character than it does hers.
Wander on over to the naughty seat; sit there a spell and reflect on your unkind ways!
Pingback| 4.26.10 @ 12:39PM
Lindsey Graham’s Climate Change | America Watches Obama links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Jim| 4.26.10 @ 1:03PM
The country was built (in part) by LEGAL immigrants!
DTCOFAZ| 4.26.10 @ 1:20PM
I'm proud of my home state AZ. We have the courage to be the first state that stand up agaisnt the non-sense, coward approach to the illegal immigrant issue from the Fed and Obama.
Bring it on Obama and anoyone that want our country being destroyed by crimimal illegals! Our state and the USA citizens won't back down.
Majito| 4.26.10 @ 2:27PM
I wrote earlier about police in Latin American stopping and asking for your id at any time. They use this technique to pick up criminals as well...this link (you will need google's page translation feature to read it in English) shows how last week police captured a blood thirsty hit man nicknamed The Butcher for his delight in dismembering humans and feed them to his pit bulls. However, what Arizona enacted is common practice in Latin American so any Latin voice complaining (read here politician or talking head like that clown Geraldo Rivera that claims to be a voice for Latinos when the sap can't even speak Spanish)...anyway read at your own risk...the descriptions are somewhat shocking...http://www.eltiempo.com/colombia/justicia/la-macabra-historia-del-carnicero-de-las-farc_7620974-1
PolishKnight| 4.26.10 @ 2:49PM
The predictable charges of racism coming from the left illustrate the sublime doublespeak of leftist policies: Self-proclaimed "latino" groups proclaim that this violates their civil rights and is "racist" even as their very self-identity is, in itself, racist. In addition, they reveal their agenda that they expect to all be eventually granted amnesty and Obama has revealed that they are to be one of his major voting blocs AND spoils special interest groups lavished with special privileges (which aren't racist since they're benefitting, of course.)
Perhaps what has the left enraged and even genuinely confused is that they didn't "drive" the issue by quietly trying to ram through "immigration reform" (amnesty) on their own timetable. Now the cat (meow!) is out of the bag along with their agenda: The USA borders should be porous, well, at least to non-white immigrants.
Pingback| 4.26.10 @ 2:59PM
Rev. Al Sharpton & Pro-Illegal Immigration/Open Border Protests, Vandalism, & Violen links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
David| 4.26.10 @ 3:12PM
Our nation had never been so divided along racial and ethnic lines until our first black president took office. He is the most divisive person I have known.
Richard Baker| 4.26.10 @ 5:41PM
By the way, try and illegally enter Mexico and see what the penalties are. Legal immigration? Oh yeah! Illegal immigration? Throw the bums out!
Don DeVan| 4.26.10 @ 6:01PM
Like a total eclipse, the chance to witness left wing media bias in such a clear manner comes only on rare occasions. In most cases we know it's there, every minute of every hour of every day. But rarely is it so obvious and blatant that even Helen Keller and Ray Charles can see it. And now is one of those occasions. Led by NBC and CNN, with ABC and CBS close behind, the left stream media has spent the last year attempting to smear the Tea Party protesters in every way possible, calling legal patriotic Americans every name in the book from radical to racist to "McVeigh-ists" to tea baggers. Never mind that these good, decent folks did nothing more racist or violent than exercise their First Amendment right to free speech, freedom of assembly and the right to petition Congress with their grievances. In short, they abide by the laws of the land and simply want the Constitution adhered to. How terribly Jeffersonian! But a funny thing has happened on the way to the vilification. The state of Arizona passed a law that says it is illegal to be in Arizona illegally. What a novel concept! However, this novel concept has caused another group of folks to also come out and demonstrate. They are not citizens and are not in Arizona or the USA legally. And there has already been violence - documented on film - at their first rally. Will the media accuse Barack Obama of inciting violence? Will Bill Clinton condemn these folks and caution them against "harmful rhetoric?" We can expect our media to treat them at least as harshly, if not more-so, than it has treated legal, legitimate, law abiding American citizens. Right? Well, don't hold your breath and wait for the answer to one simple question: Will the left stream media, led by Anderson Cooper, Ratchel Maddow, Chris Matthews, et. al, refer to Hispanic protesters as "Taco baggers?" You be the judge.
Len| 4.26.10 @ 6:39PM
A BANDAID SOLUTION
Ok, we have a lot of folks worked up about illegal immigrants and how we need to protect our borders, but the real problem is what draws them here and the detrimental effects to the US. What Arizona and all the states need to do is defy the federal government in their unconstitutional usurpations and unconstitutional socio-economic programs and laws imposed upon the states. Nowhere in the US constitution is there a grant of delegated power for such redistributive acts such as medicaid, medicare, or anything that takes from and gives to another.
Take away all these enticements and then the US becomes less attractive and having temporary workers will be a benefit and not a drag. Those needing temporary laborers will have a pool to draw from and these temporary laborers will not want to stay here as what they receive in pay will have more spending power where they come from.
How can a state like Arizona resist the usurpers in DC? Looking forward Arizona can push for an amendment ending prepaid taxes/payroll deductions. This will make the average citizen more aware of just what is being taken from him and more willing to resist unconstitutional taxes.
Another amendment would be that every bill proposed must be in regards to one item only and cite the grant of power under which it is necessary and proper. This will sap the ability to practice deal making, and force every proposal to come into the light and not be hidden away to be discovered at a later date. This will strengthen the states against unconstitutional mandates that force them to provide socio-economic aid against their will.
At a state level Arizona can pass a law that requires payment to the state government to be in gold or silver. This also takes power away from the federal government as their unconstitutional fiat money printed by an unconstitutional federal reserve will no longer be such a source of control over the economy by the federal government.
It is only be weakening the federal government's means of bullying the states that the federal government will not be able to force so many socio-economic mandates down the states throats. The politicians that thrive from gaining a constituency because of socio-economic legislation will lose their ability to hijack the government for their power grabs. They will then not fight so hard to get so many people into the country when they cannot promise them the moon and the sky.When these type of programs are taken away or at least reduced in scope then there will be a correlating reduction in the scope of the illegal immigration.
davelnaf| 4.26.10 @ 7:27PM
Gaining entry into the US for the ‘Latinos’ is all about growing the ‘Latino’ community to the point where it can dictate political outcomes through union-like voting behavior that favors the Democratic Party. And the dems are staunchly behind this effort, of course, and they could care less about long term outcomes.
The dark truth about ‘Latino immigration’ that it has always been about hostility toward the successful non-Hispanic country living contiguous to a failed Hispanic one. That a largely European culture could make a resounding success of it in North America after centuries of failure by the Mexican culture to the south grates enormously on the ‘Latino’ community here and in Mexico. The oddity in all this is that much of the effort now is about controlling the non-Hispanic community here, and with the help of the Democratic Party and the ‘Latinos’ prodigious birth rate they are at least within reach of their cherished goal.
joe B| 4.26.10 @ 8:05PM
Oh, God. The problem with Latinos in this country is summarized by the old saying,"Where there are Mexicans, there is Mexico." Notwithstanding the small number of Hispanics serving important roles in the military, Hispanics in our cities and suburbs are a burden. They commit violent crimes at quadruple the rate of whites and are twice as likely to be on welfare. Wherever they establish a presence, schools deteriorate, public places become dumping grounds, and taxes skyrocket. Whites flee in front of the Mestizo hordes who destroy quality of life wherever they go.
Bob K| 4.26.10 @ 9:01PM
I haven't had time to read all the comments above, but I have a solution to the "crisis" caused by this new law. Maybe someone else above has suggested it, but if not, here it is in all it's stunning simplicity! And, although I am not a lawyer, I would bet it is protected by the Commerce Clause of the Constitution.
As the Illegals are picked up, they are given box lunches and put on buses headed for the various Capitols of the States north and east of Arizona. They will be given the phone numbers and addresses of the Employment Offices and Public Welfare Offices located there and then will be dropped off as close to those offices as possible.
After all, they are coming to the United States to find work, aren't they? And Arizona has a surplus of these industrious people. It will be regarded as a most neighborly act, I am sure, by the citizens of Utah, New Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming
Montana, Idaho, Oregon and Washington and I predict they will welcome them with (open, I hope!) arms at their borders.
Pingback| 4.26.10 @ 10:33PM
News Briefs Volume VII / Framing the Dialogue links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Osmar Aguilar| 4.27.10 @ 1:40AM
Let's look into the future, shall we. Hispanics now number 50 million in this country. According to the Pew Research Center, by 2050 (that's in 40 years), the Hispanic population will double to 100 million. Whites, who now make up 2/3 of the population, will become a minority, representing 47% of the population.
In states with greater concentration of Hispanics, (Arizona,California,Texas,New Mexico) the proportion of Whites will be even lower.
Gentlemen, these are the facts.
You and I will probably already be dead when this comes to pass. But I have a feeling our children and grandchildren, who will live in a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic United States of America the likes we can hardly imagine....will probably be opening a time-capsule and shake their heads in disbelief that there once was a time when their fore-fathers enslaved black people, detained their Japanese-American citizens in concentration camps, and hated and despised Hispanics for no other reason than to "hang on" to their idealized vision of America.
And you know what? As much as it may be warranted, I have a feeling that in 40 years this new Hispanic majority will harbor no ill-will towards their White counterparts. On the contrary, Americans of all races will continue the never-ending task of building this country into the greatest nation the world has known.
South Texan| 4.27.10 @ 5:31AM
You don't have to look into the future. Where I live in South Texas, whites are already less than 50%. I think it's Hispanic 26%, Black 24% Asian and others 6%. That leaves white with 44%. But since "white" is not a race and most of us that are called white come from various different races, that means we are already a minority.
FTM| 4.27.10 @ 5:53AM
I hope that you're right. However, in order to continue with the building of the greatest nation in the history of the world the propensity toward being (at least being percieved) as being a welfare freeloader is going to have to be overcome.
If the state of California, I read that 40% of LA is illegal and the state being practically in a state of default is any indication I would say that the US will be in fact in a state of default well before Latinos are a social majority.
FTM| 4.27.10 @ 5:57AM
We had this conversation Sunday at Church. The preacher, a rabid liberal, said that we as Christians have an obligation to help the poor, in refrence illegal immigration and in condemnation of the new law in Arizona. My response was that it is indeed our obligation as Christians to help the poor and that the poor stand at the door and say, "Help me, I'm poor." The poor don't kick the door in and say, "I'm poor and you owe me..." The poor don't use armed thugs with guns and badges in order to help themselves to whatever it is that the poor have decided that they want. That pretty much shut that idiot up.
Pete| 4.27.10 @ 8:06AM
All the talk of crime may be accurate, but no one seems to specifically mention automobile accidents. I live in a rural county in MD, and the majority of drivers I see charged in traffic accidents, as reported by the local newspaper, seem to have Spanish surnames. We need a better way for temporary workers-- from anywhere-- to enter the U.S., but amnesty to those already here is not the way. We tried that when Reagan was president, and, as expected, we got more illegal immigration.
fred| 4.27.10 @ 8:07PM
Pete,you're so right.
I live in Tucson. A very dear friend was killed by drunk driver , here illegally, from Sonora Mexico.
The police let him go.
Invariably if you see a vehicle from Mexico, they do not have insurance.
Pete| 4.27.10 @ 8:08AM
It is axiomatic that when you support something you get more of it. Remember "welfare"?
Richard Baker| 4.27.10 @ 9:27AM
Osmar:
Do you believe in the Rule of Law?
mejamom| 4.27.10 @ 10:30AM
I like Bob K's solution. How it'd work financially, I don't know, but perhaps if other states could see what it's like in the border states there would be some sympathy. That might lead to other states taking the same action that Arizona did which would send a pretty strong message to the administration that something isn't working.
It will be interesting to see what happens in Arizona. Especially in the next few weeks. I'm on the east coast, what's a good news source from out there?
S in Severn| 4.27.10 @ 11:02AM
Having lived for a time in the State of Arizona (1998-2001) I believe that the citizens and voters have a right to DEMAND that the current laws be enforced.
New Mexico and Arizona, like California have a very large, active and vocal population of Hispanic ancestry, and their settlement in these states pre-date the founding of the United States. They are citizens of the USA too.
And many are active or even more active in the prevention of ILLEGAL immigration. There are some families that DO HAVE dual citizenship with Mexico, as well as many LEGAL immigrants and LEGAL residents.
The crimes committed by the smugglers and those they smuggle into this country are seldom reported outside the State. There is also an increase in "Third Country Nationals" being smuggled into the USA.
The Mexican Government is being VERY hypocritical, since they do guard their southern border much more effectively than the northern border and do apprehend and deport (sometimes months later) those caught illegally entering their country.
Rangers and those living outside of towns and cities that "once provided aid" like fresh water, or shelter are now being gunned down, or brutally attacked.
It is no longer a handful, but millions. Not random, but a horde like Biblical locust that feed on every available thing, and leave ruin in their wake.
Brooks R| 4.27.10 @ 1:16PM
Why do we continue to send billions of $ in aid to Mexico, only to have them urge their unskilled and uneducated to make a run for the border?
I think we would get the attention of the Mexican goverment if we deducted the real costs of supporting their citizens from the aid we send them. They may actually owe us money...
Pingback| 4.27.10 @ 2:45PM
Barry Soetoro afraid to go to Arizona now! - Page 8 - Christian Forums links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Cris Worth| 4.27.10 @ 3:34PM
Dad told me in 1969 Mexico was an enemy of the United States. At every turn they will tweak the gringo. The people of the Grand Canyon State believe it too and have responded correctly.
5th generation Arizonan| 4.27.10 @ 3:50PM
"Riding the noise for political advantage, President Obama is summoning his Justice Department to look into the matter."
Double Dog Dare. Given Holder's entrance into this arena allows Arizona to look into Holder's conflicts of interest as AG and sue Holder and even Obama.
All SOCIALIST politicians today see themselves as the new untouchable aristocracy ruling over the peon serf constituents. The crooked Hispanic Padrone politicians certainly don't have the best interest of Hispanic citizens in mind when exploiting all tax paying citizens (regardless of race) now stuck with the bills not simply for the social services that tax funds are meant to provide CITIZENS with schools, job placement, and even welfare food and housing for those in between jobs. But think about all of the taxes required to house the 1:3 imprisoned guilty criminals who are illegal aliens (only a fraction of all those caught who are only a fraction of all those entering and committing crimes not to mention all those Mexicans with criminal records from Mexico entering the US illegally). And that does not mention the cost of all law enforcement and border patrol trying to respond to the tsunami of kidnappings in Phoenix, not to mention the murders and burglaries throughout the state committed by the illegal aliens for whatever "reason".
With the losses of the AZ copper mining industry and the agricultural farming industry squandered on real estate speculator developers, exactly what do these illegal aliens plan on doing for work in AZ? As the population growth in the Valley of the Sun keeps mushrooming, there isn't enough water for lawns requiring manicures, and gravel landscaping hardly requires mowers. Exactly how many restaurants need dishwashers? The skilled laborers enter illegally also, taking away jobs from citizen machinists, mechanics and construction workers. But all taxes that employers take from the illegal alien employee never get sent to Washington, rather kept in the employers' pocket. Given Obama's pre-election work experience, Congressional thievery of tax funds and Goldman Sachs repackaging and gift wrapping of indebted deals on paper as if substance to market for investors, it appears that the only "profitable" corporations are pencil pushing scam artists.
I hope that the loopholes which the AZ legislators wrote into this new law are not overlooked by the overtaxed and over-victimized AZ citizens when it's time to vote for stronger conservative legislators in state and in Washington.
Sovereign Nation| 4.27.10 @ 4:12PM
The Arizona National Guard Unit participated in the pursuit of Pancho Villa after Villa's attack of American citizens, shooting and burning down the New Mexican town. Even El Paso Army unit sharp shooters and canons used to deal with the border problems given the pillaging Mexican bandits creating warfare havoc north of the Rio Grande just as they are today. It isn't as if there isn't precedence for declaring war against Mexican criminal citizens and even the Mexican military crossing the US Border in order to thieve, kidnap and murder American citizens. The POTUS should temporarily send the Army on the border and into Mexico to clean up the border of bandits and pirates. Damn the Mexican government for prohibiting their citizens from owning guns. The drug lords have been kidnapping and murdering American Colonial Mexicans with dual citizenship in Chihuahua, and the Mexican government has done NOTHING to protect their own citizens from the drug lords, refusing to respond when the towns are attacked and emergency calls for help get no response from nearby police. And of course the US government has done nothing to safeguard Americans from border violence except to finally agree to build a border fence that has yet to be built and has yet to be funded by Congress. The only money Congress appropriated for the "fence" was for the non-fence, the "virtual" non-functioning SQUANDERED TAX FUNDS PAID TO SOME CONGRESS MEMBER'S INVESTMENT WITH KICKBACKS TO THE POLITICIANS.
Not Again| 4.27.10 @ 4:20PM
Brooks R "Why do we continue to send billions of $ in aid to Mexico..."
Since Mexico has its own profitable oil industry, there certainly is no reason for the US to be sending TAX FUNDS there.
Charity is given by choice, but tax funds are coerced.
Whatever money that the UN, a government or politicians "organize" for "charity" ends up in the politicians' pockets. Ask Obama about Chicago's Altgelt's Garden home improvement public works project that he siphoned all the tax funds into lawyers' pockets (his own as well) leaving the decrepit housing project ransacked, the indigent residents with NOTHING, worse off than before, and lending Obama the new "pinstripe pirate" nickname before running as a politician himself.
Nobama| 4.27.10 @ 4:42PM
President Calderon is braguing about a lower, 4.8%, unemployment in March. Of course +/- 15 millions of his fellows citizens are not included in the stat ... President Calderon has failed miserably in creating a middle class to replace the current slavery existing in Mexico. Like opening key sectors of the economy to private foreign investors. Like creating an environment where his fellows citizens could earn decent wages and consequently stay in Mexico.
Why is it that the USA (R&D) have became complice of such a corrupted foreign governnment?
fsjdk| 7.1.10 @ 2:21AM
beijing massage
shanghai escorts