BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens

Subject: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 07:38 PM

By signing the Arizona immigration bill, Governor Brewer demonstrated courage and foresight. With actions like these it may be possible to save the planet after all.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: artbrooks
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 07:44 PM

Sure - as long as you aren't black haired with a tan complexion. This bill allows the police to stop anyone, at any time, on "suspicion" of being an illegal immigrant, and demand their papers.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 08:09 PM

Will they get to put an orange star on them or something along that line?

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 08:10 PM

When do the knocks on the door in the middle of the night start?

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 08:15 PM

Quite soon, I expect.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: artbrooks
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 08:19 PM

I think a brown taco, LH. Mousethief, they can start as soon as 90 days after the end of the current legislative session in Arizona.

This means that my son-in-law from Panama doesn't dare enter Arizona without a copy of his naturalization papers in his pocket. Hell, half of the native-born population of New Mexico is of Hispanic descent (and 30% of Arizonans)...and I'd bet that very few have a passport or other proof of citizenship such as a birth certificate.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: michaelr
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 08:23 PM

With actions like these it may be possible to save the planet after all.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Rapparee
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 08:24 PM

So much for conferences and conventions in Phoenix....

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 08:27 PM

Should get to the courts pretty quick.
Arizona for gringos only, all others keep out.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Ebbie
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 08:29 PM

When are you relocating, Rig?

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 08:37 PM

Someone should introduce the old gal to a chollo.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Amos
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 09:03 PM

Which old gal is that, Q?


A

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 09:06 PM

Ihre Papieren, bitte?

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: artbrooks
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 09:08 PM

My wife, who is Jewish and dark-complected, will just love this.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 09:38 PM

Brewer is 66(6).

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 10:09 PM

Going forward, as illegals leave Arizona, other states will discover the same kinds of problems and adapt similar solutions.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Ebbie
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 10:48 PM

It worked real well in Germany too. For awhile.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Bill D
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 11:10 PM

The governor of N.Mexico, Bill Richardson, right next door, is part Hispanic, and shakes his head and says that legally, HE will have to carry papers to attend a football game in Arizona.

Jan Brewer admits she has no idea what an illegal immigrant should look like, but she is SURE the clever law enforcement folks in Arizona will figure it out.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: katlaughing
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 11:37 PM

I hope there are some brave people in AZ who will follow the lead from the original Not In Our Town movement in Montana and start groups there:Not In Our Town. When hate groups targeted Jews in Billings MT the community came together and everyone displayed a paper menorah in their windows so the haters didn't know who to target. That one action has grown and been repeated in many towns. What the hell are they going to do with the Native Americans? Make them stay on the reservations out of fear? It's bad enough without this kind white supremacist bullshit being the law.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer brings the Gestapo to America
From: Genie
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 12:16 AM

Yet one more weapon in the arsenal of unscrupulous police (which, of course, is only a subset of the police) to harass and intimidate and persecute just about anyone they feel like doing it to.

Brewer says they'll be trained NOT to do racial and ethnic profiling. Of course, that means they'll need to harass, intimidate and prosecute a few white Anglos too, just to prove it.

If I understand this law correctly, if they stop you on "suspicion" of being illegal and it turns out you have documentation of your citizenship but just didn't happen to have it with you (say, on the beach or at the swimming pool or at a friend's house), YOU are still responsible for paying costs of your arrest, incarceration, trial, etc. -- whatever costs are incurred by the state before they finally let you go.

I'm wondering if they have to wait till someone is arrested under this law before anyone will "have standing" to challenge the law's constitutionality.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: artbrooks
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 12:40 AM

Genie, do you carry documentation of your citizenship? I certainly don't...but then, neither of us is dark complected.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Amergin
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 02:26 AM

So I guess the US is the whole planet as far as Riginfuhrer is concerned?

How is it possible not to see the racism in this piece of legislation? Only brown people are being targeted. They are the scapegoats of this generation. Once it was the Irish, the blacks, the Chinese, and now the Hispanic. This is just another plot from the wealthy to keep their jackboots on the throat of the workers. Racism has always been a tool of the master class. It divides the workers and keeps them from banding together.

For some reason laws passed to halt illegal emigration never seem to target the wealthy who hire them, only their employees. Who cares right? They can always hire another.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 07:55 AM

It is possible not to see racism in this legislation because it does not target "brown" people. It targets people who are illegaly in the country and shouldn't be here in the first place.
       The larger issue, however, is that it takes steps to get some kind of grasp on runaway human population growth, most of which comes from immigratioin in the US.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: GUEST,Bardan
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 09:13 AM

I find it bitterly ironic that this is going forward in a place called Arizona. Just think about the probable origins of that name for a moment, just like most place names in the southern end of the united states. If you go around stealing vast swathes of land from mexico, don't be surprised if there are a lot of hispanics in the area. If you found and build a whole country on immigration don't be surprised if there are a lot of immigrants.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 09:50 AM

Sadly, I was thinking of Widdicombe Fair when I read the title of this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Amergin
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 11:06 AM

Really, Rigin? I thought the worldwide "runaway human population growth" was caused by people having babies....not by emigrating from one country to another.

Another thing, Rigin, is who else is this law suppose to target if not "brown" people? Do you actually think they will ask white europeans for their documentation? Or how about those pesky Canadians who are so busy trying to infiltrate our country for the wonderful jobs we have? You do realise that Arizona borders on Mexico, right? What else is this but a racist, fascist law?

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 12:00 PM

it's not necessarily racist...and 'fascist' is being over used as a label these days.

What it is, is a STUPID law. Yes...everyone knows that 99% of the targets of this action are illegal Mexicans. 'Racist' is a term that suggests that opposition to a group is simply because of DISLIKE of their ethnic background, and the 'official' purpose of the law is to discover & control people based on their citizenship status. Too many illegals?....find them and stop them.
What makes it stupid is the idea that one CAN 'have probable cause' to stop someone based on 'looks', 'dress', 'behavior'...etc. That, obviously, will cause much harassment of perfectly legal folks.....who, by default in that area are often brown-skinned Hispanics.
It's a fine point, but it is de facto a discriminatory law, not a 'racist' law. It is an UNFAIR law, a useless law, a law which is internally flawed, a law which no police officer will be able to apply sanely. The law should be, and probably will be, invalidated by the courts.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 12:53 PM

"I thought the worldwide "runaway human population growth" was caused by people having babies....not by emigrating from one country to another."

          People having babies in third world countries, and then moving to a place where population growth is more stable create crowding in the places they go, and do nothing to lessen the problem in the places they leave.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Ebbie
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 01:22 PM

But 'worldwide population growth', Rig, is not increased by where a child is born.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 02:51 PM

No, the fact that the child is born increases population. That's the point.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 03:52 PM

Rig...although I totally agree about excess world population, you are making trivial points about it and trying to plug the issue into a situation where it is a very minor aspect.
We are concerned here with identifying people who are breaking the law, while not bothering those who are not. Birth rate is very marginally connected in THIS concern.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 04:00 PM

I agree, Bill, that the words "racist" and "fascist" are being way overused in people's rhetoric of outrage these days. What I would call this new law is "discriminatory and authoritarian"...and, yes, stupid.

It's a law based on the fear of the "haves" that the "have-nots" are taking over.

That's also what the Tea Party appears to be primarily based on. I read an article recently in the Times, and it seems that Tea Party members are typically White, better educated than average, middle and upper middle class people with better than average incomes. They are those, in other words, who are mostly notably more secure in life than the people they most fear...the poor, Blacks, Hispanics, those who have far less than they do. It's not the redneck stereotype that liberals love to imagine ("Billy Joe" and his pal "Bubba") who make up the real core of the Tea Party. Nope. It's Mr Conventional respectable suburban and small town America who are the core of the Tea Party.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: katlaughing
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 04:30 PM

Tell that to the local restaurant owner down the street from me, LH. I am not convinced. "Starvin' Arvin's" serves "good ol' American fare" and come up by their bootstraps, building a family business over many years which included 2-3 restaurants. For the past few months their marquee has said something along the lines of "Socialism thanks to Obama, Salazar (Senator) and Bennet (another Senator" Remember in November, vote them out." Now, it says something similar about voting them out AND join the Tea Party. What I have seen when I've gone to their place of business is redneck, white trash. As long as you are white and can talk the talk the service is decent and the food tolerable, if it's the kind that appeals to you.

I'd like to draw up some kind of flyer for the owner that says "This is your business on bush...this is you business on 'socialism'" or some such, something to make him think...I hate businesses and churches which use cutesy, catch-all phrases of the cause du jour to entice followers.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 04:41 PM

"Birth rate is very marginally connected in THIS concern."

             Actually, it's right in the center of it. Some Central American countries have very high birth rates and very few economic advantages. One of the major reasons the economic advantages aren't available is because of the birth rate.

             Their solution is to go north, come to America, make our school rooms over croweded, drive our wages down, drain our social services. The real solution is to solve the problems in the places they are coming from. Again, their major problems is a very hight birth rate.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: pdq
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 05:10 PM

The population of Mexico fell by about 2 million people between 1910 and 1920 during what is now called the Mexican Revolution.

The population stood at 14.3 million in 1921.

The population of Mexico is now between 110 and 120 million, with at least 40 million Mexican citizens living within the borders of the United States.

If you include Mexicans here legally, their children, illegal aliens and those who received amnesty in the late 1980s, there are about 68 million Mexicans in the US or 22% of the total population. This does not include families that have been here "for generations".

Ethnic Mexican children make up 1/4 of all primary school children in the United States.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: DougR
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 05:32 PM

Gee, I had no idea we had such a population of Arizonans on this forum. If the federal government would do the job it's suppose to do (make the borders secure)it wouldn't be necessary for state legislatures to take such steps as the one taken here. It's pretty easy, from a distance, to make judgements of what others should do with the kind of illegal immigration problems we have in our state.

And, oh yeah, should I run a stop sign and be stopped by the police they likely would ask to see my Arizona driver's license. I would have no problem showing it to them.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: The Barden of England
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 05:37 PM

So nice to see how the following is no longer valid in both our lands (to our shame):-

"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Not in Arizona, nor Great Britain it would seem!

John Barden

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: DougR
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 05:45 PM

The Barden: I believe the writer was talking about LEGAL immigants.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Ebbie
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 05:58 PM

As has been noted before, we are a nation of immigrants.

During the Great Depression my own family were immigrants, from North Dakota. My parents were industrious, law-abiding people determined to create a better, more secure world for their children and future generations. I don't see a great difference between them and what is happening today. (I wonder when Rig's family came to Oregon?)

They may have been legal immigrants but the truth is nobody asked. By accident of birth they were entitled to live where they wished.

Frankly, I think the great strength of our country, the USA, stems from, and has always been due to the great diversity and the dreams of the people who keep refreshing the tired blood of complacent people.

"...the United States has always been energized by its immigrant populations...At the 1998 commencement address at Portland State University, U.S. president Bill Clinton voiced support for immigrants, including immigrants from Asia and Latin America when he said that "America has constantly drawn strength and spirit from wave after wave of immigrants...They have proved to be the most restless, the most adventurous, the most innovative, the most industrious of people.
*************
Many cities, including Washington D.C., New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, San Diego, San Jose, Salt Lake City, Phoenix, Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston, Detroit, Jersey City, Minneapolis, Miami, Denver, Baltimore, Seattle, Portland, Oregon and Portland, Maine, have adopted sanctuary ordinances banning police from asking people about their immigration status.

Wikipedia

Have we changed that much? Pity.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 06:36 PM

"... to save America"

It's still "America" on both sides of that border.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 06:40 PM

Rig...you're not listening to me. Solving the high birth-rate problem IS important, but THIS issue is about how to **IDENTIFY** in a fair manner those who have come here illegally, and as a side issue, how to design border security. This is the major issue because we have to deal with that until the population issue is resolved, and barring huge disasters, that will take decades even if 'those' countries cooperate.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 06:46 PM

"It's still "America" on both sides of that border."

Yes...we know. We add "central" & "South" when it's appropriate.
That is another trivial point in THIS discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: artbrooks
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 07:07 PM

PDQ, that is an interesting set of numbers. Where did they come from?

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: artbrooks
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 07:08 PM

Oh, yeah...there is no more such a thing as an "ethnic Mexican" than there is an "ethnic American".

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: pdq
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 07:34 PM

More "fun with facts"...

New Mexico has one of the smallest populations of foreign-born "hispanics" with 16% of "hispanics" and therefore about 7% of the state's population.

That is ranks New Mexico at 46 out of 50 in that category (by count, not %).

Maine, as would be expected, ranks 50th for foreign-born "hispanics" with less than 1% of total population.

Illinois ranks 6th with 2 million total "hispanics", perhaps 1/2 are foreign-born.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Genie
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 08:09 PM

Art B, no I don't carry around my passport, birth certificate, etc. Nor do I want to.

It's not just the hassle -- e.g., having to carry ANYTHING with me when I go for a walk or am a passenger in someone else's car if I don't want to. It's that passports (especially) and even birth certificates are much more problematic if lost or stolen than even driver licenses and credit card are. I want to be able to keep documents like that in a secure place and produce them only when really needed, e.g., international travel, applying for social security, etc.

And the alternative -- a statewide or national ID that contains all your vital statistics and which everyone has to carry at all times -- is just as bad or even worse.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Genie
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 08:11 PM

@Amergin [[For some reason laws passed to halt illegal emigration never seem to target the wealthy who hire them, only their employees. Who cares right? They can always hire another.]]
Bingo!!

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: DougR
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 08:20 PM

Question: Do those of you who are critical of Governor Brewer and the majority of the Arizona legislature live in open border states/countries?

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Genie
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 08:24 PM

DougR, producing a driver license is no problem if you're driving a car.

But a driver license is not proof of citizenship.

But beyond that, why should you have to have your D L with you when you are not driving, not shopping (trying to use a credit card or check), not doing anything for which proof of identity is normally required?


Oh, and, BTW, Art, you do look sort of like you might be part Mexican. ; ) (More than Jenn does, I think.)


It would be one thing if, when the police interrupt your day and make you miss an important business meeting or your daughter's wedding and maybe even fingerprint and mugshot you, and then they find out that you are indeed a US citizen (maybe even native born 5th generation), they had to compensate you fully for all your losses, including legal expenses.   But that's apparently not the way this law is written.   You're stuck with all those costs and losses even if you've been arrested and investigated for no good reason.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: pdq
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 08:30 PM

"In every political community there are varying shades of political opinion. One of the shadiest of these is the liberals. An outspoken group on many subjects. Ten degrees to the left of center in good times. Ten degrees to the right of center if it affects them personally." ~ Phil Ochs

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Ebbie
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 08:35 PM

More than one can play the numbers game. I have no idea where pdq's 'fun facts' are supposed to lead. Or where he found them.

New Mexico had the highest proportion of Hispanics--42 percent.

Persons of Hispanic or Latino origin, percent, 2008 NM:44.9%US:15.4%
New Mexico Foreign born persons, percent, 2000   New Mexico: 8.2% USA: 11.1%


http://www.census.gov/mso/www/rsf/hisorig/sld009.htm

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: pdq
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 08:53 PM

Perhaps someone needs to read more carefully.

New Mexico is indeed the leading "hispanic" state with 45% of the total population.

However, an amazing 84% are "native-born", which is consistant with its history of Spanish colonization and Roman Catholic Church activites dating back centuries.

This shows that New Mexico is not being as heavily impacted as California, Arizona, Nevada or Texas by the last 30 years of mass migration from Mexico.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: artbrooks
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 09:02 PM

Doug, I live in New Mexico. I used to live in Arizona.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 09:07 PM

I remember years ago, in New Mexico when I was a kid, there was a scramble to prove where one was born (reason forgotten- voter registry- passport?).
Small New Mexico communities had no system and Catholic Church records were often lost (the majority in northern New Mexico were Hispanic or part Hispanic). My mother (parents from Spain but no birth records found) and my grandmother on the other side, (Irish pioneer family, records of birth lost) had to get affidavits from a ranking politician or professional like a doctor stating that they were born in the state.


New Mexico Facts
Hispanic or Latino origin- 45% (2008)
Number speaking Spanish at home- 36% (2000)
Number of New Mexicans admitting foreign birth- 8% (2000)
US Census Bureau estimates, 2009.

Arizona
Hispanic or Latino- 30% (2008)
Language other than English spoken at home- 26% (2000)
Number of Arizonans admitting foreign birth- 13% (2000)

I would not try to break out number of Hispanic foreign born.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Bobert
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 09:10 PM

Didn't the brownshirts do this kinds stuff???

Papers, please...

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Ebbie
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 09:19 PM

I know, Bob. We have all read the chilling history of this kind of thing.

Frankly, I don't believe that it will stand.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Bobert
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 09:21 PM

Well, I hope not, Eb... It opens the door to all kinds of wild west bigotry...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 09:44 PM

"(I wonder when Rig's family came to Oregon?)"

          1924 from Montana, scammed by railroads on wheat farm deals.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 09:49 PM

"I'm wondering if they have to wait till someone is arrested under this law before anyone will "have standing" to challenge the law's constitutionality."

One might think 'how about the governor?" but rest assured any police who are so stupid as to not recognise him from a photo are really too stupid to be trusted by "Der Fuhrer"..

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 09:50 PM

"...THIS issue is about how to **IDENTIFY** in a fair manner those who have come here illegally..."

          Actually, it's not. It's about how citizens in Arizona can protect themselves from an invasion or illegal persons, crime, and drug smuggling from the south.

          Identifying illegals involves the same routine as finding people with outstanding warrants. A guy runs a stop sign, the cop pulls him over and asks for his identification--it's that simple. The only difference now is, if the guy doesn't have any identification, the cop is required to look into his immigration status.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 09:53 PM

"[[For some reason laws passed to halt illegal emigration never seem to target the wealthy who hire them, only their employees. Who cares right? They can always hire another.]]"

          Actually, the Obama Administration started out doing that, and the result was, they put so many illegal immigrants out of work--many more than Bush did raiding chicken factories--that they quit doing it. If they hadn't quit, we might not be here.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 09:57 PM

I think a lot of how folks look at this issue has a lot to do with whether one sees "people as people," or "people as members of groups."

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Bobert
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 10:02 PM

Well, yeah, Rigs... That's purdy much it... And seems in Arizona they no longer have any interests in looking at people as people but as groups...

Gov. Bill Richardson, a Hispanic, said that going next door might be troublesome for him??? That's a sad commentary...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 10:18 PM

The Mexican-American-Legal-and-Educational-Defense-Fund looks at people as members of groups. Those of us who are simply worried about over population look at people as people, Richardson included.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: artbrooks
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 10:28 PM

Overpopulation isn't a problem. Just sterilize women after their second child. Start in Utah...oh, that wouldn't work. Overpopulation only counts if they are brown.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 10:36 PM

Of course Utah counts, Art. The trick is to convince folks that it's in their own best interest, the interest of their children and grand-children, and in the interest of the greater community to check out the facts.

             When religious dogma stands in the way, reality goes out the window--Catholic, Mormon, Islamic, or whatever...

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Genie
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 07:54 AM

I fear that this law may be a backdoor route to a national ID card - with way too much sensitive info on it - which ALL OF US will have to carry with us at all times.

One way to keep a law like this and avoid the "ethnic profiing" charge is to make everyone carry proof of citizenship or legal immigrant status at all times and to stop (i.e., inconvenience and maybe cause real hardship to) people at random just to check.   Oy!

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: artbrooks
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 09:17 AM

Genie, I've carried a national (military) ID card since I was 12 - hasn't burned a hole in my butt yet. The most recent iteration has all of the personal information (SSN, date and place of birth, etc.) encoded and barcoded as well as in a readable form.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 09:18 AM

Actually, it's the destrcutive legislation that Sens. Schumer and Graham are pushing that champions a national ID card. There's no mention of it in this law.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 03:23 PM

Canada has a national ID card. Labeled "Certificate of Canadian Citizenship," with signed photo, brief description and unique number.

SSN (SIN) card is pretty close to a national ID card. And you would be surprised how much information is back of your bank credit card.

Once the Federals get the Immigration laws straightened out (not the bigot- devised Arizona one), I see nothing wrong with ID cards.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: DougR
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 03:53 PM

Arizona's new law does nothing more than reinforce federal law. Federal law: it's a crime for a non-citizen to live in Arizona. Arizona law: it's a crime for a non-citizen to liven in Arizona.

Genie: Arizona has had a law for quite some time penalizing employers who knowingly hire non-citizens. However, relatively few have been penalized.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 04:46 PM

After some pfaffing finding it I have had a look at the text of the act at http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/04/16/AzSB1070.pdf.

It is a "sus" law. Sus laws brought parts of South London close to riot before reform. People should learn from history (but if they did I suppose they would not be Republicans).

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 05:08 PM

Republicans enacted the law, and bviously they did learn. Didn't you say the riots brought reform?

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 05:13 PM

Bridge comment.
For North Americans, a 'sus' law is one that permits a police officer to act on suspicion alone. It was dropped in 1981.
It will not get past the first court case.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 05:31 PM

Thankfully the Arizona law does not allow a police officer to act on suspicion alone.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 06:17 PM

Richard, could you try that link to the AZ law again? Doesn't work.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 06:25 PM

http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/04/16/AzSB1070.pdf


Second substantive paragraph in blue. "Where reasonable suspicion exists".

In practice this will create a power to arrest for being brown and/or not speaking American English. God help celebrant basketball players (if there is a god).

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: artbrooks
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 06:41 PM

Uh huh. The law says that suspicion is all that's needed:
"FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE, WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. ... A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, WITHOUT A WARRANT, MAY ARREST A PERSON IF THE OFFICER HAS PROBABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE THAT THE PERSON HAS COMMITTED ANY PUBLIC OFFENSE THAT MAKES THE PERSON REMOVABLE FROM THE UNITED STATES. ... IN ADDITION TO ANY VIOLATION OF FEDERAL LAW, A PERSON IS GUILTY OF TRESPASSING IF THE PERSON IS BOTH: 1. PRESENT ON ANY PUBLIC OR PRIVATE LAND IN THIS STATE. 2. IN VIOLATION OF 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1304(e) OR 1306(a). {is not carrying his or her alien registration card or has willfully failed to register.}

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Ebbie
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 07:00 PM

"Federal law: it's a crime for a non-citizen to live in Arizona. Arizona law: it's a crime for a non-citizen to liven in Arizona" Doug R

Surely not, Doug! A non-citizen? What about provisional residents? What about the five-year wait before a person legally in the country can take the oath of naturalization?

Surely not.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 07:07 PM

Yes, he/she would have to enter the country illegaly, then that person could not reside in Arizona, or anywhere else in the country. Millions of them do, and those are the ones who need getting rid of.

Subject: Jan Brewer takes step towards police state in AZ
From: Genie
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 07:38 PM

Doug,   You're right about laws penalizing employers for hiring illegals seldom being enforced.   And that's a huge source of the problem with illegal immigrants.

But Arizona's new law does a lot more than make it a crime for an illegal immigrant to live in Arizona. (I sure HOPE it doesn't make it a crime for LEGAL immigrants to live there!)
It seems to make it mandatory for everyone to have something like a passport or birth certificate or green card on their person AT ALL TIMES, even at times when one might normally neither need nor want to have a wallet, etc. with them.

The issue is not HAVING a state or national ID card, it's not being allowed to go anywhere without it.

We are not talking about having a driver license when you're driving or trying to buy something with a check or credit card.

There are times and places where there's no need to carry a purse or wallet and where having one with you involves great risk of loss or theft. E.g., when you go to the beach or a swimming pool or perhaps are working at a community garden or even going to a free outdoor public concert.


Q, if Canada makes everyone carry that Certificate of Canadian Citizenship at all times that's pretty oppressive. When I lived and worked in Canada, as a "landed immigrant," I did not have to carry such a card with me. Just my Ontario driver license - and I needed that only when driving or occasionally when asked for proof of age in a bar.   My Canadian "Social Insurance" (their equivalent to our Social Security) card did not have a photo or description either.

I don't want my credit cards stolen or lost either, but I'm not required to carry them with me anyway. It's also a lot easier to cancel a credit card and get a replacement issued than it is to replace a driver license or passport. And if someone gets hold of your birth certificate, how do you "cancel" and "replace" that?

Rig, I didn't say the Arizona law champions a national ID.   I'm saying it's an early step on a very short journey to getting to that point.


Art, if you're comfortable having all the info that's needed to steal your identity carried in your pocket at all times, that's fine, but I would not be. ESPECIALLY at times when I'd have to leave it unattended for a while, e.g., while swimming at the beach.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Genie
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 07:48 PM

It sure seems to me that the criteria for "suspicion" and "probable cause" are way too vaguely defined, as this law is written, to prevent a policeman merely arresting someone because s/he didn't like the way that person looked or sounded or whatever.   

Thing is, if someone "looks Mexican" and speaks Spanish but little English and is working in a low-paying job such as picking lettuce, that probably does constitute "reasonable suspicion" of illegal status simply because so many sub-minimum-wage laborers (especially those who are brown skinned and speak Spanish) ARE illegal.      But in cases like that, law enforcement should be going after the EMPLOYER FIRST, to inquire whether the workers had proof of legal residency.      Anyway, it is almost certainly going to involve a lot of ethnic profiling to enforce this law, and that is a huge problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: DougR
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 07:55 PM

Ebbie: I'll try again. Anyone who enters Arizona illegally cannot live here permanently.

No, Genie, it does not apply to legal residents.

There likely will be some instances when legal residents will be inconvenienced. I don't, however, it will be a common occurance. The police have more to do than scan the landscape looking for someone who MAY be here illegally.

If the federal government will secure the border, as it is supposed to, illegals will not be such a problem for our state. Estimates are that 450,000 illegals make their home in Arizona. That puts a terrible burden our our hospitals who are required to provide treatment, and in most instances, receive no pay for the services.

DougR

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: artbrooks
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 08:42 PM

Sure it applies to legal residents. The police can, based upon "reasonable suspicion", require that any individual who they suspect of being an illegal resident prove his or her citizenship or residency status. Failure to do so constitutes probable cause for arrest. So if Grandma Gomez (or Chang or Jorgenson), who has been a citizen for 40 years but is getting a little hazy and has forgotten most of the English she ever learned, doesn't have her Naturalization certificate in her pocket she is off to Sheriff Arpaio's gulag.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Genie
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 09:10 PM

Art is right, Doug.

It's small consolation if you're eventually cleared, if you've been detained and possibly jailed and you have to pay for an attorney, etc., and you've maybe lost business or a job or important non-business events while you were "processed" after being taken into custody because you weren't carrying your green card or passport or birth certificate.

I can see it now: A mariachi band en route to a Cinco De Mayo gig is stopped by the Arizona cops and asked for their passports or birth certificates. Since they don't normally carry these around -- being US citizens and all -- they are detained, miss the gig(s) and lose not just a few hours' or a day's income but possibly a longer-term client for being a no-show.   

There will no doubt be many other similar situations if this law is allowed to take effect.

Being stopped by the police can be a major disruption to your schedule, even if you are not charged with anything.

Anyway, if I lose or forget my driver license and am stopped by the police, I may be given a citation (after the cop calls in to check who the car is registered to, etc.) but I will not be arrested on a criminal charge or taken to jail. I'll probably get off with a slap on the wrist if I can produce my driver license within 24 hours.      It is not the same kind of offense as driving when you aren't licensed to drive.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 09:30 PM

Canadians do not have to carry their Certificate of Citizenship. Most consider it an honour, not at all 'oppressive'.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 10:25 PM

"Doug,   You're right about laws penalizing employers for hiring illegals seldom being enforced."

               Actually, the Obama Administration started doing that shortly after they took office--and legal Americans rushed in to apply for the jobs that were created. That's why they quit.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Genie
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 11:49 PM

@Rig
Huh??

Who quit? What did they quit?
The Obama administration quit cracking down on employers hiring illegals because legal US residents started filling the jobs??   Why? That makes no sense.

@Q
Maybe most Canadians consider it an honour, not at all 'oppressive', to carry their Certificate of Citizenship - sometimes.

But NO ONE here has addressed the issue of people having to carry valuable, hard-to-replace, sensitive-info-containing "papers" with them when they are in places or doing activities that would make carrying such papers cumbersome, dangerous, or both.

Again, WHY SHOULD SOMEONE HAVE TO HAVE THEIR "PAPERS" WITH THEM WHEN THEY GO FOR A WALK OR A SWIM OR A RIDE ON THE BUS?

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 01:11 AM

Obama quit cracking down on illegal employers because going after them proved to be much more effective than the administration had anticipated. The Hispanic caucus got to them. They were alienating more Hispanic voters than Bush was doing by raiding chicken plants.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Ebbie
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 01:27 AM

Let's get some documentation on that, Rig.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Genie
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 02:05 AM

Rig, I find your explanation hard to believe. First off, a lot of Hispanics -- especially those who worked hard and bided their time to go through the legal channels to citizenship -- resent illegals "jumping line," so to speak. Second, a lot of Hispanics are from other countries such as Cuba, Puerto Rico, etc., not Mexicao. It is not the case that Hispanics are a bloc favoring unrestricted immigration or amnesty for illegals.

Second, cracking down on employers is the best way to curb illegal immigration from Mexico without making criminals of the Mexican immigrants and harrassing them.

Third, it is the employers themselves, including big business, who really want to keep the supply of poor immigrants coming into the country, who are willing to work for $3/hr. In fact, the Republicans often speak of wanting to implement a "guest worker" program whereby a lot of immigrants would be allowed in legally, to work for wages that are far below our national minimum wage. If anyone put pressure on Obama to stop cracking down on the employers, it was probably the businesses themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 08:35 AM

Genie - I agree with everything you say here. There are a lot of legal Hispanics who are as much against illegal immigration as everyone else is.

          Your second point agrees with what I said--the best way to curb illegal immigration is to crack down on employers. If they would throw the board of directors of Tyson Foods in jail today, illegal immigration would probably end tomorrow.

          Your last point is partly right. Employers would have put pressure on the administration if they'd had any clout with it. But it becomes necessary to draw the line between Hispanics as a group, and "Hispanic politicians." Hispanic politicians want as many Hispanics in the country as possible because it grows their electorate.
          You only have to Google "The Nation Of Aztlan," to discover one segment of this argument. Other's are not quite so radical, but that's an element that has not gone away, and probably won't.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Genie
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 12:10 PM

Rig, Hispanic politicians may want to increase the number of Hispanic US citizens, but non-citizen immigrants can't vote, whether they are legal or not.*

Hispanic politicians also have to appeal to many non-Hispanics, as well as to the anti-illegal immigration Hispanics, if they want to get elected.

I think the mega-businesses like Tyson and trans-national corporations like ADM have humongous clout in both DC and various state houses by way of their lobbyists and their political advertising. Oh, and thanks to the Roberts court, those corporations will have almost exponentially greater influence on elections to come -- and the politicians, Hispanic and non-Hispanic, know it.



*Please don't tell me you think illegal voter registration of immigrants is a major problem. It's not that easy to get registered and vote if you're not a citizen, plus there are more legitimate minority voters are disenfranchised via sneaky and sometimes illegal means (e.g., long lines and/or broken voting machines at their polling places) than there are people illegally registered.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Genie
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 12:16 PM

BTW, one main way this new law is almost certain to be implemented this fall is at polling places.

People will be hired - some perhaps wearing official-looking uniforms - to harrass "Hispanic-looking" voters at the polls, threatening them that IF they actually vote and then cannot produce a passport or other proof of citizenship (a voter registration card won't be accepted), they will be arrested.   

That will be enough to deter thousands of US citizens of Hispanic descent from voting.

Mission accomplished.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Mrrzy
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 12:32 PM

...wasn't it *Peter* Brewer and *Jan* Stewer?

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 01:02 PM

"Hispanic politicians may want to increase the number of Hispanic US citizens, but non-citizen immigrants can't vote, whether they are legal or not.*"

               You're right again, Genie. Here's how it works, and would work again if the American public were to be foolish enough to go along with the laughable proposal the administration is calling "comprehensive immigration reform." (1) The government turns it's back and allows millions of illegal immigrants to enter the country, (2)then they make the case that the illegals have been here so long that they ought to make them all legal--they did this in 1986, remember.
               (3)Once those people become legalized, they have this insidious rule called "family reunification." Through family reunification, they bring in all kinds of shirt-tail relatives--aunts, uncles, brothers, sisters, grandparents, and etc. Once all of those people grow in numbers, they appeal to the public for another amensty. They had 3.5 million illegals in 1986, now they've got anywhere from 11 to 20 million illegal aliens.
                The other disaster that is still in place is the concept of "birthright citizenship." This is something that is left over from the Civil War and needs to be changed. It allows that anyone born in the US is automatically a citizen. These people grow up and vote too. The ones allowed to become citizens in 1986 would have been voting for 6 years now.

                Lastly, and I don't know how often this happens--we know it got Lorreta Sanchez elected--illegal aliens do vote. It's been proven.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Genie
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 01:53 PM

Rig: "(1) The government turns it's back and allows millions of illegal immigrants to enter the country, (2)then they make the case that the illegals have been here so long that they ought to make them all legal--they did this in 1986, remember."
That "they" would be the Reagan administration.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Genie
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 02:05 PM

Rig, the flaw in your theory is your ignoring the immediacy of most politicians' wishes and needs. Very few politicians think years or decades down the road; they want to get elected/re-elected now and/or in the next 2 to 6 years.

The path to legal citizenship that Reagan set in motion via his amnesty takes years, for those who are eligible.    You are right, of course, that such amnesty programs will inevitably bring in as many or more illegals to take the place of those who become legal (and will no longer work for peanuts).   But giving amnesty to the illegal immigrants who are now in the US will not make many of those people eligible to vote for 5 to 10 years; meanwhile, it may produce a backlash among the politicians who support that policy.   

I'm not sure the family reunification "rule" really allows many people outside the immediate family to become legal immigrants and citizens. I know of quite a few US citizens whose parents, adult children, etc., are still not citizens even if they are legal residents of the US.
            
The issue of f"birthright citizenship" is, I think, a topic for another thread.

As for your allegations about illegal aliens voting in numbers large enough to elect Loretta Sanchez, what is your proof?

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 02:32 PM

"That "they" would be the Reagan administration."

    Yes, absolutely. Reagan hated anything evironmentally sound.



    "The issue of f"birthright citizenship" is, I think, a topic for another thread.

      I don't. I think it's right at the core of the problem. In fact, I don't see how comprehensive immigation reform could be passed without addressing it.


      "As for your allegations about illegal aliens voting in numbers large enough to elect Loretta Sanchez, what is your proof?"

       The House did a study after the election, but decided it was too late to try to overturn the results.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: artbrooks
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 02:48 PM

Loretta Sanchez eked out an election win in 1996 by less than 1,000 votes. After a recount that determined her margin of victory was 984 votes, Sanchez was seated in the House, but Dornan (her opponent) protested, alleging illegal votes cast. In 1998, the House Oversight Committee dismissed Dornan's challenge after concluding that 750 to 800 votes cast were invalid, still short of Sanchez's 984-win, based on crosschecks with immigration records. House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) said if the number of illegal votes matched Sanchez's winning margin, action would have been taken. A resolution was passed in the House later that month dismissing the challenge.H. Res. 355, Feb. 12, 1998(10)H. Res. 355, Feb. 12, 1998.   More here.

The following relatives may be sponsored by US citizens:   
    * Spouse
    * Children (unmarried and under 21)
    * Sons and daughters (married and/or 21 or over)
    * Parents, if you are 21 or over
    * Siblings, if you are 21 or over
    * Fiance
Greencard holders may sponsor spouse and unmarried children.

Has anyone yet introduced a bill in Congress to change the 14th Amendment to the Constitution to eliminate "birthright" citizenship or has the accepted definition been challenged in US courts? Very unlikely ever to happen.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: artbrooks
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 03:29 PM

Oh yeah...that was #100.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 04:59 PM

"In 1998, the House Oversight Committee dismissed Dornan's challenge after concluding that 750 to 800 votes cast were invalid, still short of Sanchez's 984-win, based on crosschecks with immigration records."

               But still proving illegal aliens cast votes.




    "Has anyone yet introduced a bill in Congress to change the 14th Amendment to the Constitution to eliminate "birthright" citizenship or has the accepted definition been challenged in US courts?"

             Until they do, meaningful immigration reform is dead in the water.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Ebbie
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 05:12 PM

"In 1998, the House Oversight Committee dismissed Dornan's challenge after concluding that 750 to 800 votes cast were invalid, still short of Sanchez's 984-win, based on crosschecks with immigration records."

               But still proving illegal aliens cast votes." Rig

That does not prove anything of the sort, Rig. There are numerous reasons why a ballot is invalidated. Among them:

* Not a resident of that particular state
* A non-reinstated felon
* Not registered to vote
* Not registered to vote in time to vote in that particular election
* Invalid party registration, i.e. more than one party check marked
* A write-in candidate without the required check mark
* A protest vote, i.e. for Mickey Mouse
* An absentee ballot that was not posted in time.
* A badly bungled ballot. If they can't decipher intention, they invalidate the vote(s)
* The person check marked every single square (It has happened)
* The person was visibly - and audibly - intoxicated or under the influence
* The person was ejected from the premises

That's just off the top of my head. I'm sure there are other reasons.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 05:45 PM

But the primary reason was illegal aliens casting votes.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 06:26 PM

I have read every post of yours here Rig, and you display an antihispanic bigotry that its every bit as nasty as historic antisemitism. Go and wash your mouth out with soap and water.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 06:54 PM

Actually, Richard, I'm not anti-anybody. I'm just hoping to save the planet. No sense in wasting soap and water.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Bill D
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 07:02 PM

"...concluding that 750 to 800 votes cast were invalid,..."

Invalid might be for many reasons. It does not prove anything specific about why.

Everyone knows that the driving force behind some of these laws and claims IS racially motivated. Even when a law or precaution is needed, many of those who want it are only vaguely concerned with the general welfare.
What we are concerned with is how to have laws and practices that can't easily be used to harass decent, legal citizens. No one can really think of how to check on those who are already in this country illegally. Cracking down on employers might help...and finding better ways to allow LEGAL temporary workers will also....but many want to come here and 'melt into' the regular population and not even try to go home again. Some are criminals....but many are just poor, out-of-work folks looking for a better life.
   
The fact that this country was built by immigration is only marginally relevant these days....we don't NEED everyone who thinks they might like come here.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Genie
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 07:12 PM

Rig, I know the issue of "anchor babies" and "birthright citizenship" is related, but this thread is really about a law that will require everyone to carry proof of legal resident status at all times.   And it's also about a law that can and probably will be used to disenfranchise a lot of Hispanic-American voters.
That is really a topic unto itself. It's both narrower than and broader than the issue of "birthright citizenship."   Can we please talk about that in its own thread?

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Genie
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 07:17 PM

Rig, even if 984 votes - Sanchez's margin of victory - had been cast illegally (which was not the case), how could anyone know that all of those illegals ballots had been cast for Sanchez?

OTOH, Jan Brewer, when Secretary Of State in AZ, purged the voter registration rolls of about 33% of Hispanic registered voters -- many of them being actually legally eligible to vote.

Subject: New Mexico governor disenfrancises Hispanic voters
From: Genie
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 07:21 PM

Oh, and, Rig, the fact that there were illegally cast votes does not imply that they were all cast by illegal aliens. There are other kinds of illegal votes: double voting by the same individual; underage people voting; people voting who are citizens but not residents of the precinct in which they vote; convicted felons voting when it's not legal; etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 08:09 PM

Genie - I will agree that no one was able to determine why the votes were invalid. I will further argee that the law limits itself to trying to contain illegal immigration in Arizona, but the thread is about Jan Brewer taking steps to save America, whether that was what she intended or not...

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: DougR
Date: 27 Apr 10 - 01:45 AM

You know, my friends, if you don't live in a border state like Arizona, you really don't know very much about what it's like. Most of the sentiment expressed in this thread is critical of those of us who DO live in a border state and support what our governer did. No empathy or attempt at understanding from the critics what it is to live in one. So why don't you just bug off, give it some time and see what happens as a result of this Bill passing into law. Most of you don't know a damn thing about what the law is all about anyway. Mostly we are getting knee-jerk reactions from people who don't have the foggiest idea about what they are taking about. No offense intended.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Genie
Date: 27 Apr 10 - 02:39 AM

Sorry, Doug, but you don't have to live in a border state to be concerned about violation of people's 4th Amendment rights or to question the fairness or constitutionality of this law.

Nobody's denying the magnitude or seriousness of the problem. But you don't remedy one problem by creating thousands of others. You don't solve the problem of illegals by harassing and persecuting all sorts of legal residents.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: artbrooks
Date: 27 Apr 10 - 08:19 AM

Uh huh. Those of us who DO live in border states think this law is unbelievably bad for so many reasons.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 27 Apr 10 - 08:51 AM

You're right, Doug. I was pretty accomodating to immigration until I spent 20 years in California. They absolutely trashed the place, and look at it now.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 27 Apr 10 - 10:02 AM

...wasn't it *Peter* Brewer and *Jan* Stewer?

Nearly Bill Brewer, Jan Stewer (Peter Gurney, Peter Day, Daniel Whiddon, Harry Hawk, Old uncle Tom Cobleigh and all...)

Cheers

DeG

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 27 Apr 10 - 10:19 AM

Then there's that other Brewer!


ONE TOKE OVER THE LINE
Brewer & Shipley


One toke over the line sweet Jesus
One toke over the line
Sittin' downtown in a railway station
One toke over the line

Awaitin' for the train that goes home, sweet Mary
Hopin' that the train is on time
Sittin' downtown in a railway station
One toke over the line

Whoooo do you love, I hope it's me
I've bin a changin', as you can plainly see
I felt the joy and I learned about the pain
that my momma said
If I should choose to make a part of me,
surely strike me dead
Now I'm one toke over the line sweet Jesus
One toke over the line
Sittin' downtown in a railway station
One toke over the line
I'm waitin' for the train that goes home sweet Mary
Hopin' that the train is on time
Sittin' downtown in a railway station
One toke over the line

I bin away a country mile,
Now I'm returnin' showin' off a smile
I met all the girls and loved myself a few
Ended by surprise like everything else I've been through
It opened up my eyes and now I'm
One toke over the line sweet Jesus
One toke over the line
Sittin' downtown in a railway station
Don't you just know I waitin'
for the train that goes home sweet Mary
Hopin' that the train is on time
Sittin' downtown in a railway station
One toke over the line

Don't you just know I waitin'
for the train that goes home sweet Mary
Hopin' that the train is on time
Sittin' downtown in a railway station
One toke over the line

I want to be
One toke over the line sweet Jesus
One toke over the line
Sittin' downtown in a railway station
One toke over the line
Don't you just know I waitin'
for the train that goes home sweet Mary
Hopin' that the train is on time
Sittin' downtown in a railway station
One toke over the line
Sittin' downtown in a railway station
One toke over line
One toke, one toke over the line

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 27 Apr 10 - 04:14 PM

Surely Peter Davy

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: artbrooks
Date: 27 Apr 10 - 08:24 PM

Pima County (Tucson) Sheriff Clarence Dupnik has informed the governor of Arizona that "what she and the legislature has accomplished is morally wrong and a national embarrassment." and that he has no intention of complying with this law.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Ebbie
Date: 27 Apr 10 - 09:19 PM

Oh, wow. Good for him. I guess we'll find out now who has the most clout. If she does, the Sheriff is not long for the job, methinks. If he does? What then? I can easily believe that some in Arizona consider it a "national embarrassment". Rightly so.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 27 Apr 10 - 10:17 PM

Just heard that Utah is going to pass a similar bill. It seems like every time Arizona tightens up immigration enforcement, more illegal flock to Utah.

                Maybe there's hope for the environment yet!

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 27 Apr 10 - 11:40 PM

Border states aren't the only ones with illegal immigrants in them. Any state that has hand-picked agricultural products will have illegal immigrants because the corporations hire them "under the table" for sub-legal wages. Because they can, and because they know the illegals can't complain about it or they'll be deported. If they didn't your food would cost twice what it does now.

It's always sweet when vocal anti-immigration fatcats are caught with illegal household workers. Do as they say, not as they do.

There is no population problem. The US barely has sustainability WITH immigration. No other first-world nation has sustainability. Overpopulation is a third-world problem, and doesn't directly affect the US at all.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 27 Apr 10 - 11:42 PM

Oh, and I meant to ask: how does harrassing brown people save America?

Oh and "Mexican" and "Hispanic" are not races. Spaniards are Europeans. Most Mexicans are either all white, or a mix of white and native North American.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 28 Apr 10 - 12:20 AM

"Overpopulation is a third-world problem, and doesn't directly affect the US at all."

             Unless people from third-world nations come to the US, especially if they come illegally.

Subject: RE: BS: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 28 Apr 10 - 12:32 AM

Unless there's an unprecedented and unlooked-for acceleration in illegal immigration, it's really not a problem. A slowly growing population isn't going to hurt the USA any. It's not growing at anything like the rate it did in the 19th century. And that didn't kill us.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: DougR
Date: 28 Apr 10 - 01:27 AM

"Really not a problem, Mousethief?" Does your state ...oh well, whatever.

DougR

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 28 Apr 10 - 01:43 AM

Does my state's population grow? Hell yes. Between 1980 and now I believe it's just about doubled (fucking Microsoft). What was your point?

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 28 Apr 10 - 08:59 AM

Microsoft is one of the vilest importers of people on the planet.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: DougR
Date: 28 Apr 10 - 12:20 PM

My point was, Mousethief, arguing with someone with your POV is a waste of time.

DougR

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: pdq
Date: 28 Apr 10 - 08:17 PM

"Someone should introduce the old gal to a chollo." ~ Q

Er, well...did you mean cholo? Perhaps cholla?

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 28 Apr 10 - 10:26 PM

She's forging ahead. She's right and she knows it. Now Texas, Arkansas and Utah are drafting similar state enforcement statutes.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 28 Apr 10 - 10:44 PM

My point was, Mousethief, arguing with someone with your POV is a waste of time.

No wonder Teabaggers take guns to town hall meetings instead of reasoned arguments. They can't be bothered to reasonably argue with their opposition, because they have your attitude as displayed in this quote. You are the cause of the breakdown of civility in American political discourse.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 29 Apr 10 - 09:11 AM

"Unless there's an unprecedented and unlooked-for acceleration in illegal immigration, it's really not a problem."


                     There is, and it's destroying the planet. That's the point.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Ebbie
Date: 29 Apr 10 - 10:07 AM

Destroying the planet, Rig? I've heard of 'Eurocentric' but you have a very bad case of usentric.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: pdq
Date: 29 Apr 10 - 10:10 AM

The impact of illigal immigration from Mexico is not equally distrubuted.

People in Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont have seen no change in their states' demographics in 40 years, therefore they feel comfortable labling the people of sourthern California and Arizona "xenophobes" or worse.

It is different for someone who has watched their high school go from the "92nd percentile" scholastically to the "12th percentile" in that same time. The schools in California are now rated below Mississippi and Arkansas, in many cases, and have dropout rates over 50%.

The United States cannot compete with Japan, China, India, and others countries now, and the future is probably worse.

The immigration from distant countries has often been by the best, brightest and most educated of their country. It was once called thet "Brain Drain", where doctors and scientists from India, Indonesia and other countries came here, to the detriment of their native countries.

One problem is that Mexico sends us their misfits, criminals and uneducated. There are no doctors or scientists. There are no wealthy successful (non-criminal) businessmen seeking accross the US border at night or riding the freight trains up from Mexico City.

We need a good dialogue in the United States. We have a real problem here, and hissing and spitting at anyone who says someting you don't want to here gets us nowhere.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 29 Apr 10 - 10:27 AM

pdq - Yes, you are right on all counts. After moving back to Oregon--only one state away--people tell me I sound like a racist when all I do is mention all of the problems the Latino immigrants have caused in California.
             It's beginning to seep into Oregon now, and people are gradually changing their minds.
             The other issue that the Mexican government never seems to want to talk about is all of the money the immigrants send back to Mexico. Any one who ignores that part of the equation seems to me to be oblivious to the economic short comings as well.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: artbrooks
Date: 29 Apr 10 - 03:18 PM

This from the president of the University of Arizona: President Shelton reports: "We have already begun to feel an impact from SB1070. The families of a number of out-of-state students (to date all of them honors students) have told us that they are changing their plans and will be sending their children to universities in other states. This should sadden anyone who cares about attracting the best and brightest students to Arizona."

The boycott begins.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: Genie
Date: 29 Apr 10 - 04:06 PM

Rig: "She's forging ahead. She's right and she knows it. Now Texas, Arkansas and Utah are drafting similar state enforcement statutes."

That doesn't mean they're right, Rig. Drafting and pushing laws like this will shore up the right-wing Republican base and energize them, even if the laws are declared unconstitutional or if they're repealed by the state legislatures.   Jan Brewer and other Republican politicians know that.

Subject: Immigrants: Jan Brewer targets Hispanics
From: Genie
Date: 29 Apr 10 - 04:13 PM

Rig. "The other issue that the Mexican government never seems to want to talk about is all of the money the immigrants send back to Mexico. Any one who ignores that part of the equation seems to me to be oblivious to the economic short comings as well."

Then there's all the money the multinational corporations (often paying little in US taxes) send back to other countries when people in the US fill their pockets buy buying from them.
That's a much bigger money drain than what the Mexican fruit pickers' wages account for.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 29 Apr 10 - 04:45 PM

You might be right, Genie. Any drain at all right now is very discouraging.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: John P
Date: 29 Apr 10 - 05:36 PM

Arizona just passed a law which is in direct violation of the U.S. Constitution, or will be as soon as they arrest their first citizen without probable cause. It doesn't matter what state I live in, I can still see this very clearly. Why can't you Rig and Doug?

Will you still be in support of this law when the lawsuits against police officers and the State of Arizona start piling up?

And just be clear, there is nothing about this law that has anything to do with saving the planet. It in no way deals with environmentalism or over-population. Saying so is some really silly misdirection and changing of the subject.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Don Firth
Date: 29 Apr 10 - 06:24 PM

Eastern Washington is mostly agricultural. How many illegal immigrants make it this far north, I don't know for sure, but there are lots of them. They help get the crops in. This is long hours and dirty, sweaty work, and they get paid by the hundredweight or the bushel basket, so it's slog, slog, slog all day long, usually in dusty, insecticide laden air, just to make a few bucks.

When the season is over, they leave.

Most U. S. citizens, no matter how down and out, simply won't touch work like this.

The real problem is not so much illegal immigrants; it is legal immigrants who become naturalized. They tend to vote about 2 to 1 for Democrats rather than Republicans.

"Ay, there's the rub!"

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 29 Apr 10 - 09:34 PM

"When the season is over, they leave."

         Unless they happen to get pregnant and come fresh in America, then they're here for ever, along with their uncles, aunts, parents, cousins, etc, etc...

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 12:25 AM

Oh God! Can't have those brown people in America forever! Must...preserve...white...supremacy!

Subject: Arizona targets Hispanic-Americans' rights
From: Genie
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 12:33 AM

C'mon, Rig, that myth of the "cousins, aunts & uncles, etc." being allowed in because some immigrant becomes legal has been busted way back in this thread. Those kin who are not immediate family don't have special status.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: Genie
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 12:35 AM

Actually, the more we examine this new AZ law, the more it looks like a giant conspiracy (not very hidden) to line the pockets of those pesky TRIAL LAWYERS - plus various and sundry people who will be paid for rounding up "suspicious looking" people and "processing" the dealings with them in various ways.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 04:13 AM

Wonder if the AZ law enforcement will have quotas on arrests to meet, like Virginia State Troopers do to issue so may speeding tickets per month.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 07:48 AM

Actually, the Arizona law simply restates what is already against the law under federal statute. The problems was, the feds simply refused to enforce it.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: frogprince
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 10:50 AM

" Unless they happen to get pregnant and come fresh in America"
Why would anyone suspect Riginslinger of racism or zenophobia? He would never say anything dehumanizing about any particular group of people.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: DougR
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 04:36 PM

John P: No, I do not know that the Arizona law is unconstitutional. I am not a Constitutional lawyer. Are you?

DougR

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: DougR
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 05:15 PM

Well, it turns out that finding the actual Bill isn't much of a challenge. Simply Google, Arizona SB 1070. There are several refrences to the bill posted by opinion folks but the one you want is the third done listed which is an official state site.

I agree that the most controversial portion of the bill does not read as clearly as it might have, however, as I said in a previous post, the legislature has submitted an amendment to the Bill making the language more understandable. I have not yet heard whether or not the governor has accepted the new amendment. I hope she does.

DougR

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 05:49 PM

I see they are proposing more legislation. Among other things it makes it illegal for a teacher with an accent to teach children who have not yet mastered the English language.

I suppose they fear the teacher might slip and speak Spanish to them.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 07:19 PM

Not at all, mouse. There afraid all of the children will grow up speaking like the teacher. They ought to use tapes from Tom Bodett so all the kids could grow up speaking perfect American.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: John P
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 07:26 PM

Doug, why do you suppose the governors of the surrounding states, the mayor of Phoenix, at least one county sheriff, and a variety of people who are constitutional lawyers are lining up to condemn this law? They all seem to think it is both unconstitutional and racist.

Having read the Constitution fairly recently, I don't have to also be a constitutional lawyer to know when a concept is counter to the plain language of the document.

Try to use your imagination while thinking about the probable results of this law being enforced. Like this: There is little doubt that some cop is going to, at some point, stop a U.S. citizen and arrest them because they don't have their passport (a document that we are not even legally required to have) or a birth certificate (a document which many people don't have and aren't required to have) with them. Just to cover all the bases, what other documents would work for you? As we've noted, it's not impossible to get a driver license without being a citizen and lots of citizens don't have them anyway. I'm pretty sure I could whip up an exact copy of my Social Security card on my home computer.

So here's this citizen in jail for no reason, and without the officer having probable cause. What do you think should happen next? What do think will happen next?

Another scenario: Some Eastern European mafia-like gang regularly imports women to work as prostitutes, runs a protection racket, and deals drugs. The crew are all white folks with sandy, brown, or blond hair, all speak English pretty well, and are all illegal aliens. How many of them do you think are going to be asked for their papers? Unless you're willing to say that this law wasn't enacted to keep Mexicans and Central and South Americans out of Arizona, it seems obvious that these European scumbags are going to get a free pass under this law. This is the racist part. What would you call it?

Another scenario: Open season on illigal immigrants. Who's going to go to the police to report a crime? Wanna get away with rape? Go grab a Mexican girl and there will be no consequences. Want someone's wallet? Beat them up! They won't complain. This is the really, really stupid part.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 07:29 PM

So say a kid has 6 teachers in a day. One of them speaks with an accent. Will they end up speaking just like that one?

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: DougR
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 08:22 PM

John P: If there is no probable cause, there can be no legitimate arrest.

Also, a driver's license is perfectly acceptable as legal identification.

As to why other Governor's, Mayors (including the dumbo who is mayor of Phoenix)objecting to the Bill, I have serious doubts that many of them have read the Bill either.

Have you?

DougR

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: artbrooks
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 08:46 PM

Define "probable cause". The law says A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, WITHOUT A WARRANT, MAY ARREST A PERSON IF THE OFFICER HAS PROBABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE THAT THE PERSON HAS COMMITTED ANY PUBLIC OFFENSE THAT MAKES THE PERSON REMOVABLE FROM THE UNITED STATES. Clearly, being in the US illegally "makes the person removable". The new law signed today (HB 2162) says A law enforcement official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state may not consider race, color or national origin in implementing the requirements of this subsection except to the extent permitted by the United States or Arizona Constitution. A person is presumed to not be an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States if the person provides to the law enforcement officer or agency any of the following:
1. A valid Arizona driver license.
2. A valid Arizona nonoperating identification license.
3. A valid tribal enrollment card or other form of tribal identification.
4. If the entity requires proof of legal presence in the United States before issuance, any valid United States federal, state or local government issued identification. (my underlining)

Perhaps a step in the right direction - I suppose it gets the olive complected, dark haired people off the hook. However, SB 1070 seems to assume that anyone participating in informal street-corner labor pools is illegal, so I guess they are fair game.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: Genie
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 09:28 PM

"They're afraid all of the children will grow up speaking like the teacher."

OMG, we wouldn't want any US citizens to speak with a Mexican accent!   They should all speak like they're from Boston or New York or Miz'sippi, fer cryin' out loud!

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: Genie
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 09:37 PM

Art, it still sounds like anyone, including citizens, could be in big trouble (at least in for a lot of harrassment and possible lost of income) if a cop stopped them and they didn't happen to have their ID on them.    Unless the law ends up with some provision to allow someone a day or two to produce such ID, it would mean it's risky to go anywhere, even without driving, if your ID had been lost or stolen and you hadn't got a replacement yet.

I think a big issue is whether law enforcement can cart you off to jail just for not happening to have your ID on you at the time they "make legal contact" with you.   

If you are a passenger in the car of someone who is pulled over for having a tail light out, is the officer entitled (or required) to ask for your proof of legal resident status?

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 09:42 PM

If an officer pulls you over and you end up in jail, and he says he had "probable cause" and you say he didn't, whom is the judge going to believe? This gives outrageous uncheckable powers to potentially racist cops.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 09:54 PM

"Doug, why do you suppose the governors of the surrounding states, the mayor of Phoenix, at least one county sheriff, and a variety of people who are constitutional lawyers are lining up to condemn this law?"

             Because they're stupid!

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 09:57 PM

"OMG, we wouldn't want any US citizens to speak with a Mexican accent!"

                The officials in Arizona are simpy looking out for the children. If they grew up speaking like Cheech and Chong, that would be probable cause to pull them over.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 10:01 PM

Rig: If they grew up speaking like Cheech and Chong, that would be probable cause to pull them over.

This is the fucked-up mindset that this law promotes and encourages and rewards. If you don't sound and look like me, you must be an illegal alien.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 10:20 PM

Wow! I'd sure hate to look and sound like you.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: Genie
Date: 01 May 10 - 12:47 AM

And if they end up sounding like Fran Drescher on "The Nanny," this is a good thing? ; )

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 01 May 10 - 12:48 AM

How do you know what I look like? What a stupid thing to say.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: Genie
Date: 01 May 10 - 12:49 AM

I say if they end up pronouncin "nuclear" as "nucular," they are obviously not native English speakers and should, of course, be locked up.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 01 May 10 - 12:53 AM

Nobody with a Texas drawl should be allowed to even enter a school, let alone teach in it. They might teach the children to use the same substandard English they do. All children must sound like Sarah Palin.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: Genie
Date: 01 May 10 - 12:59 AM

Yew betcha, Alex!

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: LadyJean
Date: 01 May 10 - 01:27 AM

All I know is there is going to be hell to pay when some of the wealthier families in Arizona discover their maids are about to be deported. I would not want to be Ms. Brewer when that happens.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: DougR
Date: 01 May 10 - 01:44 AM

I think there may be a simple solution to this whole illegal immigration problem. Arizona should provide a free bus ticket to all the states/countries you "aginers" live in. You can take care of their health problems, the crime that results from the illegal criminals, the financial cost of educating children who cannot speak English. They should be provided with all of the wonderful things that you will provide them when they arrive at their new locations, and Arizona, perhaps, will become a normal great place to live as it was before the illegal immigration problem became the serious problem that it has. I know, because I have lived in this marvelous state for over half a century.

How about that? Gonna put out the welcome mat?

DougR

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 01 May 10 - 07:09 AM

People who haven't lived there, Doug, just couldn't know. I've been away from it for a few years, and it's gotten a lot worse in that time. When California went broke, folks began to pay more attention. Now, with these things taking place in Arizona, it's beginning to look like a last stand.

If it isn't stopped now, America is well on its way to third world status.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: John P
Date: 01 May 10 - 07:30 AM

Hey Doug and Rig: You haven't said anything to answer any of the very valid concerns many people have about this law. Saying "you don't live here so you don't get to have a say" ignores the fact that we all live under the same Constitution. Rig's response to the fact that all the surrounding governors, some police chiefs, and the mayor of Phoenix condemn this law is to say "because they are stupid". Sorry, that response is, well, stupid.

Please come up with something substantive to say. You could start by giving your reasoning why the three ugly scenarios I laid out earlier wouldn't be common.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 01 May 10 - 11:14 AM

It's like when you used to talk to guys coming back from Vietnam, John P. If you haven't been there, there's no way to explain it.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: Genie
Date: 01 May 10 - 05:16 PM

Rig and Doug, to acknowledge that there are real problems with illegal immigration does not mean that this new Arizona law is either a good or a constitutional solution.

If I have cancer, that doesn't mean that cutting off both my legs is a wise course of treatment.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 01 May 10 - 07:58 PM

No, but cutting out the cancer will usually fix it. That's all Arizona is trying to do!

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: Genie
Date: 01 May 10 - 09:29 PM

That may be their intent, Rig, but that's not the operation they're implementing.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 01 May 10 - 10:06 PM

Of course it is. The cancer is the illegal immigrants and they're trying to cut it out.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Ebbie
Date: 01 May 10 - 10:22 PM

Rig, I have a serious question for you: If everyone of these illegal immigrants were to return home and in due time come back to the US legally, would you then have no quarrel with them?

I suspect that you would then move on, probably on the basis of the large families you think they will bring along, to object to the numbers of people the US is allowing in. (Even though it is a demonstrable fact that family size tends to decrease as people learn that life is easier with fewer children).

Ideally, would you like this country to be all one color?

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: Genie
Date: 02 May 10 - 12:54 AM

They're trying to cut out the illegal immigrants by harassing, intimidating, and persecuting a whole lot of legal immigrants and US citizens in the process.

I also think a major part of the goal is to prevent a lot of Hispanics from exercizing their legal right to vote.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: John P
Date: 02 May 10 - 06:51 AM

Sorry, Rig. Saying "you have to be there" doesn't cut it either. The same Constitution applies, and common sense doesn't change from one state to the next.

Can you wrap your head around the idea that a LOT of very intelligent, very patriotic people know that our immigration situation is a mess and still think this law is worse than the situation it's trying to fix?

If you can do that, then move on to trying to imagine why they think it's a bad idea.

If you manage to get that far, you could try telling us how the three scenarios I laid out earlier won't happen.

What I'm saying is that if you're going to make the kind of statements you've made here, you need to defend them from logical challenges with some sort of logical answer. Or not, but then you lose all credibility as someone we should pay any attention to.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 02 May 10 - 09:04 AM

"I suspect that you would then move on, probably on the basis of the large families you think they will bring along..."

Yes, since the primary problem here is too many people, I would object to large families. But if they're legal there are ways to deal with that. Social encouragement, change the tax code so child deductions stop after two children, and etc.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 02 May 10 - 09:06 AM

"I also think a major part of the goal is to prevent a lot of Hispanics from exercizing their legal right to vote."

          Not really. I'd like to see and end to "birthrigh citizenship," so there'd be fewer legal Hispanics, but a citizen has the right to vote. I wouldn't quibble with that.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 02 May 10 - 09:10 AM

"Can you wrap your head around the idea that a LOT of very intelligent, very patriotic people know that our immigration situation is a mess and still think this law is worse than the situation it's trying to fix?"

       I believe there are intelligent people who think that way. I also think they are very misinformed. They haven't got to a supermarket, for instance, and been told to "go back to Europe." And they really don't understand the concept of the Nation of Aztlan.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Ebbie
Date: 02 May 10 - 10:16 AM

I believe there are intelligent people who think that way *that the current law is worse than the immigration mess we have Eb) I also think they are very misinformed. They haven't got to a supermarket, for instance, and been told to "go back to Europe."

I understand that there are people in these United States who do snarl such stuff. I have a friend from Poland who has been told that, notwithstanding that she's been a citizen for 15 years.

But, Rig, I don't understand your objecting to that phrase- from your stance on immigrants, you could be one of the people snarling.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 02 May 10 - 01:35 PM

Ebbie - I think you would be well served to investigate that portion of the recent policies put forward by the Tucson School District. Why to you suppose they object to teachers advocating the overthrow of the US government?
          It's because that's exactly what they do advocte.
          During the recession of the early 1990's, not being able to find anything for my company to do--largely because of affirmative action--I was compelled to work as a substitute high school teacher in Central California. I discovered that the Hispanic teachers on the district's staff do, in fact, advocate the overthrow of the government, and they relate these concepts to their students.

          They really think they are taking back what was rightfully theirs in the first place, so they feel justified in all of this, but many 10th and 12th generation European-and-African-Americans disagree with them.

          It all goes back to the concept of Aztlan. They think they can come over in large enough numbers, have enough babies on American soil, and take over control of Congressional districts, and eventually Senate seats until they own the place. That's really what a lot of them think. Everyone of them thought that that I talked to. Some of us would rather not see that happen.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: artbrooks
Date: 02 May 10 - 01:57 PM

I suspect that your colleagues were putting on the Anglo sub. Aztlan has about as much currency in the Hispanic population - or even the Mexican-American population, which is a very different thing - as does Ecotopia or Free Idaho among other groups.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: pdq
Date: 02 May 10 - 02:02 PM

"They really think they are taking back what was rightfully theirs in the first place..."

That is also what the people of Mexico are taught. It is the "party line" in the news media, entertainment and in schools.

Fact is that we purchased the last piece of land that now constitutes the southern borders of Arizona and New Mexico. Santa Anna himself sighned the treaty, I believe.

At that time the Anglos were a minority in both Texas and California, but the people of those states despised the Mexican government and and the people were the ones who fought for freedom from Mexican rule. They won, many of us assumed, until recently.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 02 May 10 - 03:14 PM

Yes, that's the way it is, pdq. And they've been teaching it in American schools as well for quite some time.

          Artbrooks needs to get out more.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 02 May 10 - 04:09 PM

Yes, the right of conquest is absolute and 100% moral. The Taliban now owns lower Manhattan.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Ebbie
Date: 02 May 10 - 05:39 PM

How the US acquired Texas and New Mexico is of the same nature as Israel reclaiming parts of Palestine, how South African Boers taking over the government there and perhaps how the UK planted its foot in Ireland.

Most of these things happened a long time ago, generations ago. Does that mean that it somehow became *right*?

I have frequently noticed that when something is left behind long enough, it becomes an "artifact", and removal is no longer allowable.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 02 May 10 - 05:58 PM

"The Taliban now owns lower Manhattan."

             I didn't know the Taliban had any interest in owning lower Manhattan.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 02 May 10 - 06:02 PM

"Most of these things happened a long time ago, generations ago. Does that mean that it somehow became *right*?"

       The people who present themselves as "native Americans" now took it away from someboyd else. Usually the folks who claim to be "right" are on the winning side. Some of us don't want to lose.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: artbrooks
Date: 02 May 10 - 06:10 PM

Oh, I get out enough that I don't have much time for conspiracy theories.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: DougR
Date: 02 May 10 - 06:54 PM

Ebbie: Even though it was not addressed to me, I will answer the question you posed to Rig. You ask him if he would object if the illegals living in this country voluntarily left, applied for citizenship and then returned to the U.S. I would have no objection to that at all regardless of their country of origin. This whole argument is NOT against legal immigration, it's illegal entry.

I believe I posed this question before but don't recall getting any replies:

1. Do you oppose existing federal immigration laws?
An additional question:
2. If you do, what is the basis for your objection?

DougR

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Ebbie
Date: 02 May 10 - 07:13 PM

I haven't studied existing federal law regarding illegal immigration, Doug. I could do so, obviously.

My thinking has always been that if the US is actually serious about keeping illegal migrants out, they need to attack the source.

Immigrants, especially illegal ones, come here for jobs and living conditions they can't find at home. If they cannot find jobs and housing is not available to them, the stream will dry up.

So, what I'm saying is that if we are serious about keeping them out, we have to level heavy penalties on any corporation that is found to hire and harbor illegal aliens. First time, a hefty fine. Second time, closure for a month. Third time, jail for the CEOs of the company AND closure of the company.

It won't happen. We present an official stance- but there are segments of society and of factories and of industrial farming that would fight any such implementation tooth and nail.

We know that. So we pretend that we are working as best we can to reach the desired goal but we are actually only persecuting the victims.

But thanks for asking.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 02 May 10 - 08:07 PM

I don't know anyone who is against illegal immigration who doesn't agree that preventing employers from hiring them is not the best way to do it. I've said it before: throw the board of directors of Tyson Foods in jail today and illegal immigration will stop tomorrow.

Subject: Immigrants: Jan Brewer targets Hispanic voters
From: Genie
Date: 02 May 10 - 08:26 PM

Riginslinger - " I'd like to see and end to "birthrigh citizenship," so there'd be fewer legal Hispanics, but a citizen has the right to vote. I wouldn't quibble with that."

Maybe you wouldn't, Rig, but a major election strategy on the part of the Republican party in areas where voters tend overwhelmingly to vote Democratic has been (and continues to be) to drive down the numbers of people voting.    Republican strategists have, in fact, been pretty open about that; in general, the larger the turnout for an election, the better it is for the Republicans, since there are more low-income and minority voters than there are middle-and-upper-income whites. Purging voter rolls in a manner like ocean trawl-netting -- where many legal voters are purged along with the possibly non-legal ones -- has been used in a number of locations (most notably in Florida in 2000).   But other measures such as putting too few voting machines in lower-income or minority precincts, overuse of "challenges" at the polls to intimidate would-be voters and make the wait in line longer for everyone, have a similar effect.   

It's quite understandable that a party would prefer it if people who tended to vote for some other party would stay home and not vote.    But if that goal is pursued by unreasonable purging of voter rolls close to an election (too late for those unjustly purged to rectify the situation) or by excessive an selective "challenges" to minority voters, etc., it's not ethical or fair.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Ebbie
Date: 02 May 10 - 08:37 PM

Rig, mind you, I'm not advocating such methods- I am only saying that if aer serious about keeping illegal immigrants out that is the only way to do it.

I have enough humanity, *religion*, if you will, in me that I personally would vote for, work for, borderless countries. In my opinion, borders are manmade and have nothing to do with what is best for humanity itself. This is the main reason I have such a hard time with your stance; you seem to be advocating the necessity of cutting adrift all other countries in the name of allowing for a good life in your own country. I see that as wrong.

If we can say and mean it, that the mark of a people is how it treats the least among them then the concept needs to be expanded to say: The mark of a world is how it treats the least among them. Because we are all connected, we are brothers, we are ONE.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: artbrooks
Date: 02 May 10 - 09:10 PM

200...but why?

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 02 May 10 - 09:35 PM

The people who present themselves as "native Americans" now took it away from someboyd else.

Who, the squirrels? Maybe I'm not up on current research, but I've never heard that there were any people here before the people we call "Native Americans" wandered through Sarah Palin's backyard and down into the Americas from Asia.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: pdq
Date: 02 May 10 - 09:38 PM

"...I personally would vote for, work for, borderless countries..." ~ Ebbie

Great. So please give your Social Security benefits to the new arrivals.

Leave mine alone, I will be needing them. Besides, I paid into the system, as demanded by FDR, and that money is mine. You should have absolutely nothing to do with the matter.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 02 May 10 - 09:43 PM

What you paid in is long gone, and if you live long in retirement (and I hope you do), the money you draw out will be many times what you put in. The idea that you put money into a box and then draw the exact same money out of the same box when you retire is nonsense. Few people die before they receive more than they put in.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: pdq
Date: 02 May 10 - 09:51 PM

"...if you live long in retirement (and I hope you do)..."

I choose to accept that as a sort of peace offering.

Did you know that a few months ago, the federal government started taking in less in Social Security benefits than it paid out?

We were told ten years ago that the SS fund would not support itself by 2013, but the depression/recession has pushed it forward a few years.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 02 May 10 - 09:56 PM

Of course if the government had been banking the FICA $$ all along and not using them to bankroll the rest of the federal budget, SS would not be in the red. Of course the federal debt would be significantly worse.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 03 May 10 - 01:14 AM

"...the people we call "Native Americans" wandered through Sarah Palin's backyard and down into the Americas from Asia."

             Actually, those were the later arrivals. Recent discoveries have found earlier folks.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: DougR
Date: 03 May 10 - 01:45 AM

Ebbie: So you are actually for open borders? Are you not at all concerned that our enemy, the Islamic Terrorists, would love that?

DougR

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: GUEST,Dani
Date: 03 May 10 - 01:47 AM

I'm probably throwing gas on the fire, but it's late, and I have food poisoning so I can sleep, and I'm bored between bouts of nausea. Perfect.

So, I want to paraphrase a line I heard on Peter Segal's "Wait Wait, Don't Tell Me" this weekend:

"sure, they can't profile based on the color of your skin, or your accent. Maybe by your clothes! Like if you're wearing a t-shirt that says, "my mother smuggled me across the Sonoran Desert, and all I got was this this t-shirt and a job you won't do!"

I am not in favor of illegal immigration in any way, shape or form. Nobody comes out smelling like a rose.

But face the facts, folks. We have plenty of unemployed, and under-employed people, many collecting state (and federal!) benefits, complaining of a lack of opportunities, who think it is beneath them to scrub our toilets, cut our grass, wash our dishes, pick our sweet potatoes, care for our babies. But it's ok to look the other way daily as hungry, tired immigrants (legal AND illegal) do these jobs everywhere you look (at least in MY non-border state).

Dani

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 03 May 10 - 01:52 AM

Actually, those were the later arrivals. Recent discoveries have found earlier folks.

Can you point me to something I can read, that isn't on a tin-foil-hat website? (No offense)

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 03 May 10 - 07:52 AM

Aside from the Kennewick remains, which are well documented and have been all over the news, there is the site I'll post below and many others. All you have to do is Google -- Pre-Clovis and you'll find another one.
         Only a week or so ago they discovered remains in Greenland that they've been able to conclude came from Siberia.

http://www.matrixbookstore.biz/preclovis.htm


       Many of us find it distressing that they are still teaching an outdated history in the public schools.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 03 May 10 - 07:58 AM

"I have enough humanity, *religion*, if you will, in me that I personally would vote for, work for, borderless countries."

       I guess people with religion are in a position that they don't have to worry about the destrcution of this planet because they have a better place to go to. That probably the basic difference between those of us who resist runaway population growth, and those who don't care.

       On the American side you have people with college degrees, advanced degress, and post-graduate degrees telling us that population growth is a problem, and on the other side you have people who are in the grip of Catholic dogma, who are controlled by Hispanic politicians on both sides of the border with only their own self promotion in mind.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: artbrooks
Date: 03 May 10 - 08:21 AM

"On the American side you have people with college degrees, advanced degress, and post-graduate degrees telling us that population growth is a problem, and on the other side you have people who are in the grip of Catholic dogma, who are controlled by Hispanic politicians on both sides of the border with only their own self promotion in mind.

Uh huh. Been to Utah lately? Lots of blond-haired, blue-eyed families with eight kids.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 03 May 10 - 08:42 AM

If your making the point that following religious dogma is a bad idea, Art, you won't get any objection out of me.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: pdq
Date: 03 May 10 - 01:16 PM

Between about 1962 and 1972, there was a great deal of discussion about pollution, water scarcity, resource depletion and overpopulation.

The Great American Middle Class responded and, as a nation, brought the goal of large families into disfavor.

By 1972, the population growth from native-born US'ians reached the magic "zero population growth". The count was 205 million then.

With 315 million and growing fast, the last 110 million people are the product of immigration. Our Great Central Valley in California has been paving-over farm land to make roads and houses. In the future, the US will be a net importer of food, and the produce will be grown under Third World working conditions and have poor sanitation, as well as pesticde residue from chemicals that are no longer used in this country.

Again, I don't see that we have made any progress or won many battles (in this country) in the last 50 years.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 03 May 10 - 01:48 PM

It's funny, ain't it pdq, how folks just don't want to let all them facts get in the way of their preconceived notions.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: pdq
Date: 03 May 10 - 02:00 PM

Also, Rigs, far too many people say something like "we all want immigration reform, but this is the wrong way..." when they really mean "I think the open borders are just fine and I will say and do anything I have to if you try to close them".

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 03 May 10 - 02:10 PM

Yet the folks who scream the loudest when somebody suggest cracking down on illegal immigration, are the same ones who are always making such a fuss about the environment.

             It don't make a lick a' sense!

Subject: Immigrants: Jan Brewer targets Hispanic-Americans
From: Genie
Date: 03 May 10 - 02:47 PM

Rig, I'll bet a lot of those who are screaming loudest about illegal immigrants and how they destroy our environment are among the majority Americans who
1) contribute to rampant environmental devastation via overconsumption (plus not reusing or recycling),
2) insist on buying low-cost produce (picked by immigrants who will work for slave wages) or goods manufactured in 3rd world countries that protect neither workers' rights nor the environment,
or both.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 03 May 10 - 03:00 PM

I would assume from that, Genie, that you think left wing liberals who champion the cause of "open boarders" simply don't care about the environment, because you just just can't have it both ways.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: Genie
Date: 03 May 10 - 04:42 PM

Rig, the Mudcat softward just ate my reply.

But in a nutshell, I don't know many people, liberals or otherwise, who advocate "open borders."   (Maybe in an ideal world, but not in one where there are so many corrupt, non-democratic governments. It's not practical, even if we Americans were willing to lower our standard of living substantially.)

The liberals I know are, for the most part, opposed to NAFTA, CAFTA, GATT, and the WTO. Opposed to American jobs being shipped overseas to be done in countries where neither workers nor the environment are valued or protected. In favor of changing our tax laws to disincentivize companies from locating their HQ off shore. In favor of "protectionist" tariffs
for imported products that can and used to be made in the US. In favor of workers' rights to unionize - which in itself makes it harder and/or less profitable for employers to hire illegals.   And in favor of people in countries like Mexico fighting (e.g., voting) to improve their own government instead of just fleeing north.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Ebbie
Date: 03 May 10 - 05:20 PM

Fact is that we purchased the last piece of land that now constitutes the southern borders of Arizona and New Mexico." pdq

Uh huh. How much did we pay them?

It is possible that 'borderless' countries has an official meaning that is different from how I mean it.

The way I am using it does not mean that I don't think there should be laws, rules, regulations, sanctions and penalties governing infractions. I think the European experiment needs a lot of bugs removed but it is a start in the right direction.

"Are you not at all concerned that our enemy, the Islamic Terrorists, would love that?" DougR

Has it occurred to you that just perhaps the "Islamic Terrorists" would lose their steam if there was a more level playing field? Or perhaps you think they are just naturally born that murderous?

Or do you mean to tell me that Islamic Terrorists are flocking into the countries of the European Union and overwhelming their society?

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 03 May 10 - 05:25 PM

Ebbie and Genie - You both make a number of valid points. Still, looking at the entire situation, both in the Americas and world wide, I think unchecked human population growth has to be dealt with before you can make any meaningful headway on most environmental issues.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: Genie
Date: 03 May 10 - 05:30 PM

Rig, I agree that unchecked human population growth is a major problem - one that may, in fact, have catastrophic effects on both human and other animal populations.

It's a very difficult phenomenon to curb without severely restricting human rights - something that we Americans and people in most developed countries are rightly reluctant to do.   

I don't see that problem and the immigrant population as that closely tied though. India and China account for a lot more of the world's overpopulation than Mexico does.

Plus, Americans consume the world's resources far out of proportion to our numbers.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 03 May 10 - 06:51 PM

Those are good points, Genie, and I think a well funded campaign to reduce American consumption would be a good idea. Unfortunately, I don't see something like that being proposed by either major party. We'll have to find some other way to do it.

            As far as India and China--I heard in the news last week that China has taken over as the worlds largest CO2 producer, and India is rapidly catching up.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 03 May 10 - 07:39 PM

And then there's this:



http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/05/03/frum.immigration.education/index.html?section=cnn_latest

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 03 May 10 - 08:35 PM

The way to check population growth is to educate women. Globally, the more education women have, the fewer children they have.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: GUEST,Dani
Date: 03 May 10 - 09:12 PM

Amen, Mousethief.

And thanks for the two cents, Ebbie. Good to see your common sense here.

I would like to know, Rig, what your opinion is of the Federal programs that literally truck low-wage workers here to care for/pick crops on a seasonal basis, in a state where the unemployment rate is, at last check, 11%.

Do you agree that there's a bit of a disconnect between the standard of living we expect, and the one we're willing to work for?

Dani

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 03 May 10 - 09:36 PM

"Rig, what your opinion is of the Federal programs that literally truck low-wage workers here to care for/pick crops on a seasonal basis, in a state where the unemployment rate is, at last check, 11%."

          I agree, Dani. That's an icredibly bad idea.



      "Do you agree that there's a bit of a disconnect between the standard of living we expect, and the one we're willing to work for?"

          Well, I don't know, Dani. Lloy Blankfein's income is through the roof, and I doubt if he's ever worked a day in his life. But the average American's standard of living would be much, much higher if he/she wasn't supporting a bunch of illegal aliens.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: DougR
Date: 04 May 10 - 01:05 AM

Ebbie: your reply to my question regarding the danger of open borders, and how delighted Islamic Terrorists would be if we had them, illustrates the typical liberal's point of view about the danger of war we are in with Islamic terrorists. If we were just nicer to them they would go away. What a dangerous, stupid, irresponsible point of view.

DougR

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: DougR
Date: 04 May 10 - 01:41 AM

Unfortunately, Ebbie, I fear you reflect the attitude of the current Obama administration. God help us all.

DougR

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 04 May 10 - 07:06 AM

I'm going to try this again:


Washington (CNN) -- When Arizona police ask suspected illegal immigrants for IDs, they are protecting your grandchildren's economic future.

Three years ago, ETS -- the people who administer the SAT -- released an alarming study. It combined information on test scores with demographic trends to predict that the U.S. work force of 2030 would be less literate, less skilled and worse paid than the U.S. work force of 1990.

ETS reported: "[B]y 2030 the average levels of literacy and numeracy in the working-age population will have decreased by about 5 percent while inequality will have increased by about 7 percent. Put crudely, over the next 25 years or so, as better-educated individuals leave the work force they will be replaced by those who, on average, have lower levels of education and skill. Over this same period, nearly half of the projected job growth will be concentrated in occupations associated with higher education and skill levels. This means that tens of millions more of our students and adults will be less able to qualify for higher-paying jobs."

Why?

One word: Immigration.

Since 1970, America's largest source of immigrants has been Latin America, especially Mexico. More than half of these Latino immigrants lack a high school diploma.

Compare the U.S. experience with Canada's. More than half of all immigrants to Canada possess a university degree. Half of all Canada's Ph.D.s are foreign-born.

Why does America choose poorly educated immigrants? The short answer: America does not choose them. They choose themselves.

In the last decade, half of all the immigrants to the United States arrived illegally. Even many of the legal arrivals gained entry courtesy of relatives who originally slipped into the country against the law, then somehow regularized themselves.

By contrast, Canada (a country of 1/10 the U.S. population that takes proportionately many more immigrants than the United States) allows almost no illegal immigration.

The result: While immigration has enhanced the average skill level of the Canadian population, it has detracted from the average skill level of the U.S. population.

Many Americans carry in their minds a family memory of upward mobility, from great-grandpa stepping off the boat at Ellis Island to a present generation of professionals and technology workers. This story no longer holds true for the largest single U.S. immigrant group, Mexican-Americans.

Stephen Trejo and Jeffrey Groger studied the intergenerational progress of Mexican-American immigrants in their scholarly work, "Falling Behind or Moving Up?"

They discovered that third-generation Mexican-Americans were no more likely to finish high school than second-generation Mexican-Americans. Fourth-generation Mexican-Americans did no better than third.

If these results continue to hold, the low skills of yesterday's illegal immigrant will negatively shape the U.S. work force into the 22nd century.

The failure to enforce the immigration laws in the 1990s and 2000s means that the U.S. today has more poorly skilled workers, more poverty and more workers without health insurance than it would have generated by itself.

Arizona's new law against illegal immigration can do only so much to address the problem:

•The law does not reach into the workplace, which is where enforcement will have most effect.

• It is not sufficiently neutral: Much better to check the work eligibility of all job applicants than to screen suspicious people at traffic stops.

• It is easily evaded by crossing into another state for work.

Yet there is good reason to expect that effective reduction of illegal work opportunities will slow the illegal immigration flow. The Center for Immigration Studies estimates the recession has induced a decline of 1.7 million in the illegal population, as some illegals have opted to return home and potential illegals have decided against trying to enter. Effective enforcement could have further effect.

At a minimum, it seems irresponsible for political leaders in Washington to speculate about amnesty before enforcement has had its full effect. Amnesty talk invites more illegal immigration, by raising hopes that those who can slip into the country in the next months will be allowed to stay.

Arizona's law offsets that loose talk. The law may expose Arizona's leaders to criticism. But it is at least a beginning contribution to a stronger American work force and a wealthier American future.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: artbrooks
Date: 04 May 10 - 08:10 AM

It's an opinion piece, Rig. He is, as you are, entitled to have one.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 04 May 10 - 08:30 AM

It is fact, after fact, after fact, and well documented.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Sawzaw
Date: 04 May 10 - 11:44 AM

How many states have a policy that says racial profiling is illegal, and will not be tolerated?

Any state that does not is surely morally wrong.

Subject: Jan Brewer takes step to enslave Hispanics
From: Genie
Date: 04 May 10 - 01:14 PM

Rig, that CNN piece seems conveniently to ignore many other factors contributing to the decline in the USA's academic standards and achievement. ("No Child Left Behind," anyone?
How about increasing cuts in funding of schools because of the "Taxed Enough Already" / "Get The Government Off Our Backs" mentality?   And were factors like the increasing use of entertainment media taken into account?)

I know when I worked as an academic in Canada a while back, Canada was actively recruiting highly educated people to become "landed immigrants" (which required already having a job offer or a certain amount of money) by offering them tax-exempt status. (They dropped that latter offer not long afterwards because the 'reverse brain drain' had succeeded beyond their expectations.)    It's no surprise that when a country seeks out high income or highly skilled immigrants it tends to raise the level of the population at large.    But Canada does not have a large nation on its boarders with millions of people desperate to emigrate due to poverty.
(Not yet, anyway.)

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Ebbie
Date: 04 May 10 - 01:16 PM

Hey, now Genie is doing it! The word is 'borders'. lol

Subject: Immigrants: Arizona law targets Hispanics
From: Genie
Date: 04 May 10 - 01:21 PM

Alex and Dani, you're right that educating women is an important step in curbing the runaway growth of the world's population.   But I don't think that's enough if we want to reverse the trend before a lot more environmental devastation occurs.

Attitudes and laws also need to be changed about:
1) men's behavior toward and rights concerning women (e.g., their wives)
and
2) the use of contraception.

If women are educated but societies still condone or even encourage rape and discourage or outlaw the use of contraceptives, a lot of unwanted pregnancies will still occur.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 04 May 10 - 03:21 PM

"But Canada does not have a large nation on its boarders with millions of people desperate to emigrate due to poverty."

         Exactly!



          The article didn't mention those elements of education reversals because it was written to concentrate on the issue of how immigration affects education. You're right about those things, of course, but correcting them is hampered by a continual influx of uneducated immigrants who don't speak the primary language.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: Genie
Date: 04 May 10 - 04:57 PM

Good grief, Rig, now you've got ME misspelling "borders" too! (Monkey see, monkey do, I guess.) LOL

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: Genie
Date: 04 May 10 - 05:04 PM

Rig: "The article didn't mention those elements of education reversals because it was written to concentrate on the issue of how immigration affects education. You're right about those things, of course, but correcting them is hampered by a continual influx of uneducated immigrants who don't speak the primary language."

The article didn't just "focus" on the illegal immigration issue, it singled that out as the major cause.

BTW, Canada is officially bilingual and has a whole province where English is not the primary language.   Plus both Canada and the US have millions of legal immigrants whose English (and/or French) is minimal or virtually nonexistent when they take up residency here. They may speak only Russian, Viet Namese, Mandarin, or some other language, and many of them manage to run or work for businesses pretty successfully in spite of that - as do many people who are fluent only in Spanish.

Kids in Europe often grow up speaking and understanding several different languages, yet they generally have higher academic achievement than US kids do in recent years.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 04 May 10 - 05:40 PM

The article makes the point that illegal immigration is a major cause of failing schools in areas that have to deal with it.

            It makes it very clear to me that this is a major reason why people in Canada and in northern states have a different general attitude on illegal immigration. If you have a kid in school, he/she will make very likely not make very good progress in border state schools for the very reason the article cites. That's probably the most devastating part of it for a lot of us.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Ebbie
Date: 04 May 10 - 05:53 PM

Surely just about every country experiences the same problem in a microcosmic way: people leave the countryside and move into the cities where jobs are more plentiful, more potential friends and mates, and the future looks brighter. Legalities don't enter into it nor do human rights, it is enough that they are human beings and in need.

You are among the people in the city complaining about all those country bumpkins coming in, crowding your neighborhood, making available housing scarce and more expensive and taking your jobs.

(I am speaking to Rig. Obviously.)

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 04 May 10 - 06:10 PM

"people leave the countryside and move into the cities where jobs are more plentiful, more potential friends and mates, and the future looks brighter."

       People from another country, who speak a different language, however, puts another spin on it. Add to that, the inablility of native kids to learn because the intruders are there, and the growing population explosion, and you end up with a whole bunch of pissed off folks.

       Another thing that adds to it is the schools are financed. If you're a property owner in Arizona, you're paying property taxes to educate a bunch of kids who shouldn't even be here.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 05 May 10 - 07:04 AM

"Alex and Dani, you're right that educating women is an important step in curbing the runaway growth of the world's population.   But I don't think that's enough if we want to reverse the trend before a lot more environmental devastation occurs."

            The best thing to do, and the most immediate, is to get contol of human migration.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Wesley S
Date: 05 May 10 - 12:12 PM

Too funny for words. The next Robert Rodriguez movie is called "Machete". Hard to believe it was filmed a year ago. Here's the trailer. Rig - don't watch this please - it's your worst nightmare come true. And it stars Danny Trejo, Robert De Niro, Jeff Fahey, Michelle Rodriguez, Jessica Alba, Cheech Marin, Don Johnson, Rose McGowan, Steven Seagal, Lindsay Lohan

Happy Cinco De Mayo



Machete - the Movie

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 05 May 10 - 12:35 PM

Wow! It looks like the good people of Arizona should have acted sooner.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Wesley S
Date: 05 May 10 - 12:48 PM

Just keep telling yourself - "it's only a movie......"

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 05 May 10 - 01:12 PM

No, Wesley, I know that it's real. I've experienced it first hand.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Wesley S
Date: 05 May 10 - 02:46 PM

Suuuure you have......

Just don't expect me to wait for the details.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: pdq
Date: 05 May 10 - 05:50 PM

No matter what you think of Ted Nugent, he is one hellava rock guitar player and he says what he thinks...

"By Ted Nugent

In the absence of any real border enforcement by Fedzilla and after the emergency of the recent murder of rancher Robert Krentz, Arizonans rightfully took matters into their own hands and passed a law allowing Arizona cops to demand immigration papers from people they stop.

Good for Arizona. Other states, especially border states, should follow its lead. In short, Arizona's new law makes it a crime to be in Arizona illegally. It's 2010 - Good morning, America! Those people who can't produce documentation proving they are in the country legally can be jailed up to six months and fined $2,500.

Of course, the pro-illegal-immigration crowd is going berserk that Arizona has done such a common-sense thing. These Democratic numskulls see any immigration reform measures that seek to protect our border as a threat to their future political base. You would have to be deaf, dumb and blind not to see that the grand plan of the Democrats is to entrap illegal immigrants by giving them legal status and then enslave and destroy them with numerous Fedzilla handouts and programs.

Pro-illegal-immigration weasels are protesting and yammering that this new law will lead to profiling. President Obama has weighed in and asked the Justice Department to review Arizona's new law to see if it is legal.

Unbelievably, while our borders are largely open and being overrun, the Obama administration recently lectured Israel about expanding its communities just a few feet on land that arguably is its to expand upon.

While I applaud Arizona for its bold and brave new law, putting illegals in jail is the wrong move. That costs too much. I say Arizona should follow its own American hero, Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County.

Sheriff Arpaio keeps crooks in a large outdoor holding facility and makes them sleep in tents. Among other things, he feeds them bologna sandwiches. I hope they are not fresh.

My good friend Sheriff Arpaio's common-sense policies and practices drive the American Civil Liberties Union and other leftist numskulls batty. He puts smiles on the faces of Americans who still believe that pragmatism and common sense should rule the day.

Indeed, something needs to be done about illegal immigration and the 12 million to 15 million illegals who already are in America and causing a tremendous financial burden on states because of their abuse of the states' social services and criminal justice programs. Hospitals in California and other states have closed, and jails and prisons in border states are upward of 40 percent full of illegals.

The invasion roils on."

Subject: New Arizona law makes everyone carry IDs
From: Genie
Date: 05 May 10 - 07:28 PM

Nugent and his ilk obviously have no respect for the US Constitution and the rights it asserts all (not just citizens or legal immigrants) have.    He disregards things like habeas corpus, the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, the right to be secure in your person and property against unwarranted search and seizure, et.   His idea of Joe Arpaio-style "pragmatism" is all that matters to him.

As for "those people who can't produce documentation proving they are in the country legally" being "jailed up to six months and fined $2,500," that would mean that many native-born US citizens, even those whose families have been US citizens for generations, could be jailed and fined if they can't produce a birth certificate - which is the case with quite a few citizens.

Being one helluva rock guitar player obviously doesn't require you to have a conscience or use your brain.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: DougR
Date: 05 May 10 - 07:45 PM

Genie: For Christ's sake, they don't have to produce a birth certificate! Even a driver's license will suffice, or a State issued identity card.

DougR

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 05 May 10 - 07:55 PM

The left wing media is portraying this law to be unconstitutional, and it just reiterates the federal law, so it obviously isn't. Hopefully a case will make it to court before the elections.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Arizona's new ID law
From: Genie
Date: 05 May 10 - 08:27 PM

That didn't work for the truck driver we talked about recently.

And are you sure a driver license suffices? Pretty sure Brewer disenfranchised a lot of Hispanic Americans not long ago who probably did have driver licenses and other kinds of ID.

Besides, some people don't have driver licences either - and how much does it cost to get an official state ID?    If you're one of those people born in the US but not in a hospital, or if your birth certificate has been lost or destroyed (e.g., in a fire), and you don't drive, what do you show the state to get an official ID?

Some of these requirements may be reasonable for future residents but not for people who have been citizens since the days when most people were not required to have IDs except for driving.    Maybe people like that should be grandfathered in?

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: GUEST,Dani
Date: 05 May 10 - 09:29 PM

"pro-illegal immigration"?! Really? That sounds to me like when people call other folks "pro-abortion", as if ANYONE is pro-abortion.

Rig, you miss my point entirely. People risk everything to come here because there is WORK that pays MONEY which they may not be able to find at home. A system that we are supporting by pretending the problem doesn't exist.

When we, as Americans, start paying what products, food, and services TRULY cost, we will lessen the problems with illegal immigration, and overseas slave labor, and many other messes we have created with our unrealistic expectations.

I realize I am oversimplifying to a certain extent, but truly, the prices we pay for our food in grocery stores, our 'stuff' in walmart, our 'affordable' lawncare, housework, daycare, etc. are subsidized on the backs of poor people (some illegal immigrants) who are willing to do the shitty, dangerous, boring, nasty work that we aren't.

I don't hear much of this angle being addressed. Especially as reflected in our unemployment rate. It seems like simple math, to me.


Dani

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 05 May 10 - 09:45 PM

"It seems like simple math, to me."

          Actually, it isn't so simple. The illegals come and they work cheap, but when one of them gives birth on this side of the border to an "Anchor Baby," the whole family becomes a tax payer liability. So if you're spending all little bit less for tomatoes, you're paying a whole lot more for everything else.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 05 May 10 - 10:05 PM

Viva Los Sons
!

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: Genie
Date: 05 May 10 - 10:48 PM

Well said, Dani.

That point has been made in this and related threads, but it really needs to be stressed a lot more.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: artbrooks
Date: 05 May 10 - 11:12 PM

According to Arizona House Bill 2162, 4/30/2010, the following are acceptable forms of ID:

1. An Arizona driver license issued after 1996 or an Arizona nonoperating identification license.
2. A birth certificate or delayed birth certificate issued in any state, territory or possession of the United States.
3. A United States certificate of birth abroad.
4. A United States passport.
5. A foreign passport with a United States visa.
6. An I-94 form with a photograph.
7. A United States citizenship and immigration services employment authorization document or refugee travel document.
8. A United States certificate of naturalization.
9. A United States certificate of citizenship.
10. A tribal certificate of Indian blood.
11. A tribal or bureau of Indian affairs affidavit of birth.

Only Arizona drivers licenses are valid. It's been 30 years since I've seen my birth certificate - and it was a little plaqstic card. Hell, I can't even use my military ID card. I guess I'll have to take my passport the next time I go to Phoenix.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 05 May 10 - 11:52 PM

By the time you get to Phoenix they'll accept your military ID.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 06 May 10 - 01:15 AM

In short since few Americans have passports or any of those other documents, if you want to vacation in Arizona you have to shellac your birth certificate to your abdomen.

I wonder if they can nab you if you're in the airport waiting for a connecting flight? Bring your birth certificate if you're even likely to connect through an Arizona airport, or be diverted to one.

Or long-distance truckers coming from California and going to points further east, for whom Arizona is a regrettable stretch of interstate. Tuck your birth certificate up behind your CB radio. You might look illegally foreign.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: Genie
Date: 06 May 10 - 02:17 AM

Sounds like visitors from other states could be in trouble if they don't carry their birth certificates or passports. I didn't see driver licenses from other states on that list of acceptable IDs.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 06 May 10 - 07:07 AM

You've got to wonder where that list came from, huh?

The proponents against the Arizona law are like the "birthers" insisting Obama was born in Kenya.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: artbrooks
Date: 06 May 10 - 08:17 AM

Rig, that list came from here, and it is the official test of the most recent Arizona state law. Nobody could invent such crap.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 06 May 10 - 09:10 AM

Boy, somebody needs to learn to read. Those are documents you need to produce if you're applying for public benefits. Of course the state of Arizona doesn't want to pay benefits to somebody who resides in Idaho or Maine.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: pdq
Date: 06 May 10 - 10:00 AM

For Christ's sake, the law is being intentionally misinterpreted by the major new sources, just as it is misinterpreted by artbrooks.

A driver who runs a stop sign in Casa Grande will be asked for a drivers license, just like they would be in any other place in the United States.

A California drivers license is OK, one from New Mexico is OK, so is one from any other state.

The law states:

    A person is presumed to not be an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States if the person provides to the law enforcement officer or agency any of the following:
       1. A valid Arizona driver license.
       2. A valid Arizona nonoperating identification license.
       3. A valid tribal enrollment card or other form of tribal identification.
       4. If the entity requires proof of legal presence in the United States before issuance, any valid United States federal, state or local government issued identification.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: frogprince
Date: 06 May 10 - 10:56 AM

I've held drivers licenses from Minnesota, Illinois, and Michigan. None of these required proof of citizenship or place of birth. So why would Arizona accept any of them as proof of legality?

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: artbrooks
Date: 06 May 10 - 10:58 AM

Interesting. Since New Mexico doesn't require proof of citizenship for a driver's license (and rightly so), I wonder if mine is considered valid?

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 06 May 10 - 11:04 AM

I suspect the driver's licenses you carry can be traced back to you by the Motor Vehicle's Department in the state from which it was issued. Millions of illegals are driving around with driver's licensed that were manufactured in the back of somebody's garage. If an officer calls to verify, and it turns out the license number matches somebody who died in 1972, the officer will probably become suspicious.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 06 May 10 - 11:52 AM

Nevertheless, even if it traces back completely and the Washington Department of Licensing verifies it's really my driver's license, it still says nothing whatsoever of my legal status to be in this country. If they really accept drivers licenses as proof of legality, they're stupider than a stupid thing that's really not very bright.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 06 May 10 - 12:19 PM

Surely they know that. On the other hand, it wouldn't be very bright of a police officer to make an issue out of it, would it?

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: pdq
Date: 06 May 10 - 12:28 PM

Let's say a car is stopped by a cop in Tempe, AZ. The driver was going 45 in a 25 mph zone.

The cop asks for a drivers license, and the driver presents a valid one from Washintgton state.

The driver signs the ticket and the cop says "have a nice day".

Not unreasonable, eh?

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: frogprince
Date: 06 May 10 - 02:28 PM

I'm sure everyone realizes that, in the majority of instances, the typical traffic stop will still be a "reasonable" routine. So long as there is no cue whatever that might raise the slightest question as to the driver's citizenship .

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Arizona's "papers, please" law
From: Genie
Date: 06 May 10 - 04:05 PM

Riginslinger, Rig, if those are the documents you have to show in AZ to apply for public benefits, what document(s) do you need to prove you're a legal US resident?

Also, someone living in Arizona could be applying for Social Security or Medicare or Veterans' benefits - federal programs - and wouldn't have to have their main residence in AZ to qualify.
Plus, most states don't require you to change your DL from your former state to the new one for 3 to 6 months after you move there. So someone who's recently moved to Arizona might well be eligible for some state benefits yet still have, say, a California DL.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: "reasonable suspicion?"
From: Genie
Date: 06 May 10 - 04:13 PM

Frogprice, there's the rub.   You're stopped for a traffic infraction. What - other than skin color and/or accent - would give the officer "reasonable suspicion" that you're not a legal US resident?

And if anyone argues that since most illegals in AZ are Hispanics, that does not logically a basis for "reasonable suspicion."   The question is, "What proportion of those who "look" or sound "Hispanic" are illegal?"   If it could be shown that a high percentage of people with brown skin or a Spanish accent were undocumented immigrants, that might be cause for questioning most people like that, but I doubt that that is the case.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: Genie
Date: 06 May 10 - 04:20 PM

If a valid Arizona driver license is acceptable as proof of legal status, why was this truck driver hauled off by AZ law enforcement and detained until his wife left work and went home so she could bring BOTH their birth certificates to ICE?

http://belowthebeltway.com/2010/04/25/arizona-truck-driver-forced-to-show-birth-certificate-to-prove-hes-a-citizen/

[[PHOENIX – A Valley man says he was pulled over Wednesday morning and questioned when he arrived at a weigh station for his commercial vehicle along Val Vista and the 202 freeway.
Abdon, who did not want to use his last name, says he provided several key pieces of information but what he provided apparently was not what was needed.
...

Abdon was told he did not have enough paperwork on him when he pulled into a weigh station to have his commercial truck checked. He provided his commercial driver's license and a social security number but ended up handcuffed.
An agent called his wife and she had to leave work to drive home and grab other documents like his birth certificate.
...
Both were born in the United States and say they are now both infuriated that keeping important documents safely at home is no longer an option."]]

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: John P
Date: 06 May 10 - 05:01 PM

Rig, Doug, neither of you have addressed the fate of crime victims. If you were an illegal alien and got raped or robbed, would you report the crime?

If you were a US citizen and were jailed without probable cause would your constitutional rights have been violated?

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 06 May 10 - 06:16 PM

"If you were an illegal alien and got raped or robbed, would you report the crime?"


             Probably not. I'd go back where I belonged.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 06 May 10 - 09:58 PM

"Abdon was told he did not have enough paperwork on him when he pulled into a weigh station to have his commercial truck checked. He provided his commercial driver's license and a social security number but ended up handcuffed."


          Maybe he didn't have his log book, proving that he hadn't been driving too long. Commercial truck drivers have to have a number of documents the rest of us don't have to have. It looks good in the papers, though, for folks who don't know all of that.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Smedley
Date: 06 May 10 - 10:06 PM

Probably not. I'd go back where I belonged.


------------------------------------------------------------

So everybody ''''''belongs'''''' in their country of birth?? What a limited, limiting version of human history that would be.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 06 May 10 - 10:34 PM

Such compassion. Are you a Christian by any chance?

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 06 May 10 - 11:40 PM

"Such compassion. Are you a Christian by any chance?"

          Are you asking me? If so, I think those ancient superstitions is what's causing all of these problems, so NO, aboslutely not.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 07 May 10 - 12:01 AM

Ah, just a run-of-the-mill lacker of compassion.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: Genie
Date: 07 May 10 - 03:10 AM

Rig, you're grasping at straws, I think, to try to explain away Abdon's uncalled-for detainment.   He was told his commercial truck driver's license was not sufficient proof of legal residency and made to produce his and his wife's birth certificates.   Since when are truck drivers and/or their wives required to carry passports or birth certificates with them, when they are not being investigated on probable cause for a crime?

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 07 May 10 - 07:30 AM

They aren't. I suspect there's more to the story. The Arizona law hasn't even taken effect yet, so who was asking?

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: John P
Date: 07 May 10 - 07:52 AM

Rig, you seem to be saying that rapists in Arizona should get a free ride. Are you really so stupid that you can't understand why so many police departments hate this law? Earlier you said they were mis-informed or something. Could it be that they'd rather CATCH the rapists???

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 07 May 10 - 10:14 AM

I guess I'm missing the connection between long haul truck drivers and rapists, John P.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 07 May 10 - 11:59 AM

It's the racism, Rig. That ties them together.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 07 May 10 - 02:29 PM

Well, there isn't any racism in the bill that Governor Brewer signed, so it must be somewere else.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 07 May 10 - 03:03 PM

Your naïveté is so touching.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Don Firth
Date: 07 May 10 - 03:13 PM

Well, to carry that "logic" to a bit of an extreme, one could say that there was nothing racist about Hitler's policies toward non-Aryans. He just didn't want have them around.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: DougR
Date: 07 May 10 - 03:42 PM

Rig is right, Don. Read the Bill.

DougR

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 07 May 10 - 04:24 PM

The racism is really coming from the other side, like that vice-principal in California the other day who sent those students home for wearing the American flag T-shirts.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 07 May 10 - 05:02 PM

The vote on the AZ bill was party line minus one (one Republican voted with the Democrats).
Tucson and Flagstaff are bringing suit. Won't be long before this short-sighted bigoted bumff is deepsixed by the courts.

In the meantime, if you have to visit the state, spend only on the Navajo and other reservations.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 07 May 10 - 05:16 PM

Not everything stupid is racist. And the pot calling the kettle black thing is really poor form, old chap.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 07 May 10 - 05:27 PM

Not everything that's stupid is racists, you'er right, mouse, but that vice-principal is racist, and so will Al Sharpton be if he goes down to parade around in the streets of Phoenix.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 07 May 10 - 05:37 PM

And a tip of the hat to Rick Sanchez (CNN) for his Fotos del Dia.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 07 May 10 - 05:59 PM

Al Sharpton is an meddling idiot who should have been retired on a Greek Island years ago.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 07 May 10 - 06:12 PM

Well, we can agree on that.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: GUEST,Dani
Date: 07 May 10 - 07:41 PM

Thank God there's something......

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: John P
Date: 08 May 10 - 12:54 PM

Rig, please answer the very real concerns that have been raised about this law. Why did you tell me you can't see the connection between rape and a long-haul truck driver, after agreeing that a rape victim who was an illegal would likely not call the police? You are changing the subject because you don't have an answer for why letting rapists have a free ride would be a good idea. Grow a pair and admit it.

Tell us how, under this law, the police would be able to find criminals who prey on illegal aliens. Tell us how you would ensure that a citizen is never illegally arrested or detained. Tell us why you think non-Hispanic illegal aliens wouldn't get a free ride and how that isn't a racist policy. Tell us if you really think your nebulous environmental concerns should trump these very immediate problems.

Please support your stance with real answers. Anything less marks you as a fool.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 08 May 10 - 03:48 PM

"Why did you tell me you can't see the connection between rape and a long-haul truck driver, after agreeing that a rape victim who was an illegal would likely not call the police?"

               There is not connection that I can see between a rape victim and the truck driver discussed about. I agree that a rape victim would probably not call the police if she was an illegal alien. She would have been well advised to have stayed in her own country, or obtain the proper documentation to get into this one.

               I don't think non-Hispanic illegal aliens will get a free ride. I suspect Middle Eastern illegal aliens will be monitored more closely than Hispanics.

               Environmental concerns are not "nebulous." More people place a greater demand on resources of all types. America's population was pretty much stable until the illegal invasion began.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: Genie
Date: 08 May 10 - 05:20 PM

Rig, even a legal US resident might be afraid to call the police to report a crime - against themselves or others - if they didn't have access to their birth certificate or a passport and maybe didn't have a driver license, so that they feared they would be hauled off to the police station and detained until such documents could be provided.   
Suppose a "Hispanic-looking" woman was out jogging, without taking her "papers" with her.
(Who routinely carries a driver license, etc., when going for a walk or a jog?) And suppose she is raped or otherwise attacked while away from her home sans papers.   Is she supposed to wait till she can get back to the house and look for proof of legal residency BEFORE reporting the attack?   Such a delay could well make it harder for the attacker to be apprehended, plus, she might have been injured in the attack.

Or how about this fairly common scenario:   Your purse or wallet is snatched while you are away from home.   Now you have no ID on you, so if you contact the police and they "have reason to think you might be in the country illegally," instead of focusing on solving the crime and catching the thief, the police are required to look into the legal status of your being in the US.
And when your ID is stolen, are you not supposed to go anywhere until you can get a replacement?

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 08 May 10 - 06:23 PM

Ah, so rape is the right and proper penalty for being in the US illegally. You are something else, Rig.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 08 May 10 - 06:49 PM

If I jump off a 40 story building, I can hardly blame somebody else when I finally hit the ground.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 08 May 10 - 07:08 PM

Disanalagous. People don't come here knowing they are going to get raped. Getting raped is not the logical or physical conclusion of coming to the United States illegally. If you jump off a 40 story building you know you're going to hit the ground. Even if you don't, hitting the ground is the logical and physical conclusion of falling from a 40 story building. Totally apples and black holes. Try harder.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 08 May 10 - 10:26 PM

Jump harder?

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 08 May 10 - 10:34 PM

Well, Mouse, if I hold up a convenience store with a handgun, and point it at the clerk and tell him to give me all of his money, and the clerk keels over from cardiac arrest, I could expect to be charged with 2nd degree murder, even though murdering the clerk was not my intention.

             Once an individual endeavors to break the law for personal gain, if bad things happen, they're still responsible.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: frogprince
Date: 08 May 10 - 11:08 PM

So, Rig, if you encountered a young woman who is here illegally, would you feel free to rape her, since she deserves it for the crime of being here?

I would be as astonished as I would be sickened if you were to answer yes, or if I remotely suspected that yes would be your true answer to the question. But some of your comments are so hateful, they sound too much like people I've encountered whom I truly believe might be capable of something like that.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Don Firth
Date: 08 May 10 - 11:18 PM

Ye Gods and Little Fishes!!

Rig, are you saying that if a woman—who happens to be an illegal immigrant in this country working at a menial job in order to send a few dollars home to her poverty-stricken family in a barrio outside of Mexico City—gets jumped on the street, dragged into a back alley, and raped. . . .

That's HER fault!??

You have a very strange sense of justice.

Don Firth

P. S. Hey! All you aspiring Jack the Rippers out there! Make sure you rape only women who are illegal immigrants! No jury composed of Rigs will ever convict you!! Have at it, man!!

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 09 May 10 - 12:18 AM

Mankind is doomed.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 09 May 10 - 01:05 AM

"So, Rig, if you encountered a young woman who is here illegally, would you feel free to rape her..."

            No, frogprince, I don't rape people.


    "That's HER fault!??"

            I'm only saying that she put the wheels of illegality in motion in the first place. It's not her fault any more than it would be the fault of the armed robber that the clerk died, but the law looks at things differently.



"Mankind is doomed."

            Only if he refuses to do something about human migration.





                                     "Ye Gods and Little Fishes!!"

Colorful, colorful!

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 09 May 10 - 01:09 AM

Human migration got you where you are. Go back to Olduvai.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Arizona's "papers, please" law
From: Genie
Date: 09 May 10 - 05:16 AM

Rig, what makes you think a Mexican woman is more likely to be raped if she illegally comes to the US than if she stayed in Mexico?

The difference, given this new law in AZ, is not that she's more likely to be raped but that she will probably feel more intimidated about reporting it.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 09 May 10 - 07:55 AM

"Human migration got you where you are."

             Yes, but once an area has too many people, it simpy has too many people.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 09 May 10 - 07:57 AM

"The difference, given this new law in AZ, is not that she's more likely to be raped but that she will probably feel more intimidated about reporting it."

                And if she'd stayed where she belonged, or went through the chanals to come here legally, she wouldn't have to feel intimidated.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: GUEST,Dani
Date: 09 May 10 - 08:50 AM

Wouldn't have to, but she still would would be. Believe me, even LEGAL immigrants feel vulnerable, intimidated and scared much of the time, as they work 2, sometimes 3 jobs, not knowing the rules, the language, the customs.

In my experience, these folks are among the bravest, smartest, most hard-working, long-suffering folks there are. I am often reminded, when working with them, of the experiences my own grand- and great-grandparents must have had, and I am grateful for their sacrifices.

Dani

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: John P
Date: 09 May 10 - 09:12 AM

And Rig is zero for three, ladies and gentlemen! He wins the right to be called a fool!

I agree that a rape victim would probably not call the police if she was an illegal alien. She would have been well advised to have stayed in her own country, or obtain the proper documentation to get into this one.

The question wasn't what you thought of her (you already told us what a heartless bastard you are), the question was how the police would find violent criminals. I'm pretty sure that everyone who's not you, including every police organization in the state, would rather find the rapist than prove a point.

               I don't think non-Hispanic illegal aliens will get a free ride. I suspect Middle Eastern illegal aliens will be monitored more closely than Hispanics.

OK, a partial answer. We can have equal opportunity racism for ANYONE with brown skin and black hair. How nice. Well, maybe I shouldn't even give you credit for a partial answer, since you missed the point so splendidly. The Euro-trash gets a free ride. Racism.

And it's a complete miss on the Constitutional rights for citizens! No answer at all, not even a lame one.

               Environmental concerns are not "nebulous." More people place a greater demand on resources of all types. America's population was pretty much stable until the illegal invasion began.

It's a strike and a miss on normal debate! Rig, this argument has been challenged many times already in this discussion, with you just repeating yourself instead of answering anything. The United States has been creating more environmental damage than the whole rest of the world combined for a long time, and illegal immigration has not had much effect on all those SUV drivers. Now we are being taken over by China and India -- in China and India. Again, no relationship to illegal immigration in Arizona. You'll get no argument from me that overpopulation is a major cause of environmental woes, but Mexicans entering Arizona and having kids is a small drop in that large bucket. Using that argument in this debate is extremely disingenuous.

We give a special mention to Rig's last sentence: . . . until the illegal invasion began. When, exactly was that? I've heard various dates: 1492, 1620, 1776. What's your beginning date, the date before which there were no illegal immigrants?

And the winner of the Fool Award -- Riginslinger!!

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 09 May 10 - 01:13 PM

Interesting how right-wing bloviators don't give a shit about the environment until it becomes a good excuse for flogging some other of their pet hates.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 09 May 10 - 01:51 PM

Boy, I'm glad I'm not a right-wing bloviator. Mouse gives them pretty rought treatment.


    "We give a special mention to Rig's last sentence: . . . until the illegal invasion began. When, exactly was that?"

The last wave began right after Ronald Reagan's disasterous 1986 amnesty.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 09 May 10 - 02:03 PM

We all would be glad if you stopped bloviating for the right wing.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 09 May 10 - 03:10 PM

Well, Mouse, I don't have much in common with the right wing, so I won't bloviate in their interest. I'll just continue to deal with reality when it comes to illegal immigration and human population growth.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 09 May 10 - 06:07 PM

I am certain that it has already been said in this thread. Better living conditions and assimilated cultures tend to make for smaller families than would have been had if people remained in 3rd world conditions.

Using overpopulation and bid to save the planet as a basis for argument to curtail immigration is just trying to cover fear of people who are different, especially if one believes those different people are using up resources, taking jobs they are not entitled to.

Don't fear the wrong thing. The danger is leaving people in squalid living conditions, where industry goes in to take advantage of cheap labour and lax environmental regulations. That's what is killing the planet. That is what takes jobs away from industrialised nations.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Ebbie
Date: 09 May 10 - 06:32 PM

Right!

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 09 May 10 - 06:53 PM

It all contributes, but simply the huge numbers of people is the one undeniable issue that drives the the whole thing. And it doesn't cover any fears. It is the fear.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 09 May 10 - 08:18 PM

Well, Mouse, I don't have much in common with the right wing

Except of course your attitude towards illegal immigration and population.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 09 May 10 - 09:29 PM

We share views on illegal immigration for different reasons, but the right wing has nothing against population growth. The Reagan economic model wouldn't work unless you have ever expanding markets and cheap labor. That almost mandates an ever expanding population. In fact, their fundamentalist religious views encourage it.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 09 May 10 - 09:35 PM

The fundamentalist religious views (which, by the way, the überrich fatcats that run the party may or may not share) of the Republican hoi polloi encourages them to breed. It does not motivate them to increase or even allow immigration.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 09 May 10 - 09:56 PM

The outfit that seems to attack the enemies of illegal immigration, consistantly, and are financed well enough to do it is the United States Chamber of Commerce. Every one of the spokesmen (and women) that I've seen from that organization are Republicans.

          That having been said, I would agree that the more rabid wing of the party want to do away with abortion and force American women to have children they cannot support.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 10 May 10 - 01:02 AM

They're really big on babies right up until the point they're born. After that they lose interest. A fellow on another website I frequent always refers to "right to life" with a footnote that says "offer expires after birth."

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 10 May 10 - 07:32 AM

I suppose there's a racist component to that. They want their women to out-compete women from other cultures. Once they have a live birth they've accomplished what they set out to do and go on to other things.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 10 May 10 - 12:17 PM

Stretching it.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 10 May 10 - 01:31 PM

Well, it's really going to be bad for the planet if two major population centers become engaged in a birthing contest.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Don Firth
Date: 10 May 10 - 07:12 PM

Where is this contest taking place, and can I buy tickets?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 10 May 10 - 07:38 PM

It don't cost a thing, Don. All you gotta do is go stand on a corner in Winslow, Arizona and watch all the illegals go by.

             That's the plan of The Nation of Aztlan, invade the US through the birth canal.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Ebbie
Date: 10 May 10 - 08:28 PM

"...watch all the illegals go by..." Wow. You're good at it, better than most folks, including the police.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 10 May 10 - 10:29 PM

You don't have to be good, you only have to be in Arizona.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 11 May 10 - 01:31 AM

You don't have to be good, you only have to be in Arizona.

That's true of lawmakers too.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: Ron Davies
Date: 11 May 10 - 07:28 AM

Perhaps the worst element of this new law, as I pointed out on the other thread, is that the police most on the front lines of stopping illegal immigration--as for instance the sheriff of Pinas County, with 123 miles of border with Mexico-- do not themselves want the new law, since they know what it will mean:   every rabid anti-immigrationist in Arizona will be peering over the shoulder of a policeman and telling him what to do. And threatening him with a lawsuit if he does not apprehend a person the flaming fool.... uh, stalwart citizen...thinks is likely an illegal immigrant.

Somehow it seems more likely that the sheriff of Pinas County knows more about the situation than the illustrious Mr. Rig.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: Ron Davies
Date: 11 May 10 - 07:29 AM

" Somehow it seems likely..."

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: artbrooks
Date: 11 May 10 - 08:12 AM

Pinal County

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 May 10 - 08:40 AM

Maybe Penis County is the one he meant, of course, there's Penal Colony...

          Of course, lazy sheriffs don't want another law to enforce, but it doesn't bother Joe Arpaio.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: pdq
Date: 11 May 10 - 10:16 AM

Yer all wrong, it's Pima county.

Longtime Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik does not like the new bill.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 May 10 - 10:25 AM

AHA!

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: pdq
Date: 11 May 10 - 11:12 AM

Do a Google images search of the great Clarence Dupnik.

The dweeb looks like Hubert H. Humphrey.

BTW, Joe Arpaio has the respect of criminals in his area, even the meanest and most dangerous ones. Sheriff Joe makes them work, live in hot tents in the summer and feeds them nothing better than bologna sandwiches.

Many disliked the rude treatment enough to leave crime and better their lives. Thousands of former Maricopa County inmates credit Arpaio with saving them.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 May 10 - 11:58 AM

I've heard that, pdq. Law enforcement needs more folks like Sheriff Joe.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Desert Dancer
Date: 11 May 10 - 01:33 PM

Perceptions vs. reality

Violence is not up on the Arizona border:

FBI Uniform Crime Reports and statistics provided by police agencies, in fact, show that the crime rates in Nogales, Douglas, Yuma and other Arizona border towns have remained essentially flat for the past decade, even as drug-related violence has spiraled out of control on the other side of the international line. Statewide, rates of violent crime also are down.

The Arizona border counties (west to east) are Yuma, Pima, Santa Cruz, and Cochise.

~ Becky in Tucson, 1 hour from the border

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Desert Dancer
Date: 11 May 10 - 01:37 PM

(oops, lost a closing tag on the link.)

Yes, there is violence in Tucson and Phoenix that is tied to the activity of drug cartels, but, bottom line:

"While the nation's illegal-immigrant population doubled from 1994 to 2004, according to federal records, the violent-crime rate declined 35 percent.

"More recently, Arizona's violent-crime rate dropped from 512 incidents per 100,000 residents in 2005 to 447 incidents in 2008, the most recent year for which data is available."

~ Becky in Tucson

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 May 10 - 04:08 PM

Imagine how much lower it would have gone if we didn't have all them illegal aliens out there committin' crimes.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Don Firth
Date: 11 May 10 - 04:56 PM

Flashback!!

That's exactly the same argument that those most opposed to racial integration used!

Old prejudices never die, I guess. They just find a new target.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 May 10 - 05:03 PM

Actually, Don, that was just a flash of brilliant humor. We all know that the crime rate has been going down ever since they took lead out of gasoline.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Ebbie
Date: 11 May 10 - 05:25 PM

I just got an email from a fearful friend who is following instructions to "get the truth out".

Arizona State Senator Sylvia Allen purportedly wrote an explanation for why she voted for SB 1070. Some of her assertions border on insanity.

I checked on her- she says publicly that the Earth is 6000 years old. So that's what I sent back in a 'Reply All'. It should give some people pause.

(Rig, how old do you think Earth is? *g*)

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 11 May 10 - 05:47 PM

For county and city law enforcement agencies, it rather equates to an unfunded mandate. They're expected to do more on the same budget. I'd say nobody could possibly sue a cop under this law, but I know too many racists.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 May 10 - 06:09 PM

"(Rig, how old do you think Earth is? *g*)"


               Older 'n dirt

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: Ron Davies
Date: 11 May 10 - 06:30 PM

Indeed it is Pima County. The only person on Mudcat who never makes any mistakes, and thus never has to admit he is wrong, is Greg F.

At any rate, it is interesting that though certain brilliant posters seek to discredit the sheriff in question based on his appearance, nobody has found any evidence to indicate that he is not on the front lines of preventing illegal immigration.   In fact, he says, as I pointed out on the other thread, that he has turned more illegals over to immigration authorities than any other sheriff in Arizona. His credentials are solid.

Likewise nobody has come up even with an argument against the sheriff's assertion that with this new law his men will be in a no-win situation:   either they offend legal immigrants or citizens by asking for their papers or they stand accused of neglecting duty when they do not ask--and face lawsuits from half-baked rabid anti-immigration fools (sorry again, I mean sterling citizens--my hand keeps slipping).

Particularly the clause that any citizen can sue the police if the police do not pursue a given person as diligently as said citizen desires is a classic disaster--a gold mine for trial attorneys, a calamity for everybody else--especially since it will be Arizona tax money which pays for the suits lost when the person turns out to be legal. Since obviously people falsely accused can sue just as anti-immigrationists can sue.

The law sounds like the full-employment statute for trial attorneys. Arizona will be a Mecca for them.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: Ron Davies
Date: 11 May 10 - 06:41 PM

Not only the sheriff of Pima County but in fact the Arizona Association of Chiefs of Police is also against this wonderful new law. I wonder why.

But of course everybody knows that the Association of Chiefs is in the pocket of the Mexican government.

Of course.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 11 May 10 - 07:20 PM

It's funded by the money the illegals don't send back to Mexico.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 May 10 - 09:27 PM

So all of the money in Arizona either goes to the Association of Chiefs, of it gets sent back to Mexico. No wonder the good people of the state overwhelmingly support the law.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 11 May 10 - 10:27 PM

Yes, clearly they hate police chiefs. The blackguards.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 May 10 - 11:32 PM

Blackguards are understandable. One has to wonder what chiefs of police did to them.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: Ron Davies
Date: 12 May 10 - 12:20 AM

Interesting that the anti-immigration partisans--which no doubt includes the tea party, whatever that is these day--are so enthusiastic about trial lawyers.    They must be or they would not think the new Arizona law is so wonderful---since by far the top beneficiaries will be trial lawyers, as Genie pointed out long ago on this thread.

As I noted a little while ago, it amounts to the Full Employment Act for Trial Lawyers.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: mousethief
Date: 12 May 10 - 01:14 AM

Blackguards are understandable. One has to wonder what chiefs of police did to them.

Pulled them over and asked for ID.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 12 May 10 - 07:21 AM

So, it's reverse descrimination with the chiefs, you think, huh Mouse?

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: Ron Davies
Date: 12 May 10 - 08:17 AM

So perhaps soon Rig, pdq, and Doug R can tell us why they like trial lawyers so much.   Since it's painfully obvious they will be by far the top beneficiaries of the new Arizona law.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: GUEST,Hugh
Date: 12 May 10 - 04:00 PM

As a Native American all I can say it's about time but 400 years too late.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: GUEST,bankley
Date: 12 May 10 - 06:20 PM

yeah Geronimo was deported from Arizona...

I'm looking fwd to seeing the film Machete

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: GUEST,Hugh
Date: 12 May 10 - 07:24 PM

When Goyathlay was running around AZ, killing and raiding, he'd run to Mexico on his own accord to escape from the US Army. In the later days of his imprisonment he was "deported" to OK. not Mexico. (The Mexicans wanted him just as bad as the US Army.) He wasn't a good guy. I know than many Native Americans where happy he was gone, my great-grandfather for one who fought him and carried an arrow head in his hip from one of Goyathlay men till the day he died.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save Amer
From: Stringsinger
Date: 12 May 10 - 08:44 PM

She is trying to save the planet for Arizona.

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Riginslinger
Date: 12 May 10 - 09:48 PM

She is trying to save the planet from over population.

---

Thread Closed. Riginslinger started another thread on almost the same subject. Why? I can't figure out why. When a person starts one thread on a subject, it's discussion. When it's more than one, is it propaganda?
-Joe Offer-


Click for continuation thread

Subject: RE: Immigrants: Jan Brewer takes step to save America
From: Joe Offer
Date: 13 May 10 - 12:13 AM

Later: Well, I got an explanation from Riginslinger that these are Jan Brewer/Arizona laws on different issues: Detaining Illegal Aliens, and Ethnic Studies. So, I reopened this thread, reluctantly. One wonders why Riginslinger has this obsession with Jan Brewer. Was this legislation initiated by Brewer, or by the Arizona legislature?
Whatever the case, I'm not going to allow any more propaganda thread titles from you, Riginslinger. When you start a thread, tell what it's about - don't use the title to express an opinion.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 13 May 10 - 08:41 AM

Even though illegal immigration has completely decimated California's economy, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has not demonstrated the courage to stand up to the political forces that promote it.
    Jan Brewer, on the other hand, right next door in Arizona, has demonstrated the gumption to take a stand for the benefit of her state's constituency.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Don Firth
Date: 13 May 10 - 03:35 PM

". . . illegal immigration has completely decimated California's economy. . . ."

You have some substantiation for that statement, Rig?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Genie
Date: 13 May 10 - 04:41 PM

Why do I get the impression that Jan Brewer and most Arizona Republicans wouldn't lift a finger to "save the planet" if it cost anything?

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: artbrooks
Date: 13 May 10 - 04:47 PM

Illegal immigration has reduced California's economy by 10%? Interesting.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 13 May 10 - 05:07 PM

'". . . illegal immigration has completely decimated California's economy. . . ."   You have some substantiation for that statement, Rig?"'


                Yeah, all you've got to do is to look at California's economy.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ron Davies
Date: 13 May 10 - 08:50 PM

"all you have to do..."

Thank you, Mr. Nowhere Man.

AKA: "We don't need no stinkin' evidence."

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ron Davies
Date: 13 May 10 - 09:12 PM

"all you've got to do..."

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 13 May 10 - 09:40 PM

Okay, Ron, here you go. You read it; everybody else knows it intuitively--like the sky is blue, water is wet, etc. etc.


http://www.mexica.net/immigrat/impactimmcaecon.pdf

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: artbrooks
Date: 13 May 10 - 09:56 PM

An interesting article, if a bit dated. Here is one that is a little more current - written in the middle of the current recession, in fact - that seems to indicate that California's economy is recovering and has the potential to come out well ahead. One of the things it says about immigrants, and it really doesn't distinguish between illegals and others, because there really isn't any (IMHO) is that "California's economy cannot wait or depend solely on the next round of college graduates. That means that California must remain an attractive and welcoming state—for workers and their families from other states and countries. Most jobs in California will be filled by people born and educated here. There is broad agreement including the recommendations of the Governor's Committee on Education Excellence that all of the state's children, but especially those at risk, need a good education through high school and that will require attention to both resources and reform. Filling the replacement jobs will require an upgrade in the skills and training of existing workers. Giving all students a better education is a critical goal but 80% of the workforce in ten years is already in the workforce today. That means California needs an education/training strategy that can reach existing workers who are mostly adults with families and work schedules. Given the large role that immigration contributes to California's recent and near-term workforce growth, the replacement worker challenge will require attention to expansion of ESL opportunities for adults combined with programs that allow people who are working to upgrade their skills toward targeted job opportunities."

In its usual timely manner, FactCheck.org just did a study on immigration, illegal and otherwise and employment and concluded that immigration does not adversely effect US citizen employment.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 13 May 10 - 10:03 PM

Yes, Art, education is the key, but most "illegal immigrants," which is what we are talking about here, not only do not have high school diplomas, but their drop out rate is higher than the rest of the population.

            It doesn't advance your argument to confuse legal immigrants with law breakers.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 13 May 10 - 10:05 PM

Sean Hannity is really making hay with this:


http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/05/12/hoop-dreams-shattered-arizona-safety-fears/

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 13 May 10 - 11:22 PM

I guess that everyone's knickers on in a twist, because they argue, and then wonder, or are convinced that it is a bad law, right?...Well, it's about the same as the federal law, which the federal government does not enforce. Now here's another twist for your knickers....did you know it is a crime, and more often than not, to report a crime you know is being committed??? Does the FACT that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land??? As far as I see it, the Federal law is in violation of the law, THE SUPREME LAW, and therefore should be charged, with that same crime, AS ANY ONE OF US WOULD BE!

The reason the Constitution was put in place, was to see that this kind of shit wouldn't happen,..and instead of enforcing it, they spend their energies convincing the public, that THEY have a better way...but to accomplish it, this stupid insignificant ceremonial paper, needs to be bent, shredded, and twisted beyond recognition, to remedy problems that they created, ignoring it...before that....and before that!!~!!

By the time, they imagine enough remedies, funded, of course, by corrupt control freaks, we are brought to the point, of enslaving ourselves to the very thing we ran away from, and founded a FREE open country!....and every turn and twist, I hear on here, too 'Catters squeezing the Constitution through every spun loophole of 'interpretation'...and to interpret it null and void, of it's original purpose, reason..and INTENT!

Now, if that above post, causes the twist in your knickers to rub even harder, I hope it burns you a blister!..Tough Shit!...But, on the other hand, if it makes perfect sense to you...hey!..you're a lot hipper than your peers who were, and are living in the regret of spending their youth, stuck in entitlement from mommy and daddy, and now going through a second childhood!!

Shit guys, there's a lyric for ya!

GET FUCKING REAL!.....there are rules, and even celebrity-like politicians have to obey them!

And that's why we have this problem.....and where the people are ate, who either support it, or who don't!


Shit.....I'm going down to the studio..got that itch....badly

May the law you all obey, is LOVE,

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 13 May 10 - 11:47 PM

Well, ghost, I suspect there is some reality there someplace.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ebbie
Date: 14 May 10 - 12:00 AM

Ye gods. I thought he couldn't get more incoherent but he just did. (Not you, Rig)

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 14 May 10 - 12:05 AM

Dearest Ebbie,

    I suspect you are doing fine, up there..which is really great! I'm sure there are schools up there, were you can make up for years lost, in elementary school. You might see if they have one there, and BEGIN, to learn reading and comprehension. Just something to do while your waiting for the bread to rise.

Wishing you the very best, with a wink in my eye, and a smile in my heart!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 14 May 10 - 12:12 AM

I knew I'd hear from her...here,...."and more often than not, report a crime you know is being committed???"   

Just to clarify that part...the rest is pretty clear

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 14 May 10 - 12:13 AM

How about...and more often than not, to not report a crime you know is being committed???"

Oh well, some people got it the first time through... if not, get some talc...

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Desert Dancer
Date: 14 May 10 - 12:37 AM

For music content...

The protest songs are pouring in

By Cathalena E. Burch | Posted: Thursday, May 13, 2010 3:40 pm | The Arizona Daily Star (Tucson)

Google Arizona immigration law protest songs and you'll discover that plenty of folks are out there dishing dirt on Arizona's controversial anti-immigration law.

They're rapping, swooning, crooning and preaching against it, including the Krayolas' corridor "1070 (I'm Your Dirty Mexican)."

Arizona's rapping community joined voices to remake Public Enemy's song, "By the Time I Get to Arizona."

The latest entry came out today, a kind of eerie, ominous reading of SB 1070 by ZeroKilled Music producer and artist Costanza Francavilla.

Fans of 1070 have apparently kept their opinions to themselves. So far, there's been no musical gushing of the bill, slated to go into effect in August.

(There's a YouTube video embedded in the article, or click on this link: "By The Time I Get 2 AZ- Back 2 AZ Anti-1070 REMAKE -AZ RAPPERS UNITE)

~ Becky in Tucson

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Sawzaw
Date: 14 May 10 - 12:53 AM

May 12 (Bloomberg) -- Almost three-quarters of Americans support a provision of a new Arizona immigration law that requires people to produce documents verifying they are in the U.S. legally, a survey said.

About 73 percent of those polled by the Washington-based Pew Research Center for the People & the Press said they approve of the plan, while 23 percent said they disapproved, according to the survey released today. About 67 percent said they agree with letting police detain anyone who can't verify their legal status, compared with 29 percent who disapproved.

When asked if police should be allowed to question anyone they think may be in the country illegally, about 62 percent said they approved and 35 percent disapproved. More than half, 59 percent, said they supported the new Arizona law as a whole, while 32 percent said they don't support the legislation.

Governor Jan Brewer signed legislation last month that makes it a state crime to be in the U.S. illegally and requires local police to determine the immigration status of anyone suspected of being in the country without proper documentation. The action sparked protests and calls for boycotts of Arizona.


Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2010/05/11/bloomberg1376-L2BFAP0D9L35-6.DTL#ixzz0nsNnQHPc

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Sawzaw
Date: 14 May 10 - 01:08 AM

STATEMENT BY GOVERNOR JAN BREWER

Let me be clear, though: My signature today represents my steadfast support for enforcing the law both AGAINST illegal immigration AND against racial profiling.

This legislation mirrors federal laws regarding immigration enforcement.

Despite erroneous and misleading statements suggesting otherwise, the new state misdemeanor crime of willful failure to complete or carry an alien registration document is adopted, verbatim, from the same offense found in federal statute.

I will NOT tolerate racial discrimination or racial profiling in Arizona.

Because I feel so strongly on this subject, I worked for weeks with legislators to amend SB 1070, to strengthen its civil rights protections.

That effort led to new language in the bill, language prohibiting law enforcement officers from "solely considering race, color, or national origin in implementing the requirements of this section"

The bill already required that it "shall be implemented in a manner consistent with federal laws regulating immigration, protecting the civil rights of all persons and respecting the privileges and immunities of United States citizens."

While the general protection was already included, I believe the issue is so important, we needed to make it CRYSTAL clear.

And I believe that we need to more than simply inscribe it in statute. Words in a law book are of no use if our police officers are not properly trained on the provisions of SB 1070, including its civil rights provisions.

Today I am issuing an executive order directing the Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training Board -- AZPOST -- to develop training to appropriately implement SB 1070.

Importantly, this training will include what DOES - and DOES NOT - constitute "reasonable suspicion" that a person is not legally present in the United States.

Currently, AZPOST serves approximately 170 law enforcement agencies encompassing over 16,000 sworn peace officers, 9,000 correctional service officers, and 16 training academies.

The AZPOST Board of Directors includes the Arizona Attorney General, the Directors of the Arizona Department of Public Safety, the Arizona Department of Corrections, several county sheriffs, and
local police departments.

I am also asking the Board to make recommendations on possible improvements to SB 1070 before the end of the year.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 14 May 10 - 08:17 AM

At the root of all of this, of course, is runaway population growth, and that's the point that nobody seems to want to talk about.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ebbie
Date: 14 May 10 - 09:29 AM

I think, Rig, that a number of people have spoken about runaway 'population growth'; we- or at least, I fail to see how keeping population growth away from the US solves that particular problem. Your approach appears to be that if it isn't in the US, it is not happening.Your only concern seems to be the US.

By the way, what about the posts showing that the US needs the extra population? You haven't addressed that.

Incidentally, if Mexican people are sneaking across our borders in such numbers, is population growth in Mexico itself abating? Ironic if they beat us to it, eh?

-

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: frogprince
Date: 14 May 10 - 10:19 AM

Good grief, Ebbie! Everybody you unders the wisdom Gfs imparts us; you must never anything except whole wheat muffins in school! All Governor Brewer trying to prevent the Constitution being reinforced!
Can't you understand simple English?

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: pdq
Date: 14 May 10 - 10:29 AM

People who live in Canada, Alaska, Maine, Vermont, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, or any other area which has absolutely no illegal Mexican problem should stuff a sock in.

They don't have a clue what they are talking about.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ebbie
Date: 14 May 10 - 10:40 AM

ha ha

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 14 May 10 - 10:41 AM

"Incidentally, if Mexican people are sneaking across our borders in such numbers, is population growth in Mexico itself abating?"

            A book could be written about this--and you're right, if populations were abating in Mexico, it would be a victory of sorts.

            It's not, of course, but it is slowing down. It wouldn't be slowing down at all if it weren't for the fact that the Mexican government is very serious about protecting their own borders. They don't want immigrants coming into American and sending money back to Guatemala, for instance.

            With all of those eventualities coming to pass, if America could fend off the Mexican invasion for a few more years, it seems to me like the pressure would ease.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ebbie
Date: 14 May 10 - 10:55 AM

Incidentally, as former Senator Ted Stevens would put it, Rig's and my posts evidently collided 'in the tube' and his won.

Here is what I had said:

"I suspect that it is more the foreign language that rankles so deeply. Are you afraid they are talking about you?

In Alaska, we have illegal aliens amongst us every day. Did you know that some Canadians and UKers overstay their visas or work for pay or work 'under the table'? Illegal as hell.

Oh. They all speak English."

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 14 May 10 - 11:01 AM

People who live in Canada, Alaska, Maine, Vermont, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, or any other area which has absolutely no illegal Mexican problem should stuff a sock in.

They don't have a clue what they are talking about.

By that logic Republicans shouldn't make laws about schoolbooks.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ebbie
Date: 14 May 10 - 11:03 AM

Whoa! :)

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ebbie
Date: 14 May 10 - 11:16 AM

One more tube-bumped post:

Good God, Rig, do you have any idea of how many Americans own homes in Mexico? Just having a nominal partner does not keep you from being an immigrant.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 14 May 10 - 11:31 AM

Actually owning a home in Mexico is dicey at best, but the overall problem is still the numbers of people.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ebbie
Date: 14 May 10 - 07:22 PM

Right off the top of my head I could tell you of three different friends of mine who have homes in Mexico- in different parts of Mexico.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 14 May 10 - 07:29 PM

I know. Technically it's possible to own a home in Mexico, but if somebody shows up with a Kalashnikov to tak it away, I wouldn't run to the title company.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 14 May 10 - 09:39 PM

Well, I can certainly agree with those who are concerned about the text book disaster in Texas.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,999
Date: 14 May 10 - 09:42 PM

"By that logic Republicans shouldn't make laws about schoolbooks."

mousethief, if I had a hat I'd doff it to your wit. Good one.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 14 May 10 - 09:44 PM

Does anybody hear an echo here?

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 14 May 10 - 10:01 PM

I was looking for the "bearded bruce" comment about teaching Black History, but I can't find it now.

          I think anyone who even casually thought about it would agree that a black teacher teaching Black History would find it more rewarding and maybe a little more challenging if he/she had students from other-than-black backgrounds it the classroom. I would think the students would find a course of this nature very rewarding, especially if they had a different background. The teacher would be producing a much larger footprint than he/she would if he/she were teaching only to students of the same ethnic background--my opinion.

          Further, I would think that this is the kind of education that school boards and superintendents would want to promote. A similar cultural enrichment could be found in the teaching of Chicano History and Native American history.

          I'm hopeful that this is the kind of program that "Ethnic Studies" could develop into.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 14 May 10 - 10:03 PM

Ya know what???

These discussions weren't occuring in the 90's when Hispanics were a major factor in fueling an economy that was hittin' and stickin'...

How do you spell hypocrisy???

I mean, let's get real here... This ain't the America that our grand parents knew where folks would come in and produce and be welcomed... Hispanics have out-produced almost every wave of immigrants and yet here we are playin' like they ain't squat...

I mean, we're arguing over how high a fence to build??? How many laws that target Hispanics we can pass??? How we can harass seasonal workers who have come here going back generations to harvest our food every year???

I mean, this ain't the America that welcomed the Germans, the Dutch, the Irish... This is a very hypocritical and hatefull America...

It makes me sick to be an American... It is un-American... I mean, even Redneck Nation had no complaints until times got tough... You didn't hear a peep outta them in the 90's or early 00s... Not a peep... Now, other than how much they hate Obama, it's about all that is on their mind???

Give my poor ol' hillbilly butt a break here... This is Jim Crow comin' back as, ahhhhh, Polk's warrior... Problem is that this ain't the 1840's... Problem is that a good bit of our country has been build by Hispanics...

Makes me sick... Shame on Arizona... Shame on this country!!!

b~

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 14 May 10 - 10:03 PM

Yikes--I'm on the wrong thread!

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Steve in Idaho
Date: 14 May 10 - 11:10 PM

Well this is probably redundant but isn't this basically about broken laws and the impact it is having on a state's economy? That's what laws do - provide social structure. So if you are here illegally then you have a price to pay for that.

I would quaintly suggest that our congress actually deal with the problem so the states wouldn't have to. Enact meaningful legislation to address the guest workers in this country. This isn't rocket science. But then again most politicians are not smarter than a 5th grader. And that we continue to re-elect them time after time says just how stupid we really are. My son gave me a bumper sticker, "Idahoans are to stupid to vote. See your incumbent for details." Dang if he wasn't right!

If I were in charge - those on unemployment and welfare would take those jobs of field work, child care, and cleaning toilets before they got a dime of the employed folks tax money. And that's my opinion on it.

My last attempt to fan the flames of discussion productively: Arizona Law Enforcement has its own problems. Like giving tickets to folks for going 45 in a 45. Go figure. And most of the Arizona LE I saw while there are Hispanic - are they going to profile each other??

Be well and God bless ya all - :-)

Steve

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 15 May 10 - 08:04 AM

Congress is too broken to deal with anything... People complain that the health care reform (which it wasn't) bill was a bad bill... Well, yeah... What would you expect from a body that has one of it's two chambers almost completely packed with corporation puppets...

And voting in a Republican majority in the Senate won't fix that but probably gum up the Senate even worse, if that can be done???

Ameerica has fucked itself by allowing the minority to rule...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Steve in Idaho
Date: 15 May 10 - 09:43 AM

I was thinking about this last night - we used to have a Guest Worker program. The people who hired the workers provided the medical insurance, housing, and transportation costs for them. It worked well and then for some unknown reason it was declared unfair.

You know Bob - I think the thing to do is to vote for anyone NOT in office and send all the bums who are there packing. Do that a couple of times and I think they'd get the message.

God bless ya all
Steve

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 15 May 10 - 09:49 AM

Bobert: "How do you spell hypocrisy???"

If they had the brains to spell it, they would see that immigrants should be coming in LEGALLY!

Hey, Bobert, if someone broke into your home, would you offer him a free dinner, and pay for his/her doctor bills, and let him run your house???? ....then listen to him tell you how you owe him???..and what a shit you are????

I don't think so-o-o-o-o-o.

America is my home. You can damn well ring the doorbell!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 15 May 10 - 10:03 AM

Ya' know what, GfS??? If these arguments were being made in the 90's when there were 10 times more people coming in illegally I would step back and say "Hey, these folks have a point..."

But as long as the economy was hummmin' nar a peep from the right... Now that illegal immigartion is down to trickle compared to the 90's and the economy is flat what we hear outta the right is exactly what you have just parroted... And make no bones about it, it ***is*** parroting!!!

Just like deficits... Same crap... The right counldn't have cared less while George Bush was runnin' them up... Nar a peep until Obama came into office and they are righteously indignant about deficits...

That is why akk these protests are hypocritical...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 15 May 10 - 10:39 AM

You make a good point, Bobert. It was the US Chamber of Commerce who went after Oklahoma's illegal immigrant law, and they managed to get parts of it removed. All they want is cheap labor. They don't care how many native Americans are unemployed. In fact, higher unemployment drives wages even lower.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 15 May 10 - 10:46 AM

It was wrong then, it IS wrong now...and by the way, I was bitching about it then, too! We have a government, NOT doing their job, as put forth in the Constitution. Fuck 'em..run 'em off!...both parties!
Arizona is only doing what the federal government is just too corrupt to do!..and we keep electing these traitors...stupid us!

Toss the bums out, starting with any incumbent who has a voting record of not upholding their oath!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ron Davies
Date: 15 May 10 - 11:32 AM

"All they want is cheap labor".   Correction, all the poster himself wants is cheap labor.   If he didn't want people paid less than minimum wage, he'd be for legalizing all the current illegal immigrants we now have.

Since, as we've pointed out more than once, the reason employers are able now to exploit them is that as illegals, they dare not report mistreatment of any kind--they'd be summarily deported.

If they were legal they could demand--and get---the wages legal citizens get--and would not be pushing down wages.

All workers would benefit.

So those who claim to support US workers and are not for legalizing illegal workers now here, are, in a word, hypocrites.

And anybody thinking that all the illegals should go "home" should start thinking, for a change. If you make that a requirement, not one will come out of the shadows.

It is also not "amnesty".   It would require them to learn English and they could have no criminal record except crimes associated with the act of illegal entry.

But some would rather whine about overpopulation-- a useful red herring-- than actually address the immigration issue.

And as I've also pointed out more than once, historically first generation immigrants have large families.   But as they get more education and prosperity, they realize that quality of life is better with smaller families. And act on that in succeeding generations. There is no reason to think it will be different with Mexicans coming to the US.

So extrapolation of large Hispanic families indefinitely into the future is another handy red flag to wave for propaganda fans and conspiracy theorists--but has no basis in fact.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 15 May 10 - 11:42 AM

Instead of boycotting Arizona, which some are doing, how about boycotting companies, and employers that hire illegally?..We do!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 15 May 10 - 04:34 PM

"If he didn't want people paid less than minimum wage, he'd be for legalizing all the current illegal immigrants we now have."

          Always looking at things through the wrong end of the telescope, Ron. What has to happen is to make life so miserable for the illegal aliens that they will leave and they won't be here to compete for any jobs at all. If they want to get to the back of the line and come into the country leagally, fine.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 15 May 10 - 11:29 PM

Ron: "If they were legal they could demand--and get---the wages legal citizens get--and would not be pushing down wages."

RIGHT!!! So they can come in legally! Wanting to work does not entitle you to be a citizen, ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD!

Why don't you sneak into Canada, without a passport, and tell them you want to play music for a living?...They'd tell you to fuck off!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 16 May 10 - 09:58 AM

GfS is right... If you want to stop illegal immigrants then just make FICA and income tax withholding manditory and impose stiff (jail time) penalties to anyone who hires them!!! End of *that* problem... Problem is that we are dependent on cheap labor to harvest and if you impose that law then the price of food is going to sky-rocket... Hey, I'm not saying that is bad or good... Just reality... Like they say, "Be carefull what you ask for because you might get it..."

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ron Davies
Date: 16 May 10 - 10:37 AM

"impose stiff (jail time) penalties..."

Sorry, it's not that simple.   If you clamp down on employers to the extent indicated, some --perhaps many--will just move their operations elsewhere--Mexico is an obvious choice.   As I have mentioned before.

So US jobs, and taxes for the US government, will be lost--permanently.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 16 May 10 - 10:45 AM

Bobert: "Problem is that we are dependent on cheap labor to harvest and if you impose that law then the price of food is going to sky-rocket..."

Further more, Bobert, All that labor, that we shipped overseas, and or the food we get 'cheaper' from Mexico, and other places, does NOT mean cheaper prices for the consumer(us), but rather HIGHER PROFITS, for the greed driven corrupt corporations, who have become even bigger 'multinational' corporations, who honor no borders, than the 'new borders' of their OWN business dealings. THEY are the ones dictating to the President, and the 'representatives' as what to pass, buying them off with bribes, just to create their own 'comfort zone'!!!

This could, and should be changed!

For instance, Nike, makes shoes in Korea, for approximately 37 cents, a pair....yet sells them for upwards of $200.00, for their 'top of the line' shoes,and at least $50.00 a pair for the lesser!

They are just one of many! America has lost its manufacturing base, at the behest of these corporations, and we are rapidly declining, as we generate no wealth...but has become a service oriented 'economy', and plummeting into debt, trying to maintain some sort of standard of living, that we were accustomed to, when we WERE in fact, a leading manufacturing based, giant in the world!

Now we are stuck, with the results of unenforced laws, open borders, a broken government, and the bickering, turmoil and chaos that we are left with, which in fact, is just the left-over remnant, of what the rest over the world is picking through...like a left over garage sale!!!

The lost notion, that the Democrats, are for the 'little people', while the Republican are for 'big business', is a complete farce!..that's only news to those 'head in the sand' wannabe wishful thinkers. It is in fact, so screwed up, with CORRUPTION that this country is just barely a shadow, of what it once was.

Anyway, at that, I'll give it a rest. Glad to see that we are communicating thoughts, that expand our understanding! I'm sure this 'administration' will move to put a lid on that, as well!...Probably use 'free speech' to mean only THEM!!!!!!

Regards Bobert,
Hope the lawn is mowed(wink),

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 16 May 10 - 11:00 AM

In any event, Sarah Palin is in Arizona now, encouraging people to ge there and spend their money. That will be the end of the boycott.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 16 May 10 - 11:02 AM

Ron, We cross threaded, Your post is that of defeatism!

"So US jobs, and taxes for the US government, will be lost--permanently."

The corporations who have implemented the practices, cheap labor, higher profits for themselves, don't give a rat's ass! They are not so nationalistic as you may fantasize. Why would you be concerned about their tax breaks, when they got the government to allow them tax breaks, tariff deals, to ship their manufacturing elsewhere?????????..in the first place??..........Then they sell you this 'bleeding heart' rap to the point, of even eliminating our broken borders???

If our elected so-called representatives actually, would stick closer to the Constitution, which they took an oath to uphold(even though that was merely a ceremonial show), we would not be in this problem! We are, in real time, watching our nation decaying right in front of our eyes...and the traitors in power, are shifting the blame onto us, the public...for wanting to restrict them in doing so!!!

What you expressed, in your post, is a feeling of hopelessness, and acceptance of their corrupt bullshit...which you seem content to gobble up for dinner!....thanks to their 'conditioning', and our complacency!.....

I hope, at some point, you get indigestion!

Regards,

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 16 May 10 - 12:49 PM

You're right, Sanity. Today's corporations are not nationalistic at all. I don't think there are any Henry Fords out there.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 16 May 10 - 02:28 PM

My God!!..I think I'll fall over!! That's twice in one day, on two different threads, that someone said I was right!...(instead of being 'on the right').

It's funny, Rigs, as far back as during the elections, even during the primaries, I was saying the same thing, especially about the corruption.

I think it is high time, for us, who at least pretend to be concerned, to get behind dislodging folks from their complacent, whiny, 'you do it for me' attitudes..and roll up our own sleeves, instead of waiting for a government hand-out plan to tell us, to shut up, if we want their 'free' crap! We only hurt ourselves and our nation by doing so!....besides the FACT, that we cannot afford it. Time to start, (well, past time), whittling DOWN government, and build ourselves back up!!!!!!!!!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 16 May 10 - 05:17 PM

So many of the corporations are internationally owned and financed, I don't think they care about the welfare of citizens in individual countries at all. I don't think they care about anybody; they aren't capable of it.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 16 May 10 - 08:30 PM

Hey, ya'll... We've been down this path before... Remember Ceazar Chavez and "Boycott Grapes"??? These were, ahhhhh, by today's standards, illegal immigarnts, too... Weren't no, "Geeeze, Ralp, why do ya' think they call them illegal?" crap going on then... Maybe some anit-union folks sayin', "Geeze, ralph, that's the problem with unions. They want too much"... What did Ceazar Chevez want??? Not much, come to think about it but nevermind that...

The point is that we have had this situation for a long time... My 1st wife worked for M-LAC (Migrant leagl Action Committee) in DC back in '72!!!

So lets not get bogged down her thinking that what is happening now is any different than itr has been hostoricvally... Might of fact, the crossing are way down... Way down... Like 10% of what they were 10 years ago...

The difference here is one of the tenents of fascism... That's nationalism... What is going on here is the right wing is throwin' gasoline on on a small fire trying to make it into a big fire to hide their true agednda which is to get as many people intio power so that they can suck on the front teet of corporate America...

That is hwta this is about... Pure and simple... Nothin' else other than rilin' up dumbed down people which these days ain't all that hard... Man, the right has to look over this dumbed down America and think, "A drunkards dream, if I ever did see one"....

So the debates will continue on and one and on and on... Meanwhile, corporate America will be popping champaign corks watching the ignorant people line up to be crusaders for folks who not only don't give a shit about them but secretly laugh at their total ignorance!!!

And the beat goes on...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 17 May 10 - 04:09 AM

The last line was the real eye-opener.
   
    This is very interesting and if Arizona can do it, why can't the rest of America ?

    MEXICO IS ANGRY !

    Three cheers for Arizona...

    The shoe is on the other foot and the Mexicans from the State of Sonora, Mexico do not like it. Can you believe the nerve of these people? It's almost funny.

    The State of Sonora is angry at the influx of Mexicans into Mexico . Nine state legislators from the Mexican State of Sonora traveled to Tucson to complain about Arizona's new employer crackdown on illegals from Mexico. It seems that many Mexican illegals are returning to their hometowns and the officials in the Sonora state government are ticked off. A delegation of nine state legislators from Sonora was in Tucson on
    Tuesday to state that Arizona's new Employer Sanctions Law will have a devastating effect on the Mexican state.


    At a news conference, the legislators said that Sonora, - Arizona's southern neighbor - made up of mostly small towns - cannot handle the demand for housing, jobs and schools that it will face as Mexican workers
    return to their hometowns from the USA without jobs or money.

    The Arizona law, which took effect Jan. 1, punishes Arizona employers who knowingly hire individuals without valid legal documents to work in the United States. Penalties include suspension of, or loss of, their business license.
   
    The Mexican legislators are angry because their own citizens are returning to their hometowns, placing a burden on THEIR state government. 'How can Arizona pass a law like this?' asked Mexican Rep Leticia Amparano-Gamez, who represents Nogales. 'There is not one person living in Sonora who does not have a friend or relative working in Arizona ,' she said, speaking in Spanish. 'Mexico is not prepared for this, for the tremendous problems it will face as more and more Mexicans working in Arizona and who were sending money to their families return to their home-towns in Sonora without jobs,' she said. 'We are one family, socially and economically,' she said of the people of Sonora and Arizona.


    Wrong! The United States is a sovereign nation, not a subsidiary of Mexico , and its taxpayers are not responsible for the welfare of Mexico's citizens.

    It's time for the Mexican government, and its citizens, to stop feeding parasitically off the United States and to start taking care of its/their own needs. Too bad that other states within the USA don't pass a law just like that
    passed by Arizona. Maybe that's the answer, since our own Congress will do nothing!

    New Immigration Laws: Read to the bottom or you will miss the message...

    1. There will be no special bilingual programs in the schools.
   
      2. All ballots will be in this nation's language.
   
    3. All government business will be conducted in our language.
   
      4. Non-residents will NOT have the right to vote no matter how long they are here.
   
      5. Non-citizens will NEVER be able to hold political office.
   
    6 Foreigners will not be a burden to the taxpayers. No welfare, no food stamps, no health care, or other government assistance programs. Any burden will be deported.


      7. Foreigners can invest in this country, but it must be an amount at least equal to 40,000 times the daily minimum wage.
   
    8. If foreigners come here and buy land... options will be restricted. Certain parcels including waterfront property are reserved for citizens naturally born into this country.
   
    9. Foreigners may have no protests; no demonstrations, no waving of a foreign flag, no political organizing, no bad-mouthing our president or his policies. These will lead to deportation.
   
    10. If you do come to this country illegally, you will be actively hunted &, when caught, sent to jail until your deportation can be arranged. All assets will be taken from you.

    Too strict?


    The above laws are current immigration laws of MEXICO !

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ron Davies
Date: 17 May 10 - 09:07 AM

"...defeatism..."

You spelled that wrong.

It's called realism.   That's the way capitalism works. Sorry to have to tell you--but somebody needed to.

Welcome to the real world.

If you by some chance have a counterargument, I'd love to hear it.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 17 May 10 - 09:11 AM

This is all the result/backlash of folks in the US trying to change the rules in the middle of the game... As I have pointed out, there has been at the very least a tacit agreement/relationship between Mexico and the US which has served both nations well for decades...

But as in any tacit agreement/relationship if one side changes the rules then the other will in turn change their rules... Both countries are getting more and more "nationalistic" which is never a good sign... Extreme nationalism is a tenent of fascism... It also is a sign that a nation is pulling inwards and and trying to be more isolationist... Isolationism has historically been a bad thing... If you recall the early 1900's we went thru this and ended up in WW I... We pulled back after WW I and ended up in WW II... Given the US's history and given it's current place in the world another round of nat5ionalism.isolationism ain't gonna get US outta our mess... That can only be done by breaking the stranglehold that corporations have on our people and our government... BTW, Mexico has nothing to do with that mess... That's all on US...

But let the corporate smokescreen continue... Like I said, the corportist are laughing up their sleeves at just how their little diversionary plans work with this new 'n unimproved population of dumbed down people who vote from ignorance and possess little in the way of either facts or the ability to think critically for themselves...

And the beat goes on... And on... And on...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ron Davies
Date: 17 May 10 - 09:11 AM

"They're not as nationalistic...."    That's exactly what I said--that's why they will move their operations, given the pressure you propose (jail time).

That's exactly why your plan will not work.

You should really try logic (and realism) at some point, rather than rhetoric.    It really does help.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 17 May 10 - 09:55 AM

"Remember Ceazar Chavez and "Boycott Grapes"???"

             I do remember that, and the way I remember it, Chavez came to understand that an influx of illegal immigrants undercut his ability to collectively bargain. He was against illegal immigration.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 17 May 10 - 05:23 PM

The point is that we had illegal immigrants then as we have now...

We've had decades of illegal immigrants...

My question is simple.. Why the stink now??? The border crossings are way down compared to the 90's and the ear4ly 00s...

The reason is that this is yet another empotional issue that the c orporation use as a smokescreen to keep the rednecks all pissed off... Seems that flag burnin' ammendments just don't cut it these days with Redneck Nation... And they ain't all that bothered about abortion... So the corportist have turned this into red meat and are throwing everything they have aT Redneck Nation to keep them folks all pissed off...

That, BTW, is appealing to nationalism...

No, what is needed is a major reset bewtween the US and Mexico and screw Redneck Nation... They'll be pissed off either way...

We don't need to "build the danged fence"...

We need to reform our immigration policies so that we don't have people living here and contributing who are "illegal"...

But that ain't gonna happen as long as Boss Hog can use the issue to keep Redneck Nation lathered up...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 17 May 10 - 06:58 PM

"Why the stink now???"

          Because, after the diasterous 1986 amnesty the illegals started coming in ever greater numbers. Then the country experineced the last big Reagan recession, and citizens started getting laid off in droves--probably for the first time since the early 80's. Suddenly, people woke up and discovered what had happened to them.

          Coupled with that, is a growing awareness that more people place a greater demand on resources, and those folks who were feeling a little more crowded each year looked back and realized they didn't like things they way they'd become.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ron Davies
Date: 17 May 10 - 08:42 PM

Sorry Rig, you can't enlist the ghost of Cesar Chavez for your attempt to stop history.

Chavez, if you would read more than one line, was primarily about increasing membership in his union.   Therefore, regarding the 11 million illegal immigrants already here, he'd be much more likely, rather than trying to send them "home", to try to have them made citizens--and recruit them for the UFW.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ron Davies
Date: 17 May 10 - 08:45 PM

Obviously not all 11 million would be UFW material.

But you're living in a fantasyland anyway--you've rarely been concerned with facts--except, it appears, facts about Jefferson.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 17 May 10 - 09:09 PM

COME ONE..COME ALL!! RON DAVIES SAYS ITS OKAY TO COME INTO HIS HOUSE ANYTIME YOU WANT!! IF YOU FIND THE DOOR LOCKED, COME IN THROUGH THE WINDOWS. HE IS PROVIDING FREE FOOD, LODGING AND YOUR MEDICAL BILLS WILL BE PAID, FOR FREE!! ALSO, YOU CAN USE HIS CREDIT CARDS, AFTER HE RUNS OUT OF CASH!!!! TAKE ANYTHING YOU WANT, AND BRING YOUR FRIENDS. TELL YOUR FRIENDS TO INVITE ANY AND EVERYBODY THEY MEET. THIS IS A GREAT DEAL!! AFTER ALL, WE SHARE THE SAME FORUM(CONTINENT), AND THE SAME INTERNET(WORLD)..SO EVERYONE IS INVITED. HE DOES NOT OBJECT....AND IF HE CHANGES HIS MIND, IGNORE HIM. HE HAS GIVEN UP ALL RIGHTS TO SAY WHAT GOES ON IN HIS HOUSE!!!!

BESIDES, LIBERALS ARE GREAT AT GIVING AWAY OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY!!!! nOW ITS HIS TURN, AND HE IS HAPPY TO DO SO!!!!!

phil ochs tune, just for you!

ENJOY YOUR THEME SONG!!!!!!!!!

SMILING!

GFS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ron Davies
Date: 17 May 10 - 09:15 PM

But when you come to my house, please don't shout so much.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 17 May 10 - 09:20 PM

You can't tell me that!!..You are discriminating!..After all your ol' lady shouts at you all the time!..Besides, who are you to be saying what we can or cannot do?? Shit what do you think your house is....YOURS????!!!???

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Donuel
Date: 17 May 10 - 09:47 PM

I for one do not want the USA to become MExico.

To argue that new Arizona laws are similar to Mexican law and therefore good... is nonsense on its face.

Rig may want to take the USA back... wards but I contend we move forward.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 17 May 10 - 10:25 PM

Ya' know what??? Historically there have been issues/problems with new immigrants... Nuthin' new here except that until Boss Hog wanted to lather up Redneck nation the Hispanics fit in purdy good... Plus, they worked like hell... Whats the reral deal here??? Ain't Hispanics... It's corporatist politics...

I find it interesting that the corportists wnat like, ahhhh, no federal government when it comes to producing whatever they produce but when it comes to tryin' to get their boys back in power they can't get enough government???

like wat is all that about???

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 17 May 10 - 11:39 PM

Donuel: "I for one do not want the USA to become MExico.
To argue that new Arizona laws are similar to Mexican law and therefore good... is nonsense on its face."

Donuel, I couldn't agree with you more! You are right! Therefore, when they come over here, to our country, they, being guests, if you will, should abide by OUR laws...the same when we go abroad, we should acquiesce, and abide by the laws of the land we are visiting!

What I was pointing out, was the Mexican government's laws, are far more stricter than our own, but the people don't give a damn. The hypocrisy that has become the 'liberal' banner is beyond any rational thinking. If it wasn't so tragic, it would be something you'd see on Monty Python!
....but reason has never been a benchmark of 'liberal' thinking(?), as you can see, just within this thread!

Like I've posted before, for the sake of 'equality' we should ALL be able to PICK one law, that we citizens can ignore, with impunity, if we simply allow them to do the same!

Bobert: "I find it interesting that the corportists wnat like, ahhhh, no federal government when it comes to producing whatever they produce but when it comes to tryin' to get their boys back in power they can't get enough government???

like wat is all that about???"

(hard to decipher, but) Can you spell C-O-R-R-U-P-T-I-O-N???

It is the short sighted, "Make a quick buck, and do not look at the consequences"...in fact, ignore them, then pass new laws, to prohibit others from doing the same!......Then move from the need and greed for money, to the need for more POWER!

Sincerely,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 18 May 10 - 07:43 AM

Yeah, I can spell C-O-R-R-U-P-T-I-O-N... I can spell B-O-S-S H-O-G, too... And I can spell M-O-N-E-Y, as well...

It is a sad commentary on those who parrot the corportist fight song note for note... It is "Exhibit A" that we have indeed become Huxley's "Brave New World", except in this case the Epsilons get to vote and voice their opinions quite loudly... I was watching Sarah Plain last night talking about stuff that she was totally unqualified to so much as even think (think???) about and thinking to myself that Ms. Sarah is indeed the Queen of the Epsilons...

This, by no means, is just name-calling... It is an observation... Looks as if the "elitists", you know, the folks who bother to become educated and develope their minds, are in for more and more of Daddy Bush's game plan of bashing the educated and the thinkers in favor of the Zombies...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 18 May 10 - 10:15 AM

Bobert, Boss Hog and the corporatists are the greatest supporters of illegal immigration.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: pdq
Date: 18 May 10 - 10:59 AM

Mexico is one of the wealthiest countries in the world with annual GPA of over 1 trillion dollars.

They are approximately tied with India in wealth, each ranked about 12th on the list.

Where does the money go? India has 1.2 billion people, ten times the listed population of Mexico, yet both have about the same GDP.

Yes, Mexico is a huge, wealthy, productive country with natural resources that most countries can only dream of.

Fix Mexico, don't ruin the United States. The reasons for all social problems is south of our border.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 18 May 10 - 11:26 AM

So Bobert, are you opening up YOUR home, to apply the same 'hospitality' as you want the rest of the country to adopt??...or is it just for those not near your backyard?????

"Love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal!!" --Phil Ochs

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 18 May 10 - 12:07 PM

pdq: "Mexico is one of the wealthiest countries in the world with annual GPA of over 1 trillion dollars.
They are approximately tied with India in wealth, each ranked about 12th on the list.
Where does the money go? India has 1.2 billion people, ten times the listed population of Mexico, yet both have about the same GDP.
Yes, Mexico is a huge, wealthy, productive country with natural resources that most countries can only dream of."

See folks, pdq knows how to spell C-O-R-R-U-P-T-I-O-N!

Its amazing, with all that wealth that our 'poor' don't sneak into Mexico, and get on THEIR welfare!!....other than the FACT that if they did, they'd either be thrown in prison, and held for ransom...or be shot!

Perhaps with all that money, they should use it to develop their infrastructure, and create private sector jobs.....only bummer to that is, the left socialist nutcases would have their stupid, liberty squelching agenda derailed...well at least for a while..till they bullshitted their own mentally incapable too!

SUCKERS!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 18 May 10 - 12:47 PM

Well, yeah, GfS, to some degree we have opened our home up to our neighbors... We are field boarding three horses out of the kindness of our hearts... We are allowing another neighbor to use part of one of our barns to store his stuff while he is trying to find a new home out of the kindness of our hearts... We have opened up our gardens to be toured by at least a half a dozen garden clubs out of the kindness of our hearts... I waive my fees for performing if the event is for charity... I mean, this is what neigbors do... We don't ask to see anyone's birth certificates... This is just they way we were brought up...

On another note, I reckon if you take a look at the citizens of New Mexico, Arizona, Texas and California it could be argued by the Mexicans that those folks are illegals... Get my drift here???

I mean, as a nation we have not always acted in a neigborly, pro-human manner and seems we're back into that pattern once again...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: pdq
Date: 18 May 10 - 12:56 PM

That's right, GfS.

Mexico is the most corrupt country in the Western Hemisphere. The only other candidate for that spot is Haiti, a puny place which cannot cause us the damage that Mexico can.

Eveybody should know by now that Carlos Slim of Mexico is the richest man in the world with about 54 billion dollars, ahead of Bill Gates.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ebbie
Date: 18 May 10 - 01:04 PM

And besides, the nigras are happy with their lot and wouldn't change it if they could; ol' whitey is stirrin' up a lot of trouble for nuthin'. Right, pdq?

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Joe Offer
Date: 18 May 10 - 01:53 PM

You bring up a very good point, GfS and pdq. The lower classes in Mexico, especially those of Mayan ancestry, have been oppressed by the wealthy since the Spaniards arrived in Mexico. Millions live in some of the worst slums the world has ever seen, while the wealthy class of Mexico lives in luxury. And yes, there is a powerful network of crime and corruption to add to the oppression in Mexico. Wealthy and corrupt Mexicans have no trouble getting into the U.S. The "illegal aliens" who come here are poor people looking for work.

GfS and pdq, I'm glad you're finally beginning to see the point: the "illegal aliens" are coming to the United States to escape oppression, to find the freedom and equality that we boast of. Yes, their country is wealthy, but it is so corrupt and ridden with crime that poor people never have a chance there - that's why they want to escape.

My German and French and Irish ancestors came to the United States to escape oppression by the wealthy class, not necessarily because their home lands were impoverished.
And on another note: My friend Igora is a Roman Catholic nun from India, in the U.S. on a 6-month visa to attend a sabbatical education program. She had a chance to take a second semester, and she was all excited about this opportunity. But now she got word from U.S. Immigration that her request for a visa extension has been denied. She has to go back to India and apply for a new visa. Does that seem fair or just or necessary?

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 18 May 10 - 02:26 PM

More folks are beginning to worry about the alarming increase in the numbers of people.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 18 May 10 - 02:48 PM

Your point well taken, Joe..however, perhaps a revolution south of the border would be in order, rather than one here, to accommodate the ILLEGALS!~..OH, BY THE WAY, DO GANG MEMBERS AND DRUG SMUGGLERS FIT INTO THAT PROFILE?????

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Joe Offer
Date: 18 May 10 - 02:54 PM

Rig says: More folks are beginning to worry about the alarming increase in the numbers of people.

That's true, Rig, it IS alarming. But people were alarmed when our ancestors came, too. It took some adjusting; but in the end, our immigrant ancestors made the United States into a prosperous and vigorous nation. If we close ourselves off to population growth, we may well close ourselves off to economic growth. Our economy has stagnated and seems like it is beginning to die. Perhaps we need more workers and more consumers, that the waves of immigration have brought us in the past.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 18 May 10 - 03:13 PM

Joe, If you think they are likened to 'political refugees', which is a bit of a spin, let them go to the embassy, and ask for asylum..in any event, LEGAL and accounted for, is still best! Why settle for less?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 18 May 10 - 03:18 PM

Someone just forwarded this E-mail to me....thought I'd post it. Sorry if it is too 'politically incorrect'.


Did you know?
   * That the words "race car" spelled backward still spells "race car".
   * That "eat" is the only word that if you take the 1st letter and move it to the last, it spells its past tense "ate".
   * And have you noticed that if you rearrange the letters in "illegal immigrants", and add just a few more letters, it spells out: "Go home you fucking, free-loading, benefit grabbing, kid-producing, violent, non-English speaking assholes, and take those other hairy-faced, sandal wearing, bomb making, goat loving, raggedy ass Muslim bastards with you."

Now how weird is that?

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 18 May 10 - 03:28 PM

Unfotunately, GfS, it is politically *correct* in that there are alot of folks who believe exactly that... I mean, I live in community where there are tons of folks that say that kinda stuff everyday... And worse... Ya' oughtta hear waht they say about Obama!!!

Guess no one wanted to comment on how Mexicans could possibly see the American citizens living in the West and Southwest could be considered illegals... Think Polk here...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Joe Offer
Date: 18 May 10 - 03:35 PM

Sanity, Americans, even the liberal ones, have no sympathy with those who want to enter the United States for criminal activity. That makes no sense, and it's ridiculous to even think of bringing that into the discussion.
What we're talking about is immigrant workers who come here looking for a way to earn a living and make a life for themselves. It's very difficult for them to get permission to come into this country to work.
When you refer to them as "fucking, free-loading, benefit grabbing, kid-producing, violent, non-English speaking assholes," I think that perhaps that you are forgetting that they are human beings. If we are a civilized people, than I think we owe our fellow human beings at least a modicum of respect and compassion - especially if they are hungry and impoverished.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 18 May 10 - 04:00 PM

"Perhaps we need more workers and more consumers, that the waves of immigration have brought us in the past."

             I think we've passed the point of diminishing returns, and more immigrants would just make things worse.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 May 10 - 04:05 PM

Anybody care at all that the LAW in CALIFORNIA requires police to determine the status of anyone arrested, and REQUIRES them to turn over illegals to INS?


Seems like California protests too much.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,999
Date: 18 May 10 - 05:20 PM

ET, phone home.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 18 May 10 - 11:14 PM

Joe Offer: "Sanity, Americans, even the liberal ones, have no sympathy with those who want to enter the United States for criminal activity. That makes no sense, and it's ridiculous to even think of bringing that into the discussion."

Very well, BUT entering this country illegally IS A FELONY! Fines for employing illegal aliens in California carries a $25,000 price tag! Let me see now....mmm ...25,000 X 11,000,000(in California alone, 2006),,,,umm...is $275,000,000,000.00...But instead, let's say these wonder-workers are sending home, to Mexico a $100.00 a week....so that's $1,100,000,00.00 leaving our economy...oh, and tax free earned, too. Then add the free medical, and welfare, and food stamps....Do you have any idea of missed income, and benefits we are being denied, to allow this to go on unchecked???!!!???...then you say, "...even the liberal ones, have no sympathy with those who want to enter the United States for criminal activity."

Those of us who are trying to call this to your attention, (as citizens are being foreclosed on, in record numbers) are called insensitive bigots??? .......E-X-C-U-S-E M-E-E-E-?????

Add, on top of that, the federal government is to blame, BOTH CORRUPT PARTIES!....not only those who come across, but ultimately it is our own inefficient, through corruption, government's fault!....by not doing the obvious duties that being our government, is suppose to take care of, by the supreme law of the land......and now they want to administer 'health care'??????................YOU'VE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME!!!!...and instead, they tell us, "Well, it's gotten so big, that instead of doing anything about it, we'll just do nothing, and tough shit!"

..and "I got a Bridge to sell you in New York,..come this way.."

Sorry guys, I just flat out DO NOT TRUST these screwed up politicians, and the ideological crap they're shoveling on us!

By the way, that is enough money to get California back on budget, and alleviate the problem.

Now, Bobert, I read your post about opening up your home and hospitality, to others, as I do as well..but the difference is that we CHOOSE to do that, and are not forced to do that. Choosing, and forcing is really quite different....and choosing does not impose onto someone else's rights. The other does. By the way, I hope when you extend your charity, that the lawn is mowed properly, with no crunched-up stuff of your guys!!(wink)..and P-Vine ain't yelling at ya'

Regards,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Joe Offer
Date: 19 May 10 - 01:51 AM

Well, let's see, Gfs -
You forget I'm a retired federal investigator who did a lot of work for the Immigration and Naturalization Service.

TITLE 18 US Code > PART II > CHAPTER 227 > SUBCHAPTER A > § 3559 says, in brief that a felony is a crime that carries a punishment of over one year in prison or a death sentence. If the punishment is one year or less, it is a misdemeanor.

TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER II > Part VIII > § 1325 (Improper entry by an alien) carries a punishment of not more than six months imprisonment.

Do the math.
'Tain't no felony.

You know, GfS, I suggest you visit a place where immigrant workers live, or go out in the vineyards when they're working in 100-degree weather. I've done both, many times. When you see how hard they work and under what conditions, and how bad their housing is and at what high prices, maybe you'll develop a shred of compassion.

love,
-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 19 May 10 - 05:48 AM

""Joe, If you think they are likened to 'political refugees', which is a bit of a spin, let them go to the embassy, and ask for asylum..in any event, LEGAL and accounted for, is still best! Why settle for less?""

Could it be that they don't seek asylum, in case the guy handling their claim has the same attitudes displayed by yourself and others on this forum GfS?

Just a thought, they might be scared of the reception they think they will get.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 19 May 10 - 06:00 AM

""Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity - PM
Date: 18 May 10 - 03:18 PM

Someone just forwarded this E-mail to me....thought I'd post it. Sorry if it is too 'politically incorrect'.

"Did you know?
   * That the words "race car" spelled backward still spells "race car".
   * That "eat" is the only word that if you take the 1st letter and move it to the last, it spells its past tense "ate".
   * And have you noticed that if you rearrange the letters in "illegal immigrants", and add just a few more letters, it spells out: (racist filth deleted)."

Now how weird is that?""

And that fits right in with my last post. You haven't the courage to spout your own racism, but can't wait to spread around somebody else's at the first opportunity.

And you wonder why the illegals stay under cover?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST
Date: 19 May 10 - 07:29 AM

Nobody wonders why illegals stay under cover. The task is to flush them out and convince them to go home.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 19 May 10 - 08:22 AM

If I am not mistaken, illegally entering into Arizona is not a felony but a misdomenaor...

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 19 May 10 - 09:38 AM

I was listening to a radio station out of Albuquerque, who just reversed their 'sanctuary city' status, in favor of enforcing the law. They we're discussing it, and, at least in their state, it is a felony. Perhaps they were referring to state law.

And yes, I've seen where migrants live. It looks like parts of Mexico, to tell you the truth.....and we used to go to Mexico, at least three times a month, a while ago.
All this 'bleeding heart' crap, does NOT change the fact that they could come here LEGALLY! I think we could look to Bill Clinton, and Vicente Fox to thank for that. What Bill did, was sneak the NAFTA bill in, during Christmas recess, so his very unpopular bill could pass, while the opposition gone,...and Fox was telling his population that they had a 'right' to go up and get jobs...and doing everything possible to provide maps and encouragement....all this in prelude to the North American Union....Oh, and by the way, if there is an agenda to dissolve our country, and its borders. and don't you think that the American public should at least be notified about it, and/or have a say??????. I'm sure this is 'news' to some on here, but this is what is really taking place...and the 'bought off' traitors, posing as representatives, are once again, ramming it through, either unwittingly, not reading what they are signing,(so they vote along 'party lines'), or through bribes (corruption).

This crap is feeding who? The corporate 'fat cats' at the top, who also have a system in place, and ready to spring on us(as yet another 'REMEDY'), in which a new 'identity' system, based on 3 sets of six numerals indicating financial, medical health, and criminal record. (Ironic, that these three, happen to be the three big areas of 'reform' packages) They NEED for this turmoil to fester, so they can 'offer' this solution! THIS IS NOT FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE "LITTLE GUY" The liberal left, are being USED as dupes. WAKE UP!!...The conservative right is being USED to counter. The left sees the bullshit(to a degree) in the 'right's' reporting of this, and the 'right' sees the bogus reporting on the left, and the two of them are fanning up what should be a non-issue...to FACILITATE the real hidden agenda, just waiting for the time to spring it on us. This is all pre-conceived, and the real enemy is the stupidity, that allows it to go down!....

As far as the 'race car' post, Don, and others, I was merely posting it to demonstrate the level of how certain people(the right) have gone from common sense, to anger, and of course, the emotional response (feigned appall) of the lib-left. Thank you for your appropriate responses, by the way.

Oh well,..back to music.......

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 19 May 10 - 11:21 AM

No sooner than I got off the computer, I went upstairs to check on the news(about the primaries), and there was a breaking news alert, about President Calderon(Mexico), and Obama, meeting at the White House,..and in that Calderon had just given a statement about unifying our two countries, and his opposition to the Arizona law. Apparently, just as I previously posted, they are getting a whole other 'side', of what their understanding is, as to what is being reported here....just as I said!~!!

I would think, as 'pdq' and I, brought to the attention of the post, that Mexico, should get out of OUR politics, and focus on the corruption of their own country...and as Donuel succinctly put it, "I for one do not want the USA to become Mexico."

So, there you have it. I think we, as people who are 'concerned' about this issue, should get the blinders off, and take a hard look at the reality of the situation, and look past, what is being fed to us, through the two partisan propaganda 'news' sources...and STICK to our Constitution!....which was written, and adopted, to avoid this kind of crap, from those who feel the need to DICTATE to us, for their OWN ends...not the well-being of our nation, as a whole!!

Happens when you're from 'Sanity-land'!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ebbie
Date: 19 May 10 - 10:03 PM

"So, there you have it. I think we, as people who are 'concerned' about this issue, should get the blinders off, and take a hard look at the reality of the situation, and look past, what is being fed to us, through the two partisan propaganda 'news' sources...and STICK to our Constitution!....which was written, and adopted, to avoid this kind of crap, from those who feel the need to DICTATE to us, for their OWN ends...not the well-being of our nation, as a whole!!"

Question: Just what part of the US Constitution are you referring to?

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 19 May 10 - 10:21 PM

Article 9, Section 4 of the Constitution states, "The United States shall guarantee to every state in this Union a republican form of government, "and shall protect each of them against invasion..." It appears that the government, the people you voted for and elected to represent you, are not carrying out their duties or living up to their responsibilities.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 19 May 10 - 10:36 PM

Invasion??? Pearl Habor was an invasion... What we have here is a decades old situation where the US government has done a "wink, wink" in letting lots of people enter into the country to pick crops and do other kinds of work that, frankly, lazy Americans won't do...

Now, because the right wing thinks it can turn a decades long practice into something else to stir up their voting base they have created an issue out of a non-issue... Great politics, perhaps, but completely out of touch with decades of reality...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 20 May 10 - 02:38 AM

Is it lazy to not want to work for less than minimum wage and in illegally hazardous conditions? Go on then.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 20 May 10 - 09:32 AM

invasion [ɪnˈveɪʒən]
n
1. (Military) the act of invading with armed forces
2. any encroachment or intrusion as 'an invasion of rats'
3. the onset or advent of something harmful, esp of a disease
4. (Medicine / Pathology) Pathol the spread of cancer from its point of origin into surrounding tissues
5. (Life Sciences & Allied Applications / Botany) the movement of plants to a new area or to an area to which they are not native

Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged © HarperCollins Publishers 1991, 1994,

Bobert: "Invasion??? Pearl Habor was an invasion.."

Pearl Harbor was an ATTACK..not an invasion

Mouser: "Is it lazy to not want to work for less than minimum wage and in illegally hazardous conditions? Go on then."

Wanting to work could be done legally.

What you don't seem to address is the corruptness of our government, and what is going on, in the dealing with another corrupt government, and a symptom, is the FACT that this corruption, has left the door wide open to screw the American people.

Hint: It has to do with drugs, and money, going back as far as, Vietnam, and the 'Golden Triangle', to Central America, and the 'Iran-Contra' affair, and now in Mexico...WITH THE SAME PLAYERS!

I think you can do your own research on it..but I'll help point you in the right direction:

Daniel Sheehan, attorney for the Christic Institute who filed a lawsuit exposing a huge amount of this crap!...Book: 'Out of Control'.

You will also discover what has steered U.S. Foreign Policy in Iran-Iraq...and why!..including the mid-east players. plus find out a lot more about the hostage crisis in Iran during the Carter Administration, and why they were REALLY released, as Reagan was being sworn in. That is if you're REALLY interested!

It ALL ties together. Meanwhile, we have yet another political agenda going on...and now the two are now shaking hands...getting acquainted!....as we, and the common Mexican citizen eat shit! I know your intentions may be right, but you still are being duped!...and of course, proud of it!

GfS



That's a good place to start. In the course of that

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 20 May 10 - 10:32 AM

There was a guy on NPR yesterday who said the American Southwest will belong to which ever ethnicity can "out populate the other."

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 20 May 10 - 11:29 AM

This may turn out to be a disastrous fiasco....all because our government, under various corrupt politicians, have managed to distract the American public, more on the left side, away from their obligation, as our government, while allowing an agenda of criminal activity, to go on. That being said, the 'right', for the most part, have no clue whatsoever, being as they have been sold a bogus bill of goods, with the propaganda, that a lot of this stuff was done, under the guise, of some sort of patriotic 'national security'...when it was all a cover to hide the mega-criminal enterprise, which often broke our neutrality treaties, and resolutions(Bolen Amendment), during the 80's. During the hostage crisis, in Iran, the radical hostage takers, discovered some activities, that the U.S. had been up to, and blackmailed us, in exchange for the release of the hostages, during Reagan's swearing in. The present president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, was one of the leaders of the hostage takers. For what he knows about U.S. foreign policies, in his mind, justifies his position against the U.S.....which, if our government was not so corrupt, and unrepentant, could have corrected this. Because of it, we are now embroiled in a multi-front effort....and going broke.
It's really a mess!...and the details are far greater than space and time, on a blog, can adequately be covered. You'll have to do your own research.
None the less, our border, and all borders should be secured!!!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ron Davies
Date: 20 May 10 - 10:18 PM

If you are from "Sanity" it must be a synonym for the land of purple prose and precious little sense.

But, with your dial always set on "outrage", you'll fit right in around here.   Be sure to give us your version of how world capitalism and religion, in an infernal and unstoppable alliance, threaten to destroy our lives.

It will be fascinating--or at least faintly amusing-- to hear your particular variation on this top Mudcat theme.

And please don't hold back. We know you alone have the truth and we're desperate to hear it.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 20 May 10 - 10:29 PM

Like I have said: Maybe it's time for Mexico to tell the immigrants to get the heck outta Mexico (i.e. Arizon, New Mexico, Texas, California...)

And for the record, I hate the word "annex"... Lets just use the correct word: steal!!!

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 21 May 10 - 12:00 AM

I just 'cut and pasted' this from a page on the net..thought you might find it interesting.

An interview segment of Presidente Calderon, from Wolf Blitzer, CNN:


    WOLF BLITZER: "Do Mexican police go around asking for papers of people who they suspect are illegal?"

    CALDERON: "Of course."

    BLITZER: "If somebody sneaks in from Nicaragua or some other country in Central America through the southern border of Mexico, they wind up in Mexico, they can go get a job, they can work . . ."

    CALDERON: (Interrupting Blitzer) "No, no. If somebody do that without permission, we send back them."

********************************************************************

Rush Limbaugh's comments on the interview:

Yet he criticizes Arizona for trying to get a handle on the illegal immigration that is overwhelming their state!

Rush Limbaugh said, "Is this guy an idiot? Is this guy not just a full-fledged idiot? He just undercut his entire argument. He just undercut Obama's entire argument."

Response from the Reporter:

"Yes, he is Rush. And the Democrats gave him a standing ovation today."

Rep. Smith said: "It's a little bit like inviting a guest over for dinner and having them criticize the food, and I just don't think it was appropriate."
Smith also said: "I just don't think it's right for the president of another country to come here and criticize our nation or our states for wanting to stop human smuggling, stop drug trafficking, or, frankly, secure their borders."

Rep. Smith finished with a great summary statement: "I just don't like the idea of foreign officials – officials of other governments coming to us and interfering in our domestic affairs. We wouldn't go to their country and tell them what to do. And I think they should concentrate on what's best for their nation, and let us concentrate on what we think is best for ours."

(Rasmussen)- Arizona voters now support the state's new immigration law more than ever and are still more inclined to think the law will be good for the state's economy rather than bad. A lot of voters in the state are thinking it's payback time, too, to those cities or states that boycott Arizona.

    A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Voters in Arizona finds that 71% now favor the immigration law, while 24% oppose it.

    In late April, the law was supported by 64% of the state's voters and opposed by 30%

    Nationally, 55% of voters favor passage of such a law in their state.

Who is Calderon to Lecture Americans on Our Laws?..

Good question, ask President Dickwad…

    Texas Sen. John Cornyn took Mexican President Felipe Calderon to task today for criticizing the tough Arizona immigration law and the flow of illegal guns from the United States to Mexico.

    "It was inappropriate for President Calderon to lecture Americans on our own state and federal laws," the San Antonio Republican said in a statement. "Arizona's immigration law has been amended to make clear it does not authorize racial profiling by law enforcement.

    "Moreover, the Second Amendment is not a subject open for diplomatic negotiation, with Mexico or any other nation."

    Calderon, in Washington for a state visit, addressed a joint session of Congress this morning.

Baghdad Bobby: Obama Doesn't Care About the Dems Who Lost…

GOP Sen. Orrin Hatch Rips Mexican President Calderon For Criticizing Arizona During Address to Congress…

Don't stop with Calderon, Obama was the one who allowed him to speak there in the first place…

    (The Hill)- Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) blasted Mexican President Felipe Calderon on Thursday, calling the visiting dignitary's remarks on Arizona's recently implemented immigration law "inappropriate."

    Earlier Thursday, Calderon condemned Arizona's new immigration law during a speech to a joint session of Congress, saying it amounts to little more than racial profiling and that the United States is in need of comprehensive immigration reform.

    "It's inappropriate for a head of state to question our laws, especially when the state of Arizona only acted in the best interest of its citizens and with the support of seventy percent of its people," said Hatch in a statement.

    Hatch said Arizona was forced to pass the immigration law — which compels state law enforcement officials to require proper legal residency papers from people they suspect may be in the U.S. illegally — because of the federal government's failure to stop drug and human smugglers, as well as illegal immigrants, from coming across the U.S.-Mexico border.

    "The state of Arizona is stepping in where the federal government has failed," said Hatch. "It is trying to stop waves of illegal immigrants, many of whom are dangerous gang members and drug and human traffickers, from crossing into its communities."

Mexican President Slams Arizona Law before a Joint Session of Congress; Democrats Stand and Applaud – Video

Click Image for Video
Here is video of Mexican President Felipe Calderon this morning speaking to a Joint Session of Congress. In his address he slammed the new Arizona anti-illegal immigration law.

Calderon said, "I strongly disagree with the recently adopted law in Arizona." When he said that, virtually all of the Democrats in the House Chamber stood and applauded him, including Nancy Pelosi, Vice-President Biden, and the assembled Cabinet. Notice Attorney General Eric Holder hesitantly standing at the 23 second mark of the video. Holder admitted earlier this week he has not yet read the law, even though he has been critical of it.

Calderon accused the law of pushing "racial profiling," which is patently false. The law explicitly prohibits racial profiling. But truth means nothing to people like Calderon and those on the Left seeking to push their radical agenda.

How dare Calderon come as a guest to the United States and then publicly blast a sovereign state for a law that has been enacted according to the Constitution.

But worse than Calderon, how dare the Democrats and the Obama Administration stand on the side of a foreign leader against one of our nation's 50 states.

Note: Video linked due to heavy traffic

WWII Vet Ordered to Take Down American Flag…

File this under: Stories that make liberals cry tears of joy…

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ebbie
Date: 21 May 10 - 12:06 AM

"During the hostage crisis, in Iran, the radical hostage takers, discovered some activities, that the U.S. had been up to, and blackmailed us, in exchange for the release of the hostages, during Reagan's swearing in." GfS

Hmmm. I'm trying to understand: You mean: Iran held hostages, they knew something about us and blackmailed us by releasing the hostages? Hmmmm. How does that work? There appears to be something missing in the transaction. When you blackmail somebody, they are supposed to pay,

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST
Date: 21 May 10 - 06:58 AM

They were afraid of Jimmy Carter, they held the hostages until they were sure Reagan would be sworn in. After that, Reagan delt them what they wanted under the table--think Iran/Contra.
(Riginslinger)

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 21 May 10 - 08:16 AM

I don't know why they were afraid of Jimmy... It was obvious that the militart hated him... Eevn badly botched a poorly planned (on purpose) rescue plot... Rememeber that one??? Word on then street is that the Joint Chiefs ware so pissed at Carter that they orders a couple helecopter to just go run into one another out in the dessert??? Like what was that about??? Well, I'll tell you what it was about... It helped get Reagan elected who never said "no" to the Pentagon...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 21 May 10 - 08:45 AM

They were afraid of Jimmy Carter, they held the hostages until they were sure Reagan would be sworn in. After that, Reagan delt them what they wanted under the table--think Iran/Contra.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 21 May 10 - 09:40 AM

Waht, Rigs??? You don't think we didn't know that??? Come on, man... I could recognize yer posts from outter space...

(Lotta of 'um seem to come from outter space, Bobz...)

Nevermind...

B;~)

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 21 May 10 - 10:01 AM

False..False and False.
Ebbie: (at least she asked a legitimate question)..."Hmmm. I'm trying to understand: You mean: Iran held hostages, they knew something about us and blackmailed us by releasing the hostages? Hmmmm. How does that work?"

During the hostage crisis, one of the hostages that was taken was a fellow named Buckley. He, we were told was a professor. when it came out that that was false, the 'news' told us that he was a sometime operative of the CIA, but low level. When that story didn't wash, the 'news' admitted he worked as a station chief, in Tehran. What the press DIDN'T tell us, which was true, was that he was the head of the CIA's covert operations worldwide. He was torture to death...on video tape...and the information on it, SOME of which, I'll post a link. Other things include stuff on the Pshaw of Iran, weapons and drug deals, that when the first time I heard this stuff, in detail, I cried for my country(true story). Things in Vietnam, arms sales to Iran, etc etc....it is truly appalling. ..but nonetheless here is just SOME things...which might have more to do with our border with Mexico, than being reported. Take your time, and read it.


http://www.csun.edu/~hfspc002/news/cia.drug.html

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 21 May 10 - 10:22 AM

It wasn't us they knew something about, Sanity, is was Ronald Reagan. They bought him cheap and often.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 21 May 10 - 10:27 AM

After I posted that link, I checked on SOME of the links on it, and found they had been 'blacked out'. I thought this was more common knowledge than apparently it is. So, for the cause of security, you'll have to do more of your own homework. I suggest you look into the lawsuit filed in Florida, by the Christic institute....if you can find anything about it. Also the book 'Out of Control'.

All I can say, is what I've said before....your 'news' isn't news, and the Constitution should be adhered to, and not fucked with. When you do, you set up a 'Domino Effect', of losing our rights. What next?..Free Speech?..Already they're are wanting to limit the internet, you know like China, Cuba and so on and so forth.....

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 21 May 10 - 10:29 AM

This was going on BEFORE Reagan, during and after....and still.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 21 May 10 - 11:17 AM

Then why did they want to get rid of Carter so badly?

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: pdq
Date: 21 May 10 - 11:25 AM

Illegal imigration is the most important topic in the country, ahead of even the economic disaster.

Why do you folks insist on discussing Carter, Reagan, The Shah and the CIA?

That said, John Perkins and John Pilger are absolute propaganda-slinging liars.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 21 May 10 - 02:48 PM

You're right, pdq. Immigration is at the heart of the survival of the planet.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: DougR
Date: 21 May 10 - 03:15 PM

Pdq: Bobert's forgetting to take his meds again.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 21 May 10 - 04:20 PM

No, I think he's been cured!

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 21 May 10 - 04:51 PM

pdq: "Why do you folks insist on discussing Carter, Reagan, The Shah and the CIA?:

Because the root of the problem started back then, and has continued through several administrations. I think when they figure out how to keep the price up(being as it is 'illegal'), and still usher in a new form of government, things might change....but I'm sure the folks making big profits off it, will do what they can to facilitate themselves....at our expense....and get those in power to bend the laws of the land(Constitution, et al), keep their money machine cranking...oh, and keep corrupting who they can, as well.
Happy Thoughts!
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: pdq
Date: 21 May 10 - 04:54 PM

Bobert is the Left-wing version of Earl Pitts.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: DougR
Date: 21 May 10 - 05:48 PM

Rig: "No, I think he's been cured."

You mean like a slab of bacon?

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 21 May 10 - 09:39 PM

That's funny Doug, but no. Boberts posts are consistent and rational. Sometimes I agree with him, sometimes I don't. Some posters, however, just don't make sense to me--maybe it's me--I don't know.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 21 May 10 - 09:46 PM

5 hunnert!!!

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: catspaw49
Date: 21 May 10 - 10:02 PM

From a recent ACLU newsletter:

A lot of people are outraged about Arizona's new racial profiling, "show me your papers" law. This week, the ACLU went to federal court to block this discriminatory law from taking effect.

Racial profiling is a deeply-offensive affront to the American values of justice and fairness. And using race to demand that people produce "papers" to prove who they are is a police-state tactic that is completely unacceptable in America. If we don't stop this law now, similar ones could spread across the nation. Already, state lawmakers in at least 10 other states have promised to bring similar bills to their legislatures.

That's why we're taking Arizona to court, along with our partners the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, the National Immigration Law Center, and a number of other civil rights groups.

Under the new law, Arizona police will be required to ask people they stop for their citizenship papers based on "reasonable suspicion" that they are in the country unlawfully. And by leaving "reasonable suspicion" undefined, the law leaves police officers little choice but to act on appearance and language, inviting a new wave of rampant racial profiling.

This week, our lawyers took the first legal step to stop this law. And we'll be organizing on the ground in Arizona, training volunteer lawyers to help people defend themselves against racial profiling. We won't stand by while this law transforms Arizona into a place where anyone can be forced to "show papers" when they are stopped by police just because of how they look or talk or dress."


Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 21 May 10 - 10:48 PM

It's truely amzing when Redneck Nation unites... Here we have the same 20% who thought Chaney was doing a great job a couple years ago attending these Tea Party Klan rallies and wanting everyone who ain't like them to go the fuck home and give these 20% *****their***** (??????????????????) country back?????

Give me a break... I know about those Japanese soldiers who were evetually brought outta the South Pacific islands well after WW II but to be bringing CSA rednecks out these days is a tad on disgustingly silly side...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: DougR
Date: 22 May 10 - 01:45 AM

Rig: So you still think Bobert is cured?

Spaw: So the ACLU has an opinion, what's your point?

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 22 May 10 - 01:58 AM

Can't say for sure and Spaw will of course have to speak for himself, but if I had to guess I'd probably say he agrees with their opinion and wished to share it with us. Just a hunch.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 22 May 10 - 02:46 AM

You know, i have nothing against immigrants...but why not come in legally?...Oh, and as far as the government, well, its just another thing they can't do right! Happy medical care!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Joe Offer
Date: 22 May 10 - 03:18 AM

Yeah, why not come in legally? GfS, do you have any idea how hard it is for a Mexican laborer to come into the U.S. legally? From what I understand, it's well-nigh impossible - unless you have relatives who are legal residents.
As I said above, I have a friend who's a nun from India, and she can't even get a 6-month extension of her 6-month visa so you can attend another semester of school.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: catspaw49
Date: 22 May 10 - 04:53 AM

Sorry Doug.....I guess I should have posted what mouse said and also that it was basically an FYI post regarding court actions underway.

I was nice enough to delete the sections that ask for help and also the section with the info on obtaining bumper stickers and other things. Would you like one? I mean they ARE free and very attractive.


Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 22 May 10 - 09:27 AM

The real issue here is: when do you have enough people? I think we have too many already, and I'll do what I can to keep additional people out, eject illegal immigrants, and stabilize the population we have.

    As far as keeping the Arizona Laws in Arizona, I think the toothpaste is out of the tube. Several states are writing similar legislation at this moment.

    The really funny part of it is, the administration has pretty much concluded there isn't much they can do about it. Eric Holder and Janet Napolitano have been in front of cameras a number of times saying they haven't read the bill. It was believable the first time, not the second, third, or fourth.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: pdq
Date: 22 May 10 - 10:38 AM

"The real issue here is: when do you have enough people? I think we have too many already..." ~ Rigs

Well, Arizona has 28% Indian lands and 48% Federal lands, such as National Forests and BLM property. That's 76% that the new Mexican population cannot live on, at least legally. Add some more land owned by the state of Arizona and you realize that the state is actually much closer to its carrying capacity that one might assume.

"Several states are writing similar legislation at this moment." ~ Rigs

Last time I heard it was 17 states. The puny, over-represented northeastern states like Vermont, Rhode Island and Delaware will, of course, not join the fight.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: olddude
Date: 22 May 10 - 11:37 AM

All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression.
Thomas Jefferson

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 22 May 10 - 02:19 PM

I don't know too many people who disagree with Thomas Jefferson, but I'm going to assume he is talking about people who are legally in the country. If they're illegally here, I suspect he wouldn't object to their removal.

             After Texas writes him out of the text books, however, anything can happen.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ebbie
Date: 22 May 10 - 03:14 PM

Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) may not have been sensitized to the immigration issue, Rig. In his day and memory practically everybody was an immigrant- and they didn't even have to get permission to come.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 22 May 10 - 05:01 PM

Well, Arizona has 28% Indian lands and 48% Federal lands, such as National Forests and BLM property. That's 76% that the new Mexican population cannot live on, at least legally. Add some more land owned by the state of Arizona and you realize that the state is actually much closer to its carrying capacity that one might assume.

I realize no such thing. Do you have any numbers?

The problem with bringing in Mexican workers legally is that Big Agriculture doesn't want legal workers. Legal workers have to be paid living wage and work in OSHA-approved conditions. And Big Agriculture doesn't want that. Neither do we, really, because it means we'd have to pay more for our produce, and we'd scream bloody murder if we had to do that. Already if you suggest that Wal*Mart stop exploiting its workers and suppliers, people (usually on the right) cry out, "Don't you WANT people to be able to buy cheap groceries and clothes?" Usually the same people that despise illegal immigrants.

Some people are just TOO hard to please.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: DougR
Date: 22 May 10 - 05:17 PM

Spaw: thanks for providing the blue clicky, and I did take a look at the form, but I'm gonna pass.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 22 May 10 - 06:06 PM

"Neither do we, really, because it means we'd have to pay more for our produce,..."

             I'd happily pay more for produce if I didn't have to pay for the illegals being here. Aside from that, you can't let them in legally without addressing the problem of "birthright citizenship."

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 22 May 10 - 06:07 PM

"Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) may not have been sensitized to the immigration issue, Rig."

             Probably not, but he understood the importance of law.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 22 May 10 - 06:59 PM

I'd happily pay more for produce if I didn't have to pay for the illegals being here.

Unfortunately you're not the only person making these decisions.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: pdq
Date: 22 May 10 - 07:21 PM

"The new survey results are consistent with findings conducted over many years. Three-out-of-four voters believe that the federal government is not doing enough to secure the nation's borders. In fact, 56% believe that the policies of the federal government encourage illegal immigration. Among voters who are angry about immigration, 83% are angry at the federal government. Only 12% direct their anger at the immigrants...""    ~    current poll by Rasmussen

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 22 May 10 - 07:30 PM

Only 12% direct their anger against the immigrants? Strikes me that the real issue here is anger at the government and the immigration thing is just something to focus on. The deciders of what to get angry about (the Glen Becks and Rush Limbaughs and Anne Coulters) tell their minions that, having lost on birth certificates and health care reform, the next thing to get mad about is immigration.

That's what those numbers say to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 22 May 10 - 07:32 PM

Actually, mouse, Arizona is 100% Mexican land!!!

(But, Boberdz... It was annexed...)

No, it was stolen...

And now the desendents of the folks we stole it from are being vamped on by the colonial masters...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 22 May 10 - 07:44 PM

Actually, mouse, Arizona is 100% Mexican land!!!

As Inspector Clouseau says, "Neut any meur."

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 22 May 10 - 07:53 PM

Sorry, my Spanish is a little rusty...

BTW, does yer daug bite???

B;~)

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 22 May 10 - 08:56 PM

"The deciders of what to get angry about (the Glen Becks and Rush Limbaughs and Anne Coulters) tell their minions that, having lost on birth certificates and health care reform, the next thing to get mad about is immigration."

          Actually, a lot of folks living in border states have been angry since Ronald Reagan refused to secure the border in 1986. Where was Barack Obama at that time, in high school?

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 22 May 10 - 09:12 PM

Law school.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 22 May 10 - 09:41 PM

Actually, I looked it up. He didn't enter Law School until 1988. In 1986 he was a community organizer, but he had no known influence on what was making people angry about illegal immigration, or how to deal with it until years later.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 23 May 10 - 01:47 AM

Community organizers in Chicago have little influence on illegal immigration. This is news?

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 23 May 10 - 02:13 AM

Ebs: "
"Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) may not have been sensitized to the immigration issue, Rig."

    * Born: 29 January 1737
    * Birthplace: Thetford, England
    * Died: 8 June 1809
    * Best Known As: The author of Common Sense

Thomas Paine was one of the great fiery voices of the American Revolution. Paine emigrated from England to Philadelphia in 1774. Two years later he published Common Sense, a popular pamphlet that argued for complete American independence from Britain. Later that year in his pamphlet The American Crisis he penned his famous line, "These are the times that try men's souls." The revolution won, Paine returned to England in 1787, and in 1791 he published The Rights of Man, which opposed the idea of monarchy and defended the French Revolution. To escape being tried for treason, he fled to Paris, where he wrote The Age of Reason. In 1802 he returned to America, only to find himself outcast and poverty-stricken in his final years.

GfS: I bet you he DID understand immigration issues!

Joe Offer: "Yeah, why not come in legally? GfS, do you have any idea how hard it is for a Mexican laborer to come into the U.S. legally?"

GfS: " Why would it seem so incorrect, to think that a government should regulate the amount of immigrants, coming in, when it might impact the country, as to jobs, crime and well-being of its OWN citizens?? Don't you think that a government owes its allegiance, to the citizens of their own country...especially when the government is suppose to be "We the People"?.....What gives a government power or right to rule AGAINST the will of "We the People?"
Something must correct itself, wouldn't you say?? How far are these two entities going to oppose each other, without something 'popping'? Methinks it does not bode well.
What do you think?

Respectfully,
GfS

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 23 May 10 - 07:30 AM

I agree, Sanity, why would I care how difficult it is for a Mexican immigrant to come here. He/she needs to stay where he is and change things there. In one sense, these are really people who are running away from hard work.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ebbie
Date: 23 May 10 - 10:11 AM

Guest from Sanity: Whut? Thomas Paine? Since they were contemporaries I don't think you are suggesting reincarnation here. Is it the identical first name that confuses you?

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 23 May 10 - 11:34 AM

No, my dear sweet Ebbie. Your statement was, "Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) may not have been sensitized to the immigration issue, Rig. In his day and memory practically everybody was an immigrant- and they didn't even have to get permission to come."

Paine was an immigrant. Your statement infers, Jefferson 'may not have been sensitized'. I think he was well aware of what he was laying down!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ebbie
Date: 23 May 10 - 01:24 PM

Gracious. Thomas Paine was an immigrant? Will wonders never cease? (Many a man born in the 1700s was born on foreign shores)

In any case I don't understand the relevance of Thomas Paine to this subject. I have little doubt but that Jefferson admired Paine's writings.

(The word is 'imply'. I imply, you infer what I implied)

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 23 May 10 - 02:09 PM

But what does it have to do with keeping illegal aliens out of the country?

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 24 May 10 - 01:02 AM

Rigs: "But what does it have to do with keeping illegal aliens out of the country?"

GfS: Notice how the question I posed was dodged??....Here try it again:

GfS: " Why would it seem so incorrect, to think that a government should regulate the amount of immigrants, coming in, when it might impact the country, as to jobs, crime and well-being of its OWN citizens?? Don't you think that a government owes its allegiance, to the citizens of their own country first?...especially when the government is suppose to be "We the People"?.....What gives a government power or right to rule AGAINST the will of "We the People?"
Something must correct itself, wouldn't you say?? How far are these two entities going to oppose each other, without something 'popping'? Methinks it does not bode well.
What do you think?

Don't knock each other over trying to get in line to answer it!

I guess while I'm waiting for an answer, I'll write another film score........

Still Respectfully,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 24 May 10 - 07:03 AM

Yrw right, Rigs...

The danged immigarnts do need to stay where they are and change things there so...

...for all you folks og non-Hispanic origin, you got 30 days to get the heck outta Arizona, New Mexixo, Texas and Caliofornia!!!

Plus, Spainish is the official language starting now and we're changing all the books... We don't care about yer Jeffersons and Paines... They're both pains to us...

BTW, don't let the door hit yer Europen asses on the way out...

Boberto

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 24 May 10 - 08:38 AM

"'What gives a government power or right to rule AGAINST the will of "We the People?"'

                It doesn't! Bobert thinks otherwise.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 24 May 10 - 08:47 PM

BTW, don't let the door hit yer Europen asses on the way out...

Spain isn't in Europe?

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 24 May 10 - 09:08 PM

Details, mouse...

The importrant part is that 1/3rd of the US was stolen, opps, "annexed", from the Mexicans and I find it real strange that now we have all these Europian descendents thinkin' it's okay to trash the Hispanics???

I mean, until Polk decided to annex, ahhhh, steal all of this territory it would have been the "Mericans" who were the immigrants... Don't much matter what language anyone speaks here...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 24 May 10 - 09:32 PM

Okay, I'll buy your premise, Bobert. We took it and I think we ought to hold it. They are invading now and it's our civic duty to stop them.

          By the way, Fox news is finally exposing the reality of Chicano Studies in Arizona. I've been waiting over twenty years for this to happen. Hopefully the truth will spread to other outlets.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Alice
Date: 24 May 10 - 09:35 PM

truth can spread from Fox news?? O RLY????

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 24 May 10 - 09:38 PM

Shame on you, Rigs... I thought that FOX was beneath you??? Guess not...

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 24 May 10 - 10:07 PM

No, Fox is an outlet just like the New York Times is an outlet. One is bias on way, one is bias the other. In order to get at the truth, one has to be open to both.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 25 May 10 - 01:21 AM

That's like saying Sakhalin is an island in the north and Australia is an island in the south. Yes, NYT is left and Fox is right. But Fox is 100000000 right and NYT is 100 left. You'd have to read 10000 NYT's to counter Fox (give or take a zero).

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 25 May 10 - 03:02 AM

Jeez! I don't know where some of you got your impression that Mexicans 'owned' the southwest of America. First of all, Spain conquered the land we know as Mexico, and inter married with the native tribes there, and then(the Spanish) moved north looking for the lost cities of Ci bola(gold). Cortes was, among others was the most renown SPANISH CONQUEROR. Along with that, the Catholic Church figured by 'converting' the aboriginals to Catholicism, along with the Spanish conquests, would not only increase their numbers, of Catholics, it was also a way to 'civilize' the natives, and get them on the side of helping the occupying SPANISH--from Spain. In their quest for gold, and converting, the Spanish/Catholic missionaries forced the natives(American Indians) to drop their given tribal names and adopt 'Christian' names,..hence, a man named, for example, Twin Elk, now was forced to become 'Michael(Miguel) Romero', so on and so forth....and he and his family was severely punished if caught using his native given name! Not only that, in their quest for gold, which the Indians did not relate to, like the Europeans, the went into the pueblos, lined the inhabitants against the walls, and questioned(interrogated) them as to where the gold was. The Indians didn't even know what the hell they were talking about....when the Spanish could not get the answers they wanted, they took that as 'resistance' and would smash babies heads on the walls to get the Indians to talk, and co-operate! That is just one story of the atrocities, the Spanish did. Even today, the Native Americans have deep resentment of the Spanish..and have two names, the one s used amongst their tribe, and the other 'legal' names, that for generations they we known by.

If you have noticed, in prior posts, when I've addressed Little Hawk, or Crow Sister, I'll put..>"(Yo-Ho)", after their name. 'Yo-ho' is Tewa for 'Hello', and 'Good-bye'. It is a greeting, of respect for a friend. The reason I know that, is because a few years ago, I became close friends, no, VERY close friends, to the peoples of the Tewa tribe. Tewa, is a pueblo tribe, in Northern New Mexico, in Taos, the oldest ongoing, inhabited pueblo in North America, and in being close to them, I learned a bit of the language, and their history.

So, to say that Mexico is entitled to the Southwest, is pure horseshit! Spain claimed the land, 'Mexicans' or what we call Mexicans, were merely interbred native from south of the border, and throughout the Southwest. Then the U.S. fought over the land, and they LOST....and the border was re-drawn...Both agreed, in a treaty.
That is the short version, without getting into Mexican history. In WWI and WWII Germany offered Mexico, huge concessions, including 'giving them back' the land, if they would attack us from the south.
Even the 'sacred' Lady of Guadalupe, for Mexican/Catholics, has it's roots in the 'pagan' religion of the aboriginal tribes, of what we now know as Mexico, that was co-opted by the Spanish Catholics of Spain, and Rome...and altered enough to make it 'Catholic', to intermingle the cultures, as posted above!

It reminds me of the quip, "In 1492 Columbus discovered America..from the Indians"!!!!!!

With All Due Respects,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 25 May 10 - 07:39 AM

You're right Sanity, but that's not what they teach in Arizona's ethnic studies classes.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 25 May 10 - 07:47 AM

"Fox is 100000000 right and NYT is 100 left."

             Actually, I think a lot of people are misinformed. I think this all started in the 1920's when they started establishing radio networks, and that went on to television. For a long time we only had three major networks--they all reported the same stories, from the same point of view, and guided their viewers to the same moral conclusions.

             Most people call this the "mainstream media." David Duke calls it the "Jewish dominated media." If you looked at it from Duke's point of view, I suspect it would look extremely left wing indeed.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 25 May 10 - 07:53 AM

Well, there you have it, folks... Polk started the wrong war... He should have taken the navy accross the ocean to fight with Spain!!!

Not...

There is a reason it was/is called the "Mexican War"... There is a reason that we have sanitzed our history books to use the term "annexed"...

Maybe Mr. and Mrs. Rigs-f-Sanity would like to talk about what really happened other than trying to aviod the reality that by the 1840's Spain didn't control these terrirories...

I mean, using the excuse that the American "colonists" had the right to steal territory because the Spainish had earlier is, ahhhhh, a tad on the lame and revisionist side...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 25 May 10 - 02:28 PM

Bobs: "Maybe Mr. and Mrs. Rigs-f-Sanity would like to talk about what really happened other than trying to aviod the reality that by the 1840's Spain didn't control these terrirories..."

Your right!..They were trying to colonize the Southwest, through Cortes, and the Catholic Church, but never fully succeeded! That being said, so, how was it ever 'Mexico'?

The Europeans, stumbled upon this land..quite by accident, and figured it was theirs to divvy up, while disregarding the Native peoples. England, with its separation from the Catholic Church, and Spain and France with its ties to the Catholic Church all claimed territories. France sold theirs, the Louisiana Purchase, and Spain was doing its thing, as per aforementioned. Spain just did not have the resources to fund, nor populate their 'claim' to the land, other than the spread of the Catholic Church. So basically what we had was two factions of church dominated Europe, fighting each other, for the power and lands. The founding fathers wanted this 'new' land free from the church domination that was choking the freedom in Europe.

Incidentally,(and I've been wanting to post this earlier), the history of the Catholic Church, becoming a 'state' governing body, started back in the Roman Empire. When Rome(and the Caesars, from where we get the name Czar, for the eastern side of Europe), was being unsuccessful at eradicating an new threat to their sovereignty, called Christianity, they merged with it, by co-opting certain beliefs, while holding onto their 'pagan' beliefs and practices. This was don't in 333 A.D. under Constantine. The 'newly remodeled' Roman Empire then evolved into the 'Holy Roman Empire', and the Caesars were replaced, and renamed by a (or the) Pope(Papa), which means 'Father'. The Pope had unquestioned authority in Europe till Henry the VIII, broke with the Church of Rome, over their divorce laws. This was the beginning of the Catholic Church's absolute power in Europe..along with Gutenberg, printing the Bible, so that the common man could read it, instead of it being 'interpreted' solely by the state church of Rome. As this grew, once again, Rome was losing it's grip on absolute power, and Europe was breaking up, from their control. It wasn't till the 20th century, that there was a new drive to reconstitute Europe, northern Africa, and the mid-east back to the Roman Empire. This was called, 'The Third Reich'..Reich means 'Roman Empire'

(Reich (rk, r)
n.
The territory or government of a German state, as the Holy Roman Empire, or First Reich, from 962 to 1806; the German Empire, or Second Reich, from 1871 to 1919; the Weimar Republic, from 1919 to 1933; or the Third Reich, from 1933 to 1945.)

The European struggle just continued, and spilled over to the new lands(America)....with the new inhabitants just wanting to be free, to live and worship the way they wanted, without the yoke of oppression from state controlled churches.

.....unless you just happen to be a Native American Indian...but that's another story......

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 25 May 10 - 02:57 PM

Looked at from David Duke's point of view, John Birch was a leftie.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 25 May 10 - 07:53 PM

I'd forgotten about John Birch. But the society didn't have a lot to do with the man, did they?

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 25 May 10 - 09:01 PM

I read about it ages ago and my memory isn't what it used to be (or at least what I think I remember it as being) -- let me see if The Repository of All Knowledge and Wisdom can jog my memory ...

Ah, here's the skinny, then (assuming Wikipedia has it right, which is a better than 50% bet, anyway, according to some studies). The society was named after Birch. He died in '45 and the society was founded in '58. His parents, however, were lifetime members (presumably they got gold-plated keys to the executive washroom?).

The actual founder, Welch, was a real winner. Some of our muddy conspiracy theorists would love him. In the founding speech he gave at the first convention, he said, "both the U.S. and Soviet governments are controlled by the same furtive conspiratorial cabal of internationalists, greedy bankers, and corrupt politicians. If left unexposed, the traitors inside the U.S. government would betray the country's sovereignty to the United Nations for a collectivist New World Order, managed by a 'one-world socialist government.'"

Woo. Where's my tinfoil helmet? Are those black helicopters I see before me?

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 25 May 10 - 09:07 PM

Mouser: "If left unexposed, the traitors inside the U.S. government would betray the country's sovereignty to the United Nations for a collectivist New World Order, managed by a 'one-world socialist government.'"


I suppose if you missed Herbert Walker's speech, on ushering in a 'New World Order', you'd think everyone who thought that; what you just posted had absolutely no reason to think there was a conspiracy, to accomplish just that!

But, what do I know??

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 25 May 10 - 09:19 PM

So, GfS, can we assume that Polk stole 1/3rd the United States from a native population that, as a result of being conquered, adopted Spainish as their language and Catholisim as their religion???

Hmmmmmmm???

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ebbie
Date: 25 May 10 - 09:23 PM

"I suppose if you missed Herbert Walker's speech, on ushering in a 'New World Order', you'd think everyone who thought that; what you just posted had absolutely no reason to think there was a conspiracy, to accomplish just that!" GfS

Good grief. I read quite well but parsing of that sentence is waaaaay beyond my capabilities. I'd like to see someone try.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 25 May 10 - 09:31 PM

There's a hidden meaning in there somewhere!

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 25 May 10 - 10:04 PM

Yeah, my 11th grade English teacher, Ms. Gardener, would have given that sentence an F... Some times folks oughtta just say what it is that they have to say...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 25 May 10 - 10:46 PM

What sentence?

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 26 May 10 - 01:07 AM

Bobert; "So, GfS, can we assume that Polk stole 1/3rd the United States from a native population that, as a result of being conquered, adopted Spainish as their language and Catholisim as their religion???

Hmmmmmmm???"

I bet you're not meaning from the Indians...or are you talking about the other group of Europeans?...who moved in on the Southwestern Indians

Just move on in and call it yours!
Gosh, I wonder if the moon is ours, since we stuck a flag on it!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 26 May 10 - 01:23 AM

Mouser: "Looked at from David Duke's point of view, John Birch was a leftie."

....and KKK Robert Byrd was really only kidding, just that the Dems can't figure out WHEN!

GfS

P.S. They took out my funnier one!

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Joe Offer
Date: 26 May 10 - 02:18 AM

WHO took out WHAT funnier one WHERE?
GfS, you make it sound like you got censored. I can't find any deleted posts from you in this thread, anyhow. Only thing deleted here was one no-name message.
I get a little nervous when people start saying things that sound like accusations of censorship, because most times they're untrue.
If you have a problem with a disappearing message, ask me first before you make accusations.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 26 May 10 - 07:53 AM

Sometimes the transaction doesn't go through. You think you've posted a message but you can see that the thread title hasn't moved to the top. When this happens, you have to post the "back" button and post it again.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: pdq
Date: 26 May 10 - 11:21 AM

GfS,

Thanks for trying to inform people about the difference between the Spanish conquest and the Mexican claim to Texas, California and the New Mexico territories.

Th Indian tribes, such names as Hopi, Navajo, Papago, Pima and Papago wanted absolutely nothing to due with the new Mexican government that began in 1821 when Spain abandoned Mexico. It was deemed ungovernable and was costing Spain a fortune. It was origionally expected to provide Spain with great wealth but never did.

In Texas and California, the Indians joined the Spanish and Anglos to drive the Mexican government out. The Indians were given a great deal more respect here than in Mexico. They were treated better than the tribes in Canada, too.

Once the southern border of the U.S. was established, people on both sides had a obligation to respect it. Race has little to do with it since the majority in the Southwest was Indian.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Greg F.
Date: 26 May 10 - 11:33 AM

Some people will evidently believe ANYTHING!

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 26 May 10 - 01:47 PM

Joe Offer: "I get a little nervous when people start saying things that sound like accusations of censorship, because most times they're untrue."

I was not accusing...however, if I forgot to 'sign in' I apologize. Usually I sign off with 'GfS'

If I use '(wink)' at the end, it is the way I say " No offense, but just working off a line, as a quip, and not to be taken for anything more than light humor'.....though it may SEEM like an irreverent cut.
Anyway, thanks, and will go back to the threads.

Regards,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 26 May 10 - 02:05 PM

pdq, Thank you!..Methinks that if people, some on here, were actually studying, instead of getting high, and protesting, they might have known that!

The California missions, mostly the work of Junipero Serra, were neatly spaced apart, up the coast of California, as to be no more than a days walk or horse ride, to the next mission. He was known for his butting heads with the Spanish governors and military, for their treatment of the 'Indians'. Those 'Mudcatters' in California should take a note of interest, for he was a huge historical figure there!
Here's a quick bit:

. Miguel Jose Serra, born at Petra on the Island of Mallorca, Spain.

1729
. . At the age of 16 he entered the service of the Catholic Church. He soon entered the Order of St. Francis of Assisi, and and took a new first name, Junípero, that of St. Francis' beloved original companion friar.

1749
. . Father Serra volunteered to serve the Franciscan missions in the new world. He left Cadiz, Spain and sailed for Vera Cruz, Mexico, at the age al 36. He traveled by foot to Mexico City to dedicate his mission vocation at the shrine of Mexico's Our Lady of Guadalupe. His first assignment was in the Sierra Gorda in Mexico.

1767
. . The Franciscans of Mexico were asked to take over missions in Baja California. These remote facilities became Father Serra's responsibility.

1769
. . Spain began settlement of Alta California with the Sacred Expedition which Serra accompanied. The first destination was San Diego. It was on Presidio Hill where Serra planted the cross and dedicated the first mission in Alta California. At this same time, the first fortified settlement was founded. Serra himself established nine missions, with a total of twenty-one missions eventually being established along the El Camino Real, from San Diego to Sonoma, a distance of 700 miles.

1784
. . At the age of 70, and after traveling 24,000 miles, Father Junípero Serra died at Mission San Carlos Borromeo and is buried there under the sanctuary floor.

CALIFORNIA'S 36 MISSIONS

LOWER CALIFORNIA
Serra was president of the following missions.
(all founded by the Jesuits)
1. 1697 - Nuestra Señora de Loreto
2. 1699 - San Francisco Xavier
3. 1705 - Santa Rosalía de Mulegé
4. 1708 - San José de Comondú
5. 1720 - La Purísima Concepción de
. . . . . . . .María Cadegomó
6. 1720 - Nuestra Señora de Guadalupe
7. 1721 - Santiago de las Coras
8. 1721 - Nuestra Señora de los Dolores
9. 1728 - San Ignacio
10. 1730 - San José del Cabo
11. 1733 - Todos Santos
12. 1737 - San Luís Gonzaga
13. 1752 - Santa Gertrudis
14. 1762 - San Francisco de Borja
15. 1767 - Santa María de Los Angeles         UPPER CALIFORNIA
Serra was responsible for the founding of the first nine missions.
1) 1769 - San Diego de Alcalá
2) 1770 - San Carlos Borromeo
3) 1771 - San Antonio de Padua
4) 1771 - San Gabriel Arcángel
5) 1772 - San Luís Obispo de Tolosa
6) 1776 - San Francisco de Asís
7) 1776 - San Juan Capistrano
8) 1777 - Santa Clara de Asís
9) 1782 - San Buenaventura
The next nine missions founded by Rev. Fermín Francisco Lasuén.
10) 1786 - Santa Bárbara
11) 1787 - La Purisima Concepción
12) 1791 - Santa Cruz
13) 1791 - Nuestra Señora de la Soledae
14) 1797 - San José de Guadalupe
15) 1797 - San Juan Bautista
16) 1797 - San Miguel Arcángel
17) 1797 - San Fernando Rey de Espana
18) 1798 - San Luís Rey de Francia
Founded by others.
19) 1804 - Santa Inés
20) 1817 - San Rafael Arcángel
21) 1823 - San Francisco Solano de
. . . . . . . . .Sonoma



San Carlos Borromeo, Carmel California
Founded in 1770
Serra's final resting place.



THE MAN

FATHER JUNÍPERO SERRA, THE MAN

. . Interviews with California historians and scholars assessing Father Junípero Serra's role in the early history of California identify the Franciscan missionary as a major figure in California history whose founding of Mission San Diego de Alcala on July 16, 1769, marked the introduction of a new civilization in California. Father Serra came to what is now California as a 56-year-old man, asthmatic and suffering from a chronic leg sore that troubled him for the last 15 years of his life. Yet he walked thousands of miles, rode thousands more on the backs of mules, and traveled thousands of miles in sailing ships, bringing the Spanish language to California, as well as the Roman Catholic religion and a chain of nine missions that became the cities of today's California. He introduced agriculture and irrigation systems, pressed for a system of law to protect California's Native Americans against the abuses of Spanish soldiers and created a network of roads.

. . The following excerpts of interviews with historians and scholars, as well as a Franciscan priest with extensive knowledge of the life of the pioneer missionary, describe Father Serra, the man:

DR. MICHAEL MATHES, Professor of history at the University of San Francisco:
. . "Serra was the founder and the pioneer of California. The poor man has had no privacy for years. Everybody has picked at every little aspect that could be known about this man's life."
. . "Serra fought with the military and with the governors a lot. He was unusual in that regard. . . So we have, in a lot of correspondence of these governors, criticism of Serra, lots of criticism. But this criticism of Serra revolves around the fact that he was too much involved in the care and treatment of the Indians, that he would not allow soldiers to mingle with the Indians. He didn't want these people (the Indians) to be tainted with any possible immoral activities that the soldiers might be involved with.
. . "First came the Indians in his missions. Then, if there was anything left over, the soldiers could have it. These were the complaints of the government, of the civil governors: that Serra was such a fanatical missionary that he really didn't want to cooperate with the civilian government, that his first concern was the taking care of his mission. Criticism of Serra is really a boomerang against anybody that would say Serra was a 'bad person ,' because the criticism of him supports the theory that he was a dedicated missionary, He may not have been much of a diplomat or civil servant, but he was one fine missionary."

DR. HARRY KELSEY, curator of history at the Los Angeles Museum of Natural History:
. . "Father Serra was certainly a very human man. He had lots of weaknesses, I suppose, but he had tremendous dedication and strength of purpose. He was as old as I am before he even came to California... It's something to think about doing when you're in your 20s and 30s, not when you're in your 50s. Serra had been a college professor for a long time, a fairly well known theologian, and he had lived a pretty comfortable life. When he went to Mexico, he decided he wanted to go to the missions, so his superiors sent him off to the missions. When he finished his mission, he decided that wasn't quite enough. He wanted to come here to the real frontier, so they sent him up here. "
. . "He tended to fly off the handle with the governors. Whether the governors could have been treated effectively any other way, I don't know. Serra got the missions started, though, and he was able to put them on a pretty firm footing."

DR. DAVID HORNBECK, professor of historical geography at California State University, Northridge:
. . "I look at him more as a leader in a sense of his extraordinary administrative ability, and his ability to coordinate the settlement of a whole new frontier. He did it all by himself... If he'd done that for Kentucky, if Father Serra had been Daniel Boone or any one of the sort of folk heroes that we have, well, their feats are exaggerated way beyond what they actually did. Yet, we have somebody here who took a whole brand new frontier, didn't know anything about it, and in four years had taken and converted it to a functioning, organized frontier."

DR. IRIS ENGSTRAND, professor and chair of the Department of History at the University of San Diego:
. . "We know Father Serra's life from the time he was born, where he was trained, what he thought and what he did. He wasn't out there saying, 'Wow, look at all these Indians. Let's whip them into shape.' He was physically there, he worked hard, worked 18 hours a day. He was much nicer to the Indians, really, than even to the governors. He didn't get along too well with some of the military people, you know. His attitude was, 'Stay away from the Indians.' I think you really come up with a benevolent, hard-working person who was strict in a lot of his doctrinal leanings and things like that, but not a person who was enslaving Indians, or beating them, ever."
. . ". . . He was a very caring person and forgiving. Even after the burning of the mission in San Deigo, he did not want those Indians punished. He wanted to be sure that they were treated fairly. . . "

DR. GLORIA MlRANDA, an historian who is associate professor and chair of the Chicano Studies Department at Los Angeles Valley College and who is working on a book about the pioneering family during Father Serra's time:
. . "He clearly saw the need for stability on the frontier. He was also very zealous in his protection of the tribes that he was working with. Often some of the soldiers who came north were not the best role models to imitate."
. . "He is as much a pioneer of the West as the pioneers we cherish in U. S. history. Not only because he introduced a faith -- he was a colonizer, an explorer, a man of great determination. Not that many people come around in history.
. . "His age is much more amazing. And his illness, his physical limitations. He was a very humble man, too. With his credentials, he could have had a very nice cloistered life, but he chose a life of hardship, which is very much apostolic, I think."

FATHER FRANCIS F. GUEST, O. F.M., director of the Santa Barbara Mission Archive-Library:
. . "He was a man who was not really interested in fame or in honor, or in being held in high regard by the government or by the Viceroys, or by anyone. He was simply interested in doing his spiritual work and if somebody else got the credit for it, he was not concerned one way or the other.
. . "To me, this was an act of extraordinary virtue, extraordinary generosity. It might even be called magnanimity. He was very big-hearted in his love for the Indians, in his love for his work and his dedication to his work. He had very pure intentions. I think that this was an act of virtue on his part, which would merit him very high praise from historians who studied his life from this viewpoint."

BIOGRAPHY

FATHER JUNÍPERO SERRA: BIOGRAPHY

. . When Father Junípero Serra founded California's first mission in 1769, he was 56 years old and asthmatic, with a chronic sore on his leg that troubled him for the rest of his life, and he suffered frequently from other illnesses, as well. He stood just 5 feet, 2 inches, and, as a journalist later wrote, "He certainly didn't look like the man who would one day be known as the Apostle of California." Yet he endured the hardships of the frontier and pressed forward with remarkable determination to fulfill his purpose: to convert the Native Americans of California to Christianity.

. . In pursuit of that goal, Father Serra walked thousands of miles between San Diego and Monterey and even Mexico City. He traveled the seas, also; and by the time he died August 28, 1784, in Carmel he had founded nine missions, introduced agriculture and irrigation techniques, and the Spanish language. He had battled governors, bureaucrats and military commanders to secure a system of laws to protect the California Indians from at least some of the injustices inflicted by the Spanish soldiers whose practices often were in conflict with Father Serra's.

. . Father Serra had been a philosophy professor and distinguished preacher at the Convent of San Francisco in Mallorca, the Spanish island where he was born in 1713. He was 36 years old when he reached the port of Vera Cruz, Mexico, on December 8, 1749, and walked to Mexico City. ( It was during that journey of 24 days that an insect bite caused the sore on his leg that sometimes became so painful he had difficulty walking. ) He spent 17 years in missionary work in the Sierra Gorda in the present area of North-Central Mexico. In 1767 he became president of the 14 missions in Baja California, originally founded by the Jesuits, then turned over to the Franciscans.

. . At that time, faced with the threat of Russian colonization from the north, Spain had committed itself to pushing northward into what is now the American state of California. Russian America (Alaska) was only 800 miles away. Spain feared that Russia would push south and gain a firm foothold in Alta California. The Spanish military launched an expedition into California in 1769 under the leadership of Gaspar de Portola. Father Serra set out with them to establish missions.

. . Serra's blessing of the site of Mission San Diego de Alcala on July 16, 1769, marked the beginning of the European settlement of California.

. . Between the years of 1796 and 1784, Father Serra made six voyages by sea totaling 5,400 miles. He traveled by land the distance between Monterey and San Francisco eight times, Monterey and San Antonio 11 times, His longest journey by land was from Monterey to Mexico City. In total, he traveled well over 5,500 miles by land.

. . Father Serra arrived at Monterey aboard the sailing ship San Antonio on June 1, 1770. He celebrated the first Mass on June 3, 1770, on the shore of Monterey Bay, where we now find the city of Monterey.

. . He returned to San Diego to work on the mission there, then founded Mission San Juan Capistrano in 1776, the year of the American Declaration of Independence.

. . When Father Serra died in 1784 he had established nine California missions and baptized 6,000 Indians, about 10 percent of the California Native American population. Those nine missions grew to 21. Today, more than 60 percent of the state's nearly 26 million people live in areas surrounding the missions, and El Camino Real, the road that Father Serra traveled on a tour of the missions shortly before this death, established a major artery running much of the length of the state.

August 28th is the anniversary of the death of Father Serra, and is set aside in special remembrance of his many contributions to the Catholic Church in America.

I hope this bit of history, enlightened some of ya'!

Respectfully,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: pdq
Date: 26 May 10 - 02:26 PM

GfS, if I amy steal a bit of you post:

"... Father Serra had been a philosophy professor and distinguished preacher at the Convent of San Francisco in Mallorca, the Spanish island where he was born in 1713...In 1767 he became president of the 14 missions in Baja California, originally founded by the Jesuits, then turned over to the Franciscans...

. . At that time, faced with the threat of Russian colonization from the north, Spain had committed itself to pushing northward into what is now the American state of California. Russian America (Alaska) was only 800 miles away. Spain feared that Russia would push south and gain a firm foothold in Alta California. The Spanish military launched an expedition into California in 1769 under the leadership of Gaspar de Portola. Father Serra set out with them to establish missions.

. . Serra's blessing of the site of Mission San Diego de Alcala on July 16, 1769, marked the beginning of the European settlement of California..."

I believe the "800 miles to Alaska" actually means "800 miles to Russian property at Fort Ross"

"The settlement of Ross, the name derived from the word for Russia (Rossiia) was established by the Russian-American Company, a commercial hunting and trading company chartered by the tsarist government, with shares held by the members of the Tsar's family, court nobility and high officials. Trade was vital to Russian outposts in Alaska, where long winters exhausted supplies and the settlements could not grow enough food to support themselves. Baranov directed his chief deputy, Ivan Alexandrovich Kuskov, to establish a colony in California as a food source for Alaska and to hunt profitable sea otters. After several reconnaissance missions, Kuskov arrived at Ross in March of 1812 with a party of 25 Russians, many of them craftsmen, and 80 native Alaskans from Kodiak and the Aleutian Islands. After negotiating with the Kashaya Pomo people who inhabited the area, Kuskov began construction of the fort. The carpenters who accompanied Kuskov to Settlement Ross, along with their native Alaskan helpers, had worked on forts in Alaska, and the construction here followed models of the traditional stockade, blockhouses and log buildings found in Siberia and Alaska."

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 26 May 10 - 03:57 PM

Thank you, pdq...I 'cut and pasted' from a site with a brief bio on Serra. I think the point has been adequately covered as to the 'Mexican Territories'...and the bogus claims that have been made...but in reality, I think if their argument was sound..they should turn over their properties, right back to the Native Americans..and shut the fuck up!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ebbie
Date: 26 May 10 - 05:19 PM

What one earth makes someone think that Californians don't know the story? Or Oregonians, for that matter.

Incidentally, perhaps it was just a typo back there, but Reich does NOT mean 'Roman Empire'.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 26 May 10 - 06:04 PM

Ebbie, NOT a typo! Homework time!

pdq, You think we should give everything North of Ft. Ross back to the Russians???...........
...........maybe if they migrate over, because there is jobs?...and welfare...and medical....and food stamps...and Ebbie!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: pdq
Date: 26 May 10 - 06:24 PM

"What one earth makes someone think that Californians don't know the story?" ~ Ebs

Well, are all Mudcatters Californians?

Is "the story" taught in public schools?

GfS, the Russians have more claim to North America than Spain, if proximity is a criterion.

France also claimed much of it, at one time, and they are at least as close as Spain.

There were only about 700 ethnic Mexicans in California when the Bear Flag Republic was established. There were 5000 Californios who were of Spanish descent and wanted nothing to do with Mexican rule.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ebbie
Date: 26 May 10 - 07:29 PM

GfS, I gather that you do not speak German. 'Reich' does NOT mean 'Roman Empire'; in this context it means Empire.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 26 May 10 - 08:01 PM

Unfortunately history books still teach popular myth, in many cases, and facts are often left out. I don't know if that's due to the length of time it takes to get a text book from the rough draft into the hands of the students, or because of political entities playing around with the material, like we've seen in Texas, or what, but it's not helpful to the students.
                In fact, when that happens, there will be a certain amount of material that will have to be "un-learned." Most students will probably go forward with the myths for the rest of their lives.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 26 May 10 - 09:31 PM

Dearest Ebbie,>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
                                  V
                                 
                                  V                           

                                  V

n.
The territory or government of a German state, as the Holy Roman Empire, or First Reich, from 962 to 1806; the German Empire, or Second Reich, from 1871 to 1919; the Weimar Republic, from 1919 to 1933; or the Third Reich, from 1933 to 1945.

[German, empire, realm, from Middle High German rīch, rīche, from Old High German rīhhi.]

Home of Wiki & Reference Answers, the world's leading Q&A siteReference Answers
English▼
English▼ Deutsch Español Français Italiano Tagalog

    *
The term Reich was part of the German names for Germany for much of its history. Reich was used by itself in the common German variant of the Holy Roman Empire, the "Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation" (Heiliges Römisches Reich Deutscher Nation). Der rîche was a title for the Emperor. However, it should be noted that Latin, not German, was the formal legal language of the medieval Empire, so English-speaking historians are more likely to use Latin imperium than German Reich as a term for this period of German history. The common contemporary Latin legal term used in documents of the Holy Roman Empire was for a long time regnum ("rule, domain, empire", such as in Regnum Francorum for the Frankish Kingdom) before imperium was in fact adopted, the latter first attested in 1157, whereas the parallel use of regnum never fell out of use during the Middle Ages. The unified Germany which arose under Chancellor Otto von Bismarck in 1871 was called in German Deutsches Reich. Deutsches Reich remained the official name of Germany until 1945, although these years saw three very different political systems more commonly referred to in English as: "the German Empire" (1871–1918), the Weimar Republic (1919–1933; the term is a postwar coinage not used at the time), and Nazi Germany (the Third Reich) (1933–1945).
Use during Weimar Republic

After 1918 "Reich" was usually not translated as "Empire" in English-speaking countries, and the title was instead simply used in its original German. During the Weimar Republic the term "Reich" and the prefix "Reichs-" referred not to the idea of empire but rather to the institutions, officials, affairs etc. of the whole country as opposed to those of one of its constituent federal states. Das Reich meant the legal persona of the (federal) State, similar to The Crown designating the State (and its treasury) in Commonwealth countries, and "the Union" or "the federal government" in the United States of America.
Use by Nazis

The Nazis sought to legitimize their power historiographically by portraying their rule as a continuation of a Germanic past. They coined the term Das Dritte Reich ("The Third Empire" – usually rendered in English in the partial-translation "The Third Reich"), counting the Holy Roman Empire as the first and the 1871-1918 monarchy as the second. During the Anschluss (annexation) of Austria in 1938 the Nazi propaganda also used the political slogan Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer ("One people, one Reich, one leader"). Although the term "Third Reich" is in common use, the terms "First Reich" and "Second Reich" for the earlier periods are seldom found outside Nazi propaganda. To use the terms "First Reich" and "Second Reich", as some commentators did in the post-war years, is generally frowned upon as accepting Nazi historiography[citation needed]. The term Altes Reich ("old Reich"; cf. French ancien regime for monarchical France) is sometimes used to refer to the Holy Roman Empire. The term Altreich was also used after the Anschluss to denote Germany with her pre-1938 post-WWI borders.
Possible negative connotations in modern use

A number of previously neutral words used by the Nazis have later taken on negative connotations in German (e.g. Führer or Heil); while in many contexts Reich is not one of them (Frankreich, France; Römisches Reich, Roman Empire), it can imply German imperialism or strong nationalism if it is used to describe a political or governmental entity. Reich has thus not been used in official terminology since 1945, though it is still found in the name of the Reichstag building, which since 1999 has housed the German federal parliament, the Bundestag. The decision not to rename the Reichstag building was taken only after long debate in the Bundestag; even then, it is described officially as Reichstag - Sitz des Bundestages (Reichstag, seat of the Bundestag). As seen in this example, the term "Bund" (federation) has replaced "Reich" in the names of various state institutions such as the army ("Bundeswehr").
Continued limited usage during German Democratic Republic

The exception is that during the Cold War, the East German railway incongruously continued to use the name Deutsche Reichsbahn (German National Railways), which had been the name of the national railway during the era of the Weimar Republic and Third Reich. This is because the Reichsbahn was specifically mentioned in several postwar treaties and directives regarding the right to operate the railroad in West Berlin; had the East German government changed the name of the railways to, for example, Staatsbahn der DDR (State Railways of the GDR), it would likely have lost this right.[citation needed] Even after German reunification in October 1990, the Reichsbahn continued to exist for over three years as the operator of the railroad in eastern Germany, ending finally on 1 January 1994 when the Reichsbahn and the western Deutsche Bundesbahn were merged to form the privatized Deutsche Bahn AG.
Rike, rige, riik

Rike is the Swedish and Norwegian word for "realm", in Danish spelled rige, of similar meaning as German Reich. The word is traditionally used for sovereign entities; a country with a King or Queen as head of state, such as the United Kingdom or Sweden itself, is a (kunga)rike, literally a "royal realm". Two regions in Norway that were petty kingdoms before the unification of Norway around 900 AD have retained the word in the names (see Ringerike and Romerike). Riik is an Estonian word for country and realm.

The word is used in "Svea rike", with the current spelling Sverige, the name of Sweden in Swedish. The derived prefix "riks-" implies nationwide or under central jurisdiction such as in riksväg, the Swedish name for federal road. It is also present in the names of institutions such as the Riksdag, Sveriges Riksbank, Riksåklagaren, Rikspolisstyrelsen, Riksteatern, riksdaler, etc.

The Lord's Prayer uses the word in the Swedish, Norwegian and Danish versions: Tillkomme ditt rike, Komme ditt rike, Komme dit rige ('Thy kingdom come' - old versions). Låt ditt rike komma!, La ditt rike komme, Komme dit rige ('Let your kingdom come' - new versions).
Rijk

Rijk is the Dutch and Afrikaans equivalent of German Reich. In a political sense in the Netherlands the word rijk often connotates a connection with the Kingdom of the Netherlands; the ministerraad is the executive body of the Netherlands' government and the rijksministerraad that of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, a similar distinction is found in wetten (laws) versus rijkswetten (kingdom laws). The word rijk can also be found in institutions like Rijkswaterstaat, Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieu, and Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.

Like in German, the adjective rijk means "rich".
Etymology and cognates

Reich comes from a Germanic word for "king", which was borrowed from Celtic. (See Calvert Watkins, American Heritage dictionary of Indo-European Roots, p. 70.) It has cognates in many other languages, all ultimately descended from the Proto-Indo-European root *reg-, meaning "to straighten out" or "rule", also the source of English right. The Sanskrit derived cognates in Hindi are "Raja" meaning King and also the name of an ethnic group: Rajput meaning progeny of Rajas. The cognates can be grouped linguistically as follows:
Celtic group

Proto-Celtic *rīg-, "king", from the lengthened e-grade (see: Indo-European ablaut).

    * Various Celtic words for "king" including Gaelic righ.
    * Borrowed into Germanic as *rīks-. Hence:

       * Old High German: richi; German: Reich (all senses); Reichtum "riches"; but not the unrelated verb reichen, "to reach", or its derivative Bereich, "subject area, sphere".
       * Old English: rīce; Modern English: rich, as well as the -ric in bishopric
       * Dutch: rijk
       * Danish: rige (as in Rigsmål)
       * Swedish and Norwegian: rike (as in Riksmål; Sverige, "Sweden").
       * Old Norse and Icelandic: ríki (as in Garðaríki).
       * Many Germanic names (personal names), including Friedrich, Dietrich and Richard.

    * Borrowed from Germanic:

       * Italian: ricco (borrowed from Germanic)
       * French: riche (borrowed from Germanic)
       * Old Prussian: reiks (borrowed from Germanic)
       * Spanish and Portuguese: rico (borrowed from Gothic)
       * Lithuanian: rikė
       * Various Slavonic words borrowed from Germanic, all loaned from Old High German dialects and include Slavonic phonetic innovations (like the change from r into ř-sound and soft Germanic "ch" into Slavonic "š" (like the "sh" in "she"). The PIE root "*reg-" (rule) is non-existent in Slavonic. There is also no native Slavic root for "king" and "kingdom" or similar words, probably because the early Slavic societies were highly democratic and ruled by an ancient form of parliament "wiec". Hence, Slavonic words generally meaning "king" derive from the name of Charlemagne in Old French, "Karol". Similarly, the words that mean more or less the aristocratic title "prince" come from Gothic "kunings" (with many local phonetic changes, e.g. "knędz" in Old Polish, "książę" in Polish and "kniaz'" in Ruthenian).
       * Polish: rzesza - nowadays often associated with "Trzecia Rzesza" (The Third Reich) in colloquial speech; second meaning: "a great group of people, throng, mob"
       * Czech: říše
       * Slovak: ríša

Original Germanic group

Although the line of descent of Reich and its closest cognates came into Germanic sideways from Celtic, Germanic also inherited the same Indo-European root directly in a suffixed form of the e-grade, *reg-to-, hence:

    * Old High German: rihte; Modern German Recht, "justice"; rechts, "right"; richtig, "correct"; Richter, "judge"; Gericht, "court".
    * Modern Dutch: recht, "straight"; rechts, "right"; rechter, "judge"; gerecht/rechtbank, "court"; rechtspraak, "administration of justice", "jurisdiction".
    * Old English: riht; Modern English: right; righteous.
    * Old Swedish: rätter; Modern Swedish: rät, "straight"; rätt, "law", "right", "correct", "court". (The word riktig, "correct", is borrowed from Middle Low German.)

Latin

The basic e-grade form of the root came into Latin as: regere (supine stem rectus), "to rule"; rex, regis, "king"; regalis, "kingly". A suffixed, lengthened e-grade form, *rēg-ola- gives us Latin regula, "rod". Hence:

    * Italian: re "king"
    * French: roi "king", droit "law, right" and many others.
    * Spanish: rey "king", derecho "law, right"
    * Portuguese: rei "king"
    * Romanian: rege "king"
    * German: regieren "to govern, to rule", Regierung "government", Regel "law, rule"
    * English (straight from Latin): regent; regal; regulate; rector; rectangle; erect; (borrowed via French): royal, reign; viceroy; realm; ruler (both senses) and countless others.

Sanskrit

The Sanskrit word, from a lengthened-grade suffixed form *rēg-en-, is rājā, "king", hence the words for rulers in various Indian languages. The word has made its way into common English usage as Raj—used by the British during their rule in India—and Maharaja, literally "the great king" (exactly parallel to Latin magnus rex).
See also

Sincerely,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Joe Offer
Date: 26 May 10 - 09:48 PM

GfS, please remember that we have a one-screen limit on copy-paste non-music posts. If the text doesn't fit on my 32-inch scree, it's too much. You have two recent messages that are way over the limit. I'll let you go this time, but consider yourself warned.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ebbie
Date: 27 May 10 - 12:28 AM

Like I said, Guest from Sanity, Reich

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 27 May 10 - 01:54 AM

Okay, Joe..sorry.

Ebbie, the Third Reich refers to the Third Roman Empired. if you would have read the giant post, which Joe referred to, youd know that. See if you can find an adult to help you with it.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ebbie
Date: 27 May 10 - 05:44 PM

For some reason the rest of my post didn't make it through the pipe. I won't bother reconstituting it.

GfS, you had not said that 'The Third Reich' refers to 'The Third Roman Empire'. Had you done so, I could have agreed with that.

You said: "Third Reich" means "Roman Empire". A different matter.

And I did read that long-winded cut and paste- it doesn't say what you say it says.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: DougR
Date: 28 May 10 - 01:31 AM

Hmm. Strayed a bit from the subject, right?

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 28 May 10 - 08:25 AM

Just a little!

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: frogprince
Date: 28 May 10 - 11:17 AM

Gfs: You have repeatedly written hopelessly incoherent rambling posts, and then claimed that Ebbie lacks intelligence or basic reading skills if she is unable to follow them. Now you've cut-and-pasted half a book, all of which proves Ebbie's point, and again denounced her intelligence because she doesn't misread it in the way you misread it. Most, perhaps all, of us here can see which one of you comes off as the "adult" here. I won't say which name; if you reply to this, you wil probably say that I proved that it's you.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: pdq
Date: 28 May 10 - 01:21 PM

Typical fallout from the invasion of illegals from Mexico.

Today it was announced that the Copper Quenn Hospital will close its doors forever. It has served this rural Arizona comunity since the 1880s.

Here is an article from 2005:

                                                             Bisbee Hospital problems


Tucson Weekly...
June 02, 2005

Catastrophe in Care

Hospitals are being crippled by the costs of treating migrants--and that could be just the start of an immigrant-related health crisis
by Leo W. Banks

If you drive along Southern Arizona's border with Mexico long enough, you might see a lone illegal wandering the desert. Or maybe he's hunched at the roadside sipping water from his milk jug. What's he doing there, and where are his compatriots, the people he broke into the country with?

The uninformed might ask those questions, but those who live with the daily invasion across our open borders can make a pretty good guess what's happening. The fellow got bounced from his group by the coyote-guide. Two transgressions will get an illegal cut loose with certainty: Either he can't pay, or he shows signs of tuberculosis.

You think these coyotes are fools? They don't want some hollow-eyed lunger hacking and coughing blood on them. So it's adios, pal, and now you're America's problem. But they know that already. Every illegal realizes that if he makes it to an emergency room in Southern Arizona, or anywhere around the country for that matter, he can get treatment, free of charge.

It's federal law, and has been for 20 years. In its evolution, the policy has become a kind of federal health insurance program for illegals, and its rising costs are eating up resources that could otherwise go to poor and uninsured American citizens. It has created a financial nightmare for border hospitals and contributed to cutbacks in services at Tucson hospitals.

Is this an outrage? A scandal? Some think it's both. But going back to our active TB sufferer, here's something even worse: The guy can't get treatment anywhere, goes underground and takes a job at a restaurant in Tucson or L.A., and coughs his way to infecting scores of others.

Talk about a Hobson's choice. But as with everything in the ongoing crisis of illegal immigration, the hard choices would largely evaporate if the federal government fulfilled its constitutional duty and took control of our border.

The threat illegal immigration poses to American public health plays out every day at Arizona's hospitals. Until recently, the issue remained only marginally public, a problem medical people batted around among themselves, not with the media. Even today, several hospitals contacted for this story declined comment.

The Copper Queen Hospital in Bisbee, one of the hardest hit, helped break that barrier when CEO Jim Dickson began returning reporters' calls, even though the subject, as he puts it, has become "like the third rail. You don't want to touch it."

But his problem had grown severe. Dickson's uncompensated costs for treating illegals rose from $35,000 in 1999 to $450,000 in 2004. His total shortfall now sits at about $1.4 million, a hefty deficit for a 14-bed hospital. To make ends meet, he had to close, in June 2000, the Copper Queen's long-term care facility, and cut back on staff and hours, forcing some employees to take second jobs to survive.

The hospital has seen a ray of light, however. In the first months of 2005, the Copper Queen has gone back into surplus, in part because more illegals are in Border Patrol custody when brought in to the hospital. That means the Border Patrol must reimburse the Queen for the cost. In the past, agents would drop injured illegals not in their custody at the ER and take off, sticking the hospital with bills that never got paid.

Another reason for the decrease, says Dickson: the Minuteman Project.

"It's been terrific for us in April," he says, cutting down on the number of people coming across and therefore the number requiring ER treatment. Dickson says the hospital wrote off about $6,000 in losses in April this year, compared to about $35,000 in April 2004.

The central issue, though, remains in place--the hospital has had to scale back health services to American citizens to treat illegals. Bisbee isn't alone.

The most comprehensive study on the subject found that 24 counties in four states bordering Mexico wracked up $190 million in unpaid emergency medical bills caring for illegals in the year 2000. The study, commissioned by the U.S.-Mexico Border Counties Coalition, found that California spent $79 million of that; Texas, $74 million; Arizona, $31 million; and New Mexico, $6 million.

Bear in mind that these numbers, the best available, are from 2000. We can assume, with increasing rates of crossings since then, the costs are considerably higher today. Nor do the above figures take into account non-border counties. Treating illegals in Maricopa County costs as much as $50 million a year, according to an estimate used by Republican Sen. Jon Kyl. Nationally, American hospitals lose $1.45 billion a year.

The Medicare reform bill passed in 2003 allocated $1 billion to reimburse states for federally mandated ER care given to illegals--about $45 million a year of that to come to Arizona over four years. But even that, some hospital staffers say, is little more than a Band-Aid on a huge problem.

Ruth Kish, director of patient care services at Copper Queen, expects that under the repayment formula, her hospital will receive only 10 cents of every dollar they spend on illegals. "But every bit helps," says Kish.

Another factor: The counties in the above-mentioned study spent an additional $13 million in 2000 on emergency transportation, such as helicopters and ambulances, to pick up illegals injured after sneaking across the line.

The Bisbee Fire Department's ambulance responds to about one of these calls a day during the summer, says Chief Jack Earnest. Asked how many of these patients pay up, Earnest wasn't sure, and recommended contacting the billing office in Sierra Vista. The billing office knew exactly how often illegals pay their ambulance bills--never.

But there's another category--Mexicans injured in Mexico who call American ambulances for help. By federal law, they have to respond, which makes Bisbee's Copper Queen the trauma center of choice for Sonora's northern frontier.

The calls come from Naco, Sonora, the town across the line just south of Bisbee, where, in spite of widespread poverty, cell phones are popular, and everybody knows the Americans are bound by law to treat them.

"When we get a call we go, and we don't ask where the person's from," says Earnest. Naco residents needing care go to the port of entry and declare an emergency to American officials. When they're waved through, they're transported to the Copper Queen's ER in Bisbee's ambulance, or they drive themselves in private cars.

The policy is called Compassionate Entry, and it applies to hospitals up and down the line. The Copper Queen averages about five such cases a month. Some abuse the privilege, says ER Manager Josie Mincher.

She's seen Compassionate Entries with bad sore throats and others who aren't sick at all. One pregnant girl landed in the ER recently complaining of morning sickness.

Most are seriously sick, though, and the staff rushes to help, "because that's what we do," says Mincher. But it doesn't take much to blow the budget. "Just walking in the door is $400," says Mincher. "It's not unusual to have one UDA (undocumented alien) cost $5,000, and we know we're not going to get that back. We're playing with monopoly money here."

Here's an example of how one patient can wrack up a huge bill:

A young Mexican man had a bad auto accident across the line and was taken to Douglas' Southeast Arizona Medical Center with severe neurological problems. After being stabilized there, he was transferred to Barrow's Neurological Center in Phoenix.

He spent a costly month there, courtesy of the Center, and was transferred--with a tracheotomy tube in his throat and supplies to clean it, also provided gratis by Barrow's--to a hospital in Hermosillo. That facility kept him less than a day before releasing him to his home in Naco. But for reasons no one can explain, the Hermosillo hospital kept his trach kit and cleaning supplies.

As a result, he became septic--a bad infection--and came through the Naco port under Compassionate Entry to the Copper Queen. He spent three days there, then the staff sent him off, with more free supplies, to a clinic in Agua Prieta for continued care.

How much did this fellow cost the American health care system? A figure of a quarter-million dollars would surprise no one. Cost to the Copper Queen? Almost $6,000, and they got none of it back.

Northern Cochise Community Hospital is in Willcox, far enough from the border that it doesn't get patients crossing the line for health care. But that doesn't mean it escapes the invasion.

CEO Chris Cronberg loses about $100,000 a year caring for illegals, mostly those injured in traffic accidents when their loaded vehicle flips while speeding north. "It's not make or break for us," says Cronberg. "But as a small hospital, we depend on cash, and those are dollars that aren't coming in, so it has an impact."

The same is true at Sierra Vista Regional Health Center, according to Vice President Marie Wurth. She expects the hospital to lose $250,000 this year treating those who jump the line, get hurt doing it and don't pay their bills.

The big squeeze is on in Tucson, too. Tucson Medical Center loses an estimated $4 million every year treating illegals.

The corresponding figure at UMC, which includes some foreign nationals, was $3.5 million for fiscal 2004, a $2 million increase from the previous year. Part of that is attributable to UMC, in July 2003, becoming Tucson's only Level One trauma center, meaning it saw the most serious cases.

Chief Financial Officer Kevin Burns says the hospital's re-payment rate for treating illegals is about 5 cents on the dollar. "It's very expensive for us and continues to grow," says Burns, who says many illegals, as well as uninsured Americans, use his ER like a primary care physician. "We hear anecdotally that people come here from across the border because they know they can get cared for, and if they present at the ER, they can get that care at no cost."

The federal law that put the hospitals on the hook for the medical bills of illegals goes by the acronym EMTALA--Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act. It says that anybody who shows up in an ER must get screened, treated and stabilized, regardless of citizenship or ability to pay.

But since its passage in 1985, the definition of emergency has evolved to include just about anything, and because Congress didn't fund the requirement, hospitals have had to eat the costs as word has spread that the federal goodie wagon is parked at the ER door.

In cities with huge illegal populations, such as Los Angeles, the effects have been disastrous. In its spring 2005 issue, the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons reported that between 1993 and 2003, 60 California hospitals closed because, for several reasons including EMTALA, half of their services became unpaid.

Another 24 are near closing, says author Madeleine Pelner Cosman. She also writes that in 1983, before EMTALA, L.A. County put together a trauma network that was "one of America's finest emergency med response organizations."

A mere 22 years later--again, in part because of EMTALA--Cosman says the system is coming apart, with most trauma hospitals having left the network, along with physicians, surgeons and others.

The law has caused a similar situation in Tucson, on a smaller scale. "With EMTALA, the government created an unfunded national health insurance program, and it has caused real problems in this community," says Dr. Herb McReynolds, who works for a company that manages the ER department for St. Mary's Hospital, which treats a large number of illegals.

Lawmakers wrote the legislation to prevent patient dumping--in which one hospital refuses to accept, say, an uninsured woman in labor, telling ambulance personnel to take her to the county hospital instead.

It stopped that practice. But it has caused a big increase in the amount of un-reimbursed care that hospitals provide, and in McReynolds' words, "made physicians rethink their careers and lifestyles."

"The price of it has come over time, because after so much uncompensated care, it forces physicians off our call list," says McReynolds. "Physicians have a practice to go to the next day and a family, and ask themselves, do I really want to be up at 2 a.m. providing care when I won't get comp, and I can still get sued?"

Some docs have removed themselves from on-call lists by going to work at outpatient surgical centers not affiliated with a hospital. Others stay on call, but limit the amount of time they're available. A neurosurgeon might take call one day a week, and that satisfies the law. EMTALA says that you must provide a reasonable amount of coverage, without being strict or specific about how much that is.

McReynolds says that EMTALA--in tandem with the malpractice crisis--has caused the loss of medical coverage at many hospitals around the country and in Tucson, including St. Mary's.

"Several years ago we had five neurosurgeons on staff here, and now we have two," he says. "We had hand surgery coverage every day, and now we have it one week a month. We used to have full ob-gyn coverage, and now they've left and gone to TMC. We have no ob-gyn and one gynecologist on staff covering emergencies one day a week."

With docs all over Tucson running for cover, trying to stay off call and away from ERs, the variety of emergency health care available to Tucsonans has seriously diminished. And here's the most maddening irony of all: The feds now reimburse American hospitals for treating non-paying illegals, but not for treating American citizens. Exception: Those eligible for care under Federal Emergency Services, a fairly restrictive program.

For a year and a half now, UMC has approached non-paying illegals in a novel way--it actually reports them to immigration officials.

"Some people find that cold, but we have a responsibility to protect this charitable asset (hospital)," says CFO Burns, adding that UMC's status as a public entity requires a different approach. "Our belief is that to the extent people have ability to pay, we expect them to."

After triaging and stabilizing an ER patient, the hospital sets out to learn who that patient is, and how he or she plans to pay. To those who are uninsured and underinsured, the hospital offers the option of applying for its innovative Charity Care program. Under it, the hospital charges the patient the same rate it would receive for that service from Medicare, a possible reduction of up to 70 percent.

Patients unable to pay at that discounted rate are eligible for further discounts that can tear up the bill entirely. To apply for Charity Care, the patient need only return to the hospital with a W-2 or other documents. Those who cooperate and return with the required documents don't get reported to the feds.

But the hospital does report those who take the medical care and run. How many illegals cooperate with this generous offer? Ten percent.

Burns says UMC began reporting the 90 percent who don't pay in November of 2003. So far, they've reported 565 persons. Why start reporting?

"Maybe a bit of it was born of frustration because people use our resources and make no effort to work with us and pay," he says. "Even if part of the population doesn't pay, I still have to hire new people and buy and upgrade equipment, which costs $15-$20 million a year. When you have these strains on resources, from foreign citizens and as well as Medicaid patients, you have to manage cash flow very carefully."

As with most issues related to the illegal invasion, those who live along the Mexican border, the scene of the crime, have the best view. Where health issues are concerned, it's not a pretty sight.

Residents say they've come across ground dotted with discarded pills, syringes containing nobody knows what, and used needles. Some report riding horses along creek beds, popular pull-up areas for groups heading north, and finding 70 or 80 piles of human feces, some of it blackened and running with blood.

It's as disgraceful as it is disgusting--and it raises a question: What happens when rain washes all this into the water supply? Is it a threat to spread diseases such as hepatitis? Some believe it might be.

What happens when cows drink from these contaminated creeks? And what happens when this constant flow of Third World humanity goes north, fanning out all across Arizona and the country? What kind of diseases do they bring with them?

ER workers like Mincher live with that question every day. "We protect ourselves best we can," she says, "but if somebody comes in with a contagious disease, I might as well buy the farm, because I don't know what it is. A lot of times, they don't know what they have either. If they came off a ranch in southern Mexico, they've had no immunizations, no health care, nothing."

Most of what she sees at Copper Queen--around 75 percent--is orthopedic, falls suffered while jumping fences, for instance. Dehydration, too. Some of these are pregnant women nine months along, who, in Mincher's words, "are so desperate to have their babies born in the U.S., they'll do whatever it takes."

She sees cardiac-related cases among illegals who've been given crack, methamphetamine or speed by their coyote so they can keep walking. But she's also treated illegals with active chicken pox, tuberculosis, all varieties of hepatitis and AIDS.

The Web and print media are full of stories about the diseases illegals carry, and their effect on American health. But some writers make alarming claims with sketchy evidence at best. In the cases of two diseases, however--Chagas and tuberculosis--the evidence is clearer that they're indeed coming across our border.

Chagas, a potentially fatal illness spread by contact with the feces of the reduviid bug, called the "kissing bug," is prevalent in South and Central America. Fifteen million people in that region are infected with the parasite, and 50,000 die of it every year, according to the World Health Organization. A person can be infected for 10 or 20 years or more before showing symptoms, making it particularly insidious. At its most severe, the disease can cause the heart to fail, and literally explode.

In the United States? Louis Kirchhoff, of the University of Iowa Medical School, estimates that between 80,000 and 120,000 Latin Americans with Chagas live here. Matching prevalence studies and immigration numbers, Kirchhoff figures about 10 Chagas-infected persons entered every day from Mexico alone in the 1990s.

The disease can be transmitted four ways, but for Americans, the most worrisome is the blood supply. In the United States overall, the chance of contracting Chagas from a blood transfusion is small, one in 25,000, according to David Leiby, a research scientist at the American Red Cross in Washington.

But in cities with high populations from Latin America, the numbers fall to much riskier levels. In Miami, for example, the chance is one on 9,000. In L.A., 1 in 5,400.

Researchers have confirmed seven cases of people contracting Chagas through blood transfusions--five in the U.S., two in Canada--and they say the number of unknown cases is probably much higher.

"A rate of one in 5,400 is something we're concerned about," says Leiby, adding that the FDA is still a few years away from a useable blood-screening test. "Chagas is overlooked by the health care system in the United States. Our physicians aren't aware of it and wouldn't recognize it in most cases."

Tuberculosis, which also shows up in high rates in Mexico, is migrating north as well. Many assume a place like Cochise County, right on the border and overrun by illegals, would have a high incidence of TB. But it doesn't, says Edith Sampson, of the Cochise County Health Department. "The immigrants only pass through here on the way to Atlanta, or whatever city they're going to," she says.

Exactly the problem--which is a big reason why 53 percent of the TB in the United States in 2003 was among foreign-born persons, up from 29 percent in 1993, according to the Centers for Disease Control. In L.A., again because of its huge illegal population, the figure is closer to 80 percent.

Only 15,000 Americans suffer from active TB, the only dangerous kind because it can be passed to someone else, usually by coughing and expelling the bacteria from the throat or lungs. That's a small number, but the New York Academy of Sciences estimates that each victim will "infect 10 or 20 or more people--in whom the disease will likely remain latent, creating the potential time-bomb effect."

The State Health Department says that Arizona had 295 reported cases of active TB in 2003, a jump from the previous year. Why the increase? More of the disease was found among kids under 5 years old and prisoners. The latter were mostly Immigration and Customs Enforcement detainees--in other words, illegals.

Sixty-eight percent of Arizona's foreign-born TB cases are from Mexico, says state health. Will TB return to the United States in a big way?

It hasn't yet, says Lee Reichman, executive director of the New Jersey Medical School's National Tuberculosis Center. But he adds that with globalization--the ability to get around the world in 20 hours--and because "we can't stop people from getting in to this country, no matter how hard we try," the potential exists for a new epidemic.

His particular concern is with multi-drug-resistant TB, fatal in 60 percent of cases. This strain requires a long regimen of costly drugs that illegals are unlikely to take, or have access to. Arizona has a small number of MDR-TB cases, and all of them in the past five years have been among foreign-born persons.

"The reason you haven't heard about TB here is that good public health is working," says Reichman. "People who are symptomatic go to physicians, and the physicians don't ask questions. As soon as you have to ID yourself, or say we're going to send you back to Mexico, these people go into hiding and spread more TB. Any physician who cares about being a physician isn't going to ask those questions, because he took an oath to treat sick people."

The Copper Queen's Rush Kish says that under Medicare reimbursement guides, her hospital cannot ask patients if they are in the country illegally. But how do you bill the feds to get money back for treating illegals if you can't ask if someone is illegal?

Well, you play a little Orwellian word game, probing around the issue with a list of government-approved questions, then make educated assumptions. But the illegal holds the trump card, because he can refuse to answer every question. "We don't know yet what evidence Medicare will accept when we apply for reimbursement," says Kish. "But at least we can begin documenting the enormity of this problem."

The question isn't whether those with genuine emergencies should get treatment. Of course they should. In Naco, residents have no access to ER care and many would die if they didn't get to the Copper Queen. The real question is: Who pays?

Rev. Tom Buechele, pastor at St. John's Episcopal Church in Bisbee, thinks it's appropriate for the federal government to keep ponying up, as long as American companies "maintain their illegal trafficking in human labor."

"Until we have comprehensive immigration reform, we need to bear the health-care costs for undocumented workers, whatever those costs are," says Buechele, who, for almost a year now, has been running a free monthly clinic in Naco, Arizona, catering to the poor and uninsured on both sides of the line.

Although they talk a different language, politicians, even Republicans, promote policies that further Buechele's liberal vision. They boast to constituents that they've saved border hospitals by pushing through the Medicare reimbursement plan, which provides a relatively small amount of money over four years.

But that's another Hobson's choice, which is to say no choice at all. What do you do, let hospitals go under? Kyl, who pushed to get the reimbursement money, says an emphatic no.

"If we want those ERs to be there for us, then we'd better keep them in business," says the Arizona senator. "If our hospitals are required by federal law to treat anybody who comes into the ER, and the federal government has failed to control the border, then it's appropriate for the government to reimburse these hospitals."

But some argue that the system as it stands now, with EMTALA firmly in place, is rigged to produce two results: The federal treasury will remain wide open to illegals, and that all but guarantees that more and more of them will bust the line to get here.

After all, this is the end of the rainbow for them, where jobs await, education is free, health care is free. Who wouldn't come? And the more they come, the more American health suffers--from such diseases as Chagas and TB, further cutbacks in hospital services to American citizens, and even possible closures.

Where's the compassion in that? Copper Queen ER nurse Josie Mincher, herself Hispanic, puts her health, and possibly her life, on the line to treat illegals. Listen to the emotion in her voice as she describes what that's like:

"I go to work every day feeling like I'm on a torture wrack. My heartstrings get pulled in one direction by these sick people I want to help. Because I'm Hispanic, I know how they live. And I'm pulled in the other direction, too, thinking that if our hospitals aren't around, where do I take my own kids?

"But we have to treat them because of EMTALA. It says that anybody who comes within 250 yards of an ER gets treatment. What would happen to Safeway if the law said anyone who comes within 250 yards of the store gets free food? They'd go out of business. Well, we're a business, too."

Mincher's solution? "Send the bills to Mexico. If it affected them financially, they might do something about all these people coming across. My grandparents came here legally, and it took a long time and a lot of money. They respected the law. These people just walk across now. They weren't brought up the same way."

Burns at UMC says he wants the U.S. and Mexican governments to work together to find a solution. But, as Kyl cautions, don't expect any breakthrough soon. Mexico benefits far too much from our illegal immigration nightmare--in jobs for its citizens and cash sent home--to step up with money to care for its own people.

Until the border brought under control and the invasion stopped, we'll continue to pay the bills of people who illegally tiptoed across the line in the dead of night.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: beardedbruce
Date: 28 May 10 - 01:41 PM

pdq

Last post was too long- please post a short part or summary, and link. The long post will probably be removed, and the information should be here.

Thanks

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 28 May 10 - 01:43 PM

Yes, pdq, this is an issue that people have been trying to avoid for decades. Once the hospital closes, they can't ignore it any longer.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: pdq
Date: 28 May 10 - 02:01 PM

Here is another little problem: murder by illegal Mexicans. Mexican nationals commit 22% of all homocides in the United States each year. This is the story of just one...


Tucson Weekly
April 29, 2010

The Krentz Bonfire

Will the murder of a respected Cochise County rancher change anything on our border?
by Leo W. Banks

A little more than a month has passed since the death of Cochise County rancher Rob Krentz, and the emotion generated by his murder, the pure shock of it, has ignited a bonfire that still burns across Arizona's borderlands—and all the way to Washington, D.C.

Now everyone is demanding troops. Now, with Gov. Jan Brewer's signature on a tough new illegal-immigration law, the nation is embroiled in a loud debate about racial profiling. Now everyone has a multi-point plan for bringing some control to a border so porous that anyone who wants to get into the country can eventually do so, as Cochise County Sheriff Larry Dever last week told the U.S. Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

Will anything change now?

When the bonfire cools, will we be able to look back and say, as the heartbroken Krentz family hopes, that Rob's death wasn't in vain?

Last week, Rob's brother, Phil, described how surprised and heartened the family has been at the outpouring of support they've received from around the country.

"It has really woken people up to what's going on," he says. "But I don't know if anything will be done about it. It's too early to tell. Meantime, we're coping any way we can."

Rob's sister, Susan Pope, says, "This has really taken legs, and I think some things will change for the better. But I don't think it'll ever get to where we feel secure."

The Popes' home in the Chiricahua Mountains has been broken into three times. Susan works as a bus driver and teacher at the one-room Apache Elementary School, which has been hit so often that nothing of value remains inside.


"When was the last time you felt secure?" I asked.

Susan let out a joyless laugh and said, "I can't remember, honestly."

What has to be noted first is the inevitability of what happened. Something like the Krentz murder was coming, and everyone knew it.

Life in the Chiricahua Corridor north and east of Douglas, as the Tucson Weekly has been reporting for two years, has become a nightmare of break-ins, threats, intimidation and home invasions.

The stories residents told this newspaper, the frustration they feel trying to keep property and family safe in smuggler-occupied territory, were like a freight train in the night. Down the tracks, you see a faint light, coming closer and closer.

On March 27, in Cochise County's big country a mile west of Paramore Crater, the train arrived.

The aftershock has been so powerful, because the killing exploded the lie about a secure border that Washington, D.C., has been working hard to promote.

In the days and weeks before Krentz's murder, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, on TV and in speeches, had been telling the American people that conditions on the border had improved enough to proceed with amnesty.

"The security of the Southwest border has been transformed from where we were in 2007," she said. It was a sales job meant to push a political goal.

This is the same homeland security secretary who, in April 2009, told CNN it's not a crime, per se, to cross the border.

How committed can our government be to securing the border when the person charged with doing so—a former governor of Arizona, no less—doesn't know it's a federal misdemeanor to enter without inspection?

Now, back up a moment.

Yes, arrests are down across the Border Patrol's 262-mile-wide Tucson sector—from 378,239 in 2007, to 241,673 last year.

Welcome news. But understand that the people who got away outnumber arrests by about 3 to 1.

Yes, the feds have built fencing along the Southwest border, boasting that 628 miles are now in place.

But as Glenn Spencer of American Border Patrol notes, only 310 miles of that is people fence, and some of that is next to useless. The remainder—318 miles—consists of vehicle barriers that don't deter anybody on foot.

I've written before of the Tortilla Curtain, an invisible barrier that filters the facts about the border through various lenses—race, culture, civil rights, politics—so that by the time the information gets to the power centers in Washington and New York, it looks nothing like the truth.

The Tortilla Curtain's stoutest pillar is our own government, and no, it wasn't much different under George W. Bush.

But now, even big-media conservatives like Michael Barone and Charles Krauthammer, lost behind the Curtain, are trotting out arrest numbers and fence numbers, dutifully falling in line behind Napolitano.

These guys need to come to Arizona and get their suits dirty on the trails.

Around Nogales, where arrests are down 20 percent, Susie Morales—who lives 2 1/2 miles from the line in the national forest west of Interstate 19—has seen no letup in crossings.

As she cooks dinner in her kitchen, she can look out and see mules backpacking drugs on a trail 75 yards from her front door. Another trail runs 50 yards behind her house.

These trails are so close that when Susie spots incursions, she runs into her bathroom with her cell phone and shuts the door. She has to keep her voice down so the crossers can't hear her calling for help.

"There are more Border Patrol agents around, but the tide hasn't abated," says Morales. "It's amazing. They're still coming. We need active-duty military here, because we're just outnumbered."

She carries a .357 magnum everywhere she goes.

Foot traffic still pours over the Huachuca Mountains, south of Sierra Vista, to the tune of 1,500 a week, according to a citizen who places game cameras on trails there and counts crossings.

East of the Huachucas, John Ladd tells me that in the 18 days prior to April 10, he counted some 350 illegals on his San Jose Ranch. Every one had climbed the fence.

Ladd's property near Naco has been fenced since 2007, with the barriers ranging from 10 to 13 feet. But fencing just west of Ladd's, across the San Pedro River, stands 18 feet tall, so why would anyone bother with an 18-footer when you can walk east and climb a 10-footer?

"I'm on the phone to Border Patrol on average three times a day, seven days a week, to report groups," Ladd says. "I don't know what normal is anymore. I've become cynical, untrusting and pissed off."

East of Ladd's at Douglas, drug-laden ultra-light aircraft fly up from Mexico—right over Border Patrol headquarters, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement headquarters, every night of the week.

Arrests in Douglas are up 25 percent this year, and the danger has never been greater.

As one resident told me, "We're under the gun all the time. There are people watching us all the time. The smugglers have scouts on hills, watching us, watching customs, watching Border Patrol. They're terrorists, very militaristic, and they get a high out of it. As long as they can get away with it, it's OK. That's their mentality."

Do you think DHS changed its song after Krentz's death?

On April 4, The New York Times quoted DHS spokesman Matthew Chandler saying the agency "will continue to ensure that we are doing everything necessary to keep communities along the Southwest border safe."

Continue to ensure? If our border communities were safe, Krentz would be alive. Continue to ensure. Imagine having the cojones to say that after Krentz's murder?

They spun before Krentz's murder, and they're spinning now. And word out of Washington is that President Obama plans to push ahead soon with comprehensive immigration reform.

The sense of abandonment in the Corridor is palpable, and no one expressed it better than Roland Snure, a doctor who grew up in the area and knew Krentz well.

"I cannot understand how a government that takes, and takes, and takes, could not provide the only thing it has to do—protect its citizens," he said.

If you want to talk transformation, life in Southeast Arizona has been transformed over the past month. But not in the way Napolitano claims.

Now, when men go out to work at their corrals, sometimes miles from the house, wives follow along, afraid to be home alone.

Up in Rodeo, N.M., Tess Shultis no longer allows her two boys to play outside the house.

"Not unless me or their dad is with them," says Shultis, a clerk at the market in Rodeo. "It's too dangerous."

Transformed.

The most dangerous thing you can do on the border now? Reach for your cell phone. Forget you even own one. Keep your hands visible. No sudden moves.

If you encounter the wrong guy, and he thinks you're calling Border Patrol, he might start shooting. That's likely what happened to Krentz.

It's supposition, but his killer probably has a criminal record, and rather than get arrested for it, he opened fire. For good measure, he shot Rob's cow dog, too, breaking its back. The animal had to be put down later.

The killer's tracks led to Mexico along Black Draw, a heavily used smuggler trail through the San Bernardino National Wildlife Refuge. The shooter is still at large.

The Cochise County sheriff has released a photo of a person wanted for questioning in robberies around Portal, in the Chiricahua Mountains. Some suspect a connection to the Krentz murder.

The man, Alejandro Chavez-Vasquez, was arrested in Southern Arizona's Santa Cruz County in early May 2004; the following month, he was charged with felony re-entry after deportation, according to federal court records. To earn that charge, he'd likely been caught crossing the border multiple times. In a plea agreement, he got 36 months of supervised release and a fine of $100.

Cochise County sheriff's spokesperson Carol Capas says Chavez-Vasquez also has convictions in this country for theft, sexual assault, motor-vehicle theft and narcotics possession, and has used multiple birthdates in dealing with police. Capas said some of his crimes occurred in Nevada, but she could not name other states in which he might've been active.

Krentz's killer, whoever it is, might've been jacked up on something. Many smugglers take meth or some form of speed to keep moving.

Anna Magoffin, who lives along Geronimo Trail, finds needles and discarded steroid vials on her horseback rides across the borderlands. "These guys aren't just walking," she says. "They're bumped up on something."

Not surprisingly, sympathy for illegal crossers has cratered.

"I've detected a hardening of hearts," says Lynn Kartchner, who co-owns a gun shop in Douglas. "People who used to give them water and a sandwich and let them sleep in the shade, now they're going to run them off at gunpoint."

In the days since the murder, Kartchner's business has boomed. Some of his new customers are bird-watching lefties from Portal who've suddenly become sudden Second Amendment converts, now that grim reality has hit them, too.

And what of our government's talk of comprehensive immigration reform? Of amnesty? It has made the crisis worse.

The words have been all over Mexican TV and radio, and the result is a rush to the border, same as it ever was, says Magoffin.

During the Bush years, she could look south from her house to a highway in Mexico and see big white buses unloading people. They'd line up single file and march into the country.

"It was like a long snake of people walking through the desert," Magoffin says. "The amnesty talk today has the big loads going through again."

Transformed.

But the polite border-crossing worker—some are still out there—has given way to the bad hombre. In the Tucson sector, 17 percent of those arrested by the Border Patrol have criminal records in the United States.

The most alarming reality is the takeover of people-smuggling operations by the drug cartels. Now, a group of 15 from, say, Chiapas, Mexico, with jobs lined up in Chicago, can't get into the country without dealing with the drug operations that own the trails.

To cross around Douglas, the going rate is up to $2,500 per person. When the Chiapas guys say they don't have it, the coyote hands them his drugs and says, "Carry this, and you can come in for free, and we'll guide you"—and up they come.

The coyote is accompanied by another fellow, also armed, who serves as muscle to make sure the workers turned mules don't drop the product and bolt.

If Border Patrol happens to jump the group, a few of the workers might get rounded up while the coyote and his muscle disappear into the mountains, armed and dangerous—and good luck finding them.

They know the trails like their own faces in the mirror, because they make those runs over and over again.

When I visited Ladd recently, he uttered a chilling remark that Dever echoed in his testimony in Washington last week: "I guarantee that every group coming across that border today has a gun behind it."

We can have a discussion about open labor markets, about legalizing drugs, about our insatiable demand for drugs, about the skill of the cartels at getting their junk into the country and how that creates more demand than there otherwise would be.

But that's for another time. The immediate issue: How do we protect American citizens from this imminent danger?

The worst thought of all is that maybe the federal government is incapable of doing it. Maybe the bureaucracy is too big to do much of ... anything.

The communications issue inspires zero confidence.

Susan Pope's husband, Louie, has worked closely with the Border Patrol, even volunteering to show young agents how to work the terrain and the trails. He likes some of what he sees.

"They're good kids, and they damn sure want to work," says Pope.

But he has also watched the agency regularly put two men on a trail to track a group of 20, without maps, night-vision equipment or radios.

Veterinarian Gary Thrasher tells of being flagged down on an isolated ranch road at night by an agent left there to track a group alone—again, with no radio.

If he needed backup, the agent was told to use his personal cell phone. But the battery had gone dead, and he asked to borrow Thrasher's cell.

For years, at every meeting with the Border Patrol, residents of the Chiricahua Corridor have pleaded with Border Patrol to fix its communication problems.

The corridor runs along a seam between the agency's Douglas and Lordsburg sectors, and the two sectors have been unable to communicate with each other.

Border Patrol agents stationed at forward operating bases out on Geronimo Trail, east of Douglas, can't radio back to headquarters in town.

Residents along Geronimo Trail can't call the forward operating base. Rancher Bill McDonald says if trouble brews at his place, he has to drive to the base, 5 miles away on dirt roads.

After Krentz was shot, Border Patrol agents and sheriff's deputies worked the area looking for clues, but they couldn't communicate with each other.

Close observers say Krentz's killer was likely back in Mexico well before Rob's body was located, so bad communications probably didn't play a role in his escape.

Within days of the murder, after Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords contacted DHS about the sorry state of communications in the corridor, satellite GPS radios arrived.

But it took a death, and a congresswoman raising hell, to get the bureaucracy to finally move.

Another loud plea, widely heard, is that the Border Patrol needs to be on the border itself, not tracking people five miles north of the line, or 30 miles north.

Thrasher, who travels the borderlands daily in his work, has made this his signature issue, and his view reflects the cynicism some feel toward the Border Patrol. He says the fall-back strategy cedes American land to the gangs and puts citizens at risk.

"There is no interest among the higher-up in stopping this at the border," says Thrasher. "Instead of being preventative, they're reactionary, because then they can show all the wonderful things they're doing. Look at how many arrests we made. Look at all the pot we caught.

"The border should be our line in the sand. That's where we need to stop them before they get to any citizens."

In fairness, Border Patrol has always said they don't have enough manpower to form a blockade at the border, and backing up allows more time to make arrests. They make a similar argument with fencing, saying it pushes illegals out into remote areas and gives agents days rather than hours to make arrests.

But that bothers Thrasher, too. Stop them at the line, and nobody dies in the backcountry.

"We push them way out and give them a two-day head start, then run them down," says Thrasher, who played football for Woody Hayes at Ohio State. "Rob's murder was terrible, and the danger everybody faces is terrible. But all of us out here are sick of seeing the bodies (of illegals), too."

The one that haunts him the most, oddly, was one he never saw. But a rancher in the Chiricahuas told Thrasher the story.

A woman had died up in the mesquite and had been there long enough for the coyotes to get to her. When searchers went out to bag the body parts, they found her head here, some guts over there, a scatter of limbs.

When the rancher picked up an arm, he noticed the Timex watch on the woman's wrist still ticking.

The idea of ceding American ground to the cartels is the pulse point of this crisis, because fundamentally, this is a fight for land. It's going on in this country and on ranches in northern Mexico, where a lot of good folks there have it even worse than we do.

Every trail on our border is either bought or won through blood. The profits are great, and no gang that controls valuable land is going to give it up willingly.

As John Ladd says, "Nobody has tried to stop them yet. But if we do, it's going to be a battle."

Do we have the political will to take it on now, after Krentz?

A telling sign will be the rules of engagement under which troops, should the president decide to send them, will operate. Giffords and Sens. John McCain and Jon Kyl have called for the immediate deployment National Guard troops.

Will they be allowed to stand their ground if challenged? Will they have bullets in their guns?

Remember back in January 2007, when unidentified armed men approached a National Guard outpost on the border near Sasabe, southwest of Tucson, and the soldiers followed orders and fled?

All across that section of the border, you could hear residents wailing, "No! Protect us! Why are you here if not to protect us?!"

If that was a probe by the cartels to see if the gringos were finally serious, they got their answer.

We can't do that again.

As Susan Pope says, "If we don't stop it now, God help us, because He's the only one who'll be able to. It'll send a message to the cartels, 'Hey, it's a free for all. Come on up.'"

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 28 May 10 - 02:25 PM

Well, pdq, maybe you'll be pleased to know that Rand Paul wants to eliminate birthright citizenship.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 28 May 10 - 05:19 PM

If we had a single-payer system hospitals wouldn't close because of non-paying customers.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 28 May 10 - 07:41 PM

No, we'd just all pay for them. I'd rather pay $4.00 a pound for tomatoes.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: pdq
Date: 28 May 10 - 08:42 PM

Tomatoes?

Do like a lot of us do and grow your own!

{compliments to Guy Clark}

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 29 May 10 - 02:34 AM

No, we'd just all pay for them. I'd rather pay $4.00 a pound for tomatoes.

Now just get megaveg to go along. Good luck. Write.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 29 May 10 - 07:22 AM

Here's the part that folks don't like... The econmy of the 90's was fueled by cheap immigrant labor... That meant more and more taxes collected... More econimic growth... Hey, more money into Social Security...

I mean, it's easy to just look at the costs associated with immigrant (legal and otherwise) and say, "Well, Ralph, theat's the entire story..."

Well, it's not the entire story... It's only half the story...

There is a balance sheet that folks who now are on the hate-immagrants bandwagon are not willing to recognize as part of the equation...

Just looking on the cost side is very narrow minded...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 29 May 10 - 08:46 AM

And now they're here, and now we're supporting them, after they've become American super-consumers.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ebbie
Date: 29 May 10 - 12:00 PM

Rig: "..they've become American super-consumers".

Superconsumers? Somehow I don't visualise most immigrants, illegal or otherwise, buying the megamansions any time soon.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 29 May 10 - 12:29 PM

No, but instead of buying a ear of corn, the buy a bag of dorritos(sp?) and need to throw away the bag, etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 29 May 10 - 01:18 PM

The Governator has made a hilarious quip about the Arizona situation.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ebbie
Date: 29 May 10 - 02:08 PM

"...instead of buying a ear of corn, the buy a bag of dorritos(sp?)"

Rig, I think you'll find that Mexicans have a MUCH longer history involving *corn* than we/YOU do. That is a pure dee snide assertion.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 29 May 10 - 06:06 PM

Ebbie - I'm aware of the relationship between Mexican culture and corn. That's why I used that example. Corn is corn, but once it is processed into a fast food product, the environment has to absorb the pollutants of processing, and then the products of packaging, and the then the disposal of everything conncected to both. More people consuming those kinds of products places a larger burden on resources and the environment.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 02 Jun 10 - 02:23 PM

Well, the big march is history and I didn't see anything on the news about Al Sharpton. He must be slipping.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 02 Jun 10 - 07:28 PM

I'll supply the banana.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 02 Jun 10 - 09:34 PM

Thanks, mouse. Maybe somebody will put it on you-tube.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: artbrooks
Date: 03 Jun 10 - 08:53 PM

FactCheck article on the Arizona law.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: artbrooks
Date: 03 Jun 10 - 09:10 PM

Oh yeah...600. Figure that out if you can.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 03 Jun 10 - 09:51 PM

Here's the law, if anyone cares to read it.

http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070s.pdf



r

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 03 Jun 10 - 11:31 PM

Rigs: "
Here's the law, if anyone cares to read it.
http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070s.pdf

Gosh! You mean Mudcatters will read it before the Administration!!???!!
Wow!..and to think there are those who are actually believing what Washington is telling them about it!..and they admit they haven't even read it! Now you can read it yourself!!

Like I've said NUMEROUS times on here, They tell you WHAT to THINK, rather than HOW to THINK!
(...."and you think we're talkin' about someone else"---Frank Zappa)
Good for you, Rigs!!!!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 04 Jun 10 - 05:06 PM

"They tell you WHAT to THINK, rather than HOW to THINK!"

            Yeah, they really do that in Ethnic Studies classes.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 04 Jun 10 - 05:20 PM

When's the last time you took an ethnic studies class?

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 04 Jun 10 - 09:28 PM

Nobody concerned themselves with ethnic studies when I went to school, Mouse. Then, we were all simply Americans. I've seen some taught, though, and it ain't pretty.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 04 Jun 10 - 10:20 PM

Mouser: "When's the last time you took an ethnic studies class?"

Have you really read the Arizona law, yet???....or before Rigs posted it??...or didn't bother?..because you've already formed an opinion?

Curiously,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: John P
Date: 05 Jun 10 - 11:13 AM

Here's an article published yesterday by the Associated Press using actual crime statistics saying that the border area is actually safer than many other parts of the country and is getting safer every year. Why don't the Arizona lawmakers have this information? The most likely explanation is that they do and are grandstanding.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 05 Jun 10 - 08:12 PM

All of this is very curous, especially the timing. But article tracks violent crimes, and as Phoenix has become the kidnapping capital of America, one can assume they don't consider kidnapping to be a violent crime.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: John P
Date: 05 Jun 10 - 08:56 PM

Well, the timing isn't all that curious. With all the noise in the air about the Arizona law, it makes sense that someone would do the math.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 05 Jun 10 - 09:15 PM

All of this is very curous, especially the timing. But article tracks violent crimes, and as Phoenix has become the kidnapping capital of America, one can assume they don't consider kidnapping to be a violent crime.

Either that or the number of kidnappings is too small to make a dent in the number of other violent crimes.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 05 Jun 10 - 10:14 PM

Yes, otherwise the criminals might be carrying out those crimes on people that matter.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 05 Jun 10 - 10:42 PM

Indeed! And it might not be happening at all if the people who shouldn't be there weren't.

Of course, the only violent crimes they know about are the ones that are reported, and the illegals probably aren't reporting a lot of crimes in Arizona right now--thankfully.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: pdq
Date: 05 Jun 10 - 10:46 PM

There are a few Mudcatters with open minds, so, for them:

                                                      
                                                          Phoenix kidnappings, drugs, illegals

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: artbrooks
Date: 06 Jun 10 - 12:24 AM

Arrest them. Lock them up and throw away the key. But don't make victims and witnesses afraid to come forward and report kidnappings for fear of deportation. That is just dumb.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Riginslinger
Date: 06 Jun 10 - 04:02 PM

The point is, Art, to make illegal victims go home where they belong - The more important issue is getting them out of the country...

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Stringsinger
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 02:27 PM

Jan Brewer's policy is institutionalized xenophobia. Arizona has never been known for its tolerance level to outsiders, let alone Hispanic people.

The State of John McCain (who attempted to outlaw MLK day), Barry Goldwater and William Rehnquist should send cold shudders up the spines of anyone who isn't part of Rick Perry's Texas, Bobby Jindal's Louisiana or Haley Barbour's Mississippi.

Borat seemed to bring out the worst in the Arizona citizenry.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Riginslinger
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 03:01 PM

Actually, it's having to pay huge sums of money for the feeding and keeping of illegal aliens, while they are seeing their school districts destroyed, that brings out the worst in Arizona citizenry.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ron Davies
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 09:10 AM

So, Rig, you think the Arizona citizenry will prefer wasting their tax dollars for the care and feeding of trial lawyers--since that will be the result of this law--rather than having illegal aliens pay taxes, especially Social Security, for services that they will never use.

Interesting.

And it hasn't penetrated your brain that if you don't want illegal aliens to stay, you should make legal entry and departure easier.

Since if you make it as difficult and expensive as it is now, they will never leave--since they would not look forward to the same process again if they want to return.

And if you care at all about US workers, you should make the current illegal workers legal--since the fact that they are not gives employers carte blanche to underpay them--it they complain they know they will be summarily deported.

So it seems you don't in fact care at all about US workers.

Time for you to start thinking.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ron Davies
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 09:11 AM

"if they complain..."

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 02:02 PM

"And it hasn't penetrated your brain that if you don't want illegal aliens to stay, you should make legal entry and departure easier."

             That would only work if you eliminate "birthright citizenship" first.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Riginslinger
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 03:59 PM

Sorry, I can't seem to keep my cookie.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 04:22 PM

Try a bagel...they're heavier!

Wink,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Stringsinger
Date: 09 Jun 10 - 10:04 AM

Jan Brewer takes steps to step on American justice. What do you expect from Arizona?
The white community in Arizona have been doing their "purges" for years. Rehnquist down at the polls keeping minorities from voting, is a case in point. McCain refusing to recognize MLK Day in Arizona, another one. Barry Goldwater certainly didn't have minority sentiment in mind in his crusades.

Arizona btw translates to "arid zone". So what else is new?

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Riginslinger
Date: 09 Jun 10 - 06:52 PM

Still, if we don't save civilization there, the whole country is sunk.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ron Davies
Date: 10 Jun 10 - 11:39 AM

"...eliminate birthright citizenship first."

Wrong.

And stupid.

That move will solve no problem and create a new one.   Added to which, it's DOA--it will never make it through Congress. There are more than enough sensible people-people not subject to absurd racist nightmares-- in the US to kill that idea if it ever raises its ugly head.

As we've discussed before, that is the way to ensure a young underclass with no ties to the US.    Sounds like you would like riots similar to those France has had--and will have again.

And if you now say that riots will make people realize there is a problem, that, as usual with your brilliant suggestions, is worse than useless--everybody already knows there is a problem.

Somehow we've seen this movie before. You need to get those voices out of your head.
Which as I've said before, will not happen--since you want them there.

And round and round we go.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: artbrooks
Date: 10 Jun 10 - 12:30 PM

Sen. Bingaman has asked for an official ruling on whether or not New Mexicans should be advised to obtain US passports to travel to Arizona, since NM considers a driver's license to be proof of the ability to drive and doesn't require proof of citizenship or legal residency to get one. More than half the population of NM is of whole or partial Hispanic ancestry.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Riginslinger
Date: 10 Jun 10 - 01:12 PM

The easier solution would be to simply require proof of citizenship to get a driver's license.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: frogprince
Date: 10 Jun 10 - 01:27 PM

"The easier solution would be to simply require proof of citizenship to get a driver's license."
So how does that work out for citizens whose current licenses don't expire for several years? Would everyone be required to required to obtain a new license, which indicated verification of citizenship, immediately? Or should the necessity to do so, to avoid major disruption of one's life, simply be considered the appropriate price for being a bit brown?

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: artbrooks
Date: 10 Jun 10 - 01:27 PM

Why? I'd rather know that the person in the next lane knows how to drive than that he is a citizen. What does one have to do with the other?

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 10 Jun 10 - 04:36 PM

Unidentified Guest said:

What one has to do with the other is, if he/she is illegal he/she shouldn't be in the country causing traffic accidents.

Two serious logical problems with that comment, Guest:

1. It's a classical fallacy, called "begging the question". That is, it assumes as fact the very point what was to be argued. The question is whether there is any relation between being in the country illegally and unsafe driving. You assume in your comment that there is.

2. Also, we could equally say "if he/she is entirely legal, a citizen, he/she shouldn't be in the country causing traffic accidents."

Legalizing someone, giving them a green card, or making them a citizen doesn't make them a good and safe driver.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Riginslinger
Date: 10 Jun 10 - 05:34 PM

What one has to do with the other is, if he/she is illegal he/she shouldn't be in the country causing traffic accidents.

---

You're right Dave, and as far as the illegal go, a lot of them are suspected to have been driving under the influence of Roman Catholicism.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: frogprince
Date: 10 Jun 10 - 05:53 PM

Now, now, everyone; don't assume that Riginsliner's "good natured joke" reflects anything about his real attitudes...

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ebbie
Date: 10 Jun 10 - 06:28 PM

I agree, FrogPrince- and it didn't fool me. I am certainly convinced that down deep he has an equal opinion of all races and cultures. In his belief system, they are all as good as his own and he will defend them to the death (not his, of course).

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Riginslinger
Date: 10 Jun 10 - 09:31 PM

Of course, if "his" death were to materialize, there'd be no way he could defend them. I mean, well, unless...

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 10 Jun 10 - 09:40 PM

Jeez! They can always go to downtown L.A., and get any papers they want, for about fifty bucks! True story!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Riginslinger
Date: 11 Jun 10 - 07:55 AM

Yeah, I remember laying a guy off in California once, in the winter when there was nothing going on, and he went down to file for unemployment compensation, and some Mexican had already filed a claim using that guy's social security number.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ebbie
Date: 11 Jun 10 - 11:12 AM

Well, now. Damn that Mexican.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 Jun 10 - 12:04 PM

I suspect it happens all the time, but nobody ever seems to report on these things.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 11 Jun 10 - 01:20 PM

Yes, therefore illegal immigrants should all be shot?

Actually there are plenty of social security number "twins". When I worked at Boeing, there were about 200,000 workers, and of those about 100 were social security number "twins" of someone else in the company (i.e. about 50 SSN's were shared).

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ebbie
Date: 11 Jun 10 - 02:37 PM

Wow, MT. I didn't know that.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 Jun 10 - 04:46 PM

Lost my cookie again

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ron Davies
Date: 11 Jun 10 - 07:46 PM

"happens all the time". In your head, at any rate.



To return to an earlier, related, topic.

It is clear to any thinking person that if illegal immigrants are forcing wages down for US citizens, it is because they can be exploited by employers who can underpay and otherwise mistreat them.   If they complain, they know they will be summarily deported.

It is also obvious to any sentient being that therefore if they were citizens, the same employers could not use this tactic.

So the blazingly clear solution is to put these illegal immigrants on a path to citizenship.   That way employers would be forced to pay them what they pay US citizens. And the downward pressure on citizens' wages would cease.

So anybody who does not support a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, yet claims to be concerned about US workers is a hypocrite.

If you disagree, exactly why is this not true?



By the way, new illegal immigrants coming into the country would have no bearing on this, since the same would hold true for them--the goal should be to make them all citizens.

So you need not bother with that pathetic red herring.

We are only talking here about illegal immigrants already in the US.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: artbrooks
Date: 11 Jun 10 - 08:06 PM

Not even that is necessary, Ron. A greatly expanded "guest worker" program, with legal protections including entitlement to minimum wage, employer-paid health insurance and the right to complain to the DOL, a renewable term, eligibility to receive earned Social Security benefits, etc. would solve the problem quickly and easily. Most migrants don't want to stay in the US. This isn't home; their culture and families are elsewhere.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Riginslinger
Date: 11 Jun 10 - 11:30 PM

It's weird about them cookies--I need to contact the Girl Scouts.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: artbrooks
Date: 11 Jun 10 - 11:34 PM

So some kid is born in the US to parents who are here as students, workers or whatever. His parents take him back home when they go. Why should he even care if he is legally a US citizen? Is this somehow special to a Panamanian, a German or a Thai?

If you feel that is an issue, get your senator or representative to cosponsor Nathan Deal's birthright citizenship bill. Of course, it has never gotten out of committee and it has zero chance of passage if it ever did.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 12 Jun 10 - 12:18 AM

I'm glad to see the dialogue has shifted, into doing things legally! Whether or not you agree with our laws or not, they are our laws! If immigrants did things legally, employers would find it harder to exploit them, political parties wouldn't be so inclined to wrongly load the electorate, they could go to and fro, to visit their families, taxes might get paid, the playing field would not discriminate against U.S. citizens, or Mexican(or any other), there might be some distancing away from those who do things legally, and other illegal activities...on BOTH sides of the border, and people tend to protect and or defend that which causes no threat to them! ...nor would they be prone to have animosity, and think, "I'll rip em' off, fuck 'em"

Keep going!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: artbrooks
Date: 12 Jun 10 - 10:01 AM

That may be a good thing. Since such a bill clearly violates the plain language of Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment, it will go directly to the US Supreme Court and put the whole issue of "birthright citizenship" to bed.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 12 Jun 10 - 11:19 AM

Will Arizona also make guns illegal, and religion, and public gathering?

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Riginslinger
Date: 12 Jun 10 - 12:41 PM

"...such a bill... will go directly to the US Supreme Court and put the whole issue of "birthright citizenship" to bed."


            And that's what the proponents are looking for. The Supreme Court will either decide in their favor, or tell them to change the 14th amendment, which they will promptly do...

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 12 Jun 10 - 12:44 PM

Um, no, SCOTUS can't demand changes in the constitution. Their job is to interpret the constitution, not change it. Read it sometime, it tells all about it.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Riginslinger
Date: 12 Jun 10 - 12:58 PM

You're splitting hairs, mouse. If the Supreme Court sides with the people who want to continue "birthright citizenship," the burden of changing it falls upon those who wish to change it. The decision will indicate that to be the case without the court telling them anything.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: pdq
Date: 12 Jun 10 - 01:00 PM

"SCOTUS can't demand changes in the constitution. Their job is to interpret the constitution, not change it." ~ mouse

True enough, but they change the Constitution by changing the interpretation of the Constitution.

One example is the right to private ownership of guns. All the Founding Fathers owned guns and their written works show that the Second Amendment intended private gun ownership, but many recent vocal members of SCOTUS have said "no", it applies only to a malitia.

We may see the "new" interpretation soon, if Obama gets to name a couple more SCOTUS members.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 12 Jun 10 - 01:11 PM

And maybe get some of our civil rights back.

"Intended"? There's a slippery eel.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Riginslinger
Date: 12 Jun 10 - 01:23 PM

And it's our civil rights that matter.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Riginslinger
Date: 13 Jun 10 - 03:40 PM

In any event, the legislation on birthright citizenship should be out soon.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 03:14 AM

And then soon (as these things go) struck down as unconstitutional. Ho hum.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Riginslinger
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 07:52 AM

Actually, thief, I expect it will be, and that will be the beginning of a movement to finally put an end to this insanity.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 01:02 PM

A man can dream, I guess. I, of course, hope you're wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 01:24 PM

I can assume then, you want to see North America consumed by humanity and destroyed.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: artbrooks
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 04:27 PM

And here I thought that you were concerned about Mexicans...who also live in North American, last time I looked.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 05:41 PM

And your point is?

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 07:48 PM

I can assume then, you want to see North America consumed by humanity and destroyed.

I think you mean America consumed by humanity and destroyed. Mexicans moving to the United States doesn't change the population density of North America at all. So changing US immigration laws to allow more Mexicans in, or changing --or not-- the 14th amendment's birth citizenship provision, will not further or retard the consumption and destruction of North America.

But we already know you are paranoid an irrational about population growth; that's a given. Will letting lots of people into the United States destroy it? In Wikipedia's list of 230 countries and dependencies ranked by population density, the United States clocks in at 178. More than half the countries in the world have a greater population density than we do. Countries like the Netherlands, Japan, the UK, Germany, Italy, Denmark, Poland, Portugal.... None of which as far as I know are being destroyed by humanity.

The US's population density (people per square km) is about 83. For comparison, Germany is about 230. Italy, 200. UK, 255. (Mexico, FWIW, is about 55.)

The sky is not falling, Chicken Little.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Riginslinger
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 10:00 PM

"I think you mean America consumed by humanity and destroyed. Mexicans moving to the United States doesn't change the population density of North America at all."

                It's time to take off the dunce cap, mouse. I've said many times that I would be much less concerned if the population of Central America went down each time one of their immigrants came here. That's obviously not what happens, however, so the population of North America goes up with each immigrant that comes.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: artbrooks
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 11:03 PM

Rig, Mexico is in North America. The US is in North America. The population of North America doesn't change even a little bit if a person or a million people move from one to the other.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Riginslinger
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 11:35 PM

I see now why pursuing a discussion like this is so hopeless.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ron Davies
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 11:46 PM

Bingo, Rig. It is hopeless.

And the top reason is the voices in your head. Attempting rational discussion with you is a black hole of time.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 15 Jun 10 - 12:30 AM

It's hopeless to pursue a conversation where people aren't using words the same way.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 15 Jun 10 - 12:31 AM

Central America, by the way, is not a continent. It is part of North America. It is primarily a political construct: those nations of North America south of Mexico. If Mexico annexed all of what we call Central America, the term would cease to have meaning. We wouldn't say all of Mexico south of its current southern frontier is "Central America." We wouldn't say "Central America" at all.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 15 Jun 10 - 05:27 PM

You're missing the point, mouse. If you just confined them to Mexico--at least until they brought their birthrate under control--they'd finally reach a saturation point, and you wouldn't have any additional population growth. If you let them migrate, everyplace will reach a saturation point.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 16 Jun 10 - 12:53 AM

They're fuckin' like bunnies, eh?

Maybe you haven't noticed but when people get better off, and particularly with the more education they get, the fewer kids they have. My boss at my previous job was a 2nd generation Mexican-American. His parents spoke Spanish at home, but he doesn't speak a word of it, and has only 2 kids and only plans to have 2 kids. Your racist idea that Mexicans are more fecund than northern Europeans (or whatever you think "we" are) is stupid. Or maybe you think it's because they're Catholic. Here's a clue: even if Mexico reaches "saturation" (whatever that is), they'll still be Catholic. If they move here and rub elbows with the Protestants, Jews, Atheists, and the occasional Baha'i, they're far less likely to remain Catholic.

Yep, no doubt about it. The way to keep a Mexican family from multiplying like bunnies is to move them to America.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Riginslinger
Date: 16 Jun 10 - 08:07 AM

Like I said earlier, hopeless.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: katlaughing
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 04:10 PM

Getting back to the AZ law, I just got this update:

Brave New Foundation's Cuéntame, has made major headlines this week for its video interview with Arizona Police Officer Paul Dobson speaking out about draconian Arizona anti-immigration bill, SB1070. Officer Dobson is now under investigation for exercising his first amendment right to speak freely about the real effects of the law:

"I know people will not call the police in case of a real emergency. This law is purely racist and solely focused on Latinos. In my opinion, SB 1070 violates equal protection under the law." Paul Dobson, Patrol Officer, Arizona.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 05:19 PM

It sounds like this Dobson character has been out in the Arizona sun too long.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 05:55 PM

It sounds like this Dobson character has been out in the Arizona sun too long.

Interesting how the police are so wonderful and we need to support them wholeheartedly, until they disagree with our racist laws. Then they've been out in the sun too long.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 06:19 PM

No wonder Azizi left this joint... There is some serious racism going on here... And it ain't on the mouser/Bobert side of the isle...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Riginslinger
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 07:45 PM

There's nothing racist about wanting to enforce the immigration laws. Although, the way the word has come to be used being called a racist is no more offensive than being called an optimist or a bicyclist.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 08:17 PM

What's racist is supporting a bogus law that was passed for purely politicval reason... That, my friend, is racism...

If you want immigration reform then tell yer Repub buddies in Congress to quit fightin' it and to put forth what they want to see in such legislation...

This is nothin' but grandstanding by Arizone Repubs for the November elction... That is the real deal here...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Riginslinger
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 09:19 PM

I don't want immigration reform. That's what we had in 1986, now it's time to get around to enforcing it. And that's all the Arizona law does.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 09:36 PM

Okay, Rigs... That is about as straight forward as you can put it...

I want immigration reform and if you polled the rest of America I think you'd find yerself in a little right winged fringe minority...

You didn't used to be this way...

Welcome to Tea Party/Redneck Nation...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 10:25 PM

There are more border patrol persons on the job right now on the Mexican border than EVER BEFORE in the HISTORY of the UNITED STATES. What more would you like to have done? Be specific. I mean other than pulling over people for driving while brown, which is what this new Arizona law is about. Leaving that out, what would you like to have done that isn't being done now? Specifics.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Riginslinger
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 11:50 PM

Well, mouse, I would do more of what is just starting to happen. Prosecute employers and throw them in jail. Fine them heavily and take their ill-gotten gains away. The problem will solve itself.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: mousethief
Date: 23 Jul 10 - 03:38 PM

Well, mouse, I would do more of what is just starting to happen. Prosecute employers and throw them in jail. Fine them heavily and take their ill-gotten gains away. The problem will solve itself.

We don't need this particular law to do that. We just need to enforce the laws we already have.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 24 Jul 10 - 12:34 AM

Today's News

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Ebbie
Date: 24 Jul 10 - 03:00 AM

Tom Tancredo is so far off base that he will not be taken seriously by ANYONE who is not certifiably insane.

I read a couple hundred of the Comments following his article and I have just one question: What did previous presidents do about illegal immigration?

Don't try to say that this is a new development - we know better. So just why are the unbalanced bloggers calling for impeachment on the basis that this president has not secured the border?

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Riginslinger
Date: 24 Jul 10 - 07:17 AM

"We don't need this particular law to do that. We just need to enforce the laws we already have."

         Exactly, Mouse, but nobody is doing it. That's why it is important for the Arizona law to stand, so at least Arizona can enforce the law in Arizona.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Riginslinger
Date: 24 Jul 10 - 07:22 AM

"What did previous presidents do about illegal immigration?"


             Nothing! Absolutely nothing. Ronald Reagan signed the current law into existence in 1986 and never enforced it. That's why we have so many illegal aliens in the country now. He didn't enforce it, Bush Sr. didn't enforce it, Clinton didn't enforce it, Bush Jr. didn't enforce it, and now it's way behond the breaking point.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 24 Jul 10 - 07:28 AM

Yer right, Eb...

If you listened strictly to the righties ypou'd think that the border crossings are at a all time high and creating a war zone with criminal elements... This is FALSE... The crossings are way, way down and the crime is, as well... I mean, I could see the right making a stink about it maybe in the late 90s ot early00s but they were happy to have the cheap labor...

That is way for the right to be making such a stink about this now is not only hypocritical but smacks of partisan politics...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Riginslinger
Date: 24 Jul 10 - 08:53 AM

I would agree that the immigration laws should have been enforced right after they were enacted in 1986. The point is, they weren't.

                Runaway illegal immigration isn't a problem right now in Minnesota--though it will be--but it's a huge problem in Arizona. Which is why that state enacted the local law they did.

                If Arizona can protect itself against this onslaught, the illegals will start going somewhere else. Wherever they go will end up with the same problems Arizona has now. Which is why 9 other states have joined with Arizona to try to put this law into action.

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 24 Jul 10 - 09:46 AM

On quite a few of my posts, I've pointed out that SEVERAL administrations, of BOTH parties have been screwed up..corrupt or working hidden agendas. This is not a partisan issue, but rather an American issue, and for whatever reason either party's agenda, they are not following the law, nor enforcing the law, nor representing US- You and me..."We the people" and our Constitution, for which they swore to uphold,........but they sure want you to pay your taxes!!!!!!!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: Bobert
Date: 24 Jul 10 - 10:31 AM

If it's an American issue, GfSer, then why is it that it is being pushed soley by the Tea Party and FOX un-news???

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 24 Jul 10 - 11:28 AM

Bobert: "If it's an American issue, GfSer, then why is it that it is being pushed soley by the Tea Party and FOX un-news???"

I can't speak for the 'Tea Party', being as I see them as a predictable backlash to what the government has become...that being said, I'm sure that they too, have elements in them that will co-opt them into something else. As far as Fox News, sometimes they report things that the other biased media omits..even though they have their slants and biases too.
   When I listen to the 'news', I listen to more than Fox. Most of the time the news reports a cover story...to provide just that COVER! Usually they provide a 'red cape', as a matador holds a red cape, so the bull goes after the cape....INSTEAD OF THE MATADOR!!
   Frankly, I get a lot of news online, PBS, NPR, and some other sources, that I've developed, who I've been astounded at their accuracy, and 'inside' access.
   To blame everything on Fox or the Tea Party, then disregard them entirely, is like throwing out the baby with the bath water. Even a broken clock is right, twice a day!
   I find NBC, and MSNBC are so watered down and biased, its a waste of time watching or listening to them, without then going to Fox, and finding out another side to the same story...which also turns out to be incomplete!..but, its still more of the same story.
   We from Sanity-Land, have a 'smell test', the lets us know when something is bullshit or not, on the news...and YES, you can count on the fact, that the REAL news, that we should all be getting, that affects our lives, is NOT going to be reported on the 'infotainment' networks.
   Getting back to the 'Tea Party'.....I think they were/are a backlash to the Obama administration, just as the Obama Administration was a backlash, to the prior administration/S, bullshit, that we've grown so painfully accustomed to.
   That being said, career politicians, are going to represent those who are their bread and butter. IT SHOULD BE US!....but sadly, it is those who pay them more to vote whichever way their money backers want them to...and that entails bribes(call it any other name that you want)...and that is illegal!....even in private life!...Why not hold these evil clowns accountable??!!?? The 'NEWS' is just the propaganda cover stories, that allow them to continue this treasonous behavior!
   Anymore, if a politician does not hold to strict adherence to the oaths they take, throw them out and into prison!...You have a government salary of up to $200,000 a year, versus millions paid out for a swing vote on a certain issue, which benefits the payer of that money. Which do you think gets the representation??..the one with the ideological idealism?????
   In my humble opinion(as if my opinions are humble--wink), its time to clean house!!...and rely on the rule of law set forth by the form of government we a suppose to have...not what it has come to, through corrupt opportunistic bullshit artists!...IT'S NOT A MATTER OF PARTY POLITICS! The difference being spouted by both sides, is just the 'reason' they hide behind. They DO NOT give a rat's ass about those issues, as they would like their supporters to believe. It is deception on a mass scale!...and it is wrong, it is corrupt, it is treasonous, it is illegal...and it is evil!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Arizona law on detaining illegal aliens
From: pdq
Date: 24 Jul 10 - 12:47 PM

It doesn't really matter what the federal laws say.

What matters is how the executive branch chooses to enforce the laws.

Here is a bill that was passed since the disasterous 1986 amnesty bill...


The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, Pub.L. 104-208, Div. C, 110 Stat. 3009-546 (often referred to as "i-RAI-ruh" by federal appellate law clerks, and sometimes abbreviated to IIRIRA) vastly changed the immigration laws of the United States. In 1996 the Illegal Immigration Reform and Responsibility Act (IIRAIRA 96) was passed and signed by President Bill Clinton. Title III of this new act created the notion of "unlawfully present" persons; specifically, the three-year, ten-year, and permanent bars were formed.

This act states that if an immigrant has been unlawfully present in the United States for 180 days but less than 365 days he or she must remain outside the United States for three years unless the person obtains a pardon. If the person has been in the United States for 365 days or more, he or she must stay outside the United States for ten years unless he or she obtains a pardon. If the person returns to the United States without the pardon, the person cannot apply for a waiver for a period of ten years. This is the permanent bar.

Constitutional issues within the law

Previously, immediate deportation was triggered only for offenses that could lead to five years or more in jail. Under the Act, minor offenses such as shoplifting, may make an individual eligible for deportation. When IIRIRA was passed in 1996, it was applied retroactively to all those convicted of deportable offenses.

However, in 2001, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that Congress did not intend IIRIRA to be applied retroactively to those who pleaded guilty to a crime prior to the enactment of IIRIRA, if that person would not have been deportable at the time that he pleaded guilty. (INS v. St. Cyr).

In an effort to curb illegal immigration, Congress voted to double the U.S. Border Patrol to 10,000 agents over five years and mandated the construction of fences at the most heavily trafficked areas of the U.S.-Mexico border. Congress also approved a pilot program to check the immigration status of job applicants.

IIRIRA's mandatory detention provisions have also been repeatedly challenged, with less success.

Deportation issues

Deportees may be held in jail for months, even as much as two years, before being brought before an immigration board, at which defendants need to pay for their own legal representation. In 2001, the Supreme Court curtailed the Immigration Service's ability to hold deportees indefinitely. (Zadvydas v. Davis)

Relations between federal and lower levels of government

IIRIRA addressed the relationship between the federal government and local governments. Section 287(g) is a program of the act that deputizes state and local law enforcement personnel to enforce immigration matters. This provision was implemented by local and state authorities in five states, California, Arizona, Alabama, Florida and North Carolina by the end of 2006.