BBC BLOGS - Mark Mardell's America
IN ASSOCIATION WITH
« Previous | Main | Next »

Would Arizona harass US citizens?

Mark Mardell | 21:56 UK time, Tuesday, 6 July 2010

The US government is claiming Arizona's tough new law to tackle illegal immigration would cause the harassment of American citizens, ignore humanitarian concerns and interfere with foreign policy.

So it is taking the state of Arizona to court to try to stop it ever happening.

Critics of the Arizona law, which is due to come into force at the end of this month, claim it is racist. The government's complaint doesn't go that far but it does say the state is overstepping its authority and suggests it is blundering into a delicate area.

The Arizona law would mean that police officers would be able to arrest people on "probable cause" of a public offence "that makes that person removable from the United States".

The US government's official complaint says "it will cause the detention and harassment of authorized visitors, immigrants, and citizens who do not have or carry identification documents specified by the statute" arguing this would "result in countless inspections and detentions of individuals who are lawfully present in the United States".

The government's wider argument is that immigration policy is the rightful preserve of the federal government, which has to balance many competing interests. It says it can't be done at the level of a state. It says the Arizona law is only interested in reducing the problem of illegal immigration ("attrition"), and, it says:

"It will altogether ignore humanitarian concerns, such as the protections available under federal law for an alien who has a well-founded fear of persecution or who has been the victim of a natural disaster. And it will interfere with vital foreign policy and national security interests by disrupting the United States' relationship with Mexico and other countries."

No doubt there will be an agonised debate about states' rights and some will be keen to portray this as intrusion by central government. But there is a much more basic problem. The United States, nation of immigrants, has long see-sawed between welcoming new blood and pulling up the drawbridge.

President Barack Obama suggests much is being done to keep illegal immigrants out, insisting last week:

"Today, we have more boots on the ground near the south-west border than at any time in our history. Let me repeat that: We have more boots on the ground on the south-west border than at any time in our history. We doubled the personnel assigned to Border Enforcement Security Task Forces. We tripled the number of intelligence analysts along the border... The southern border is more secure today than at any time in the past 20 years."

But there's a perception that whilst this may be the federal government's job, it is not doing it. While Mr Obama has signalled it is a priority to introduce new rules about immigration, nothing has happened. His strong speech has not been matched by any move in Congress. Anyhow, if there was a new bill the president has made it clear it would centre on turning illegal immigrants into citizens, rather than finding new ways of making their life more difficult and throwing them out.

It is the apparent failure of the federal government, seemingly frozen by the difficulty of the problem, that has goaded Arizona into action.

Comments

or register to comment.

  • 1. At 10:11pm on 06 Jul 2010, dennisjunior1 wrote:

    Mark:

    I read parts of the Arizona Law and, I have my serious issues and doubts about it, and, I think that it could be used to harass U.S. Citizens of Other heritages than Anglo-Saxon (European)....

    (d)

    Complain about this comment

  • 2. At 10:30pm on 06 Jul 2010, lochraven wrote:

    I wonder how EU countries would handle this since many have the same problem? I'm not talking about free movement of member states, but even here some member countries don't like the free movement policy.

    Complain about this comment

  • 3. At 10:35pm on 06 Jul 2010, crash wrote:

    The US government should not interfere,they have done nothing to stop illegals entering the US which costs us billions in education,medical,law enforcement.The US can not run the post office let alone immigration issues

    Complain about this comment

  • 4. At 10:40pm on 06 Jul 2010, GH1618 wrote:

    It is the "apparent failure of the federal government" over a few decades and several administrations that has "goaded Arizona into action," but it is the predominately conservative Republican political makeup of Arizonans that leads them to blame Obama for the problem.

    It is normal for the federal government to challenge encroachments by states into federal jurisdiction. I'm satisfied to just wait for the courts to sort it out.

    Complain about this comment

  • 5. At 10:51pm on 06 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    Oh, joy.
    Immigration.
    Again.

    Thank you, Mark, for providing positive proof of the existence of purgatory.

    Complain about this comment

  • 6. At 11:01pm on 06 Jul 2010, Echotheword wrote:

    It's the wild west show.

    Complain about this comment

  • 7. At 11:51pm on 06 Jul 2010, worldstage wrote:

    Would Arizona harass US citizens? Of course it would; if they were engaged in illegal activities, not paying taxes, terrorizing and even killing other US citizens, trafficking illegal drugs, it would "harass" them all the way to jail. Look, if we were talking about a small minority of Hispanic people sifting across the border, that might be different. What we're dealing with is a vast and uncountable majority. In addition, a few miles away across the border, there is a gang war raging, which has produced countless deaths. This gang war is all about who has the right to traffic illegal drugs into the United States. We are already aware of numerous creative ways the border barriers have been breached. Americans (the ones who pay taxes to provide the secure social infrastructure we enjoy in this country) have been terrorized, and killed. This is, unfortunately, an era of heightened security; sometimes, at the expense of our privacy and freedoms.

    When rigorous airport security measures were implemented after the terrorist attacks, people griped and complained. There were even questions about violations of our right to privacy. But, we got used to it. Some people may feel harassed or unjustly detained when they stand in line at security check points or are searched for weapons; but, for all of our complaining, I doubt many of us would consider a return to pre-911 airport security protocol a legitimate course of action.

    Really. Doesn't it just make sense?

    Complain about this comment

  • 8. At 00:28am on 07 Jul 2010, McJakome wrote:

    4. At 10:40pm on 06 Jul 2010, GH1618 wrote:

    I agree with this post, especially the following,

    "...It is normal for the federal government to challenge encroachments by states into federal jurisdiction. I'm satisfied to just wait for the courts to sort it out."

    Sometime there is exclusive juristiction [making war, conducting foreign relations-all reserved for the federal government] and sometimes there is overlapping jurisdiction. Sometimes the feds and sometimes states will go too far.

    In this case, though I am neither a lawyer nor a judge, I don't believe the feds can prevail [at least not completely]. The reason is that the states have centuries of precedent [and "stare decisis"] on their side.

    If the present state law falls, they could use loitering or without means of visible support against people hanging out at building supply stores. Laws regulating corporations could be used against employers of illegals.

    It is true that the federal government [under both Democrat and Republican administrations] has not been adequately protecting the nation and its people [and their job is protecting THIS nation, NOT Mexico; protecting OUR people, NOT theirs].

    This law was not really necessary, nor is it as bad as the naysayers
    claim. Neither is the law as good as its proponents insist, and there is probably more than a little politics and seeking election advantage in trying this tactic.

    And, yes, the "decider" will not be the President or congress, but the Supreme Court.

    Complain about this comment

  • 9. At 00:50am on 07 Jul 2010, theseherbsarerare wrote:

    The whole idea behind the law is bologna. Instead of focusing on WHY people immigrate here illegally, they want to use valuable manpower stalking individuals. If they instead targeted the BUSINESSES who hire undocumented people instead of legals (mostly for nefarious reasons), that would decrease the influx of illegals, most of whom are NOT up to no good, just looking for better work and need it sooner than how long the hoop-jumping citizenship process takes (which is intentionally made harder for Mexican applicants to discourage legal immigration so big business can take advantage of their undocumented status). People already here illegally would also have no choice but to leave from lack of opportunities. This new law isn't about efficiently or effectively handling a serious problem, just pandering to the reactionary racists that unfortunately make up a substantial part of Arizona's voters.

    Complain about this comment

  • 10. At 01:00am on 07 Jul 2010, me wrote:

    Every country in the world requires "documentation"! If the US government can't seem to get it together then Arizona needs to step up to the plate and DO WHAT THE feds CAN'T(or votes won't allow them to do)

    Complain about this comment

  • 11. At 01:19am on 07 Jul 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    I don't see where the Arizona police will have any more authority or mandate to enforce the law that the Federal government isn't enforcing than Federal authorities have. The restrictions on the use of the State's authority under the new law are quite specific and the safeguards considerable. I am sure there are problems when federal authorities exercise their resposibilities too. In instances where it happens under this law it will be well publicized by its opponents. There are some who would like to open the floodgates of America to anyoe who wants to come here. That would destroy our country.

    I don't think this law will cause a sudden rush of harrassment but it may net some illegals and deport them who would otherwise slip through the system. The Federal government is not doing its job which is why Arizona's state government has to. We could use the same law in a lot of other states. For example there are fifty thousand Irish here illegally and I guarantee most of them are not in Arizona.

    While Europeans may have given up on the idea of national sovereignty over their territory, most Americans have not. That is why so many of us are so angry and frustrated at the Federal government's laxity. Nor do we want a rerun of the failed McCain Feingold bill that was supported by President Bush and both liberal and conservative leaders in Congress but which the American People smashed decisively with demands to their Congressmen to vote it down or else face their wrath on election day.

    We cannot give illegal aliens a guaranteed path to legal residency or citizenship when of necessity we cannot make the same offer to everyone who applies to come here legally. Not if we are to remain a nation of laws.

    Complain about this comment

  • 12. At 01:25am on 07 Jul 2010, Ernesto wrote:

    The saddest thing is many Americans do believe the lies they hear from conservative politicians, they do believe immigrants "steal jobs from Americans" and that they're receiving too much from the state (education and health primarily).
    Well let us be honest for once. Not only does America NEED immigration, America NEEDS illegal immigration. California's agro-industrial businesses have no use for legal migrants. Many industries that rely on manufacturing have no need for legal (and unionized) workers.
    Please just think of how many American businesses of all sizes (run and owned by Americans) would go out of business if they didn't have the hard labor of 11 million illegal immigrants.
    America needs them... but Americans wants them ILLEGAL. Obama would have to fight powerful lobbies if he wants to change a comma in immigration law. And he would not have a second term since the average uninformed American will never vote him again.

    Complain about this comment

  • 13. At 01:26am on 07 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 14. At 01:29am on 07 Jul 2010, Political_Incorrect wrote:

    I wish someone in Britain would have the guts to do what Arizona has done.

    Complain about this comment

  • 15. At 01:52am on 07 Jul 2010, femmefatale wrote:

    I'm an American. I'm a minority in the US. The Arizona law is against my right as an American to be free from unnecessary search and seizure without probable cause. Regardless on how one feels about illegal immigration, the law violates the 4th and 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, as well as Article VI which gives the US authority over other governments residing in its domain. End of discussion. It is naive to believe that this "law" will stop at crimes being committed in Arizona. It gives the Arizona police full authority to stop anyone they feel is illegal. What makes an illegal alien? An accent? Brown skin? Many people in my family have both (as we are Louisiana Creoles), but we have been in North America since the 1750s. And none of us carry our passport and/or birth certificate everywhere on a daily basis.

    When I was a child, we were stopped in Georgia while going on a Sunday drive. My father, who is biracial (black/white), may appear Hispanic to some people. The policeman who pulled him over asked him if he was Mexican. When my father pointed to us in the car(we look black), the policeman apologized but proceeded to write my father a ticket for driving too slow.

    I'm glad the Administration is suing Arizona. The US needs immigration reform, but this is not the answer. And we have two land borders and two water borders. 9/11 conspirators came through Canada. Most people coming from the South border are usually escaping violence and poverty. Protect all, or protect none.

    Complain about this comment

  • 16. At 01:53am on 07 Jul 2010, Tiger80 wrote:

    I have had alot of South American friends and they went through the right channels and became U.S. citizens. That is how it should be done, otherwise it's going to overload our health care and other welfare systems and essentially destroy our economy. Now we have these crazy drug cartels spreading death and destruction on both sides of the border.
    We need to hermetically seal the border. If only it was possible.

    Complain about this comment

  • 17. At 01:54am on 07 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    USA vs. State of Arizona.
    It should say USA vs. Obama.
    Obama has made himself clear. The fight is on.
    This is Americans vs. Illegals.

    President Obama is showing Americans that he is not going to fight for us. He is ready to fight for the rights of illegals to take over our jobs, homes and our country.

    The President is not on our side anymore. He is against us.

    It is up to Americans now to fight for our country or lose it forever, creating a world in which our children are less than human and ruled by foreigners. This is what many foreign powers desire- to make us and our children slaves. Obama is doing everything they want. It is only too easy. Sadly, much like Sept. 11th. It was only too easy then for the terrorists. Now it is too easy for Bush and Obama to destroy America.

    We must fight like never before if we are to come through this alive.

    The most powerful people in the world are against Americans.
    We only have ourselves and God now.

    Complain about this comment

  • 18. At 02:09am on 07 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    Although I would like to add that the Americans who fought against the terrorists on 9/11 were true warriors, especially the ones on Flight 93.

    The passengers on Flight 93 stopped the terrorists from destroying the White House or Capitol Building. If it wasn't for them, our White House or Capitol Building might not remain. They talked with family members, some of whom told them it was a suicide mission. The Americans stopped the terrorists from their mission. The Americans (not the President, not the Supreme Court) saved the White House and Capitol Building.

    Complain about this comment

  • 19. At 02:11am on 07 Jul 2010, Loren wrote:

    It appears that many people are incapable of facing reality. If you look like a duck, walk like a duck, talk like a duck, there is a pretty good chance that you are a duck. According to most published figures, there are currently 12 1/2 million illegals in the USA, and I do not think that Obuma and his henchmen should just wave their magic wand and make any illegal a US citizen. My solution would be to use the entire 1st Division of the US Army, which is assigned solely for domestic service,and deport the illegals after taking a blood sample for DNA purposes. At some point, many of these people may want to apply for immigration status and citizenship and that would be great and legal.
    My biggest question is this. At what point do we no longer UPHOLD the law? These people are in this country illegally and yet many are saying that is okay. If I would go out and rob a bank would anyone tell me that it is okay to do so? Of course NOT. At my age, I would probably spend the rest of my life in prison. What about exceeding the speed limit by 15 mph? Certainly one would be issued an expensive ticket if caught by
    law enforcement. If some can avoid the consequences of breaking the law, why can't all of us be treated equally?

    Complain about this comment

  • 20. At 02:15am on 07 Jul 2010, Gavrielle_LaPoste wrote:

    12. Ernesto:

    Business has always sought to employ cheap labor. It's not that they need illegals, it's that they like illegals because illegals have no protection under the law. They can be overworked, underpaid, ill-used and discarded without being able to complain about their treatment to the proper authorities. In the early 20th century working Americans of every stripe fought for labor laws to protect our people from the kind of abuse you imply is perfectly acceptable. The fact that you are advocating for, at the very least, the indentured servitude of millions of people, makes me wonder what sort of person you are. We don't need illegals. Businesses want slaves, and illegals, heaven help them, are unwittingly offering themselves up into servitude.

    Complain about this comment

  • 21. At 02:21am on 07 Jul 2010, JJames wrote:

    Ernesto is right - America has relied on migrant workers for decades, many of whom would return to their home in Mexico after living in substandard conditions and harvesting crops or building homes. As the border has tightened post 9-11 many migrants have elected to stay in the US where they have a livelihood. Many of them have mixed citizenship families. Many came as small children and grew up here. Many have been waiting years for their naturalization process to begin. Many more are just keeping their heads down. The vast majority are law abiding hardworking and kind hearted. I moved to within 40 miles of the US Mexico border in 2008. I have seen tremendous increase in federal border patrol - helicopters, omnipresent border patrol vehicles, additional interior road checkpoints. So it really is not true that the federal government has done nothing about immigration. Pres. George W Bush tried to reform the law in 2007. Sens Kyl and McCain have been in the US Senate for decades - they have done nothing. This AZ law does nothing about the border. There is tremendous drug cartel violence in Mexico, but in fact violence in AZ cities like Tucson and Phoenix has been falling - not rising. See the Center for Immigration's website for some real facts about migrants and crime. This law was passed to take attention away from the abysmal efforts the governor and legislature have made to deal with AZ's budget crisis. It will only create racial tensions in an area that has a large hispanic population that lived here for several centuries before this part of AZ was purchased from Mexico a little over 100 years ago. I hope Obama can change immigration law - I personally plan to support those efforts.

    Complain about this comment

  • 22. At 02:30am on 07 Jul 2010, maryw wrote:

    I don't think there are any "bad guys" in this argument. Clearly many in Arizona have had enough of the federal government ignoring the enforcement of the nation's immigration laws. Nor do I think the average illegal immigrant is more of a "problem" or less of a "solution" than a legal one. But what I do feel should be of concern to Americans is that any liberalising of immigration laws to deal with "the mexican problem" is a de facto opening of the border to all of Latin America. It will not be politically possible in the long term for a Mexican Government to champion a free and open northern border whilst simultaneously harshly enforcing its southern one at the behest of the US, rightfully worried about hundreds of millions of Latin Americans arriving to demand their free education and health care.

    Complain about this comment

  • 23. At 02:31am on 07 Jul 2010, JJames wrote:

    Lucy J you should visit the website" takeourjobs.org" - The United Farm workers are willing to have American Citizens replace them. This is a silly and foolish myth that undocumented workers take jobs away from Us citizens, or that deporting all those who are not US citizens who work here illegally will reduce unemployment. An engineer from Detroit Michigan does not want to pick farm produce or work in a meat processing plant.

    In fact these people add to our economy - not take away from it. And if you deport the breadwinner, the citizens dependent on that bread winner will fall onto our welfare rolls! Check out immigration policy.org for more reliable information.

    Complain about this comment

  • 24. At 02:38am on 07 Jul 2010, dapex wrote:

    A month ago a resort outside Atlanta was raided and about 100 illegals were marched off. They were doing menial tasks - maids, groundskeepers, etc. As soon as the resort advertised the openings, hundreds of citizens applied for work. Australia is an island and doesn't share any borders, but look at the trouble you have with boat people, etc. And look what trouble you have with the gangs that you have let in casually! Lots of murderers, etc. Should have kept the past policy.....

    Complain about this comment

  • 25. At 02:41am on 07 Jul 2010, Curt Carpenter wrote:

    I favor the doctrine of fair exchange. For every hard-working Mexican that is granted the right to be shamelessly exploited here by our U.S. businesses, Mexico must agree to accept one of our lazy, shiftless citizens that THEIR businesses can shamelessly exploit -- if they can.

    Happily, there is no shortage of the later group of American citizens in, for example, Arizona! So there are no real impediments to establishing the doctrine as law from that quarter. And the Mexican government is much more experienced than ourselves in dealing -- in a care-free way -- with mass poverty and indigent control. They're better equipped to take a rally hard line on grifters when it's called for too -- as it surely will be as the doctrine begins to bite in.

    This seems like a good and equitable solution to me. Non-working Americans that are leeching off our schools, medical and welfare systems NOW would be replaced by the new faces of people that actually WANT to work in exciting careers like meat packing and roof repair! And the bonus would be that we would save huge amounts of taxpayer money that would otherwise be spent on senseless "iron curtains" between our two countries.

    This is a win-win-win "population neutral" scheme that would establish a completely new "illegal immigrant" paradigm that might work all over the globe!

    Complain about this comment

  • 26. At 02:43am on 07 Jul 2010, Bill Baur wrote:

    Being part Swiss, I would love it if the US sent me back to Switzerland, because there are jobs there. Problem is, my family came here in the 1800's legally.

    Complain about this comment

  • 27. At 02:44am on 07 Jul 2010, McJakome wrote:

    I reluctantly and sadly agree with this statement from elsewhere, “But could an American Civil War happen again? Absolutely.” However, I disagree with the reasons given.

    It is the work of the zealots, tearing the country apart socially and politically. There are zealots on both sides, but the worst and most intolerant are the right wingers.

    They promote distrust, or even hatred of other Americans [non-white, non-Christian, non-American English speaking, non-heterosexual, non-conservative (i.e. liberal) and non-GOP]. If you doubt this, just read some of the bigoted and ignorant posts above.

    I did not particularly favour gay marriage, but when red state zealots descended on Boston to propagandise and proselytise against it and interfere in OUR laws and culture, not a few Bay Staters were offended by THEM [including myself]. I now support it, their propaganda against it having been so wrong.

    The poisonous atmosphere and mutual intolerance is very similar to that preceding the Civil War. Once again it is the Grey/Red states on the wrong side of history, seeking to discriminate against non-straight WASPS and enslave the minds of those without the same narrow prejudices.

    God save the United States of America [from them]!

    10. At 01:00am on 07 Jul 2010, me wrote:
    “Every country in the world requires ‘documentation’! If the US government can't seem to get it together then Arizona needs to step up to the plate and DO WHAT THE feds CAN'T(or votes won't allow them to do)”

    You almost make me agree with MAII about the undemocratic notions prevailing elsewhere. In the US the police need a reason to ask for documentation. I could not just be asked by a policeman for my ”papers” while walking down a street and minding my own business. That is seriously contrary to American legal and human rights concepts.

    Complain about this comment

  • 28. At 02:52am on 07 Jul 2010, wcorey wrote:

    Sorry, but the US does not need ILLEGAL immigrants at a time of serious budget problems.

    We have room and a need for skilled legal immigrants AND for guest workers to be legally entitled to work in this country for a certain period of time under proper supervision.

    Mr. Mardell, I'm disappointed that you approach the issue as delicately as you do. I assume you support President Obama's wish to force Arizona to drop its planned new anti-illegal immigrant law.

    Yes, it's very possible, in fact likely, that citizens or legal residents of this country will be stopped and asked for their ID's or papers when stopped for some other reason.

    But, anyone who drives around or goes out in public SHOULD have some sort of ID with them at all times. Anything could happen. An aircraft engine could fall on them, and they would need to be identified.

    Equally to the point, American tend to think Western Europe is the epitome of the social welfare state or social democracy. It is or has been that in many ways.

    But, the police in countries like France have had more authority to interrogate suspected illegal immigrants than the police in Arizona will have under the new law.

    This hardly means that Western European countries aren't "civilised." It just means they'll protect their borders as well as possible - unlike the U.S. government.

    Complain about this comment

  • 29. At 02:59am on 07 Jul 2010, Ruethan wrote:

    The United States should adopt the same immigration laws as Mexico.

    In the meantime, the federal government should enforce existing immigration laws. Under existing law, states, which in the US federal system are sovereign entities, can detain any person in the US illegally.

    Complain about this comment

  • 30. At 02:59am on 07 Jul 2010, Camo wrote:

    Bingo Femmefatale.

    States cant make it a state offence for someone to be already committing a federal offence. It is a federal offence to be inside the borders of the US without permission or citizenship. The trick is in the phrase "public offence that makes that person removable from the United States."
    Ergo - it is a state offence to be committing a federal offence in this state.
    Cant happen, no constitutional court, no matter how many Republican golf judges are sitting, could uphold Arizona's law.

    On the other hand... it IS possible for me to commit a US federal offence punishable by deportation by committing a US state offence. (huh?)
    As a visa-holding visitor, if I commit a state felony, I can be deported. Thats why they fingerprint us on the way in.
    My visa says I can stay if I be good. So if I'm bad (at state level), I've breached the be good clause (which is federal) and off to home I go. The local Sherrif wont deport me, the immigration officer will.

    Besides all of which, cant local, county, state and city law officers already report someone to immigration if they dont have paperwork? Aren't they already required to do just that?

    Complain about this comment

  • 31. At 03:10am on 07 Jul 2010, pkimble wrote:

    I live in Arizona! I am not a conservative! Or Republican of any sort! I back SB 1070 without any reservations.

    If I am speeding, and get pulled over by an officer, I will be asked for I.D. ( drivers license, registration, proof of insurance, etc)These I must show!! I have no problem with this. I have a lot of friends that are of Hispanic descent, some of them are 100% in favor of this bill. I have heard stories of this "friend of a friend" got stopped for no reason and asked for identification. The law has not taken effect yet and no officer has the right to "racial profile" anyone. Even when the law goes into effect, they can not pull someone over or stop someone walking down the street to ask for proof of citizenship. They must be detaining a person for breaking some law even if it is jaywalking to be able to ask about immigration status.

    We have had an Employer Sanctions Law since 2007 and it has done nothing. No one wants to hurt the employers that are hiring the illegals so nothing is done. Our county sheriff, Sheriff Joe of Maricopa County, is constantly acting on tips and raiding businesses with illegals working for them. They are released either back to our streets, at the border, or flown to their country of origin only to be back again in a few months.

    Any one that has worked in an office setting in Arizona has seen the W-4 claiming 15 dependents so no taxes are withheld. And then when they are offered health insurance, they turn it down because they can get Medicaid (if their family is even in the states)so why should they pay for insurance like the rest of us??

    They do not insure their vehicles and then drive recklessly and cause an accident. Anyone not having full coverage on any vehicle in Arizona is a fool. Chances are that if you are in an accident, the other driver will not have any insurance and you are left holding the bag!! This happened to me!! The driver of the other car(and he had borrowed it) did not have a license, no insurance, no English and open container in the car!! After causing the accident, he fled the scene! Lucky for me there was a motorcycle officer behind me, and is the only time I was ever happy to see those lights come on behind me. He chased the guy down and arrested him, but he never made it to court, he was released and disappeared.

    Now, with the approach of SB 1070, our local paper and news are running stories about how many illegals are leaving the state for more welcoming states!!! I do believe that all the states that are boycotting Arizona are becoming their new homes.

    Here's my "papers"

    Complain about this comment

  • 32. At 03:16am on 07 Jul 2010, TikiMouse wrote:

    I live in Arizona 60 miles north of Mexico, and think it's a strange, politically motivated law. The police I have talked to have said it will not make their duties any different; the police who are doing racial profiling will continue and the ones who don't will not start. They are worried that their safety will be compromised by more people carrying guns and being desperate (in the case of illegals) or righteous "I hate the government" types (legal citizens). Despite what our governor and two Senators say, the crime rate in southern Arizona has decreased.

    I agree that there is a problem, but America needs to make the citizenship process faster and needs to prosecute employers who knowingly hire illegals. Here in the largest city closest to the border, the people who are most disruptive are the high school kids who love skipping school to "protest" downtown, waving Mexican flags and cruising the streets hanging out of car windows and screaming anti-American phrases.

    People yammering that illegals are stealing their jobs need to start flooding their Congressional representatives with demands that American businesses stop sending jobs overseas, and that American brands are manufactured within our borders once again. What's happened to Detroit is a tragedy. The pundits also need to start quashing violent rhetoric. It's disgusting to hear "patriots" laughingly calling for violence against the "America hating liberals". Freedom of speech is one thing, but you need to accept the consequences of what you say.

    Complain about this comment

  • 33. At 03:27am on 07 Jul 2010, Andy wrote:

    Two notes on the Arizona law-

    First (and the one that no one in the media talks about), is that there is a significant focus on holding businesses accountable for hiring illegal workers. First offense is a temporary suspension of business licenses and a signed affidavit that they have no known illegal immigrants. Second offense is a permanent suspension of the licenses (and theoretically, personal charges against the affidavit signer).

    Second, everyone likes to point to race and being illegally searched. IF you commit some other crime AND the police officer has some reason to suspect that you may be illegal NOT BASED ON RACE as stated in the law, then he can seek to ascertain your legal status. This is more protection than is currently offered in any other state/jurisdiction that is currently part of the 287(g) program that allows law enforcement to check the legal status of any detained person.

    Is Arizona's law political, yep, trying to get some real reform brought to attention. Is it their first attempt, nope? Courts recently upheld a similar immigration law from 2007 challenged by the current administration.

    Complain about this comment

  • 34. At 03:33am on 07 Jul 2010, farmerTom wrote:


    12. At 01:25am on 07 Jul 2010, Ernesto wrote:

    Funny you would say that Ernesto.....

    Hi,
    I'm Tom and I live and work in Arizona. Sense the early eighties my wages have stayed pretty much the same, and it is very hard for me to get a job and keep it in my chosen profession....I work in construction. I am a minority even though everyone else says I'm not because I'm usually the only white guy, or black guy, or Asian guy, or any other race for that matter on the job site. Discrimination vs. prejudice, I don't know but unless you "fit in" you are forced out. There are an estimated 460,000 illegals in Arizona, and 300,000 of those (or more) are here in the Valley to take my job! They are driving without insurance, they claim 5+ for deduction and skip out on their major bills..... this is a fact folks. Why? Because if they mess up they only have to get a new I.D. .
    Illegals get iron-clad I.D.'s so they are not really that worried about the new law, they are leaving because there is no work.

    Police that are prejudice didn't need this law as femmefatale clearly pointed out! That has been going on for a long time. That is another matter, that needs attention outside this issue!

    I am the only white guy in my neighborhood, the people next door are Chinese, but the rest of the neighborhood are Hispanic (many are illegals too), but I don't mind, most everybody in this neighborhood are good people, I'm lucky I live here! I'm not prejudice I got friends and co-workers in every color. If England was on our border and they were pouring over the border at a rate of several thousand a day, I would be complaining about you guys instead, really I would.

    I don't blame the people from Mexico, if I were born in Mexico I would run across the border too, because I refuse to be a peasant! The problem isn't with the people crossing the border, it's solely rest on the shoulders of the Mexican Government, and every other government that has forced wage-workers pay rates to sub poverty levels. Mexico isn't alone, India, China, etc.....that's what outsourcing is all about right!

    Why would they run here? Ask them, I have, it all about money..... Why here...
    The United States, Canada, Northern Europe, Australia all have strong economies because ....... they are white people.....no. Why because at some point in their history workers stood up for their right to make a decent wage, that's all there is to it. What is presently happening to the global economy due to outsourcing, emerging markets, and wage cuts?????? The global economy is collapsing because all of the world rode on the backs of these "fairly" paid workers, I like to call them consumers. Without consumers who buys the goods???? Good question huh! >>>> grin. Well the majority of them are gone now, I mean that they are now on a "subsidized income".

    Define: consumer > Someone who can afford to buy things other than food, clothing, and shelter.
    Define: peasant > Someone who only makes enough money to pay for food, clothing, and shelter.

    Is this starting to make sense to you? The only fix for this problem is to form harsh tariffs, and economic sanctions against countries (or entities) pertaining wage earners compensations. Level the playing field so to speak. Can you imagine a world where every one (except the rich of course) were able to make an income to where they able to be come consumers....6 billion + consumers. I think the rich people don't know what they are missing out on, they got to greedy and missed it! LOL!

    The illegals crossing our border isn't our problem it's because of what Mexico is doing, or should I say it's what Mexico hasn't done....

    hasta la vista,
    farmerTom


    Complain about this comment

  • 35. At 03:33am on 07 Jul 2010, Gavrielle_LaPoste wrote:

    26. At 02:43am on 07 Jul 2010, Bill Baur wrote:

    Being part Swiss, I would love it if the US sent me back to Switzerland, because there are jobs there. Problem is, my family came here in the 1800's legally

    The US government would be happy to send you free of charge to Switzerland, if that's what you really want. All you have to do is contact the State Department and tell them you'd like to renounce your American citizenship. Then pack your bags, Bill! Because after filling out a few forms and surrendering your US passport, you're getting an all expenses paid, one-way flight to the country of your choice! Whether or not that country accepts the new stateless you is another matter entirely.

    Complain about this comment

  • 36. At 03:55am on 07 Jul 2010, Summonindeed wrote:

    If ever questioned via Profile, It couldn't bother me in the least. Cooperate and move along, Big deal. Carry proper proof of citizenship, So what. It's every Citizen's duty to see above self-interest in that plausible moment. Economic oblivion awaits partially because of those who create wear & tear on the State in which they live but contribute nothing to the Treasury. Arizona is being sane when those in D.C. refuse to be. They have my Accolades.

    Complain about this comment

  • 37. At 04:05am on 07 Jul 2010, rodidog wrote:

    15. At 01:52am on 07 Jul 2010, femmefatale wrote:
    I'm an American. I'm a minority in the US. The Arizona law is against my right as an American to be free from unnecessary search and seizure without probable cause. Regardless on how one feels about illegal immigration, the law violates the 4th and 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, as well as Article VI which gives the US authority over other governments residing in its domain. End of discussion. It is naive to believe that this "law" will stop at crimes being committed in Arizona. It gives the Arizona police full authority to stop anyone they feel is illegal.
    ---------------

    In what way does the Arizona law violate the IV and XIV Amendments? The Arizona law requires that probable cause must be established before any question on ones immigration status can be asked. In other words, only after someone is detained for a separate violation or crime. That would satisfy the IV Amendment.

    The law also say's that a drivers license is accepted as proof of ones legal status. In addition, Federal law requires immigrants to carry their green card at all times, this also establishes one's legal status. The law does not allow police to deport anyone, merely to detain them for further questioning and evaluation and eventual transfer to ICE. That would satisfy the XIV Amendment.

    As for article VI, your premise is correct, only I do not see where the Arizona law violates Federal law. Are you suggestion that local and State police are prohibited (by Federal law) from detaining anyone suspected of a Federal crime?

    Complain about this comment

  • 38. At 04:09am on 07 Jul 2010, rodidog wrote:

    27 JMM,

    What does gay rights have to do with illeagal immigration?


    "In the US the police need a reason to ask for documentation. I could not just be asked by a policeman for my ”papers” while walking down a street and minding my own business. That is seriously contrary to American legal and human rights concepts."

    How does the Arizona law violate this concept?

    Complain about this comment

  • 39. At 04:22am on 07 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    joycejames,
    you should check out fairus.org or alipac.us/
    They are two very informative websites that use a lot of facts.

    I have nothing against immigrants (regardless of race) who come here legally, including learning English, following our laws and being pro-American, which means holding allegience to our country over all other countries. But I do believe there should be a limited number of them.

    Illegal is not a race.
    Illegal is a crime.

    Arizona simply wants to stop the illegal foreign invaders from destroying their state and our country.

    I stand in support behind Arizona. Arizona should know that there are many Americans from other states who love, support and cherish them.

    Big govt. is rearing its ugly head.
    Big govt. desires total domination over the people.
    Big govt. wants to take away state's rights.

    Complain about this comment

  • 40. At 04:51am on 07 Jul 2010, cl123456 wrote:

    If you come into a foreign country as a visitor learn the customs of that country and respect the rules of that country...unfortunately the only customs of importance in the American culture are greed and consumption. Agri-business is taking advantage of poverty wages paid to people coming into the country illegally and the federal government does nothing to stop this.

    Bottom line if some one is in a country illegally and without a visa they should be deported--the Arizona law is simply a means to find such people ONLY IF THEY ARE Committing a CRIME. If a business is hiring illegal workers--THROW THE OWNERS of the COMPANIES IN JAIL and shut the business down. If people are entering a country to commit crimes find ways to get them out of the country. The problem is the illegal migrants in the US are victims of greed and consumption...and that is what the American dream has always been about.

    Complain about this comment

  • 41. At 05:01am on 07 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    Freedom of speech is a right granted to us by the Constitution.

    Maybe some don't like what others are saying, but when it comes down it, we all have the right to say whatever we want.

    We cannot let others intimidate us into giving up our freedom of speech.
    We must continue to speak freely and openly.

    Whatever political party you are on, every single person has just as much of a right as another person to exercise freedom of speech.

    Complain about this comment

  • 42. At 05:02am on 07 Jul 2010, grammieinvincible wrote:

    I live in Arizona, have been here for over 50 years. No one representing the state of Arizona in our Congress has pushed for immigration reform since the 1980s when Ronald Regan created the amnesty program. No one from our state Legislature pursued immigration reform or asked Congress to deal with immigration reform or even asked for discussion on the topic until Obama was elected.

    It has been a great benefit to our farms and ranches to have migrant workers employed to keep the wages low. No one in residence in this state would consider working for the wages and no benefits that Mexican migrant workers will.

    Corporations that serve the farms and ranches have never called for immigration reform. Nothing was called for until a southern Arizona rancher was murdered. Not by illegal aliens, but murdered by members of the Mexican drug cartels that are ignored by the Mexican government.

    Investigative journalism which is almost dead everywhere, has been looking into the statements made by our current governor stating that illegal aliens have been tied to the criminal activities of the drug cartels. The information we are getting is not supporting her statements or those of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arapio.

    Drug running along the borders is nothing new. This has been going on since the mid 1960s. Having been in the news business for far too many years I know how the game is played here in Arizona.

    Now we have to fight the trend to demonize anyone who does not agree with the SB1070.

    You will find that a number of well know White Supremists socialize with the sponsors of that bill and with the Tea Party folks. None of them will disavow the ties to White Supremists.

    Be careful who you cozy up to in Arizona. Rattle snakes aren't the only things lurking in the tall grass.


    Complain about this comment

  • 43. At 05:07am on 07 Jul 2010, clamdip lobster claws wrote:

    This is a bogus argument. What other country in the world opens up its healthcare system, schools, housing and jobs to illegals? Americans have had to accept years of waiting up to 24-36 hours in hospital emergency rooms, overcrowded schools, depressed wages and now the possibility of bankrolling our aging parent's because the American government gave away social security to people have never worked one day in their life on American soil. Is it fair that my war hero father who earned a purple heart and silver star and designed radar systems that defended his country was denied subsidized housing in his later years because it was filled with illegal immigrants? What moral government would treat their own citizens in this reprehensible way? Now that they've allowed every criminal in to rape and destroy an entire economy and an entire generation of young Americans and a major ocean, the world wonders if Americans will be unfairly discriminated against. Get Real!
    Americans are realizing they've been duped and sold into servitude by their fellow Americans and we are pissed to no end.

    Complain about this comment

  • 44. At 05:12am on 07 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    25. At 02:41am on 07 Jul 2010, Curt Carpenter wrote:

    "I favor the doctrine of fair exchange. For every hard-working Mexican that is granted the right to be shamelessly exploited here by our U.S. businesses, Mexico must agree to accept one of our lazy, shiftless citizens that THEIR businesses can shamelessly exploit -- if they can."

    ____________

    This wins the prize for the funniest posting I have seen here since John-in-Dublin's comments about "There he goes speaking out of his head again."

    Complain about this comment

  • 45. At 05:12am on 07 Jul 2010, Rangdrol wrote:

    As an American, there are certain some red flags, here. The one thing many are forgetting, however, is that immigrants who are here illegally are not American citizens, and thus, it is questionable whether or not they are protected under the Constitution. While I despise the footwork and racist rhetoric of McCain, who claims that illegal immigrants are the cost of crime and violence, I don't believe that people should go unpunished; they have violated laws, and American taxpayers are paying for this, in many, many ways. Something MUST be done to keep ALL illegals out. The fact is that if Hispanics are targeted and they turn out to be American citizens, then their rights have been violated, and they can pursue that in court. This isn't harrassment if they are here legally, it is if they are legal. And I say this having had very close interpersonal relationships with many "illegals", not just from Mexico, but from Peru, Chile, and Guatemala. Many think that America has an open door policy. It doesn't. And just because we enforce rules doesn't mean we dislike Hispanics. Illegal aliens must assume responsibility for their actions, like everyone else.

    Complain about this comment

  • 46. At 05:48am on 07 Jul 2010, drw1773 wrote:

    Given that all the people of color I know tell me that they are harrassed by law enforcement even without this kind of law, I do think the approach is misguided. However, I reject the idea that the only possible motivation for it is racism. It is possible to be in favor of immigration and against illegal immigration. Immigrants make a great contribution to the United States. However, a policy that favors those who start their relationship with the country by flouting its laws seems as misguided as the Arizona law.
    That said, chasing and deporting illegal immigrants themselves is a fool's errand. A secure national ID system and jail time for offending employers (especially in Arizona) are the only actions that will be effective in the least.

    Complain about this comment

  • 47. At 05:49am on 07 Jul 2010, Tiger80 wrote:

    I just read that Obama is suing Arizona, what happened to States rights. Big Government anyone.

    Complain about this comment

  • 48. At 05:52am on 07 Jul 2010, Charles wrote:

    What most people in other parts of the world do not realize is that despite the bragging of the United States about "freedom and justice for all", the United States is still a country whose people hang on to race based attitudes. And the Arizona law would definitely open the flood gates for racist police officers (of which there are many nationwide)to harass ANY person of Hispanic origin. Case in point, despite successful civil rights law suites in the state of Maryland, against the practice of racial profiling, 75% of the traffic stops on Interstate 95 by the State Police are still committed against African American motorist, while African American motorist make up only 17% of the traffic. Arizona's law only legalizes such racial profiling by the police and mostly stems from the Republican Party's cultural war against this nation's first African American President.

    Complain about this comment

  • 49. At 06:14am on 07 Jul 2010, dahaye wrote:

    Don't make me cry. No One's ancenstors are originally from the country they were born in. Humanity as a whole is a bunch of land grubbing free for all's. To actually post that you believe in the stereotype of the illegal alien, denotes not enough attention was ever paid in your history classes. Empires rose and fell because of these so called illegal aliens. Everything you have today is because of these so called illegal aliens. If you have problems with taxes, border security, or crime, don't pin it on a nation as a whole. Wars get started over that or weren't you paying attention that day too?

    Complain about this comment

  • 50. At 06:20am on 07 Jul 2010, Gavrielle_LaPoste wrote:

    47. At 05:49am on 07 Jul 2010, Tiger80 wrote:

    I just read that Obama is suing Arizona, what happened to States rights. Big Government anyone.

    Obama isn't suing anyone. The Federal government is challenging the law on the grounds that it infringes on their constitutional mandate and interferes with foreign policy. Suits like these are nothing new. States sue the Federal government, the Federal government sues the states, we citizens sue both - it's how we knock out what our laws can and should be, by challenging them in court on constitutional grounds, rather than at the point of a gun - and letting the Supreme Court be the ultimate arbiter of what is and isn't constitutional.

    Complain about this comment

  • 51. At 06:36am on 07 Jul 2010, d_m wrote:

    41. At 05:01am on 07 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    "Freedom of speech is a right granted to us by the Constitution."

    That's not quite correct Lucy. The constitution doesn't say anything about free speech. The First Amendment does. But, the first amendment only says that Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech....

    The operative word here is Congress. It says Congress shall make no law, it doesn't say that New Jersey can't or Chicago can't or the Bourough of Queens can't. It just says Congress can't. The right to free speech was brought to through the XIV Amendment via a little constitutional intrepretation. Specifically, the right of free speech derives from Section 1 of the XIV Amendment. The XIV Amendment was written June 13, 1866, and ratified July 9, 1868, almost, some 80 years after the constitution was written.

    Think about that Lucy when you start thinking about strict constructionism. . The constitution wasn't perfect. We've been perfecting it for over 200 years.

    Complain about this comment

  • 52. At 06:47am on 07 Jul 2010, farmerTom wrote:

    42. At 05:02am on 07 Jul 2010, grammieinvincible wrote:

    "It has been a great benefit to our farms and ranches to have migrant workers employed to keep the wages low."
    How "sweet" of you to feel this way......isn't this the root of the problem?
    "1980s when Ronald Regan created the amnesty program. " Right after that 10 million illegals bolted across the border to wait for the next amnesty plan! Smooth move Ronald!
    "Be careful who you cozy up to in Arizona. Rattle snakes aren't the only things lurking in the tall grass."
    Yeah like the ones that think what they do is worth 10 times the amount of what you do for a living. I personally would feel comfortable if we allowed 10 million, I mean 12 1/2 million illegals to come to this country if they were seeking employment as reporters, really wouldn't effect me. Just think what that would do to the industry as a whole?

    I know a man that worked here in the U.S. up until he was in his sixties, but in construction after sixty people wont hire you, it's hard to keep up with the younger workers. He didn't actually retire, he just left, he was illegal and couldn't retire. That is why this needs to stop.

    Also think of all the other people in the world in countries other than Mexico, say England for instance, why don't we give some of them a chance to immigrate to this country, how could we when there are too many people here already. This needs to stop it is way out of control.

    Tom

    Complain about this comment

  • 53. At 07:14am on 07 Jul 2010, farmerTom wrote:

    8. At 05:52am on 07 Jul 2010, Charles wrote:

    "What most people in other parts of the world do not realize is that despite the bragging of the United States about "freedom and justice for all", the United States is still a country whose people hang on to race based attitudes."

    The law isn't about racism, it's about freedom (for instance my freedom to not have thousands of illegal competitors against me in this depressed job market), it's about justice (not allowing millions of people to break the laws of this country).
    The racist people didn't need this law to do what they have been doing for centuries. You are the one making a racial issue out of it. The more cops you have the more bad cops there will be.

    Tom

    Complain about this comment

  • 54. At 07:38am on 07 Jul 2010, Edward Peterson wrote:

    Some people say that the individual states do not have the right to investigate Federal crimes. Well, bank robbery is a Federal crime, so the states should not investigate bank robberies? Kidnapping is a Federal crime, so the states should not investigate kidnappings? Possessing a machinegun is a Federal crime, so the states should not investigate the illegal possession of machineguns? So how about this; a bunch of Mexican criminals sneak into Arizona armed with machineguns to rob banks and kidnap American citizens for ransom. Now, should the Arizona police arrest the criminals, or should they stand around and do nothing?

    Complain about this comment

  • 55. At 07:42am on 07 Jul 2010, LIbertarian wrote:

    Well, this is one of those things the founding fathers did not foresee. They assumed the federal government would see the value of secure borders and controlled immigration, and so made it the domain of the federal government. That makes sense, as the borders with Canada and Mexico are stretched across multiple states. I don't understand all the song and dance about whether or not it will pose problems to humanitarian and foreign policy concerns, when it is so clearly dictated in the constitution that this is the domain of the federal government. This case will no doubt be a massively expensive and time consuming farce that should last just a couple hours at most.

    That being said, the feds have done next to nothing. Those troops are not allowed to do any actual enforcing of the border; they can only spot people coming across or help the border patrol with organization and intelligence. You could put a million men on the border with the current policy and nothing would change, except maybe your expenditures and how well you document the number of illegals. That border is no more secure than it ever was, but it certainly does look good on paper or in a speech.

    This brings up one of the most interesting legal questions the supreme court will have ever dealt with, in my opinion. When the federal government fails to provide the services relegated it by the constitution, are states allowed to take matters into their own hands? I can think of many compelling arguments for both sides of the discussion. This, of course, assumes that this case will be considered in a legal mindset, and not the more likely political and emotional mindsets both sides have been spewing since day one.

    Complain about this comment

  • 56. At 07:48am on 07 Jul 2010, longboard wrote:

    I don't think it's unreasonable to have carry around proof of your legal status in a country. I've traveled extensively and almost always carry a copy of my passport or visa with me and have been asked to show it on numerous occasions. Many of friends from university were international students and many of them carried a copy of their passport or visa with them so as to comply with US immigration law. So what if Arizona wants to enforce this law? If it's on the books, lets enforce it, if there is no will to enforce it then lets reevaluate it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 57. At 08:04am on 07 Jul 2010, Scott0962 wrote:

    The Arizona law closely copies the Federal law so this isn't about discrimination. Cynical politicians in the Federal government are ignoring our national security and endangering the safety of U.S. citizens in order to court Hispanic votes with lax enforcement of the border and "immigration reform" that amounts to little more than another amnesty program, something tried in the past and which actually encouraged more, not less, illegal immigration.

    Complain about this comment

  • 58. At 08:15am on 07 Jul 2010, Scott0962 wrote:

    51. At 06:36am on 07 Jul 2010, d_m wrote:

    41. At 05:01am on 07 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    "Freedom of speech is a right granted to us by the Constitution."

    That's not quite correct Lucy. The constitution doesn't say anything about free speech. The First Amendment does. But, the first amendment only says that Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech....

    ____________________

    Amendments to the Constitution when adopted become just as much part of our Constitutional law as the original Constitution itself. Where Lucy errs is in saying that the Constitution grants us freedom of speech, the language of the First amendment clearly implies that free speech is an inherent right of the People and it explicitly restricts government from infringing upon that right so it is more accurate to say that free speech is a right protected by the Constitution, not one granted by it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 59. At 08:31am on 07 Jul 2010, john wrote:

    "The US government is claiming Arizona's tough new law to tackle illegal immigration would cause the harassment of American citizens, ignore humanitarian concerns and interfere with foreign policy.

    So it is taking the state of Arizona to court to try to stop it ever happening"

    Well no.
    They are taking it to court because it is clearly unconstitutional.

    The Tea Party'ers scream about the sacredness of the constitution but like to run over it when ever they feel it is in their interest.

    Complain about this comment

  • 60. At 08:46am on 07 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    The stage is set for a constitutional showdown: The Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against the state of Arizona Tuesday, challenging its new immigration law.




    Here's wondering when the state of Arizona will file a lawsuit against The Department of Justice for failing to enforce existing immigration laws.


    And a current U.S. president for failing to protect and defend our Southern Border.

    Complain about this comment

  • 61. At 08:48am on 07 Jul 2010, Hypatiacat wrote:

    Please correct me if I am wrong, but hasn't Border Patrol been doing everything stated in Arizona's immigration law 1070? I get the impression that people away from the problem area think that new activities will be occuring in order to stem the flow of human and drug traffic.

    I don't think this is the case. I think the law simply gives local law enforcement the right and responsibility to question suspicious persons in regards to their citizenship. In the past, I believe they had limited powers and even in the extreme cases where an officer might hold a crime suspect while he suspects the person is an illegal alien, that officer had to call Border Patrol to deal with it.

    Illegal immigrant hunting parties are not being legalized here, local enforcement of federal law is what has been passed.

    I don't know if we are supposed to/able to post .pdf files, but anyone interested in learning more can do a search for "Arizona 1070 summary" or the law itself.

    Complain about this comment

  • 62. At 08:50am on 07 Jul 2010, d_m wrote:

    58 Scott0962:

    No. The first amendment only prohibits the federal government from abridging free speech, not the states or counties or municipalities. As I said, the right of free speech was guaranteed by the XIV Amendment via the due process clause and the doctrine of incorporation and that didn't occur until the mid 1920's.

    I guess I make a distinction between the Constitution and the Amendments because the Amendments came after, some quite awhile after. But I see your point.

    Complain about this comment

  • 63. At 08:57am on 07 Jul 2010, d_m wrote:

    58 Scott0962:

    You are also correct that the constitution protects the right to free speech, rather than granting it.

    Certain rights were delegated by the people to the states, which in turn delegate some rights to the federal government. But all rights derive from the people.

    Complain about this comment

  • 64. At 09:21am on 07 Jul 2010, Vince Millett wrote:

    "I wish someone in Britain would have the guts to do what Arizona has done."

    What? Pass a law making it possible for the police to abuse Mexicans without recourse to courts or any due process? Firstly, we don't have very many Mexicans, and secondly we fought a world war to stop the encroachment of fascism into Britsh life. Shame on Americans for their continued surrender to neo-fascism. It starts with laws like this and ends up with concentration camps.

    Complain about this comment

  • 65. At 09:24am on 07 Jul 2010, Vince Millett wrote:

    LucyJ wrote: "It is up to Americans now to fight for our country or lose it forever, creating a world in which our children are less than human"

    Less than human? By not harrassing Mexicans you become less than human? Or are you implying that a higher population percentage of hispanics makes you less than human? We fought the second worold war to stop that kind of thinking. Shame on you.

    Complain about this comment

  • 66. At 09:24am on 07 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    MM reports: "The government's complaint doesn't go that far but it does say the state is overstepping its authority."



    Mark, try and find out what American Civil War was really fought over.


    BTW. Mr Obama's governmental also claims that Louisiana has no right to take certain anti-oil spill actions on its own and act pro domo sua without prior and specific Washington's approval.

    Although it does not go as far as claiming that Louisiana's crticism of Obama Administration's inaction and ineptness is motivated by racism.

    Complain about this comment

  • 67. At 09:36am on 07 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    The US government's official complaint says "it will cause the detention and harassment of authorized visitors, immigrants, and citizens who do not have or carry identification documents specified by the statute".





    A few years ago I forgot my driver's licence at home and I was indeed stopped and harassed for that reason on 405 by a California Highly Patrol officer. So the problem is real.

    Complain about this comment

  • 68. At 09:44am on 07 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    President Obama points out:

    "We tripled the number of intelligence analysts along the border".




    Yep, that's exactly what we need to protect that border, Mr. Obama:

    more analysts.

    Complain about this comment

  • 69. At 09:56am on 07 Jul 2010, Spinlandia wrote:

    I live in a border state and it is laughable that Obama says the Mexican border is more secure now. We are undergoing an invasion of illegal aliens like never before. I'm talking about millions and millions. And Obama just wants to give them all citizenship, which just like last time 20 years ago will only attract more. We need serious enforcement of our border and deportation of all illegals. Obama just wants more votes for the Democratic party and he is selling America out.

    Complain about this comment

  • 70. At 10:25am on 07 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    Re #20 "They can be overworked, underpaid, ill-used and discarded without being able to complain about their treatment to the proper authorities."




    Are you referring to often abused and de facto enslaved servants of many a exterritorial UN diplomat in NYC?


    Because if so, you're absolutely correct.

    Complain about this comment

  • 71. At 10:52am on 07 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    Re #69 "We need serious enforcement of our border and deportation of all illegals."



    As recent arrests of Russian illegals in NJ and Boston area show, the problem is much wider and by no means limited to Mexicans; nor to people who sneak into U.S. just to pick lettuce and grapes.
    Or smuggle only narcotics.

    Complain about this comment

  • 72. At 11:29am on 07 Jul 2010, 3634 wrote:

    I am a legal immigrant – got green card, and now an American citizen. I went through all the legal procedure without violating any laws. As such, I am proponent of Arizona.

    Racial profiling is just so sensible. I am Asian and San Francisco International Airport is quite strict on Asians – well think about large inflow of Asian immigrant over there, it makes sense. Carrying ID? When I was a permanent resident (a green card holder), I was required to carry my green card all the time. So, I see no problem in Arizona’s law. I just do not understand why American people make a big deal of the law. It is like you are mandated to carry Driving license when you drive.

    I have to tell you that I do not like “ILLEGALS”. Just not fair for people like myself! However, some illegals have already established their life here and already rooted. I think it is more humane to have some kind of category – like people already lived in the states for more than 10 years, and give those people Amnesty. Deport people who do not fit into the category. Then tighten the Borders to prevent further inflow. And punish corporations who willingly employ ILLEAGALS.

    Complain about this comment

  • 73. At 11:33am on 07 Jul 2010, Rufus wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 74. At 11:45am on 07 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    #31 pickimble: And then when they are offered health insurance, they turn it down because they can get Medicaid (if their family is even in the states)so why should they pay for insurance like the rest of us??"



    But surely you must admit after BHO's health care reform your insurance premium has gone down, hasn't it?


    Just like for the rest of us?

    Complain about this comment

  • 75. At 11:50am on 07 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    "Chances are that if you are in an accident, the other driver will not have any insurance and you are left holding the bag!! This happened to me!! The driver of the other car(and he had borrowed it) did not have a license, no insurance, no English and open container in the car!! After causing the accident, he fled the scene"



    This happened to me too, except the driver did not flee and had no open containter in the car.


    But since he did not have any insurance, my own premium has gone up, because my own insurance company had to pay for my (extensive) car repairs.

    Complain about this comment

  • 76. At 11:53am on 07 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    Re #69 Spinlandia : "Obama just wants more votes for the Democratic party and he is selling America out."



    And do you recall why a voting age was lowered from 21 to 18, and by whom?


    So a kid can now legally vote, but cannot legally buy a beer?

    Complain about this comment

  • 77. At 12:03pm on 07 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    " The illegals crossing our border isn't our problem it's because of what Mexico is doing, or should I say it's what Mexico hasn't done....hasta la vista,
    farmerTom




    You can hardly blame MEXICO, since it's government is basically helpless (just like the Afghan one) with the country run by narcotraficantes.

    Who have much bigger operation budget than the government in Mexico City.

    Complain about this comment

  • 78. At 12:10pm on 07 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    "If you come into a foreign country as a visitor learn the customs of that country and respect the rules of that country"





    Less than a year ago, a German officer at Frankfurt Int., who could hardly find an empty space in my U.S. passport to put a stamp in, told me roughly:


    "Next time, I will deny you an entry to BRD".

    [I got another 2 dozen pages attached to my pass after that]

    Complain about this comment

  • 79. At 12:15pm on 07 Jul 2010, The Toothbrush Man wrote:

    62. At 08:50am on 07 Jul 2010, d_m wrote:

    "No. The first amendment only prohibits the federal government from abridging free speech, not the states or counties or municipalities. As I said, the right of free speech was guaranteed by the XIV Amendment via the due process clause and the doctrine of incorporation and that didn't occur until the mid 1920's. "

    This to me is the problem with the US. The Constitution - whilst a very notable document - is being held up as the ultimate arbiter in every dispute - with the minute examination of every sentence, word and punctuation mark supposed to be significant.

    Consider the 2nd Amendment. In one of the two original versions there is a comma between "for the security of a free state" and "the right of the". The presence of absence of the comma is seen by some as pivotal in the how to interpret the 2A. 10,000s of lives lost each hinge around that single smug of ink on a slowly browning document. Bizarre. Mad.

    To push the point home, the writers of the Constitution are now revered in the same mystical glow as Moses himself - even to the handing down of the tablets of stone upon which hare written God's immutable laws. To dare point some of the more unsavouring aspects of the writers is tantamount to blasphemy - and the sooner forgotten the better.

    The fact is that the words of the Constitution, although erudite, are legally ambiguous and written from a viewpoint in a very distant history. We live in a world that the writers could not have dreamed of in their wildest fantasies (barring Ben Johnson who had some pretty wild fantasies, I can tell you).

    In the middle ages, there was a massive, huge debate in the Catholic church. Armies were raised - wars raged - thousands died, maimed, made homeless. Politics and powerplay meant Kings, emperors and despots rose to power and fell from grace just as quickly.

    Why ? The debate hinged around 1 question: "did Jesus carry a purse ?". This required the minute examination of the Bible (already heavily edited into a document for propaganda a thousand years previously) for clues, hints and events that might answer the question. Examination led to further disputes, which became wars, and so on.

    The lesson ? Do not slavishly adhere to documents - however inspiration, patriotic or spiritual. Such documents quickly become obsolete and are as heavy as millstones upon your shoulders.










    Consider the 2 constitutions





    Complain about this comment

  • 80. At 12:28pm on 07 Jul 2010, The Toothbrush Man wrote:

    56. At 07:48am on 07 Jul 2010, longboard wrote:

    "I don't think it's unreasonable to have carry around proof of your legal status in a country."

    In the UK you are not required to carry identification papers. There was a move to bring in ID cards - but this wasn't particularly popular and much vaunted biometrics turned out to be unreliable.

    The question is what would happen to you if you didn't have documents on you. Should you be required to find the documents on the spot ? Have the cops escort you home so you can find the ID ? And what if one cop checks you on one street corner only to have a second check you on the next street corner. And how do cops feel about having to do such a repetative, menial check ? And what documents are necessary ? Passports ? Do you really a passport to travel through your own country ? Drivers licences ? Not everybody drives. What about IDs from other countries ? Other states ? Are student cards okay ? And do you really expect the cops to track what is okay and what is not ? And is it just cops ? Can anybody else check ? And what about the erosion of civil rights ? Will you need to pay a regular fee for you documents ?

    It's a long slippery slope. I am amazed at the right wing conservatives in the US who fear monger about communism, dictatorships, government control and such, yet are promoting such an onerous idea as having to carry ID papers around everywhere you go.


    Complain about this comment

  • 81. At 12:28pm on 07 Jul 2010, Guy wrote:

    I am disgusted with the Republicans and the nausiating Tea Party...Yet I can sympathize with the people of Arizona on this.

    The fact is that illegals depress wages.

    This depresses terms and conditions for an entire layer of society who can no longer buy Ford Mustangs. It's not just farm workers...its a range of low end jobs.

    This not only destroys the consumer market that otherwise might exist, but since a significant proportion of the money paid to illegals is sent out of America...It hurts the US economy.

    The fact is that illegals pressure government services.

    This leads to a decline in the quality and availability of services. The people of Arizona know this.

    The fact is that illegals change the culture of a place.

    There are many Arizonans who liked Arizona as it was, and dont want to see it Mexicanised. They have their view...It's their state.

    The fact is that immigration is good...In small measure, but is disastrous in large measure.

    Try emigrate to Japan...Or china...Right.

    The fact is that mass deportation is unrealistic...it's not going to happen.

    So the only option now is to work out some sort of conditional amnesty plan, and then properly seal the borders...Deporting all illegals entering thereafter.

    It's hard...Rather cruel...All that.

    But there is no alternative.

    Complain about this comment

  • 82. At 12:29pm on 07 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 83. At 12:31pm on 07 Jul 2010, U14545399 wrote:

    Immigration : why discordance ?

    People from India or China or Mexico will dream for a better life in the United states and yes the currency arbitrage does lure people to move and work overseas.

    This immigration law is very unfortunate.We all know how corrupt or inefficient a police force can be.If the police be given the authority to throw out immigrants "on probable cause of public offence",its scary, vague and can me interpreted to be used preposterously.

    US and the occident have championed the cause of Globalization for the last 30 years.As Fareed Zakaria correctly points out,US ambassadors traveled around the world to convince governments on free markets.US enjoyed prosperity and growth for decades then.Today he world is accepting globalization with India and China leading the way.Why then be jittery?

    US should realize that immigrants do bring in a new culture ,and it does sometimes cause friction in a monolithic society,but it enriches the nation overall towards a competitive economy and a pluralistic society.

    And all the noise this administration makes on Outsourcing is just vote-bank politics.It knows companies will move out any arm-twisting happens in this regard ? I believe the long tern solution lies in improving the quality of education system and integrating immigrants into the society.

    Complain about this comment

  • 84. At 12:54pm on 07 Jul 2010, Martin wrote:

    I agree with your comments, Mark.
    I really can't see the problem. If a problem, such as illegal immigration, is emanating from one quarter, one would expect law enforcement to focus on that quarter.
    Leaving aside the issue of alleged racism in the Metropolitan Police in London, the same issue occurred there in the 1980s in Brixton with the black community. The police countered charges of racism with statistics of who was committing various types of crime.
    I'm a frequent visitor to the U.S.A. and I always carry my passport with my I-94 stub in it as proof that I am there legally.
    Arizona has acted because the Federal Government has not. What will it take for them to do something? Huge drug-related shootouts on the streets of Tucson?

    Complain about this comment

  • 85. At 12:58pm on 07 Jul 2010, Freeman wrote:

    "68. At 09:44am on 07 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:
    President Obama points out:

    "We tripled the number of intelligence analysts along the border".


    Yep, that's exactly what we need to protect that border, Mr. Obama:

    more analysts."

    Ain't socialism grand....

    Complain about this comment

  • 86. At 1:00pm on 07 Jul 2010, U14545399 wrote:

    To give an example of how immigrant communities are viewed by some "educated" people,here is a TIME article titled : "My Own Private India"

    http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1999416,00.html

    It sneers and jeers on Immigrant Indian Americans and writes,I quote :

    "Eventually, there were enough Indians in Edison to change the culture. At which point my townsfolk started calling the new Edisonians "dot heads.

    It also writes with derision ...

    " One kid I knew in high school drove down an Indian-dense street yelling for its residents to "go home to India." In retrospect, I question just how good our schools were if "dot heads" was the best racist insult we could come up with for a group of people whose gods have multiple arms and an elephant nose."

    And contemptuously states :

    "For a while, we assumed all Indians were geniuses. Then, in the 1980s, the doctors and engineers brought over their merchant cousins, and we were no longer so sure about the genius thing. In the 1990s, the not-as-brilliant merchants brought their even-less-bright cousins, and we started to understand why India is so damn poor."

    If this is the attitude on immigrants by some so called educated people , I am not surprised at this reprehensible and vicious immigration law in Arizona.

    Complain about this comment

  • 87. At 1:00pm on 07 Jul 2010, MagicKirin wrote:

    It seems like Eric Holder you have not read the law.

    ID can only be checked if another crime is being investigated. So an illegal immigrant can't be profiled however if he or she is stopped for a motor viechle violation a legal id would have to be provided.

    Which is required for all citizens:

    You also can't check into a hotel, board a plane without one either.

    Complain about this comment

  • 88. At 1:03pm on 07 Jul 2010, arclightt wrote:

    All: Lots of comments in the "stew" this morning, and they are all over the map (makes the "stew" tasty). To me, this problem calls on us to first agree on some core principles, and then separate issues.

    Warning: This is not short, because this issue has a lot of moving parts. If you don't want to read a bit, skip this one.

    The core principles that seem to be in play are:

    1. We will do nothing without due process. We adhere to the rule of law; we cannot sacrifice that principle here.

    2. We will not tolerate slavery in any form inside our borders, regardless of who the target is. We fought a Civil War in part over the relationship between slavery and economics, and firmly decided that no economic consideration justified slavery.

    3. Our commitment to the rule of law applies to everyone within our borders. Nobody, be they citizen or alien, gets a free pass.

    4. US immigration policy rightfully should be designed and executed to benefit the citizens of the United States, just as immigration policy of other countries should benefit the citizens of those countries. The United States has no obligation to design or execute its immigration policy to benefit citizens of other nations.

    Some folks in this country will disagree with this last for various reasons. Some of them will claim that we should all be "citizens of the world" or some such, or that we have some obligation to open our borders to everyone who wants to be here, regardless of whether or not we can actually support them, or any other consideration. These folks are one of the two groups of people who most vociferously resist any real effort to deal with illegal immigration. I disagree with their philosophy and their actions.

    Assuming we can agree on core principles (either those above or some others), then we can start tearing this problem down into (a) what to do with the folks already here, and (b) what to do with the folks who will show up tomorrow or next year.

    a. With regard to the folks already here illegally:

    a1. There seems to be indisputable evidence that their illegal status is used as a weapon against them to keep them in line, or to keep them silent in the face of abuse. This is a form of slavery, and it's wrong. Adherence to our core principles means that (a) we have to identify and punish the perpetrators and (b) we have to rigorously enforce our labor laws (including wage laws) in the industries involved. That will cost us both in terms of higher taxes to fund real enforcement, and higher costs for certain items. That's the price of being true to what we say we believe; we pay the costs and move on.

    A side benefit of this is that when prevailing wages have to be paid, it will no longer be true that "the illegals do the jobs Americans don't want..." because the wages will be the same. That knocks out a justification for the illegal behavior to be tolerated.

    a2. Some folks have recommended that we deport all the illegals. Assuming there's 12 million illegals here, and assuming an average family size of 4 (this takes into account the singles, etc. as well as the large families), we can estimate 3 million deportation actions requiring due process. Counting legal fees and court costs, I'm estimating the average deportation action will cost $100,000. Based on these figures, the total legal bill to deport 12 million illegals will be about $300 billion dollars. That money is not available, so it's doubtful that this is a workable solution.

    a3. If we remove the economic incentives for illegals to find work by adjusting the wages paid, some of them are going to go home. Those that are left, it appears, we will have to assimilate since the costs of mass deportation are too high. If we are true to our core principles, however, that assimilation should be designed to benefit the citizens of the United States, not the folks being assimilated. What does that mean? To me that means the following:

    1. They don't get any more slack on obeying the laws than a citizen would. If they are breaking laws concerning housing, or insurance, or theft of identity, or any of the other laws of this land, they are breaking the law and they are punished--no discussion and no argument. Since they are already here through the leniency of the citizens of the United States, deportation with no possibility of return could be part of the package depending on the nature of the offense.

    2. They have to assimilate. While our nation does tolerate dual citizenship, those who participate in such are still required to obey all the laws of the United States. Additionally, it can certainly be questioned whether or not a person who chooses not to assimilate into American society has truly committed themselves to be a citizen of the United States, as they expect the United States, and its citizens, to commit to them. I would strengthen the law here to ensure that those who remain are required to truly assimilate, and that includes (a) learning to speak, read, and write the language, (b) knowing the foundations of our society (including the roles and functions of our government), and (c) executing the responsibilities and commitments of citizenship. On that last point I recognize that a lot of us who are citizens could stand a firm refresher!

    b. With regard to what to do with those who will show up next week or next year:

    b1. Securing the border is a favorite solution, but it's not a simple task because of the geography. Some of it passes through rugged mountainous territory. Other parts split a river. There's no just building a fence and calling the job done. It's going to require regular patrolling and maintenance, both of which cost significant tax dollars.

    b2. Turning the border into a killing zone is one possible approach, but not one that I would advocate. Maintaining the killing devices also costs significant tax dollars. Finally, it would require uprooting several US border towns, and that would also cost significant tax dollars (not to mention a lot of public support).

    b3. If we do the things in (a) to make it less desirable to come into the country, that will tend to make managing the border more successful.

    b4. Some folks are opposed to a national ID card. Through our unwillingness to manage our laws, we have already acquired one: the Social Security card. Regardless of how the law reads, it's already used as a de facto ID card (try to do business without a Social Security ID and see how successful you are).

    In my opinion, there has to be SOME mechanism to positively establish that I am who I say I am, and that someone else is NOT. I think we need a national ID, but I also think it has to be married to an amendment to the Constitution making it illegal to (a) store anything other than DNA information in the ID file, (b) making use of the DNA information for anything other than identification, and (c) making tampering with anything in the ID file a punishable offense.

    b5. I think we should change our Constitution to disallow the children of illegal immigrants from immediately becoming citizens. I don't believe our Founders envisioned people using that clause in the Constitution to establish a "beachhead" for justifying illegal behavior, and it's certainly not warranted.

    That's my view. Unfortunately, getting much of this done is going to require that the Congress make a long-term commitment to managing the border and enforcing immigration laws, and there are powerful incentives (i.e. campaign cash) for them not to do so.

    That's the thing to watch, by the way: If the Congress actually amends the Constitution to deal with this issue, or at the very least moves the funding of real enforcement efforts into the "mandatory" part of the budget, then they are serious about it. If they don't do either one, however, then you can pretty much bet that any law that's passed will be treated the way the last one was--by ignoring it for the most part. That's what the slave-labor employers and the "citizen of the world" types agree on, by the way--pass any law you want, but don't fund the enforcement of it year by year, so nothing really changes.

    Regards,
    Arclight

    Complain about this comment

  • 89. At 1:26pm on 07 Jul 2010, wcfloyd wrote:

    What would you Brits do if a bunch of heavily armed French thugs established a beach head on your shores at Dover where they brought in massive amounts of drugs and people, and tried to blend them into your society, and all the British govt did was post signs that warned citizens to stay away because the presence of drug trafficers and smugglers made the area dangerous?

    Complain about this comment

  • 90. At 1:26pm on 07 Jul 2010, Lynn wrote:

    Criminal entrants into the US cost the states enormous sums of money which they no longer can afford. 13.8 billion a year to support criminal entrants in CA alone. The myth of "Americans won't do the work illegals do" is wrong. When businesses in OH were raided, and criminal entrants taken into custody, the next day there were 1,000 people lined up for the 500 jobs made available. Migrant workers from Mexico do get permits to work the seasons in the US, been done for years, then they leave. Phoenix has become the kidnapping capitol of the world and the violence is spilling over the border on a daily basis from the drug cartels and the human smugglers. People who are lawful citizens, including Hispanic families, are being terrorized, their homes broken into and robbed by criminal entrants. Just this week, a Lebanese man was arrested and is being accused of funding terrorism and arranging for Hezbollah to infiltrate the US through the Mexican border. This whole immigration debate is not just about Hispanic people, it's about illegal criminal entrants who are breaking the law, no matter which country they come from, be it Mexico, Russia, China, Lebanon or any place else. No one seems to be paying attention to the victims of human smuggling for prostitution, weapons smuggling, or the problems of drug smuggling. Top ten on the FBI most wanted list are illegal criminal entrants to the US.

    Complain about this comment

  • 91. At 1:54pm on 07 Jul 2010, BluesBerry wrote:

    I see in the US government’s move against Arizona proposed law the roots of two much bigger problems:
    1. the individual states becoming increasingly restless under Federal authority, and therefore an increase in the "need" to propose state’s rights vs. Federal rights with the attitude – either you take care of our state needs or we will take care of them ourselves. I feel in this change a slight inkling of secessionist thinking.
    2. Mr. Obama cannot turn illegal immigrants into citizens before the porous border is fixed, or his citizenship agenda will be endless (with the added costs to social programs like Health Care).
    Would citizens be hassled under Arizona Law?
    Sure, how can that be avoided?
    So, the question becomes: is Arizona, is the Federal Government deeling with the right problem: Why are Immigrants fleeing Mexico for the United States - often under great danger and sometimes carrying drugs?
    2008 poll in Mexico City's Reforma Newspaper, 57% of Mexicans think the Mexican Government is losing the fight against the drug cartels. US law enforcement officials, meanwhile, say there is evidence the cartels have started to penetrate cities across the United States. 57& of Mexicans think that the guns, the violence, the slaughter, the drugs, the mules, the entire cesspool of daily Mexican life will not and cannot improve.
    Any long-term strategy to control the border between the United States and Mexico must include the drug problem and the gun control problem, and in these areas, for whatever reason, I find the United States Government lacking.
    The Mexican government says that the US has failed to curb drug demand. Back as far as 2007, President Calderon and President George W. Bush agreed to cooperate on counternarcotics efforts. Result: the Merida Initiative, a three-year, $1.5B plan to combat drug trafficking in Mexico and Central America.
    This initiative, as you can easily see, does absolutely nothing to curb US demand for drugs.
    Prior to the passage of the Merida Initiative, Mexico received $40M a year for anti-drug efforts from the United States (Colombia, by comparison, receives $600M per year).
    Guess what?
    Mexico and Columbia remain the hotbeds of illegal drug trafficking with its associated violence.
    If and until the United States does more to address its domestic demand for narcotics the situation will not improve.
    If and until the United States does more to address gun-running into Mexico the situation will not improve.
    The gun laws in border states have a loophole allowing individuals to purchase weapons without a background check. As a result, the weapons trade along the border is easy and lucrative; so, why isn’t this loophole closed? Who gains from leaving it open?
    If you were Mexican would you not want to escape to someplace relatively safe?
    If you were a Mexican would you find yourself willing to mule drugs rather than have your family exterminated?
    If you were a Mexican would you not be afraid of the guns each and every day of your miserable & traumatic life.
    Now tell me how Arizona’s law or reform of Immigration Law is going to reduce the desperation of Mexicans and therefore solve the border problem?

    Complain about this comment

  • 92. At 1:54pm on 07 Jul 2010, MagicKirin wrote:

    More time should be spend of the Black Pather voter intimidation case which is a clear racism by an extremist group than a legal law where no one can be stopped unless it is for justfied means.

    We all have to produce photos ids when stopped for a traffic infraction.

    Complain about this comment

  • 93. At 2:00pm on 07 Jul 2010, ghostofsichuan wrote:

    The US Congress has done little on immigration for the past twenty years. This has mainly been at the request of the business community that enjoys illegal employees that will not argue over pay or working conditions. The Two-faced Republicans continue their right-wing rethortic while doing the opposite of what they say. They have made a good living off the ignorrance of their followers. As long as they can create social problems that get them elected and benefit the business community they are happy to lie to the public. The Republicans cannot stand concensus.

    Complain about this comment

  • 94. At 2:05pm on 07 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    "I am amazed at the right wing conservatives in the US who fear monger about communism, dictatorships, government control and such, yet are promoting such an onerous idea as having to carry ID papers around everywhere you go."




    Tell that to a state trooper next time he stops you on a freeway and you don't have your driver's licence and a car registration on you.

    Good luck!

    [whatever colour, creed and sexual orientation you are]

    Complain about this comment

  • 95. At 2:16pm on 07 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 96. At 2:23pm on 07 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    "Based on these figures, the total legal bill to deport 12 million illegals will be about $300 billion dollars."


    Arlightt, as much as I agree with most of what you wrote, perhaps you should ask Barack Hussein Obama why #300 billion dollars is not available for the purpose.

    [a hint: no BHO has not used it to prop up our "military-industrial complex". ;)]

    Complain about this comment

  • 97. At 2:27pm on 07 Jul 2010, Arthur1958 wrote:

    This dispute makes no sense. If local police, anywhere in the US, while enforcing state law, develop probable cause to believe the suspect is an illegal alien, they already have sufficient authority to detain the suspect for transfer to federal law enforcement. In Arizona they can also hold the suspect under state law if the federal authorities fail to cooperate. But why would the federal authorities refuse to take custody of the suspect? Especially after the local police have already caught the suspect for them? Is this actually happening? Why the drama?

    Complain about this comment

  • 98. At 2:27pm on 07 Jul 2010, FromTheLedge wrote:

    I'm a legal resident in the US, currently living in Texas, and I find this all very troubling. If I leave the house without my wallet, which contains my drivers license, social security card, and green card, and inadvertently run a red light... can someone please reassure me that the cops won't send me to Arizona?

    Please?

    Complain about this comment

  • 99. At 2:32pm on 07 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    "If they are breaking laws concerning housing, or insurance, or theft of identity, or any of the other laws of this land, they are breaking the law and they are punished--no discussion and no argument."



    Making not only U.S. passports, but more importantly state driver's licences and SS cards much more tamper-proof would go a long way to stop the veritable illegal immigration flood.


    For as things stand now both: a phoney driver licence and a SS card can be purchased by illegal immigrants from those who came before them (e.g. to Ciudad Juarez) for rougly $150 - $200.00 max. Reportedly.

    And then one can be legally employed, open a bank account and get a credit card.

    Isn't it a great country or what?! :)

    Complain about this comment

  • 100. At 2:35pm on 07 Jul 2010, csgators wrote:

    arclightt in post 88 nailed this issue. Those supporting the illegal aliens are supporting a virtual slave class of laborers and lower wages for all workers in the United States.

    Complain about this comment

  • 101. At 2:36pm on 07 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    Re #88 " I would strengthen the law here to ensure that those who remain are required to truly assimilate, and that includes (a) learning to speak, read, and write the language..."





    What language?

    United States does not have an official language.

    [Although La Raza activists try to make Spanish an official language of the U.S.]

    Complain about this comment

  • 102. At 2:46pm on 07 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    arclightt "I think we should change our Constitution to disallow the children of illegal immigrants from immediately becoming citizens"






    In Germany even children of LEGAL immmigrants (e.g., Turkish Gastarbeiters) are not granted German citizenship.


    And Germany has a dangerously low natural birth rate.

    Complain about this comment

  • 103. At 2:48pm on 07 Jul 2010, hms_shannon wrote:

    89. At 1:26pm on 07 Jul 2010, wcfloyd wrote:
    What would you Brits do if a bunch of heavily armed French thugs established a beach head on your shores at Dover where they brought in massive amounts of drugs and people, and tried to blend them into your society, and all the British govt did was post signs that warned citizens to stay away because the presence of drug trafficers and smugglers made the area dangerous?
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Gulp! that is what happened at Hastings in 1066,& now they are running the country...

    Complain about this comment

  • 104. At 3:00pm on 07 Jul 2010, Knoydart wrote:

    The Federal Government can't have it both ways. If immigration enforcement is a Federal responsibility then it should enforce the law & deal with these criminals. Arizona is taking these steps precisely because for so long the Federal Government has done NOTHING.

    Illegal immigrants of any race are criminals, their very first act on US soil breaks the law. They continue by working illegally, not paying Social Security or taxes & many drive without licenses or even insurance. These are not the "Good citizens" they claim to be.

    I am a LEGAL immigrant to the US & if I were to commit the crimes these people have done I would be in very serious trouble with the immigration service, yet these repeat offenders are to be rewarded for their acts by being given Citizenship? Why not reward car thieves who steal a car by letting them legally keep it? Why not let bigamists stay married to multiple spouses?

    When I was a child I was told that "Crime doesn't pay". Well illegal immigrants have committed crimes, why should it be different for them & what does this say to everyone else who tries to live a decent, law abiding life?

    Complain about this comment

  • 105. At 3:01pm on 07 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Whats wrong with being showing ID or being stopped by the police, you have been doing this in iraq and afghanistan for 9 and half yrs now...cordoning off roads and areas from the local, where the soldiers or other westerners dwell.....Dont expect that you would impose extreme measures only in a forgein land, the mind becomes extremist and when it becomes that, then it thinks this way, be it your country or mine...

    Complain about this comment

  • 106. At 3:01pm on 07 Jul 2010, CHEET0S wrote:

    I think everyone forgets these people are NOT CITIZENS. Laws uphold rights and protect CITIZENS. They should be treated however the U.S. likes. If Mexico hates how its CITIZENS are being treated they should protect them by keeping the from illegally entering other countries.

    Complain about this comment

  • 107. At 3:10pm on 07 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    Lynn wrote (in #90) "Criminal entrants into the US cost the states enormous sums of money which they no longer can afford. 13.8 billion a year to support criminal entrants in CA alone."







    According to reliable MEXICAN sources [sic] Mexican immigrants transfer roughy 20 BILLION dollars from U.S. to Mexico year in year out.

    [And Mexicans by no means amount to 100% of illegal entrants from Latin America alone!]

    Now, according to the same sources, those are CASH transfers, which dispels a heavily promulgated myth that those illegals actually stimulate US economy and increase legal employment by buying American consumer goods (cars, plasmas, DVD players, fridges, microwave ovens, dishwashers, computers, air conditioners, MP3 players, etc.).


    No, illegals send those monies to their extended families who buy such goods in Belize, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Salvador, Uruguay, etc.

    [Argentinians, Brazilians and Chileans are the least of our problem]

    Complain about this comment

  • 108. At 3:14pm on 07 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Those of you who have never objected to harassment of american soldiers towards iraqis and afghanistanis dont have a right to opioniate about us harrasing anyone....Those who have never objected to the jewish check posts in palestine, or idf who can ask for papers from a palestinian any time and anywhere should also be careful in commenting anything about us harrasing arizonians..Either you dislike harassament universally or you dont...you cannot all of a sudden be anti harassment because now its knocking at your own doors...

    Complain about this comment

  • 109. At 3:17pm on 07 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    Re #87


    Do you remember why Miranda law was concoted?

    And to protect whom?

    [w had protections against illegal search&seisure already]

    Complain about this comment

  • 110. At 3:24pm on 07 Jul 2010, willa wrote:

    No one denies that the problem of illegal immigration needs to be fixed. The Arizona law however, is a badly crafted, flawed policy. Sound, effective policies have clear, concise parameters and are consistent in their application. They are written in such a manner as to be clearly identifiable, enforceable, and with appropriate penalties.

    Just what does an illegal alien look like? What is the criteria? How would a police officer know when and when not to detain someone about their legal status? If a US citizen has no papers and is detained, isn't that harassment? If a mistake is made, what recourse would a legal citizen have when they arrive late to work, miss a doctor's appt. etc., because they have the wrong "look" or the wrong skin color?
    The US constitution provides that the People shall not be subjected to illegal searches and seizures. As much as Arizona would like to resolve the very real problem of illegal immigrants, it is going about it the wrong way and breaking constitutional law in the process. The Arizona law is simply too ambiguous. It leaves every single one of our citizens vulnerable to the dragnet, not just illegal immigrants.

    No amount of training can teach law enforcement to identify "illegal aliens" based on subjective "on sight" assessments. The Arizona law is an open opportunity for bigots, racists and bullies. It is opening a very wide door for a lot of mischief and abuse of power.

    Complain about this comment

  • 111. At 3:29pm on 07 Jul 2010, diverticulosis wrote:

    "86. At 1:00pm on 07 Jul 2010, ChunMun wrote:

    To give an example of how immigrant communities are viewed by some "educated" people,here is a TIME article titled : "My Own Private India"

    http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1999416,00.html

    If this is the attitude on immigrants by some so called educated people , I am not surprised at this reprehensible and vicious immigration law in Arizona."

    There is such a thing called satire.
    I know you may not understand the concept. Here is the wiki definition:

    In satire, vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, and society itself, into improvement.


    Complain about this comment

  • 112. At 3:44pm on 07 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    Found on BBC's Have Your Say...


    MrWonderfulReality wrote:

    I suggest the USA airforce bombs Mexico with condoms.

    The eleventh annual census, conducted in 1990, reported a total Mexican population of 81,250,000; in 20 years it has increased to 112,468,855 (July 2010 est.CIA)

    Reality, Mexico, like many countrys has economic and social unsustainable population expansion, in 20 years it has grown by around 25% and is presently growing at similar rates.

    Complain about this comment

  • 113. At 3:59pm on 07 Jul 2010, Echotheword wrote:

    I have read the Senate Bill 1070. Racial profiling is not in the document. It is a legal bill which give the state control over the problem of illegal people, including Iraq, Iran, and the middle east people who come to Arizona. The Hispanics are hiding and they are guilty of being here illegal. How come California bused in people to protest in Arizona??? It's all show biz and a huge production cost.
    The Mexican government doesn't want their own people. It's cheaper for the Mexican government to send them here. The American government gives the farmers subsidies. What a wicked game both governments control.
    Thank you Farmer Tom for your #34 comment. It's so true in Arizona.

    Complain about this comment

  • 114. At 4:02pm on 07 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    At 1:26pm on 07 Jul 2010, wcfloyd wrote:
    What would you Brits do if a bunch of heavily armed French thugs established a beach head on your shores at Dover where they brought in massive amounts of drugs and people, and tried to blend them into your society, and all the British govt did was post signs that warned citizens to stay away because the presence of drug trafficers and smugglers made the area dangerous?
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ukwales responds: Gulp! that is what happened at Hastings in 1066,& now they are running the country...





    ukwales, the imigration laws should have been strenghtend there and then.


    I remember having recommended it to Hammurabi in the Mesopotamia.

    And it worked for a long while, until those Iranian ayatollahs....


    BTW. How is your indigenous, Waziristan-trained 5th Column doing?

    Complain about this comment

  • 115. At 4:13pm on 07 Jul 2010, arclightt wrote:

    @101 (pmk): "What language?

    United States does not have an official language."

    Good point. I know it will break some folks' hearts, but I'm going to advocate English. There's one blindingly-obvious reason for this: As we pile up more and more "native tongues" in this country, it's going to become harder and harder to provide all the warning information (on signs and containers, for example) in all those languages. Rather than endure endless lawsuits because someone's language wasn't included (surely a fertile field for ambulance-chasers) we should cut the rope now.

    Complain about this comment

  • 116. At 4:14pm on 07 Jul 2010, Philly-Mom wrote:

    <RICHPOST>I'm still mulling over the Arizona Law, especially since I've lived in cities:<BR />-- where employers hire illegal workers as Cheap Day Labor (w/ no rights),<BR />-- where citizens have a hard time finding work 'cause we're too expensive,<BR />-- AND, I've had friends from many continents who have waited, and waited and waited to become legally naturalized.<BR />___________<BR /><BR />Now, have ya read the law? You probably should. <BR />And, if you're lazy like me, read a summary of it like this[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]">http://acluaz.org/ACLU-AZ... .pdf</a><BR />(Yes, this is a link to the ACLU. Don't like 'em? Don't follow the link. 'nuf said.)<BR /><BR />So, Three Points about Arizona's Law AB 1070:<BR /><BR />FIRSTLY<BR />Is it really unconstitutional that this law <i>"allows the state of Arizona to regulate immigration by establishing a separate state offense for any person to violate provisions of the federal immigration law regarding registration and carrying registration documents." </i>? Really?<BR /><BR />SECONDLY<BR />I am actually kinda perturbed about this section that:<BR /><i>"(E) Gives police officers authority to conduct warrantless arrests of persons for whom the officer has probable cause to believe have committed any public offense that makes those persons deportable.".</i><BR /><BR />It seems like a blank check for Police Bullying, especially when a later line indemnifies officers from repercussive class action law suit.<BR /><BR />THIRDLY<BR />I find it very very interesting that there is extensive language prohibiting <BR />a) Hiring, and <BR />b) Policies that allow safe harbor of deport-able illegal aliens.<BR /><BR />I'm not quite sure what to make of this. <BR />I actually think it could be good.<BR />So, I'll just sit back and read what ya'll have to say about it, eh?<BR /><BR />______________________________<BR /><BR />PS: Peace &amp; Love ya'll, and Happy B-day Mr. Starr </RICHPOST>

    Complain about this comment

  • 117. At 4:17pm on 07 Jul 2010, Scott0962 wrote:

    It's very easy for Brits to criticize America over it's immigration polcies but then Britain doesn't have over a thousand miles of land border with a country full of people anxious to escape poverty. They can sit safely behind their big ditch and pretty much pick and choose who to let into their country.

    Complain about this comment

  • 118. At 4:24pm on 07 Jul 2010, arclightt wrote:

    @96 (pmk): "Arlightt, as much as I agree with most of what you wrote, perhaps you should ask Barack Hussein Obama why #300 billion dollars is not available for the purpose."

    He's not the entity to ask about this budget item, or any budget item. The US Congress ultimately owns the budget, the tax code, and the law, even though as Dominick has pointed out the President exerts influence in all three areas.

    Arclight

    Complain about this comment

  • 119. At 4:26pm on 07 Jul 2010, Philly-Mom wrote:

    Just to spin a little case study out there for ya'll --

    Some people here in Philly never get a Driver License. They use SEPTA.
    Some people here don't carry credit cards. They use cash only.
    Some people here in Philly don't carry ANY ID AT ALL.

    Now, some people in Philly just wanna be free w/o The Man lookin' in on em'.
    But, some people here in Philly are up to no good and want to enjoy the freedom to lie to cops about who they are.

    IMHO
    Would a law requiring that we carry ID be good for Philly? Perhaps.
    Would I want a law that gives officers the right to search/arrest folks based upon suspicion of 'deportable offence'? No.


    ...thoughts?

    Complain about this comment

  • 120. At 4:32pm on 07 Jul 2010, Harry Kiester wrote:

    @ dapex

    "...Australia is an island and doesn't share any borders, but look at the trouble you have with boat people, etc. And look what trouble you have with the gangs that you have let in casually! Lots of murderers, etc. Should have kept the past policy....."

    Ahhh... the good old White Australia policy.....

    Complain about this comment

  • 121. At 4:45pm on 07 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Just what does an illegal alien look like? What is the criteria? How would a police officer know when and when not to detain someone about their legal status?
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Looks like a taliban...Dont you have other arguments to come up with, 9 yrs ago same arguments were used in afghanistan when civilians were killed, "they all look alike".....the crieteria in arizona is " mexican looking human being"...the law was passed to stop illegles from mexico, not from Nigeria or Laos...its mexicans they have problems with...Why then beat aroud or about the bush....just nail the mexican looking bush...or in arizona's and mexican geographical case, cactus..

    Complain about this comment

  • 122. At 4:50pm on 07 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    Re #104 "Why not let bigamists stay married to multiple spouses?"


    Can't do: would be considered a "cruel&unsual punishment".

    Complain about this comment

  • 123. At 4:54pm on 07 Jul 2010, Bob Blanchett wrote:

    @wcorey

    The people of UK and Europe well remember "sus" laws and the friendly face of plausible tyranny or occupation that begins with the Phrase: "Papers, Please"

    The favorite old saw of the lazy, partisan or secret policeman is "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear" carries with it the implicit offenses:

    using the sidewalk while (Black/Japanese/Muslim/Hispanic/Disabled/Jewish/Romany/Sunni/Shia/Hazara/Dalit etc)

    That's why The Arizona laws are being contested; The Shadow of Bull Connor and his spiritual soulmates: the scoundrels who passed these laws are stalking Arizona.

    Complain about this comment

  • 124. At 4:56pm on 07 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    colonelartist wrote:
    Those of you who have never objected to harassment of american soldiers..






    For the record: I do object to a harassment of American soldiers.

    And think those GIs should be allowed to harass back.

    By BHO changing our Rules of Engagement.

    Complain about this comment

  • 125. At 5:02pm on 07 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    "If a US citizen has no papers and is detained, isn't that harassment?"


    No it'ain't.

    Unless you've registered our fingerprints and iris images already, you should have some form of ID on you.


    BTW. I hear that Puerto Rican birth certificates are the hottest item among local thieves right now. For obvious reasons.

    Complain about this comment

  • 126. At 5:07pm on 07 Jul 2010, Philly-Mom wrote:

    Oh, and to spin out another angle:
    Hasn't anyone on this forum yet considered that Employee Law in the USA PROTECTS PEOPLE??? Immigrant & Citizen alike!! Seriously!

    I'm a big fan of opening immigration and making it easier folks to come on board,
    BUT - 'looking the other way' when employers hire Illegal Aliens:

    a) means that there is no legal oversight that the work sites are SAFE
    b) means that poor people who are, unfortunately, BORN HERE may not get jobs from cheap employers tryin' to avoid expensive Employer Taxation and Insurance Fees.

    Hmmm.... just a thought.

    _________

    BTW: @ Bill#26:
    I'm way too much of a mutt to even know which country/continent I'd deport to. Not that I'd want to. I'm actually rather happy in my little Philly Home. Sunday night's fireworks were lovely.

    Oops! High Noon! Peace, ya!

    Complain about this comment

  • 127. At 5:09pm on 07 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    In an answer to certain ChunMun:

    "In satire, vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, and society itself, into improvement."






    That's why I believe that not all North Korean citizens should have their right to emigrate to the South curtailed, and that not all 1.4 billion Chinese should be spied upon if they decide to use Google search.

    Even if they punch in such highly offensive terms like "Dalai Lama" or "Tiananmen".


    And that at least some Cuban citizens should have a right to rent a boat.

    Complain about this comment

  • 128. At 5:13pm on 07 Jul 2010, GH1618 wrote:

    Tiger80 (#47): "I just read that Obama is suing Arizona, ..."

    Wrong. The United States of America is suing the State of Arizona. There is nothing particularly unusual about a lawsuit between the United States and a state over a matter of jurisdiction. The federal courts will have their say on how "states' rights" apply to this case.

    Complain about this comment

  • 129. At 5:26pm on 07 Jul 2010, Gavrielle_LaPoste wrote:

    70. At 10:25am on 07 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    Are you referring to often abused and de facto enslaved servants of many a exterritorial UN diplomat in NYC?

    Them too. I actually had the chance to work at the dysfunctional United Nations for a while back in the mid 90s. With the exception of UNICEF, a more worthless organization does not exist in this world.

    Complain about this comment

  • 130. At 5:33pm on 07 Jul 2010, oldguy10 wrote:

    Has anybody here checked the definition of illegal lately? It means against the law. Why is this such a complicated issue?

    Complain about this comment

  • 131. At 5:36pm on 07 Jul 2010, Tom wrote:

    The lawsuit is a farce. Where does this reasoning take us in drug trafficking issues or felons in interstate flight? Are these areas reserved for the federal government only? It is the duty of all law enforcement officers to uphold the law and for most issues the feds don't mind.

    As for this being a republican or democrat issue, I think this is more a matter of the average US citizen being fed up with our federal government playing games while the rest of us suffer.

    Complain about this comment

  • 132. At 5:40pm on 07 Jul 2010, Gavrielle_LaPoste wrote:

    76. At 11:53am on 07 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    And do you recall why a voting age was lowered from 21 to 18, and by whom?

    So a kid can now legally vote, but cannot legally buy a beer?


    Originally, 18 year olds were allowed to buy alcohol, but do you know why the drinking age was raised again? Because as we quickly discovered, alcohol doesn't just lower your inhibitions, it interferes with the thought processes and pretty much lowers one's mental age by about 3 years. So when a 21 year old drinks a bit too much, he starts thinking like a (fairly responsible) 18 year old who's more likely to hand over the keys to the car. When an 18 year old drinks, he starts thinking like a 15 year old - no sense whatsoever and obstinate about it too.

    In NYC, when I was 18 and allowed to consume alcohol, the drinking age in New Jersey was 21. Every weekend city kids would go to the bars and take the bus or subway home. And every weekend, kids from New Jersey would drive into the city, get drunk and drive home. Some of them even made it back alive, though that can't be said for all of their victims. Once NYC raised the drinking age to 21, most of those drunk driving deaths stopped. It may not be fair to tell an 18 year old he can't drink when he can vote, but it also isn't fair to put innocent people at risk because someone else isn't capable of making an informed decision about when to drive.

    Complain about this comment

  • 133. At 5:48pm on 07 Jul 2010, James wrote:

    It is funny that people who claim discrimination, often are the worst offenders. I can only find contract work because I am unable to meet minority quotas. This has been confessed to me by hiring unions and by reading company hiring policies. Under this administration, as well as the several previous, we have perpetuated racism by enacting laws that favor one race over the other. Times have changed. If a Black American can get elected to the highest job in the land, then Affirmative Action needs to be revoked immediately.

    Arizone is a member of the Republic, like the rest of the States. It can enact laws to protect itself as long as it does not violate the Constitution. If you are in Arizona legally or by Citizenship, then you best have ID for your own protection. If not, you should be deported immediately with no chance for any type of visa.

    I have known people who were contributing to society, law abiding, and had began their life in this Country, only to be deported on technicality. They had left willingly, even though they did not want too. I felt bad for them because of all the illegal migrants getting to stay because of political favortism. Just because my friends were from India, not Mexico, they had to leave. They had insurance, held jobs, and paid taxes. They did not traffic drugs, commit murder, and claim they were due something for nothing. It is a sad state of affairs in this Country. I am angry and dissatisfied with the system.

    I tried to have faith that maybe Obama could change my mind. I gave him a chance. It is time for him to go. Who was it that said a Revolution every once in a while is a good thing? Maybe the time is now.

    Complain about this comment

  • 134. At 5:50pm on 07 Jul 2010, James H wrote:

    I live near Tucson, Arizona, less than 100 miles from the border. I am an avid outdoorsman, hiking and camping all over the southwestern United States. I have to take issue with the president's comment that the border area is safer now than it has been in the last 20 years. 10 years ago, I could camp within a few miles of the border and rarely see anyone else. Now, there are literally thousands of border crossers, drug runners, and bandits, along with the Border Patrol. Trash left by the crossers is everywhere. We visited the San Raphael Valley in February, which is where the movies "Oklahoma!" and "McClintock!" were filmed. A Border Patrol agent asked us to leave because there had been so much activity by heavily armed bandits in that area. The bandits come across and rob the border crossers, the drug runners, and even the US mail delivery truck. It is so sad. I feel as if there is a 10 to 50 mile wide buffer zone at the border I need to avoid.

    Complain about this comment

  • 135. At 5:58pm on 07 Jul 2010, Philly-Mom wrote:

    Wow. Some of ya'll really want to make this about Race/Color (Lucy! Shame on you!).
    I don't think it is. It's about money and power.

    Employers want to hire cheap labor.
    I know White College Kids here in Philly who can only find menial jobs in town working for cash... why are they working for cash only? Because they need to pay rent, and the employer doesn't want to deal with problematic tax issues. Employer Taxes are soooooo inconvenient.

    The fact that many of these Cash-Only employees are Illegal Immigrants of Color only serves to perpetuate ridiculous ideas of race prejudice in America. It's disgusting. This is about Money and Power. Don't play the Color card too quickly, folks.

    But, do I want a cop to stop me while I'm jogging without a purse (ID) and detain me for local crime? Do I want an unwarranted Arrest on my record just 'cause I fit a suspicious "profile" (AKA Color Match)?? NO!!


    Still - FarmerTom has a balanced view about the employment issue in AZ:

    Thank you Tom! You know, honey -- a while back I lived in Los Angeles about two blocks off an avenue where hundreds of folks (mostly Hispanic, some Asian) lined up every day at 5am with tool belts hoping for a day job. Some folks waited all day in the hot sun, hoping to bring home a day pay by sunset.

    Did those (probably illegal) guys get water on the job? Pee breaks?
    What happens if they're injured? (No Insurance out there - No Treatment!)
    What happens if they're only paid pennies after 10hrs work?

    Meanwhile, I knew citizens w/o jobs who were hopin' for work, too...

    It just ain't right.
    The whole system is messed up and has been for years.

    Complain about this comment

  • 136. At 6:01pm on 07 Jul 2010, MilwaukeeRay wrote:

    All of these over-heated accusations of possible racism are to be expected from the ACLU and the rest of the PC brigade. There is nothing racist in the Arizona law, which pretty much mirrors federal law which isn't being enforced. Harrassment? If I am pulled over by a cop for cause, I expect to show him my license and registration, and as a law-abiding citizen I have no objection to it. I also have to show my valid ID in banks and liquor stores. So what? There is also the smug underlying Liberal assumption that all Arizona cops are racist and prejudiced against Hispanics. Well, if you get stopped by a cop in Tucson or Phoenix, as likely as not his name will be Ramirez or Hernandez. The "ethnic profiling" issue is also a red herring. Who do think is illegally crossing our southern border in the millions? Estonians?

    Complain about this comment

  • 137. At 6:11pm on 07 Jul 2010, clamdip lobster claws wrote:

    Sorry Powermeerkat,
    But it's against the law to be driving without your license and car registration. So your argument sort of falls apart on that comment. Anti fascist tendencies are one thing, knowing who exactly is in your country is another. In the week prior to the London bombing incident there was a foreigner sending telephonic messages over a phone line. Wouldn't you like to have known who the identity of this woman was and what exactly she was up to a week before London's worst terrorist incident?

    Complain about this comment

  • 138. At 6:26pm on 07 Jul 2010, clamdip lobster claws wrote:

    No Colonelartist,
    Americans have a problem with anyone breaking their laws and entering the country illegally.

    Complain about this comment

  • 139. At 6:30pm on 07 Jul 2010, derjager wrote:

    A stupid, ignorant law passed by stupid, ignorant people. Unfortunately a lot of stupid ignorant people support this law. Fortunately we are a nation of laws, and these people will eventually lose. The Arizona law will be overturned when the federal government wins their legal action - they are supported by 140 years of court cases. Arizona must have a lot of cash to waste, they were told from the beginning that this abomination would not stand.

    Complain about this comment

  • 140. At 6:42pm on 07 Jul 2010, Scott0962 wrote:

    re. #109. At 3:17pm on 07 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:
    Re #87


    Do you remember why Miranda law was concoted?

    And to protect whom?

    [w had protections against illegal search&seisure already]
    -----------------

    And for those who may wonder "whatever became of Miranda?", Ernesto Arturo Miranda died in 1976 after being stabbed in a bar fight in Phoenix AZ. His attacker excercised his Miranda rights and was released then fled to Mexico and was never brought to justice.

    You gotta love the irony.

    Complain about this comment

  • 141. At 6:53pm on 07 Jul 2010, GH1618 wrote:

    Most Supremacy Clause cases involve conflict between federal and state law. What is interesting about this case is that Arizona has attempted to conform to federal law in enacting its own law.

    Here is a link to a document on the subject: The Supremacy Clause and Federal Preemption

    Look at Pennsylvania v. Nelson for a case with some similarities to the United States v. Arizona case.

    Complain about this comment

  • 142. At 8:15pm on 07 Jul 2010, Lynn wrote:

    #107 According to reliable MEXICAN sources [sic] Mexican immigrants transfer roughy 20 BILLION dollars from U.S. to Mexico year in year out.

    [And Mexicans by no means amount to 100% of illegal entrants from Latin America alone!]




    According to a study by the Federation for Fair Immigration Reform, the cost to the states to maintain criminal entrants is 113 billion per year. The single largest cost is 52 billion a year for education followed closely by healthcare and housing. For the states with the largest number of illegals the costs often are larger then the state's deficits. 113 billion a year in three years would pay to deport all the illegals.

    Complain about this comment

  • 143. At 8:20pm on 07 Jul 2010, rodidog wrote:

    #141 GH,

    For Arizona law to fall to the Supremacy Clause, would the law not have to be in conflict or contrary to Federal law? The Arizona law does not attempt to rewrite immigration law in any way. The police turn over any suspect deemed to violate existing immigration law, via probable cause, to Federal jurisdiction.

    I'm not seeing where the law can be overturned via the Supremacy Clause.





    Complain about this comment

  • 144. At 8:20pm on 07 Jul 2010, Sue Tarjan wrote:

    This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain

  • 145. At 8:58pm on 07 Jul 2010, GH1618 wrote:

    rodidog (#143): "For Arizona law to fall to the Supremacy Clause, would the law not have to be in conflict or contrary to Federal law?"

    I am neither inclined nor qualified to give a legal opinion. I don't think this case is so clear either way that it can be predicted how it will turn out. We have a Supreme Court which has often been divided nearly evenly on important questions, and they might be here as well. It could turn out that parts of the law will stand and others will fall. I'm just waiting to see how it will turn out.

    Complain about this comment

  • 146. At 9:13pm on 07 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    No Colonelartist,
    Americans have a problem with anyone breaking their laws and entering the country illegally.
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Why? they only expect themseleves to break other countries laws and enter them illegally? They are scared of change...If it wasnt for the migratory instinct of human nature, everyone would still be in Africa..

    Complain about this comment

  • 147. At 9:16pm on 07 Jul 2010, Pat Gunn wrote:

    Whether the Federal government has acted on this or not is moot - it is not a matter for individual states to decide, and if people want a different national policy, they should try to elect people at the national level that will act as they desire. It'd be easy for people of a region to decide that they don't like national policy on some matter and declare that they want to do what the nation as a whole won't do, but that's no excuse and allowing it is bad policy.

    More on the specifics of this state law, it's a bad solution to a real (but overstated) problem - if citizens in Arazona were to go out for a jog in the evening, for example, with no id on them and were they to look suspicious (most likely look hispanic, show signs of latino pride that might look to police like mexian nationality, or otherwise) they face grave risks of deportation. The law and policy might explicitly state that race/ethnicity/cultural identity cannot be a determinant, but this either results in an unenforcable law or one that must ignore those conditions; otherwise how could a policeman decide who looks suspiciously foreign?

    There are two problems with this law - first it is a state trying to take on itself a federal role, and second it is extremely bad public policy in that it encourages police to do racial/cultural profiling and endangers people who don't carry their ID with them all the time.

    If this is a good time to consider immigration reform, it needs to happen at a federal level, as part of a national conversation, and in a way that doesn't encourage racism or hamper hispanic citizens. The timing for engagement on the issue is one chosen by conservatives looking for an issue with which to attack Obama; it's been a low-priority issue for a very long time but it'd be nice to come up with a solution adequate enough that it will never again be used as a political football.

    Complain about this comment

  • 148. At 9:26pm on 07 Jul 2010, AZ_Expat wrote:

    First, the context: Arizona born and bred. Been across the pond for 4 years and counting (first Middle East and now Europe).

    I grew up with illegals, and never cared about it until one of them ran me over with his car a few years back and took off down the road never to be seen again. Yeah, good luck doing the paperwork on that! High deductible, anyone?

    The Federal government is of course welcome to assert its authority over immigration. In fact, we Arizonans invite them to start enforcing it any time they want. The AZ law is borne from decades of pleading with the Fed to do something, with no response.

    The Supreme Court has a practical mindset. You can't assert your authority to enforce a law and not implement proper measures to actually enforce it. I think Obama is headed for disappointment.

    And for the record, I have to carry legal ID showing my immigration status with me at all times and this has been the case for years. I don't complain. Why is this such a problem for everyone else?

    Complain about this comment

  • 149. At 9:59pm on 07 Jul 2010, Protocol417 wrote:

    pkimble, your hypothetical said you were speeding. And that's a very important distinction... you are doing something illegal. Imagine if you were sitting out on your front lawn reading a book or something and an officer pulled up and asked for your driver's license, registration, and proof of insurance just because he saw a car parked in your driveway. That's what this law is. It's presuming that the person is guilty of something with no evidence whatsoever. It is intruding in that person's life on the off chance that they are doing something illegal.

    Complain about this comment

  • 150. At 10:01pm on 07 Jul 2010, Protocol417 wrote:

    AZ_Expat - Question: If this person hit you with his car and then took off, never to be seen again, how did you know he was an illegal immigrant? Did he shout "I'm here illegally, by the way" as he drove off?

    Complain about this comment

  • 151. At 10:20pm on 07 Jul 2010, Pat Gunn wrote:

    @AZ_Expat: I gave a good example of why always needing to carry ID is problematic. Right now, as a white male living in PA, I regularly go out for jogs in the evening wearing little more than biking shorts and an athletic shirt - no pockets, no wallet, no keys (usually left in a hiding spot outside my home). Were I in Arizona, I suspect I could not do that if I were hispanic, and were I to accidentally leave my wallet in a coffeeshop, the idea of ending up being pushed out of the country is utterly ridiculous. There must be some better way to handle these oddly-suddenly-"urgent" issues.

    The issue of race/cultural identity suddenly being judged by police as contributing to a likelihood of criminal behaviour is also dangerous, as is the possibility of names being taken for things legal but culturally frowned-upon (e.g. visiting adult video stores) - the traditional notion of only being asked for ID if one is reasonably suspected of something criminal (or entering a controlled area like an airport or a courtroom) is much diminished when something so vague as "looks foreign, might not be here legally" is added to our system. General anonymity aids privacy and helps prevent religious conservatives (or police) from harassing those with unpopular interests or opinions.

    Complain about this comment

  • 152. At 10:41pm on 07 Jul 2010, allmymarbles wrote:

    148, AZ_Expat.

    I wonder how much of our tax money goes to illegals and institutionalized welfare. By institutionalized I mean those who have been on it for generations. Of course those figures would never be released. If they were there would be riots. Go Arizona! I am tired of paying for others.

    Complain about this comment

  • 153. At 10:49pm on 07 Jul 2010, GH1618 wrote:

    Protocol417 (#149): "Imagine if you were sitting out on your front lawn reading a book or something and an officer pulled up and asked for your driver's license, registration, and proof of insurance just because he saw a car parked in your driveway. That's what this law is."

    No, it does not provide for that. The Arizona law is readily available online, but it doesn't appear that you have read it or read any neutral analysis of it.

    Since the law has not yet taken effect, we do not know whether it might be applied in the way you suggest, even though not contemplated by the legislature. One of the criticisms of the federal lawsuit is that it is premature, as it should be based on actual abuses not hypothetical ones. There is some merit in that, I think.

    Complain about this comment

  • 154. At 11:15pm on 07 Jul 2010, fkeaz wrote:

    Does this frighten me? Yes, but perhaps in a different way. .. I am fearful when I see people substituting fear for logic.

    The thing that doesn't compute is, how 99% of what is modern-America is the result of many many generations of immigration.

    Sadly, a large percentage of this group are now against anything pro-democratic, pro-choice and pro-diversity.

    ... You fear-mongerers have only your families' to blame for this, as for many years Americans have exploited illegal immigration for the benefit of less-paid workers on undesirable jobs.

    This 'problem' as you call it is not new, only a labeled substitute for your political fear tactics.

    Complain about this comment

  • 155. At 11:18pm on 07 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    Illegal immigration costs U.S. taxpayers about $113 billion a year at the federal, state and local level. The bulk of the costs — some $84.2 billion — are absorbed by state and local governments.
    The annual outlay that illegal aliens cost U.S. taxpayers is an average amount per native-headed household of $1,117. The fiscal impact per household varies considerably because the greatest share of the burden falls on state and local taxpayers whose burden depends on the size of the illegal alien population in that locality
    Education for the children of illegal aliens constitutes the single largest cost to taxpayers, at an annual price tag of nearly $52 billion. Nearly all of those costs are absorbed by state and local governments.
    At the federal level, about one-third of outlays are matched by tax collections from illegal aliens. At the state and local level, an average of less than 5 percent of the public costs associated with illegal immigration is recouped through taxes collected from illegal aliens.
    Most illegal aliens do not pay income taxes. Among those who do, much of the revenues collected are refunded to the illegal aliens when they file tax returns. Many are also claiming tax credits resulting in payments from the U.S. Treasury.

    113 billion x 10 = 1,130,000,000 trillion dollars we have spent on illegals over the last ten years.

    Complain about this comment

  • 156. At 11:23pm on 07 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    The question is: over the next ten years, do we want to spend trillions more money we don't have on illegals?

    Or do we want to spend several hundred billion to deport the illegals and save trillions which we can use for our children, our schools, our hospitals, our states, our country?

    Are we more interested in being a country who puts Americans first or being a country who puts foreigners above us?

    Do we want to be a country where Americans and foreigners are expected to follow the law or do we want to be a country where Americans must follow the law, but foreigners can break it?

    America is supposed to be about justice.

    Justice is deporting people who are in our country illegally, regardless of race, age, gender or how long they have been here.

    Complain about this comment

  • 157. At 11:50pm on 07 Jul 2010, cactusman7 wrote:

    As an Arizonan, I am continually amazed by the fact that while many complain about SB1070, very few people have actually read SB1070, and that included President Obama, Attorney General Holder, Homeland Security Secretary Napolitano, all of whom spoke out against SB1070 before they even read it. Napolitano, who was the Governor of Arizona before accepting the Homeland Security position and repeatedly requested the Federal Government assistance in dealing with the immigration problem when she was Governor of Arizona, has developed amnesia and is more involved with Gulf Oil Spill than dealing with Border Security.

    There is a misconception that under SB1070, that Police can just walk up to people and demand identification. In most countries around the world, Police can do just that without any other reason, but that is forbidden here in Arizona under SB1070.

    Few realize that prior to the passage of SB1070, the Federal Government had authorized Arizona law enforcement agencies at the city, county and state level to enforce immigration laws under the 287(g) program that allows local law enforcement to check the legal status of any detained person. Arizona lawmen were successful in apprehending hundreds of illegals, much to the embarassment of the Federal Government, who then withdrew the 287(g) authority in 2009. Several months later, Arizona passed SB1070, which copied 287(g) authority for use solely within the boundaries of Arizona ONLY. There are no conflicts between the provisions of Federal law and SB1070.

    SB1070 contains provisions against the transport and smuggling of illegals and sanctions against businesses who knowingly employ illegals as well as checking on an individual’s legal status. All the state level provisions of SB1070 were copied directly from the federal level laws, so as to not conflict with Federal law.

    The only conflict really between the Federal Government and Arizona lies with the willingness to enforce the existing immigration laws, which Arizona is willing to do. Although Federal agencies such at U.S. Border Patrol and ICE are doing a great job, they are greatly outnumbered by the mass of illegals that are coming across the border. For every illegal caught, there are many more that successfully enter the U.S. illegally.

    The estimated COST of illegal immigration to the ordinary American taxpayers last year was about $550 BILLION dollars, according to news reports. This includes the cost of incarceration of illegals convicted of crimes, the cost of fighting organized criminal gangs who deal in drugs, human trafficing and all other forms violent crime that includes drive-by shootings, the cost of social services, which includes medical, education, food, housing, legal assistance. It is unfair burden on the American taxpayer, as it is akin to a swarm of locusts that decend on a farmer’s crops; consuming while leaving nothing for the farmer who labored to grow the crops in the first place. Illegals pay no taxes or contribute anything to the social systems or assistance programs that they take advantage of, to detrement of taxpaying citizens. The financial drain caused by illegal immigration is bankrupting governmental social services.

    The source of illegal migration experienced by the United States is not just from Mexico, it’s from ALL of Latin America: from South America, from Central America as well as Mexico. Mexico is also plagued by the illegal migration of people from south of its border who wander through the length of Mexico in order to get to the United States. Mexico deals with those who enter Mexico illegally rather harshly under Mexican law, with reports in the news that those being caught are robbed and beaten, forced to pay bribes to local corrupt officials.

    And then, recently, the Mexican President comes to the U.S. and complains that HIS PEOPLE are being mistreated by SB1070, which has not gone into effect yet. IF THEY ARE HIS PEOPLE, WHAT ARE THEY DOING OUR COUNTRY?

    What needs to be understood is that this is largest mass migration of people into the United States since the 19th Century migrations from Europe. What differentiates the Hispanic migration of today from the European migration of the 19th Century is that the Europeans entered the United States LEGALLY, entering through Immigration centers in all the port cities, Ellis Island in New York, for example. They were screened and given papers that allowed them to be in the country legally, and they were also screened and when necessary, quarantined for disease. Today, there are outbreaks of diseases in our border areas where illegals live, such as tuberculosis, a disease that was all but eradicated decades ago in the United States, but not in Latin America. It is not something the news media reports.

    Most, if not all Americans agree, that reform of our immigrations laws is needed immediately. And although politicians and public figures publicly condemn SB1070, the majority of ordinary Americans realize that illegal immigration is causing real problems here in the U.S. and many support Arizona’s effort to take action before things get worse.

    The majority of Illegals entering the U.S. cannot be blamed for seeking a better life. They seek to escape the poverty, squalor, disease and the hopelessness they face in their native lands. Their own governments are either unwilling or unable to improve the social conditions that exist their own countries. The poor simply remain the poor with no real change happening to improve their lives. So, instead of rising up in armed revolution, so characteristic of Latin America, these people are voting. They are voting with the feet and leaving. While that might ease things in their native lands, it creates problems here in the U.S. The U.S. cannot take in everyone who does not like the conditions their native lands, nor is the U.S. the world’s cornucopia of plenty.

    The United States of America is unique in the recorded history of man, in it’s efforts, financial and non-financial, to improve the conditions of mankind on this earth. Since the end of World War Two, the United States has given TRILLIONS of dollars in financial aid to the nations of the world, to build business and infrastructure, to provide for the development of social systems, education, healthcare and representative government. Under the Marshall Plan, 1947-1951, the United States initially assisted in rebuilding western Europe from the ravages of war, after which those nations so assisted, took over and undertook the continued rebuilding of their own nations by their own means and efforts that has resulted in a prosperous region of the world and as partners in peace.

    In contrast, Latin America, which has not suffered the ravages of war, has received Billions of dollars in assistance since the end of World War Two, repays the United States with the mass migration of its poor into the U.S.

    As a reminder, the financial aid dollars that are given to nations all around the world didn’t just grow on trees, they came from the ordinary American taxpayer, who worked for and earned that money and paid it to those nations through taxes.

    Complain about this comment

  • 158. At 11:55pm on 07 Jul 2010, clamdip lobster claws wrote:

    ColonelArtist,
    I wholeheartedly agree with you. My country never matches its laws to its rhetoric. Why does the world continually put up with their Mafia inspired corrupt nonsense? The real issues are about a government that protects its own drug dealers and allows Israeli ex military to train drug cartels with impunity. This is about playing both sides of an issue for profit and votes whether its profit from undocumented workers,drug dealing, human smuggling....whatever. The issue is about a few members of a ruling class trying to control the world and all the rest of you be damned. Now that their grand socialist scheme isn't working they've had a moral epiphany and suddenly want to share the wealth with the rest of the world while stateing that they are morally justified to bomb Iran. Whatever the issue they will with chameleon color changing precision change their stance. It's just another power grab for world domination. This is what the world needs to fight against. How about a world where everyone lives a comfortable, contented life without political spin.

    Complain about this comment

  • 159. At 00:14am on 08 Jul 2010, Dave Templeton wrote:

    I live, pay taxes and vote in the State of Arizona. God bless Governor Brewer as the federal U.S. government is doing nothing to limit unlawful entry through out southern border. When this fact was publicized, Obama and Homeland Security Chief, Nappy Napolitano, couldn't bear the shame and embarrassment of being negligent. And six other states are designing their bills similar to the federal government which is identical to the SB 1070 of Arizona's. The state of Missouri "already" has passed their bill and there was "No response or argument form the federal government". The majority of the country supports this crackdown of unlawful entry, drug smuggling and human trafficking. Obama is eager to become the champion of the illegals who are "already living in the U.S." in hope he can get more registered Democrats out of the one-half million hiding out in Phoenix. As a resident of Arizona the only harassment we see is the meddling from a very immature, ill suited and unprepared orator who "accidently" got elected by a 52% of the votes. What most foreigners and residents of the other 51 states are told by this “temporary and immature US government” is that it is a immigration issue? It is about breaking this nation’s law not immigration! We have a legal process for immigration as most countries do, we expect foreigners on our to follow our law or get out!

    Complain about this comment

  • 160. At 00:24am on 08 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    Happy Birthday, America!

    Big govt. wants to take away state's rights.
    Big govt. wants to make the people powerless.
    Big govt. wants to destroy America.

    There is no greater stab in the back than how the Justice Dept. under Obama decided to sue Arizona only days after America's birthday.
    Boy, what a grand gift!!!

    All you have to do is ask Eric Holder what he thinks of our country.
    He called us a nation of cowards.

    There is no one more cowardly than Holder and Obama.

    Complain about this comment

  • 161. At 00:49am on 08 Jul 2010, Pat Gunn wrote:

    @LucyJ: You neglect the damage done to American businesses in this mass-deportation you imagine. Also, I am curious as to your source - is this from the FAIR group? If so, you should not consider it reliable - they're heavily biased and classified as a hate group by the SPLC.

    Complain about this comment

  • 162. At 00:59am on 08 Jul 2010, McJakome wrote:

    64. At 09:21am on 07 Jul 2010, Vince Millett wrote:
    "I wish someone in Britain would have the guts to do what Arizona has done."

    "What? ... Shame on Americans for their continued surrender to neo-fascism. It starts with laws like this and ends up with concentration camps."

    What a bizarre definition of fascist. You are as bad as the Americans who call Obama a Socialist. Don't you know what Fascist really means and implies? Ignorance is unlovely from my own Americans and doubly so from puffed up Europeans and others who claim to be better educated.

    Enforcing border security and legal immigration procedures is hardly fascist, unless in your mind all governments are fascist. Arresting criminals is hardly fascist, unless, in your mind, all police are fascist. I could go on, but trying to reason with you is probably also fascist.

    Complain about this comment

  • 163. At 02:44am on 08 Jul 2010, McJakome wrote:

    • 69. At 09:56am on 07 Jul 2010, Spinlandia wrote:
    “I live in a border state and it is laughable that Obama says the Mexican border is more secure now. …We need serious enforcement of our border and deportation of all illegals. Obama just wants more votes for the Democratic party and he is selling America out.”

    And the Bushes wanted more votes for which party [and more money from which contributors] and Reagan Bushes wanted more votes for which party [and more money from which contributors]?

    To quote JC, “why do you complain about the mote in your neighbor’s eye when there is a boulder in your own.”

    Unlike right-wing dupes of the GOP and big business, I readily admit that Democrats are just as corrupt as the GOP. AND I believe we should get rid of all of them as well as those who corrupt them.

    Complain about this comment

  • 164. At 03:00am on 08 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    pgunn, The SPLC is also classified as a hate group by others.

    Complain about this comment

  • 165. At 03:10am on 08 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    pgunn,

    Can you name anything FAIR has said that is racist?


    The problem is reverse racist are even more prevalent nowadays than racists.

    Complain about this comment

  • 166. At 03:27am on 08 Jul 2010, pgillenw wrote:

    Obama WRONG, Arizona RIGHT. It is about the Rule of Law, Protecting our Borders, Crime, Drug Cartels, Human Smuggling, Deaths along the Border, the inability to adsorb millions upon millions of the uneducated, strain on our hospitals, social services, law enforcement and the list goes on.

    The Illegal does not add to our economy they take from the economy. They are afforded jobs at lower wages or subsistence wages, they require huge investments of social services, food stamps, emergency cash, commit identity thefts, work under cover paying no tax and send millions and millions of remittances back to their homeland further robbing our economy.

    The mis-placed anger towards Arizona by some is unfounded. Arizona has shouldered the burden the Federal Government has refused to do.

    Obama's Administration took an oath to protect the sovereign U.S. they have refused to do so. They should be arrested, tried and put in prison.

    The lawsuit against Arizona is WRONG, the American people no it and a price will be paid for those who continue down this path.

    NO AMNESTY. Reagan tried that and the invasion grew. No Comprehensive Immigration Reform that will mean more foreign workers and Amnesty for the Illegal.

    Secure our Borders.

    What will it take to make them understand the errors of their ways. Dumping more on the Native Born American and refusing to listen to us or protect our way of life will in the future cause violence to erupt within our borders, race wars.

    Many are asking their State to secede. I am for Arizona seceding from the Union. The Union is not acting on the best interest of Arizonan's.

    Complain about this comment

  • 167. At 03:36am on 08 Jul 2010, gedion wrote:

    Let us make a civil argument that is intellectually American, that got this country a powerful nation to start with. Here we go.

    Does Arizona have a constitutional right to pass such laws? Well, it does and almost every US states does have such right. To understand this, look the negation under "Power denied States". Under that agreement within the US constitution, a state may not only introduce laws but directly go to war if it can justify it has been invaded or is under imminent danger for which the federal government help is untimely thus delay may prove to be costly.

    Can the US federal government sue the state? Only if the state of Arizona (citizens) chooses to be sued. If the US federal government can sue states, then any other foreign countries ought to be able to sue each US state without their choosing. But that makes each state independent of the federal government. That is not how the constitution is written. The federal government can not declare war on Arizona, that is definitely grounds for a bigger problem, and other states and citizens of other states can not initiate even a boycott as it translates as an act of war (after all the very reason the constitution exist is to avert wars between states). Even if the federal government were to win that the law violates civil right the state might choose to ignore the findings and not alter or modify the law. What is the next remedy to the stand off? Arrest all state legislators, governor and state attorney general? That just can not happen unless the federal government is etching for a civil war. Even then the federal government has to show that the sate intended to discriminate or discriminated upon other none white citizens and it has to prove (evidence) the state has done so to begin with. So, Arizona seems to have the upper hand under the law we agreed upon from the start.

    Let us a look at from Arizona point of view. While Arizona is in its right to enact a law to enforce immigration on the basis of “imminent danger”, however some responsibility remains burden of the Arizona citizens. That is how not to affect and violate the right of citizens who legally and naturally are entitled to their daily chores in the daily economic activity of the states. How to guarantee that and still manage to enforce the law takes on a big maneuver. The question is, is Arizona citizens ready for what is to follow even if it takes the state in to undesirable path. Is there a safety mechanism by which an event of mass victimization can be averted?

    Some are simply raising the issue out race hate. Others are simply raising the issue blindly with out substance. To me Arizona and some other states I am aware of are in some trouble from illicit drug trafficking. But these groups are not always from Mexico. They are also from EU who has overstayed their visas. Others are US citizens who have the capital to fund the activity. So gang rapist of the good old USA does not just come from Mexico, though it is the one that is currently visible. The gangs are made of all color and race.

    I am an immigrant yet I take my chances on this just to see our children get some relief from drug peddling street gangsters. But, I do have other suggestion that makes drug profit undesirable in the US. I will share that with you another time.

    Complain about this comment

  • 168. At 03:59am on 08 Jul 2010, fkeaz wrote:

    @ LucyJ - you said:

    "America is supposed to be about justice.

    Justice is deporting people who are in our country illegally, regardless of race, age, gender or how long they have been here."

    Talk about justice... then those who have intentionally motivated and/or partaken in illegal-immigration by providing lucrative work for under-the-table pay.... those 'Americans' would be found guilty of conspiracy [to commit fraud to the IRS]

    Are you really prepared to take your idea of "American Justice" this far.... you would find MANY MANY MANY Americans in prison if you really think you are being serious by just touting 'Justice' like this.

    Think about it, thats all.

    Complain about this comment

  • 169. At 04:03am on 08 Jul 2010, fkeaz wrote:

    Basically, Illegal Immigrants wouldnt be near the mass of a huge [yet, uknown exact size] population if it weren't for the Companies inside America that are more than eager to hire these people for little pay and under-the-table.

    There would still be some, but the majority would reconsider doing it because there would be no work to be had without proper tax forms for employment, if companies themselves obeyed 'the law'.

    its quite simple, yet the sheeple have made this a political game.

    Complain about this comment

  • 170. At 04:25am on 08 Jul 2010, Gurudev wrote:


    I am Asian Indian have lived in UK during former prime minister Thatcher time.She said "our Country is swamped by immigrant" in 1975.
    Well I have been in Arizona over 25 years.I understand how white feels,probably swamped by non white.( Illegal has become easy Target).
    My native American Indian friend said "I fell all of you are illegal,now one illegal is telling another illegal,- illegal".
    More serious note many Southwest Us state California,Florida ,Texas demography has changed matter of years Hispanic population would be equal to white,worse Any patriot person needs to divide people on racial line.Russian are watching with joy.We need solution as we all have no where else to go !In Past Irish,Italian and Asian population had same experiences.White fanatic in name of God,Constitution and patriotic fervor wants country turn the way Hitler turn Germany to Slaughter house.
    Remember Hitler was democratically elected,God save America. I home Obama does not have to became another Lincoln.

    Complain about this comment

  • 171. At 04:55am on 08 Jul 2010, allmymarbles wrote:

    170, Gurudev.

    It is not about white, or Hispanic, or Asian, or black. It is about taxes. It is about the cost of maintaining illegals. It may appear to be anti-Hispanic because Hispanics are the ones coming across our border in great numbers. If they were Irish or South Africans we would feel the same way. So don't turn this into a bias situation. It is about illegals living off American citizens who pay through the nose for whatever benefits they receive.

    Complain about this comment

  • 172. At 05:01am on 08 Jul 2010, Withidread wrote:

    I've been having trouble figuring out just exactly how a police officer's actions would change with regard to the Arizona law. Currently, if I were to be pulled over for, lets use speeding, the officer would likely ask to see my driver's license and car registration. He would then proceed to either write me a ticket or not and I'd be on my way.

    In providing the officer with my driver's license and car registration, I have shown that I am a US Citizen and satisfied the Arizona law, have I not?

    I say the real problem here is the Federal Government's relative inaction with regard to the illegal immigration issue. With the current situation in Mexico with regard to violence that seems more and more like it won't stay in Mexico, the Federal Government needs to step up and live up to their responsibility of not just protecting our nation's borders, but ensuring that the legal immigration process is properly efficient, so fewer feel the need to immigrate illegally.

    Complain about this comment

  • 173. At 05:04am on 08 Jul 2010, GH1618 wrote:

    gedion (#167): "Can the US federal government sue the state? Only if the state of Arizona (citizens) chooses to be sued."

    Where did you get a cockamamie idea like that? Arizona has been sued by the US, and we will be reading about the progress of the suit in the news in the weeks and months ahead.

    Complain about this comment

  • 174. At 05:04am on 08 Jul 2010, AZ_Expat wrote:

    To respond to Protocol417,

    He was nice enough to get out of the car and ask if I was okay (in Spanish). Thankfully I speak Spanish with a distinct Sonora accent (this is Arizona, after all).

    Wouldn't call it an assumption on my part, but a pretty educated guess after conferring with my insurance company. This is not an unusual scenario.

    To respond to pgunn -
    I kinda doubt police are seeking to prey upon hispanics who leave their wallets in coffeeshops. If you really think that's what the law says I will be happy to send you a copy.

    Please come to Arizona. You'll find that hispanics are the largest racial group in the state. People make it sound like police are on patrol looking to scoop random ones off the street. Utterly ridiculous.

    Complain about this comment

  • 175. At 2:19pm on 08 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    "Arizona has been sued by the US, and we will be reading about the progress of the suit in the news in the weeks and months ahead."





    Here's wondering when the great state state of Arizona is going to to sue US Federal government and Barack Hussein Osama specifically, for a dereliction of duty?

    Complain about this comment

  • 176. At 3:10pm on 08 Jul 2010, Keith Inglis wrote:

    Generally speaking the police force already has a seriously bad attitude and is overzealous. Providing additional powers for stopping people can only lead to more aggravation for innocent parties.

    Complain about this comment

  • 177. At 4:23pm on 08 Jul 2010, tsigili wrote:

    Just imagine, what would happen in the UK, if you suddenly had 12 million illegal Mexicans in your midst, most of whom spoke no English, and who would work for less money than English workers, causing employers to give preference to the illegals, and who could then abuse those workers, because they are illegal, and imagine the Mexican restaurants, the Spanish language signs, and all the rest, that Americans are dealing with.

    The UK folk wouldn't be a bit happy about that, I assure you. In fact, Americans have tolerated it now, for decades, but the magnitude of it, has continued to grow and grow, and now so much of it is associated with the drug cartels, and the crime and violence factor has become a major concern.

    I know no other country in the world, that would tolerate this situation......and no other government, that would permit it.

    Obama will go down in the history books, as one of the worst Presidents, in US history, along with his namesake, Jimmy Carter.

    Complain about this comment

  • 178. At 7:16pm on 08 Jul 2010, GH1618 wrote:

    tsigili (#177): "... along with his namesake, Jimmy Carter."

    How do you get a "namesake" for Obama out of Jimmy (James Earl) Carter? You have no clue what it means, do you?

    Complain about this comment

  • 179. At 8:16pm on 08 Jul 2010, Gavrielle_LaPoste wrote:

    178. At 7:16pm on 08 Jul 2010, GH1618 wrote:

    How do you get a "namesake" for Obama out of Jimmy (James Earl) Carter? You have no clue what it means, do you?

    LOL! Sometimes, you have the dubious fortune of running into Slip Mahoney from The Bowery Boys on the Internet. Kind of makes you wonder what they sound like in real life.

    Complain about this comment

  • 180. At 8:43pm on 08 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Where did you get a cockamamie idea like that? Arizona has been sued by the US, and we will be reading about the progress of the suit in the news in the weeks and months ahead.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    And the matter is out of your hands and in the court room...the judges are going to base their judgement on which side's lawyer present the best evidence...I think you are all wasting your time, and the optimists on both sides are presenting a very pessimestic view...There, I have proved that americans are infact pessimesstics no matter what the circumstances are, wether its related to issues within their country or without..The whole country is presenting a very pessemestic view of afghanistan if the military withdraws, the same goes for your intention for harming iran, if iran not stopped, it will destroy america and israel, pessimistic scernario of the highest order..

    Complain about this comment

  • 181. At 10:25pm on 08 Jul 2010, Noliving wrote:

    "joycejames1 wrote: Lucy J you should visit the website" takeourjobs.org" - The United Farm workers are willing to have American Citizens replace them. This is a silly and foolish myth that undocumented workers take jobs away from Us citizens, or that deporting all those who are not US citizens who work here illegally will reduce unemployment. An engineer from Detroit Michigan does not want to pick farm produce or work in a meat processing plant. "

    _________________________________________________________________________

    To be fair joycejames, illegals are taking away jobs from americans in areas such as construction, in fact I know several people who were fired/laid off and then replaced by illegals in the construction industry.

    The only real industry in which they are not taking jobs would be agricultural industry, and the primary reason for that is wages, the agricultural industry is exempt from a lot of federal and state labor laws. For example they are not required to pay minimum wage and also child labors laws are a lot less strict in the agricultural industry, for example 13 year olds and older can work 40 hours or more per week during summer vaction, no other industry can have children/minors that young work that many hours during any time of the year.

    One of the key reasons wages are also low is because there is a readily available supply of illegal immigrants willing to do that work for so much less as a result there is no real incentive for the employers to increase the wages and or benefits.

    The reason why that engineer doesn't want to work those types of jobs is because they don't pay the bills, you most likely have a family along with student tuition bills, a job that doesn't pay minimum wage and is exempt from those wage laws is not going to pay for your house/apartment/motel/hotel bill nor is it going to put food on the table at the same time for yourself and or your family nor is it going to pay your car payments and insurance. Do I need to go on to make my point? It is quite obvious that no engineer would take those jobs because they don't pay enough to pay the bills.

    As for the benefits, most illegals have kids here, those kids are able to draw on welfare because they are legal but their illegal parents do not make enough money. Ironically one of the most common welfare benefits illegals use for their legal children are food stamps.

    Complain about this comment

  • 182. At 11:56pm on 08 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    Americans are beginning to realize we must make a stand for ourselves.

    Since the Obama Admin. announced they were suing Arizona, Americans from all 50 states have stepped in to donate over $500,000 to Arizona's defense fund.

    The majority of the donations were around $100, but they were of all amounts. It is amazing to see Americans help Americans fight big govt.

    This gives me great hope and encouragement, as there are people from every state in the country against the Obama Admin. suing Arizona.

    Americans are in this together. We must stop big govt. from destroying our country.

    Can we stop big govt. from destroying our country?

    Yes, we can!

    Complain about this comment

  • 183. At 01:09am on 09 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    We must do what is right for the American citizen,
    not what is right for the illegal foreign invader.

    This is not really about Arizona.

    This is about the illegals getting citizenship.

    That is what it has been about all along.

    Complain about this comment

  • 184. At 01:14am on 09 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    The federal govt. still has not secured the border.

    If the federal govt. is not protecting us and the federal govt. takes away states' rights to protect ourselves, wouldn't this mean we are being left alone to fend for ourselves?

    If this happens, guns and weaponry will be more important than ever in the new century. It will be all we have to protect ourselves.

    Complain about this comment

  • 185. At 02:43am on 09 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    The federal prosecutor tasked with quarterbacking the Obama administration's high-profile case against Arizona's immigration law is no stranger to controversy or the limelight.

    Justice Department attorney Tony West is a member of the so-called "Gitmo 9" -- a group of lawyers who have represented terror suspects.

    West, the assistant attorney general for the department's Civil Division, once represented "American Taliban" John Walker Lindh, a controversial move that West feared would derail his political ambitions and helped delay his nomination to the department for three months in 2009.

    He helped negotiate a 20-year sentence for Lindh, an American citizen who was 21 years old when he was captured in Afghanistan in 2001. Under the deal, Lindh avoided a life sentence by pleading guilty to serving in the Taliban army and carrying weapons, and the government dropped its most serious charges, including conspiracy to kill Americans and engaging in terrorism.

    Complain about this comment

  • 186. At 11:48am on 09 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    Those 10 just extradited to Russia, including a Peruvian "journalist", were not kicked out becasue they were illegal aliens smuggling drugs. ;)

    Which just goes to show you that the problem is much wider, and is most certainly not race skewed.

    [FBI is an equal opportunity spy catcher. As required by law.]

    Complain about this comment

  • 187. At 11:50am on 09 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    LucyJ wrote: "West, the assistant attorney general for the department's Civil Division, once represented "American Taliban" John Walker Lindh"


    But he wasn't a member of the Walker Ring, was he?

    [Walkers were not working for Taliban if memory serves ;)]

    Complain about this comment

  • 188. At 2:00pm on 09 Jul 2010, Bullfighter wrote:

    And cities who passed "sanctuary laws" violate the protection of Federal laws for American citizens. An American should have the full protection of federal, state, and local laws no matter where they are in the United States.

    Mexico has pushed a "war of law" on the American people while they still help Mexicans sneak into the US though they had promised the American people since the 1960's that they will "do something" about illegal immigrants from Mexico violating American soverignty.

    Mexico has a population of less than 2% of the world's population yet it has forced more than 10 times that amount on the US. It is an act of war not one of immigration. It will soon be coming clear to all the American people that they are not safe anywhere in their own country unless the US takes military action against those who have been invading for decades.

    Complain about this comment

  • 189. At 5:52pm on 09 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    This what usa should do quickly.
    Force all the mexican looking population to useless areas in arizona, then start building a wall around it, then arrange a heartbreaking scenes of police forcing the non mexicans out of those areas, and build check posts all over all the exit points from that area, demolish all the houses that are 500 meters inside the mexicans side of the wall, and build watch towers 1 or 2 meters away from the wall from the non mexican side...Every mexican coming in and going out should be given a special permit and in non mexican side, the police should check any mexican looking without any hesitation, no one will mind, because, they see it in case of israel....and defend it too...both republican leaders and democratics...

    Complain about this comment

  • 190. At 6:22pm on 09 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    He helped negotiate a 20-year sentence for Lindh, an American citizen who was 21 years old when he was captured in Afghanistan in 2001. Under the deal, Lindh avoided a life sentence by pleading guilty to serving in the Taliban army and carrying weapons, and the government dropped its most serious charges, including conspiracy to kill Americans and engaging in terrorism.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Yes, the luxury of being white and american....while innocent non white non americans are still waiting in gauntanamo bay for the american government to charge them with something...this one was brought to usa, had his trial and has finished more than half of his sentence.

    Complain about this comment

  • 191. At 6:40pm on 09 Jul 2010, steve wrote:

    9/11 conspirators came through Canada wrote femmefatale. Totally false get your facts right before you write.

    Complain about this comment

  • 192. At 6:45pm on 09 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Americans are extremely aversive to facts.

    Complain about this comment

  • 193. At 7:04pm on 09 Jul 2010, USVETERAN wrote:

    Among the unintended and unanticipated consequences of the Arizona immigration law could be that some illegals gain documented legal status due to a formal review of their cases by the federal immigration agency. There are circumstances that could allow a federal agency official or judge to grant legal status for someone otherwise illegal, and then Arizona could not further challenge that formerly illegal.
    Such cases would be rare, but they could exist in the future. Once a path to legal status is discovered by one or more, then it would likely spread to others to seek similar relief. In a way, that would "solve" Arizona's dilemma with illegals by making some of them now legal. The full effects of any law are rarely what the legislators envision when they enact it. The courts must take their turn to decide the full impact of the law, and then the government agencies must take their turn as well. The result is a sort of "drunkard's walk" toward the final result.

    Complain about this comment

  • 194. At 7:41pm on 09 Jul 2010, Hopalongcasualty wrote:

    If you carry your ID and provide it to law enforcement during a lawful interaction you will not be harassed.

    If you don't have your ID, expect to be detained until they can ascertain your proper identity. As I understand it that is the way it is supposed to work anyway. (in the USA)

    I also understand that if I am travelling in any foreign land, that in accordance with their laws, I must have my passport and visa (if applicable) or I will be detained.

    Seems straight forward to me.

    Complain about this comment

  • 195. At 7:55pm on 09 Jul 2010, Hopalongcasualty wrote:

    colonelartist wrote: This what usa should do quickly.
    Force all the mexican looking population to useless areas in arizona, then start building a wall around it, then arrange a heartbreaking scenes of police forcing the non mexicans out of those areas, and build check posts all over all the exit points from that area, demolish all the houses that are 500 meters inside the mexicans side of the wall, and build watch towers 1 or 2 meters away from the wall from the non mexican side...Every mexican coming in and going out should be given a special permit and in non mexican side, the police should check any mexican looking without any hesitation, no one will mind, because, they see it in case of israel....and defend it too...both republican leaders and democratics...
    ----------------------
    I believe that you could use some therapy...

    Complain about this comment

  • 196. At 8:23pm on 09 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    I believe that you could use some therapy...
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    When I present the israelian solution I need a therapy, when your leaders and their followers keep quiet at this solution, they are supporting security of israel..."Hello, hello, testing 1,2,3" this is reality checking up if you can heart it..

    Complain about this comment

  • 197. At 10:52pm on 09 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 198. At 11:02pm on 09 Jul 2010, Curt Carpenter wrote:

    Here is my clever scheme.

    Everyone entering Arizona should be required to get a "Citizen's Chip" implanted under their skin, very much like the ones we implant in our dogs and cats so that the vet who finds them after they run away can know who they belong to.

    Then, the Arizona authorities could sort the sheep from the wolves, so to speak, using those little hand-held scanner gizmos like they use at the grocery store. Beep -- citizen! Boop -- Illegal alien. This technology is called "RFID" I think. We have it now!

    The potential for "profiling" with this system is almost zero -- the Citizen's Chip is UNDER YOUR SKIN!!! And I can tell you for sure that you aren't going to have fifty or sixty counterfeiters set up in Nogales to turn out chips the way you will some silly "National ID Card" if you try that.

    I freely release this clever scheme into the public domain.

    Complain about this comment

  • 199. At 01:36am on 10 Jul 2010, 173csk wrote:

    Az is breaking no law. It is a known fact that every time one is stopped by the police the first thing they ask for is identification. Also if you can not produce ID you can and in most cases will be detained at police station until some one brings your id to the police. Since 9/11 the producing of id has been enforced much more stridently. When ever some thing does not suit Obama he calls it racist or profiling. One must take into consideration that Obama wants to make criminals who broke American laws of legal entry into the states free men and woman. He is doing this to get votes. He is afraid he will lose the Houses in November due a sharp decline in popularity due to eroding constitutional rights, oil spill, health care and other bills he tried to strong arm through the houses. Plus Obama would sympathize with illegal immigrants after all he is spending millions of dollars to hide his birth certificate from the American public. "Thou do protest to much."

    Complain about this comment

  • 200. At 01:38am on 10 Jul 2010, McJakome wrote:

    196. At 8:23pm on 09 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:
    I believe that you could use some therapy...
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "When I present the israelian solution I need a therapy, when your leaders and their followers keep quiet at this solution, they are supporting security of israel..."Hello, hello, testing 1,2,3" this is reality checking up if you can heart it.."

    Although I have rarely agreed with you, in this case your barb is brutally apropos and on target. Not to mention very intelligent and witty.

    Now if you could only convince the Palestinians to use wit and intelligence instead of missiles and bombs I could sympathize with them instead of satisfying my sense of injustice by occasionally criticizing Israel.

    Complain about this comment

  • 201. At 02:27am on 10 Jul 2010, Jerry Amos wrote:

    Arizona is desparately trying to avoid the real issues:
    #1, the real biggie, is Arizona businesses and farms knowingly employ illegal immigrants. If the immigrants can't get jobs they won't come. The U.S. absolutely refuses to have a reasonable guest worker program because the businesses and farms want to hire illegal people at low wages, not pay taxes or unemployment or health insurance, etc. Businesses and farms employing illegals should be stopped from working.
    #2 Rampant drug use by Arizona people. Drug free workplaces and drug free schools by rigorous testing would eliminate much crime. Arizona won't do it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 202. At 2:11pm on 10 Jul 2010, sean56z wrote:

    Mexican gangs insist on privileges to traffick dangerous drugs. They swear that police officers will be executed to continue this illicit practice. The mobs vow to use torture and sexual assaults for the tactic of fear and intimidation. They attempted to commit massive arsons in Phoenix to reduce law enforcement security. Obama lends his usual lip service to this situation. The Southwest needs a strong move by the National Guard to restore the border.

    Complain about this comment

  • 203. At 3:52pm on 10 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    Sean is right.

    There is no reason why some of our national parks along the border are being shut down or why our police along the border are being threatened with violence for shutting down human smugglers/drug traffickers.

    When is enough enough?

    We Americans are too scared to go to national land, this means that we are basically giving up our land. Part of our country.

    It is high time to bring in the National Guard, military, CIA and FBI.

    Complain about this comment

  • 204. At 4:24pm on 10 Jul 2010, LordTrenchant wrote:

    I assume that as a Brit living in the USA, Mark Mardell has a Permanent Resident Card. The accompanying paperwork with the issue of this document states that the card must be carried at all times. I also assume that the majority of traffic stops would, or should, involve persons with a current drivers license. What's the problem? The Democrats want voters and the Republicans want cheap labor. Police cars proudly proclaim "to protect and serve". Sometimes I'm tempted to add the word "occasionally".

    Complain about this comment

  • 205. At 4:57pm on 10 Jul 2010, Rod Donovan wrote:

    All Arizona is doing is simply enforcing laws already on the books. Nothing wrong there. The problem arises when so many laws are passed and not enforced that eventually laws will be enforced selectively by those in power against those not in power. As it is, I am probably breaking the law some where just commenting here. I hope Texas, New Mexico, Nevada, and others join Arizona. If the federal government wants to weigh in on this, let them FINISH BUILDING THAT BORDER FENCE and SECURE OUR BORDERS. Understand, you cannot be a viable nation if you do not control your borders. That is why we are loosing the war in Iraq, and Afghanistan. The Terrorists come and go as they please.

    Complain about this comment

  • 206. At 5:34pm on 10 Jul 2010, rdixiesunrise61 wrote:

    FarmerTom your #34 post was spot on. Two thumbs up!

    Complain about this comment

  • 207. At 6:37pm on 10 Jul 2010, Rod Donovan wrote:

    Well said Bullfighter.

    I have lived in Laredo, Texas for many years. You cannot believe how rapidly it grew from the 80's till now. Our sister City Nuevo Laredo, in Mexico has become a high risk city. The drugs are bad, the people are bad, and it has become worse. Most of the trash in Mexico gravitates to the US border where drug trafficking and people smuggling are big business. I commend Arizona on their attempt to eradicate illegals from our soil. Thank you Arizona. I wonder if Texas and other states have the "cajones" to do this, or are they just Federal Government whores? Time will tell if the Feds are serious about securing our borders.

    "Papers?! We don need no stinkin peppers". If you show U.S. birth certificate and social security card when getting a State Drivers License or Photo ID Card, no other papers should be required to prove citizenship.

    Complain about this comment

  • 208. At 8:45pm on 10 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    207. At 6:37pm on 10 Jul 2010, Rod Donovan wrote:

    "Papers?! We don need no stinkin peppers". If you show U.S. birth certificate and social security card when getting a State Drivers License or Photo ID Card, no other papers should be required to prove citizenship.

    ____________


    Obviously, then, the preparation and sale of good forgeries of US ID documentation is about to become even more lucrative than before.

    Now who might have the capital to invest in that kind of glowing business opportunity?

    With which kinds of business might the provision of false documents have great synergies?

    Which businesses might be located in a foreign country, close to the US border, where the police might be corrupt, or corruptible, and the chances of being caught would be small.

    Hmm. Let me think.

    Complain about this comment

  • 209. At 11:24pm on 10 Jul 2010, Obaaje wrote:

    42. At 05:02am on 07 Jul 2010, grammieinvincible

    I was about to wrote off Arizona. Great read. Refreshing to know that there are normal folks there. Thanks

    Complain about this comment

  • 210. At 8:19pm on 11 Jul 2010, self00 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 211. At 8:30pm on 11 Jul 2010, self00 wrote:

    The immigration law is worse with the Federal Immigration law. Problem is, it's not enforced. Most people are for the Arizona law... the politicians that want the Mexican vote don't want to make them angry... However, most Mexicans like the Arizona law, as they came in legally.

    Here is a story you might be interested in. I posted it but BBC says it was taken off due to copyright laws. There is nothing on this site that says copyright. lol
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-411846/We-biased-admit-stars-BBC-News.html#comments

    or go to...

    http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/islam/T92QK87FOMBCJ0HB8

    BBC I know you don't like me, but let's be fair?????

    Complain about this comment

  • 212. At 8:48pm on 11 Jul 2010, andyparsonsga wrote:

    The Mexican government actively encourages its citizens to violate US immigration laws. I believe that they do that and so vociferous in their condemnation of US Immigration law for three main reasons. Firstly, by encouraging what are, mainly poor, poorly educated and low skilled workers to illegally live and work in the US they abdicate any social responsibility towards those citizens with regards to healthcare, education, support and welfare. Secondly, they reduce the risk of a mass uprising by a large proportion of citizens who are, and have been for hundreds of years, totally disenfranchised. Thirdly, the flow of foreign currency, mostly earned free of any US Federal or State taxes back in to Mexico provides the Mexican government with its second largest source of foreign currency estimated at $50 billion a year.

    The Arizona law bans sanctuary cities that refuse to enforce immigration laws, stiffens penalties against illegal alien day laborers and their employers, makes it a misdemeanor for immigrants to fail to complete and carry an alien registration document, and allows the police to arrest immigrants unable to show documents proving that they are in the US legally. The law applies to all races and nationalities, not just Hispanics. So if you are black, yellow, brown or white and are stopped by the police in Arizona for committing an offence and the officer has a reasonably suspicion that you are not native born, he or she can ask to see proof of your immigration status.

    The bulk of the law’s wording was taken straight from Federal Immigration law and rather than being “unconstitutional” as the Federal lawsuit suggests, supplements the Federal law by allowing local law enforcement resources to be added to the Federal resources, which is within the Constitution.

    If these rules constitute the racist, xenophobic, fascist regime that so many on here claim, then what about the regulations and restrictions imposed on foreigners by Mexico?

    If foreigners upset “the equilibrium of the national demographics.” The Mexican government will bar them. How’s that for racial profiling?

    If foreigners are considered not to enhance the country’s “economic or national interests” or are “not found to be physically or mentally healthy,” they are not welcome. Neither are those who show “contempt against national sovereignty or security.” Foreigners must not be economic burdens on Mexican society and must have clean criminal histories. Those wanting to obtain Mexican citizenship must show a birth certificate, provide a bank statement proving that they have economic independence, pass an exam and prove that they can provide for their own health care.

    Illegal entry into the country is punishable by two years’ imprisonment. Document fraud is subject to fines and imprisonment, as is alien marriage fraud. Evading deportation is considered a serious crime. Illegal re-entry after deportation is punishable by ten years’ in prison. Foreigners can be deported without due process and without the taxpayer funded appeals afforded by the USA.

    Law enforcement officials at all levels must cooperate to enforce immigration laws, including arrests and deportations. The Mexican military is also required to assist in immigration enforcement operations. Native born Mexicans are allowed to make citizens’ arrests of illegal aliens and turn them in to the authorities.

    A National Catalog of Foreigners tracks all outside tourists and foreign nationals. A National Population Registry tracks and verifies the identity of every member of the population, all of whom must carry an identity card. Visitors who do not possess the proper identification and documentation are subject to immediate arrest and deportation as illegal aliens.

    All of these provisions are enshrined in Mexico’s General Law of the Population. There will never be any public outcry for “comprehensive immigration reform” in Mexico because pro-illegal alien speech by foreigners is prohibited. Under the Mexican Constitution, political speech by foreigners is banned. Non citizens cannot “in any way participate in the political affairs of the country.” In fact, a multiplicity of Mexican statutes limits the participation of foreign nationals and companies in just about everything. Foreigners have severely limited private property and/or employment rights.

    The Mexican government is notorious for its abuse of illegal aliens who attempt to violate Mexico’s southern border. In 2008, the Mexican government launched an aggressive deportation plan to curtail illegal Cuban immigration and human trafficking through Cancun. Meanwhile, Mexican consular offices in the US are demanding a moratorium on all deportations and a freeze on all employment raids across America, while putting extreme pressure on local authorities, financial institutions and healthcare facilities to accept a “Matricula Consular ID card”, issued by the Mexican Consulate rather than something issued by the US government.

    Complain about this comment

  • 213. At 9:58pm on 11 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    The Mexican government actively encourages its citizens to violate US immigration laws. I believe that they do that and so vociferous in their condemnation of US Immigration law for three main reasons. Firstly, by encouraging what are, mainly poor, poorly educated and low skilled workers to illegally live and work in the US they abdicate any social responsibility towards those citizens with regards to healthcare, education, support and welfare.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Blame it on the mexican government....Its not about mexican illegals, its about your own economy going down...its not mexicans fault that that your private firms and industries have to cut the jobs...Its not illegals fault that your fraudulant housing schemes went bankrupt...Its not as if every illegal is working....YOu all have to go back to Guanajuato Proposal in feb of 2001 between your president and the mexican president, and then step by step retrace the steps back to today...the obsticles on mexican imports into usa, the systematic effort to substitue them with israelian goods, the american amazing threat to mexico in security council to support it against attack on iraq...Your leaders have given you an easy argument to isralify america...A kind of reason which hitler used, the kind any country with economy pressure would do..

    Complain about this comment

  • 214. At 10:04pm on 11 Jul 2010, BienvenueEnLouisiana wrote:

    Would Arizona harass US citizens? - Mark

    Short answer, no.

    All one has to do is read the law to understand that; all else is conjecture and misinformation.

    Complain about this comment

  • 215. At 10:14pm on 11 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    If these rules constitute the racist, xenophobic, fascist regime that so many on here claim, then what about the regulations and restrictions imposed on foreigners by Mexico?
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The rules, as a rule "never" constitute racism and xenophobia, its their trckle effort on the common individuals that give rise to racism and all that stuff...The law encourages xenophobia, you can call it xenophobia, i will call it hate..and that which encourages, unwittingly or wittingly hate, should be met with disgust..

    Complain about this comment

  • 216. At 11:16pm on 11 Jul 2010, femmefatale wrote:

    Why do some proponents of this law believe having a driver's license is enough proof of citizenship? It wasn't enough proof when you received your job, right? Most of us get our jobs here by providing two forms of ID, one of which has to be a birth certificate, a social security card, and the like. The license only proves you are who you say you are. Many Americans don't even have one. I don't have one myself. Passports and birth certificates, and Federal IDs like military IDs are how you prove citizenship. And you probably won't have a passport if you don't go anywhere.

    Complain about this comment

  • 217. At 02:59am on 12 Jul 2010, lancelot83 wrote:

    ...No, & niether would Obama

    I prefer to keep this very simple:

    Obama's Plan:...
    1.) Illegals pay a significant fine
    2.) Illegals register and begin paying taxes
    3.) Illegals get to the back of the immigration line to become citizens

    If I'm an Illegal Immigrant:

    1.) I'm living on peanuts so, payng a fine does not make me inclined to step forward.
    2.) I'm living on peanuts so paying taxes and living on less does not make me inlcined to step forward.
    3.) I would be uncertain about the impact to my ability to draw free medical, welfare, food stamps etc. so not going to risk losing that.

    In short, the only way for Obama's plan to be successful is to racially profile illegals and to round them up and make them follow through with his plan. Sure, he'll do that right?

    His plan is then NOT IMPLEMENTABLE. It's more words spoken with confidence and no implementation plan to actually make it successful. This is Obama in nearly every speech....

    Complain about this comment

  • 218. At 03:49am on 12 Jul 2010, McJakome wrote:

    217. At 02:59am on 12 Jul 2010, lancelot83 wrote:
    ...No, & niether would Obama

    Please answer these questions truthfully:
    1. When Rush Limbaugh said, "I hope he fails." What was your reaction?
    2. When the GOP and Blue Dogs vote NO on everything, and refuse any cooperation, what's your reaction?
    3. When the "Birthers" claim he isn't American, what's your reaction?
    4. When they blame Obama for what George W. Bush did, what's your reaction?
    5. When they call him a socialist, then criticize him for being in bed with banks, wall street, etc., what's your reaction?

    You don't have to publish the answers here, but if you are an honest and truthful person, and are honest and truthful with yourself, think about your answers quite carefully. So should Anne Coulter's alter-egos on this board.

    It is not only the leftist wing nuts who are damaging this country, it's the rightist wing nuts too.

    Complain about this comment

  • 219. At 07:07am on 12 Jul 2010, Tom wrote:

    The border between USA-Mexico is 6ft tall and has holes every 40 feet. The bulk of the illegal immigration comes from Mexico, 500,000 apparently are in Arizona alone. The central government has failed to protect the borders and Arizona must, amougst others, help deport the illegal immigrants because illegal immigrants do effect the local community.

    1/10 Americans are unemployed, 12 million illegal immigrants apparently are in the USA. The problem can no longer be ignored and as a responsible and sensible community the Americans (white, black, hispanic and asian) must come together to sort out the problem.

    The main problem is the border. It is not fit for purpose. The second is the fact that the illegal immigrants are not documented and criminal gangs are able to sneak in. The USA is supplied with drugs and Mexico is becoming a failed state due to cartels.

    The solution is quite simple or least I believe so. Instead of allowing the illegal immigrants to become citizens, allow them to reside in the USA with their own documents. If they go on to cause trouble then deportation becomes an option but if they become citizens, your stuck with them forever.

    The second solution is to allow a flexible immigration system. It will help break the cartels but without a real border you will always get individuals choosing the illegal route hence why a strong border is needed.

    Complain about this comment

  • 220. At 3:55pm on 12 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Instead of allowing the illegal immigrants to become citizens, allow them to reside in the USA with their own documents. If they go on to cause trouble then deportation becomes an option but if they become citizens, your stuck with them forever.
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Did you get this idea by israel or from the arab countries? the arab countries are consistent with their policy of never giving anyone the citizenship, israel picks and choose, the thai or vietnamise or indian workers can stay there but never will get citizenships, the people who can say that their great or great grand mother was at one time or another was a jew, get the citizenship...BAsically i go for consistency...if one is not an emarati or kuwaiti, then you can never become a citizen, doesnt matter how devout muslim wahabi you are..

    Complain about this comment

  • 221. At 4:08pm on 12 Jul 2010, Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote:

    Funny to listen to europeans say how racist we americans are. I didn't realize we have sporting events here like soccer where black players are rediculed, coaches (like spains) insult black people, and fans throw bananas onto the field?

    You really have some nerve lecturing to us.

    Complain about this comment

  • 222. At 4:15pm on 12 Jul 2010, JRH wrote:

    This is a difficult topic (for politicians.) Almost 90% of legal residents want the borders secured and the issue resolved.

    It is not a Democrat or Republican issue. Public sentiment was the same under Bush (with a Republican Congress) and he backed away from it. Now under a Democratic Congress Obama is also tap dancing around it.

    The problem is that the money behind most politicians is against securing the borders or resolving the issues. Some of them see cheap labor, others see future voters, etc...

    The question everyone is ignoring is if Arizona can't enforce Federal Immigration statutes, what gives them the right (or requirement) to enforce any Federal regulations or statues?


    Complain about this comment

  • 223. At 5:06pm on 12 Jul 2010, MagicKirin wrote:

    BTW at the governor conference in liberal Massachusetts only the proffessional protester came, far more pro Jan Brewer supporters.

    Complain about this comment

  • 224. At 5:27pm on 12 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Funny to listen to europeans say how racist we americans are. I didn't realize we have sporting events here like soccer where black players are rediculed, coaches (like spains) insult black people, and fans throw bananas onto the field?
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Its not funny, in your country, people and government is scared of the law suits...You like to pretend that all of you have some neutral color when you go out in public, but in reality, no one really intermingles with anyone from a different race...and if someone does, it is made into a huge thing..."oh my best friend is a black, or a white or hispanic or a mexican or a jew or a muslim"..and then its supplimented with a sentence, "but he is different from the rest of the blacks or whites or jews or muslims"

    Complain about this comment

  • 225. At 5:29pm on 12 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    This is a difficult topic (for politicians.) Almost 90% of legal residents want the borders secured and the issue resolved.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    YOur leaders seem to take a leading role and lead you into wars, when it comes to this issue, they conviently become politicians and want to do what 90% residents want?

    Complain about this comment

  • 226. At 03:08am on 13 Jul 2010, Neil Stapley wrote:

    Where the system is broken just as it is in Europe. When you leave a topic a sensitive as this to small minded point scoring bigots it will end in harrasment to anyone who doesn't fit the profile of a middle class white american.

    In the 1930 similar events were taking place in Germany and look what that exploded into, how many people we put into camps just because they looked Jewish?

    The only way to deal with the problems that come with immigration is to deal with firstly the Americans who employ the illeagals by making the punishment for the crimes more than just a slap on the wrist. Life in prison and seasure of all assesets. More money is needed to investigate and bring to justice those who are the cause not those who are just trying to escape povety and crime.

    If there is no work for the illeagals they wont come.

    Complain about this comment

  • 227. At 07:10am on 13 Jul 2010, BienvenueEnLouisiana wrote:

    The question everyone is ignoring is if Arizona can't enforce Federal Immigration statutes, what gives them the right (or requirement) to enforce any Federal regulations or statues? - JRH

    This is truly a horrific question to ponder, however I believe it’s more likely that such a legal contradiction would survive, and state governments would grow ever more subservient to the will of the Feds.

    No one really intermingles with anyone from a different race...and if someone does, it is made into a huge thing..."oh my best friend is a black, or a white or Hispanic or a Mexican or a Jew or a Muslim"..And then it’s supplemented with a sentence, "but he is different from the rest of the blacks or whites or Jews or Muslims" - colonelartist

    Talk about a time warp to Jim Crow...very few people speak that way about mixing races openly anymore because it's considered to be inappropriate and offensive; Personally, I've only heard it said openly once in my whole life, and that person was a Democrat. As for intermingling, you've obviously never met a Creole before.

    In the 1930 similar events were taking place in Germany and look what that exploded into.... - Neil Stapley

    Are you seriously suggesting that the Arizona law is similar to the policies of the German Reich that led to the holocaust? You, sir, are seriously misinformed; I recommend you read the law in question.


    Complain about this comment

  • 228. At 12:15pm on 13 Jul 2010, Artur Freitas wrote:

    It’s ironic how stringent the USA is with me at airports and yet it shows no urgency in clapping down illegal border crossings or am I missing something?

    Complain about this comment

  • 229. At 12:38pm on 13 Jul 2010, Summonindeed wrote:

    No. All of whom I know would be delighted to cooperate with any Official pertaining to this Matter. An incoherent Masse does exist who predict unheard of Glee knowing they did their part in rupturing the US Spine.
    Amongst themselves they believe they're right to wrest the US 'back' for 'Brilliant mexico'.

    Complain about this comment

  • 230. At 4:01pm on 13 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    steve wrote: " Funny to listen to europeans say how racist we americans are. I didn't realize we have sporting events here like soccer where black players are rediculed, coaches (like spains) insult black people, and fans throw bananas onto the field?

    You really have some nerve lecturing to us"





    Try to be an Arab in France, a Turk in Germany, an Albanian or a Gypsy in Italy, and, last but not least (in view of the most recent mass protests in Barcelona) a Catalan in Spain.

    Le alone a Basque.

    Oh, hypocrisy of those traditional European racists!
    And crypto-antisemites! :-(((

    Complain about this comment

  • 231. At 4:18pm on 13 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Are you seriously suggesting that the Arizona law is similar to the policies of the German Reich that led to the holocaust? You, sir, are seriously misinformed; I recommend you read the law in question.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I recommend you read, if you can read german, the old articles and poems and books and even some news articles here and there when nazism was at its intial stages, all of them warned against nazism because those few people knew what such innocent looking rules and attitudes would lead to..Genius holocaust was the end of such descrimination. Laws are easy to be made,but once made they stick...Havent learnt lesson from your quickly made patriotic laws and the laws which made those guantanamobay detainees illegal combatants?

    Complain about this comment

  • 232. At 4:25pm on 13 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    rE #227

    according to some British posters attempts to make British Petroleum a more reponsible operator are racist in nature as well.. :-)))

    Complain about this comment

  • 233. At 4:28pm on 13 Jul 2010, GH1618 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 234. At 4:39pm on 13 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Anyway Arizona was part of mexico 200 years ago, not a long time considering jewish can reclaim their land after so many centuries ago.Mexico should use this golden chance of usa engaged in wars with several countries, and atart a war with usa..

    Complain about this comment

  • 235. At 5:04pm on 13 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Talk about a time warp to Jim Crow...very few people speak that way about mixing races openly anymore because it's considered to be inappropriate and offensive; Personally, I've only heard it said openly once in my whole life, and that person was a Democrat. As for intermingling, you've obviously never met a Creole before.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Yes, and my point was that in usa people dont talk about racists because they are scared of law suits..they dont mix because they are afraid that they would say something to each other that would be considered as offensive, they are so tense when they try to socialise that you can sense the tension before you enter the house.

    Complain about this comment

  • 236. At 5:41pm on 13 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 237. At 6:25pm on 13 Jul 2010, space_commander wrote:

    The one item everyone has failed to take into consideration is Mathematical Probability, if you have 100 illegals and 95 of them are Hispanic, who are you going to stop? And if Arizona is wrong, what about these Sanctuary cities and states who totally ignore Federal law? It is a slippery slope, with no simple answers, hampered more by the refusal of the Federal Government to do its job. What they are doing now is closing the gate AFTER the horse ran out.

    Complain about this comment

  • 238. At 8:20pm on 13 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    What they are doing now is closing the gate AFTER the horse ran out.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    No, what you are saying is isralification of usa..Do you really think that americans today with their extreme mentality can identify themselves to the hippie decades`? From hippiesm to israeliasm....just in a matter of a few years...Now who has changed whose mindset? ben laden changed yours, or you changed the muslims...Of all the options in the whole world, the governor of arizona picks up the one which israel has in place for 6 decades, First comes stopping people who look differnt, then comes the small riots, then comes tightenting of laws in the name of security, wall, checkposts.

    Complain about this comment

  • 239. At 8:25pm on 13 Jul 2010, Tom wrote:

    Colonelartist

    #220.

    No, it's because there is a strong criminal trend when it comes to illegal immigration and not simply for being illegal immigrants.

    Then of course why would the USA want to offer citizenship and be stuck with thousands of potential criminals?

    #231.

    Nazism and immigration? I call Godwin's theory. There is no link between the two and I suggest you stop implying otherwise.

    #234.

    I hope your joking because thats ridiculous. Great Britain owned part of America too, doesn't mean we should still own the land, right?

    Do you want to remind me who used to own Mexico... There is a reason why Spanish is spoken, you know.

    Complain about this comment

  • 240. At 8:28pm on 13 Jul 2010, Tom wrote:

    Space_Commander

    #237.

    "The one item everyone has failed to take into consideration is Mathematical Probability, if you have 100 illegals and 95 of them are Hispanic, who are you going to stop?"

    People who break the law, does it matter what happens after that since the person broke the law and law enforcement is simply digging a little more to find out for information?

    Complain about this comment

  • 241. At 8:42pm on 13 Jul 2010, Tom wrote:

    colonelartist

    #238.

    I suggest you read the law, it is not there to stop people who look different. What will the hispanic law enforcement have to say if it was the case?

    If you ever went to the border between the USA, you'd see it's 6ft high and every 50ft it will have small hole!

    You seem to care more about ranting about the USA instead of talking about the issue at hand, why? Do you even live there?

    Complain about this comment

  • 242. At 8:52pm on 13 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    No, it's because there is a strong criminal trend when it comes to illegal immigration and not simply for being illegal immigrants.

    Then of course why would the USA want to offer citizenship and be stuck with thousands of potential criminals?
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Look at australia and that should answer your question of why should usa be stuck by criminal legals..its not as if every white settler who came to america was a respectible or non criminal... There is some criminal trend with illegal but that trend also exist with the legals as well..Its not as if states of america where there is no mexican illegal problem, the crime is non existant or lesser..99 percent of illegals are ordinary people, looking for opportunities to better their lives, and no one has a right to stop other human being from making their lives better..This is crime against humanity..the biggest crime.worse than genocide, worse than making women cover their faces or heads, worse than not allowing women education..

    Complain about this comment

  • 243. At 9:00pm on 13 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Nazism and immigration? I call Godwin's theory. There is no link between the two and I suggest you stop implying otherwise.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Your problem is you see nazism when it had taken its worse shape, before that, read about the trends in germany, the so called germans said almost everything against the jews and the gypsies which you say about the illegal mexicans..A few good and reflective germans of that time stood up against such things, but mostly people in general laughed at their apprehention of the trend, just as you refuse to believe that you are on the same path, you have no idea how your next generation will use these laws...Americans are ignorant and fanatics, there is no connection between what they say and what they actually do..Given two alternatives you pick for the one which is extremist in nature. and you should be thankful of me who atleast has pointed out this fact..

    Complain about this comment

  • 244. At 9:16pm on 13 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    I suggest you read the law, it is not there to stop people who look different. What will the hispanic law enforcement have to say if it was the case?

    If you ever went to the border between the USA, you'd see it's 6ft high and every 50ft it will have small hole!

    You seem to care more about ranting about the USA instead of talking about the issue at hand, why? Do you even live there?
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I wish the native indians had built the wall to stop the settlers from europe coming to usa..the country is based on settlers..I see no difference between these people trying to settle in that country by whichever means they have, either through holes in the walls or whatever way they can use.Mexicans look different, and I do not and will not digest this hokus pokus that the law is not discrimatory, it will never allow the police to randomly stop a non mexican looking citizen so that he could prove he is the legal one..whereas legal mexicans will be stopped..

    Complain about this comment

  • 245. At 9:50pm on 13 Jul 2010, Tom wrote:

    colonelartist:

    #242.

    "Look at australia and that should answer your question of why should usa be stuck by criminal legals."

    You've not answered why the USA should accept illegal immigrant criminals. Do you have a clue about the cost of housing criminals? Your talking thousands per prisoner, the chances are more money is spent on the criminal compared to average joe.

    "its not as if every white settler who came to america was a respectible or non criminal."

    Your quick to play the race card. However, what's was the point? In the USA when the Italain and American mafia families decided to re-establish their links to one another, many were arrested as soon as they stood on American soil. I ask you, why should the USA not be consistant on how they treat criminals?

    "here is some criminal trend with illegal but that trend also exist with the legals as well."

    Yes... what's your point? Those criminals are residents of the states and should be handled through their legal system. Why should the USA deal with foreign criminals?

    "ts not as if states of america where there is no mexican illegal problem, the crime is non existant or lesser..99 percent of illegals are ordinary people, looking for opportunities to better their lives, and no one has a right to stop other human being from making their lives better."

    How ridiculous! One problem of undocumented immigration is because it is undocumented! That means we have no idea how many illegal immigrants actually live in the country and can only estimate. However, 99 percent? Where's that evidence?

    "his is crime against humanity..the biggest crime.worse than genocide, worse than making women cover their faces or heads, worse than not allowing women education.."

    Ridiculous. The government has a duty towards her citizens and residents of the country. That must include immigration controls or you will have millions and millions of people entering the West. How one earth can you provide for your citizens when the population rises uncontrollably.

    What about my life? How can I be expected to compete if immigrants walk in and compete with the same jobs? How can I compete for housing when the housing stock is taken and not replaced?

    Why should the West look after the world because their governments and their people are too careless and populate the world like rabbits?

    Complain about this comment

  • 246. At 10:03pm on 13 Jul 2010, Tom wrote:

    colonelartist:

    #243.

    "our problem is you see nazism when it had taken its worse shape, before that, read about the trends in germany, the so called germans said almost everything against the jews and the gypsies which you say about the illegal mexicans."

    I am not that old! I have never seen nazism. However, have you been to Eastern Europe... they still say anything and everything about the jewish people and gypsies! However, since when did this become about Mexicans? Your the one playing the race card here.

    "mericans are ignorant and fanatics, there is no connection between what they say and what they actually do..Given two alternatives you pick for the one which is extremist in nature. and you should be thankful of me who atleast has pointed out this fact."

    How silly. How can you sit there and play the race card and in the same comment also generalise Americans as ignorant and fanatics? I have never met an American and even if I do I wouldn't base an entire group of people on how that American is with me.

    The world would be alot better place if people like you didn't have such prejudice attitudes towards different people.

    Complain about this comment

  • 247. At 10:11pm on 13 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    What about my life? How can I be expected to compete if immigrants walk in and compete with the same jobs? How can I compete for housing when the housing stock is taken and not replaced?

    Why should the West look after the world because their governments and their people are too careless and populate the world like rabbits?

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Very good, from illegal workers, the undocumented ones, to crime to housing and jobs in usa to the west. Your problem is with mexicans who come to a place to better their lives..and like I said, they have this right, they have seen and heard that through out the centuries the whites from europe went there and bettered their lives, why shouldnt the mexicans not do the same? afraid of the compition? afraid that they one day will overtake you because they will produce like rabbits? Your fault, you dont produce like them..reproduce yourselves...Just because your criminal system creates burden on the society doesnt mean you have to take it out on a third party, channel your anger where it should be. Just because one or two or maybe three out of every 50 or 60 or 100 illegals are criminals, doesnt mean that every illegal has to be seen as a potentional criminal..pre-emptiveness didnt work in war against iraq and it wont work with illegals..This is part of life, people have always migrated, envirnoment has always changed..you cannot fight the nature..Its better to accomodate the illegals than to hunt them out..You talk about globalization, but your globalization stops the moment you are on the receving end of it..

    Complain about this comment

  • 248. At 10:12pm on 13 Jul 2010, Tom wrote:

    colonelartist:

    #244.

    "he country is based on settlers."

    What has today and tomorro got to do with events that happened 100 or 200 years ago?

    "exicans look different, and I do not and will not digest this hokus pokus that the law is not discrimatory, it will never allow the police to randomly stop a non mexican looking citizen so that he could prove he is the legal one..whereas legal mexicans will be stopped."

    Mexicans? Please point out to a section in this law that even mentions the word Mexican.

    You don't even know how the American system works! If it was racist or even discriminative it would be unconstituational and the federal government would block it.

    Do you even know how many law enforcement are 'Mexican looking'? You seem to believe this is 1960's America and whites are imposing their will on the minority. Have you seen the president lately?

    You also seem to be assuming that I am a white American. I am not, I have an interest as a minority on the immigration system and I see no reason why the police should not be able to ask for proof of their legal status for those stopped for minor charges.

    Complain about this comment

  • 249. At 10:26pm on 13 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    How silly. How can you sit there and play the race card and in the same comment also generalise Americans as ignorant and fanatics? I have never met an American and even if I do I wouldn't base an entire group of people on how that American is with me.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Saying mexicans are mexicans and different from the whites is not playing the race card, its stating the facts..I repeat, no white will ever be stopped to prove his legality..and I can safely generlise that americans are ignorant and fanatics, their general attitude to solving different issues be it forgein policy or this internal issue of legal vs illegal, its all driven by extremism..Just in case you failed to notice, the whole world has become more extreme than what it was 9 yrs ago, thanks to extremism that outpoured from the west..When the barbarians met the civilized, the civlized turned out to be the other side of the same coin..

    Complain about this comment

  • 250. At 10:38pm on 13 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    I am not that old! I have never seen nazism. However, have you been to Eastern Europe... they still say anything and everything about the jewish people and gypsies! However, since when did this become about Mexicans? Your the one playing the race card here.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    And do you think that I am sort of a prison condemned by G-d to live on this earth forever..I am also not over 100 years old, however, luckly I wasnt all that obessed with the ending of discrimination, I was more interested in knowing how the most powerful nation of that time, could fall down to such a level..and some people told me to read some old things about german society to put things into some context.I am aware of my race and I am quite aware of other races...this is the firs thing I notice..skin color, does it stop me from making contacts, never..sometimes race is the only reason i take contact with others, I think world would be a boring place to live if there was not so much variety of mind and body....And I hate bordom..And I dont like to boast but I am very good at guessing people's race just by looking at them...so neither the chinese or the whites or the africans can fool me when it comes to a question of which part of europe or africa or china they come from..

    Complain about this comment

  • 251. At 10:42pm on 13 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Mexicans? Please point out to a section in this law that even mentions the word Mexican.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The beauty of the law is that they dont mention the words, its implied...Even idiots can put two an two toghether and come up with mexican, the law is passed in arizona,which has problem with illegal mexicans..No need to pretend that arizona passed this law to keep illegals from bangladesh or india.

    Complain about this comment

  • 252. At 10:47pm on 13 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    You also seem to be assuming that I am a white American. I am not, I have an interest as a minority on the immigration system and I see no reason why the police should not be able to ask for proof of their legal status for those stopped for minor charges.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    All i assumed was that you are a settler..if you want to make arizona a police state, be my guest, but too much resources used in some useless work, means taking resources away from other more useful works..what will arizona do next, encourage people to rat on each other? you can take down the billboard saying welcome to arizona, replace it with wellcome to israel, and future china.

    Complain about this comment

  • 253. At 10:57pm on 13 Jul 2010, Tom wrote:

    colonelartist:

    #247.

    "Very good, from illegal workers, the undocumented ones, to crime to housing and jobs in usa to the west."

    Your all over the place. You suggest that we should be free to come and go as we please while ignoring the clear problems that would arise. If we all came and went as we pleased do you believe people would not head for the West since it's the richer part?

    "Your problem is with mexicans who come to a place to better their lives..and like I said, they have this right, they have seen and heard that through out the centuries the whites from europe went there and bettered their lives, why shouldnt the mexicans not do the same?"

    I have never met a Mexican. How can I have a problem with people who I have never met? To be honest I do not expect much difference considering we are both Europeans, maybe a century or two apart but Europeans nonetheless. You can see this when it comes to Mexican culture and values.

    However this is 2010 and not 1800. The world is different, we no longer need to explore a world where all the edges of the map have been filled in. The Mexicans we know today and the Americans came from Europe. Why should that matter though? It has nothing to do with today or tomorro. Your emotionally comment is nothing more then that. It has no logic whatsoever.

    "afraid of the compition? afraid that they one day will overtake you because they will produce like rabbits?"

    There you go again. Why presume I am white? If I went to the USA I would be more of a minority then the Hispanics, even the African Americans! I am not afraid of the competition but I understand that jobs are limited or have you missed the recession? How can we expect our children to have a better life if for every one job out there, there is 100, 200 300 people applying for it? Please explain the benefits of that.

    "Your fault, you dont produce like them..reproduce yourselves...Just because your criminal system creates burden on the society doesnt mean you have to take it out on a third party, channel your anger where it should be."

    Them, them? I could be one of 'them' for all you know. I actually beleive in large families too. However, your missing the point and clearly you do not believe on bettering ones self when you have an attitude like that! You still miss the point. Why should the USA or any other countries accept foreign criminals? I thought deporting foreign criminals would be of the benefit of the entire community, even the immigrantion communities themselves.

    "Just because one or two or maybe three out of every 50 or 60 or 100 illegals are criminals, doesnt mean that every illegal has to be seen as a potentional criminal."

    I accept that claim although I would state, thats YOUR OPINION and NOT FACT. You seem to have a habit of pushing your opinions as if it were reality. Every illegal is a criminal since they're not respecting the immigration laws. I accept that the USA should have a more flexible system but let's not forget that these people already have shown lack of respect for being there illegally in the first place.

    However, considering I am not Americans, why should I be expected to go through the legal process of getting my green card while others do not? Why do you want to discriminate against me?

    "pre-emptiveness didnt work in war against iraq and it wont work with illegals..This is part of life, people have always migrated, envirnoment has always changed..you cannot fight the nature..Its better to accomodate the illegals than to hunt them out..You talk about globalization, but your globalization stops the moment you are on the receving end of it."

    Yes I accept that people have always migrated. I am the one who raised that point. However, times change and circumstances change. The world is over populating and resources are limited. Riots happened all over the world because food prices went out of control and in the UK, I noticed there is a ban against watering plants etc That's quite a recent development.

    We need a sensible and mature discussion about what can provide as a country and not have a debate led by emotion as you clearly are doing.

    Complain about this comment

  • 254. At 11:07pm on 13 Jul 2010, Tom wrote:

    colonelartist:

    #249.

    "Saying mexicans are mexicans and different from the whites is not playing the race card, its stating the facts."

    No, generalising and saying an entire group of people are stupid and fanatics are racist. Your not different from the Europeans who landed in the USA and Africa and considered the tribes nothing more then savages.

    However, what's the difference between a Mexican who was European once upon a time and a white person who no doubt was European once upon a time?

    "I repeat, no white will ever be stopped to prove his legality..and I can safely generlise that americans are ignorant and fanatics, their general attitude to solving different issues be it forgein policy or this internal issue of legal vs illegal, its all driven by extremism."

    I accept no white will be stopped to prove legality the law does not allow anybody to be stopped and checked. If you break the law, you might be checked but again, you've not bothered to read the actual law and simply reading what was said in the papers or on the news.

    However, considering Americans are White Europeans, African Americans and Latino-Americans, how can you assume all those things? I will say it again. Your not very different to the Europeans who went to America and Africa and said the tribes were nothing more then savages, your very prejudice and I hope your a minority, wherever your from.

    "Just in case you failed to notice, the whole world has become more extreme than what it was 9 yrs ago, thanks to extremism that outpoured from the west..When the barbarians met the civilized, the civlized turned out to be the other side of the same coin."

    The East met the West centuries ago... you can't blame the west for all your ills. If the west and the USA didn't exist, I wonder who you would blame... Why don't you go into politics and make the world a better place?

    Complain about this comment

  • 255. At 11:17pm on 13 Jul 2010, Tom wrote:

    colonelartist:

    #250.

    "and some people told me to read some old things about german society to put things into some context.I am aware of my race and I am quite aware of other races."

    Races? Since when did we all stop being human? I might look different to you but I am not less or more human for it. I want the best for my family and friends. I worry about the future and where we all will be.

    Am I any different to you?

    "this is the firs thing I notice..skin color, does it stop me from making contacts, never..sometimes race is the only reason i take contact with others, I think world would be a boring place to live if there was not so much variety of mind and body."

    Just because someone looks like you does not suggest for a moment that they share your interests or values. The moment you start seeing differences between 'races' and I use that term reluctantly is the moment we create a platform for people to say, 'My people are better then yours.'.

    "And I dont like to boast but I am very good at guessing people's race just by looking at them...so neither the chinese or the whites or the africans can fool me when it comes to a question of which part of europe or africa or china they come from."

    It shouldn't matter where they come from. It does not define who they are. Or do you believe we are all different? If you do, then immigration debates is rather pointless since you have a political interest.

    Complain about this comment

  • 256. At 11:30pm on 13 Jul 2010, Tom wrote:

    colonelartist:

    #251.

    "The beauty of the law is that they dont mention the words, its implied...Even idiots can put two an two toghether and come up with mexican, the law is passed in arizona,which has problem with illegal mexicans..No need to pretend that arizona passed this law to keep illegals from bangladesh or india."

    It would also be worth mentioning that Arizona is host to many Mexicans and Latino-Americans and has been for centuries. This law is back by the overwhelming majority, is it not safe to say that Mexican-Americans also back this law? Arizona has a population of just over 6 million. There are 500,000 illegal immigrants. That's almost 1/6, 1/7 people. Is that not a cause of concern since it will have an inpact on services?

    Isn't it at least important to document these illegal immigrants so the government can do it's job and provide the services needed?


    #252.

    "All i assumed was that you are a settler..if you want to make arizona a police state, be my guest, but too much resources used in some useless work, means taking resources away from other more useful works."

    You assumed I was white, you've not made the mistake to suggest that I may be of Mexican orgin. I am also from a police state. Arizona is not a police state, far from it. In the UK you can be stopped for being a minority and even searched. That's discrimination. It's stopped though, I believe.

    However, how can we expect governments to provide services if we don't know the amount of people in the country? How can we build schools if we don't know how many children there are? How can we build hospitals with the right amount of beds? What about houses?

    "what will arizona do next, encourage people to rat on each other? you can take down the billboard saying welcome to arizona, replace it with wellcome to israel, and future china."

    People should tell the border controls about the illegal immigrants whereabouts. They should be rewarded too.

    They're not only illegally in the USA but are frauding the system by not paying taxes and still expecting the state to educate their children and hiring Spanish translators isn't even cheap. Maybe that's why people are a little annoyed.

    Complain about this comment

  • 257. At 11:31pm on 13 Jul 2010, donmc0261 wrote:

    As a Anglo-Saxon, born American citizen, if I am pulled over by the police for being suspected of, or braking a law I am required to prove who I am or they will take me to jail till I can I am or or the police can. If I was visiting your country I am required to carry my passport to prove who I am, and am there legally.

    Complain about this comment

  • 258. At 11:31pm on 13 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    There you go again. Why presume I am white? If I went to the USA I would be more of a minority then the Hispanics, even the African Americans! I am not afraid of the competition but I understand that jobs are limited or have you missed the recession? How can we expect our children to have a better life if for every one job out there, there is 100, 200 300 people applying for it? Please explain the benefits of that.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    YOu are settler, there are other settlers than whites in usa..Just because the world has recession, not the fault of illegal mexicans, but those who were supposed to prevent the recession..its the american legals who decided to do everything at a quick pace that they reached the saturated point too quickly...blame them, ask them..As far as children are concerned, they will manage or not manage the challanges they would face...children dont stay children forever, they become adults especially in usa while their parents are still alive, its we who have to think about the children's future as who knows when something happens and either the children are left without parents or parents left without children, all the planning gone down the drain..You are just responsible for yourself..not your children..dont bring children into it..most of them dont even think that the parents know anything of their world or that the parents dont fit into their world...

    Complain about this comment

  • 259. At 11:41pm on 13 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    However, considering I am not Americans, why should I be expected to go through the legal process of getting my green card while others do not? Why do you want to discriminate against me?
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Well, if you want to take the illegal way, I wont stop you, its your choice that you want to take the legal way, but dont blame others for choosing what you have chosen..People have evoluted from darwins theory of survival of the fitest or whatever its called..dont complain about over population, it can take just one tsunami or one plague or one war to under populate the whole world..if an illegal can make a few dollars in a day, what does it matter to people who make hundreds in a month or a week..And ofcourse, the illegals have a right to think about the future of their children, not just the civilized or the legal ones...children are children, unless ofcourse they misbehave or dont listen to their parents then they become headaches..

    Complain about this comment

  • 260. At 11:42pm on 13 Jul 2010, donmc0261 wrote:

    It is not just Mexicans this law effects, there are a few hundred thousand Canadians that come to Arizonia every year they will have the exact same requirements, and treated the same, and be required to have the same paper work, or they will be deported back to Canada. Just like the Canadians, the Mexicans will have to give the police a reason to question them. And yes they do deport Canadians every year.

    Complain about this comment

  • 261. At 11:50pm on 13 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    It shouldn't matter where they come from. It does not define who they are. Or do you believe we are all different? If you do, then immigration debates is rather pointless since you have a political interest.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I dont believe that we are different, I see that we are different, I cannot pretend to be like hispanic or mexican or black or white or chinese or sikh or what not, when I am not..and i cannot pretend that they are like me, when i can see that they are not like me, in a country which is based on immirgation debate on immigration should have been pointless..I have no political interest, I am not an american, have no wish to become a settler there, unless requested by a native indian..even then I will be hesitant to settler there..I dont care what happens inside america to the americans, but since its about stoping people from making their lives better, so i have posted here..It goes against my principle when people make up all sorts of subtle and preventive laws against one group of people just because their own existance is threatened. If you want to win the game of life, then play it fairly and squarely..dont cheat by bringing into some laws which support you and not the other team.

    Complain about this comment

  • 262. At 11:55pm on 13 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Races? Since when did we all stop being human?
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Since the day monkeys evoluted to humans..Just in case you didnt notice, our ancestors the primates have different races, we call them species but they are different races of primates, some humans evoluted from orangutangs and others from chimpenzees, while some macaks, the only thing that differentiate humans from their ancestors is the ability to live together, irrespective of their colors , features or ethnicity, take this out, and humans and primates are alike..

    Complain about this comment

  • 263. At 00:00am on 14 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    It is not just Mexicans this law effects, there are a few hundred thousand Canadians that come to Arizonia every year they will have the exact same requirements, and treated the same, and be required to have the same paper work, or they will be deported back to Canada. Just like the Canadians, the Mexicans will have to give the police a reason to question them. And yes they do deport Canadians every year.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Ideally it should be like that for canadians, but in reality it wont, arizona isnt crying over illegal migrants its problem is mexicans..First it was the body screening at the airport and now its police resources being spent on useless checking...Americans do know how to waste the money and then they complain about recession.

    Complain about this comment

  • 264. At 00:28am on 14 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    colonelartist wrote: dont cheat by bringing into some laws which support you and not the other team.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The illegals are the ones cheating- by coming here illegally.

    As for the laws, everyone is supposed to obey the law and no one is supposed to be above the law- whether it is the President or an illegal from another country.

    As Bob Dylan sings in his song It's Alright, Ma,
    "Even the President of the United States has got to stand naked."
    That line always stuck out to me. I saw Bob Dylan in concert twice and once he sang that song. I sang out the line with him.

    The conflict is that many of the illegals and their supporters want citizenship, despite the fact that they have not obeyed our laws.
    Basically amnesty and open borders.

    Although I feel some sympathy for some of them, I also feel that if they want to be USA citizens, they should only be able to do so the legal way.

    If we give illegals citizenship, this would change the idea that no one is above the law.

    Complain about this comment

  • 265. At 00:46am on 14 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    colonelartist wrote:
    Since the day monkeys evoluted to humans..Just in case you didnt notice, our ancestors the primates have different races, we call them species but they are different races of primates, some humans evoluted from orangutangs and others from chimpenzees

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    So are you saying the different races come from different monkeys and that is why we are different skin colors???

    Complain about this comment

  • 266. At 01:06am on 14 Jul 2010, Tom wrote:

    colonelartist:

    #258.

    "YOu are settler, there are other settlers than whites in usa."

    Everyone is a settler, people don't spawn from the ground.

    "Just because the world has recession, not the fault of illegal mexicans, but those who were supposed to prevent the recession..its the american legals who decided to do everything at a quick pace that they reached the saturated point too quickly...blame them, ask them."

    You can't avoid a recession. Even Karl Marx said that many decades ago and even today we still face recession. That's what happens in a capitalist system. The bubble bursts.

    The government would have more money to spend without the illegal immigrants. They can't pay tax but I also expect many to use the public services that they don't actually contribute towards. What's fair?

    "You are just responsible for yourself..not your children..dont bring children into it."

    Your certainly a strange person. You are willing to argue on the rights of illegal immigration but when it comes to children, it's something not to discuss! You don't own the land you walk on, it's loaned to you by your children! If you don't provide for your children then you won't have much of a country when they come to take responsibility.

    #259.

    "...but dont blame others for choosing what you have chosen."

    I am not pinning blame. I am asking to be treated equally.

    "...if an illegal can make a few dollars in a day, what does it matter to people who make hundreds in a month or a week."

    It won't matter. It does matter to those who want to work but can't and the illegal immigrant is currently undermining the system for working for less then legally allowed. That's not fair or right. How many worked hard for the rights workers have nowadays?

    However, I would raise the point that if you accept the theory of survival of the fittest then you also accept the wars, battles and crimes against humanity that includes. How far will you go to protect the rights of the illegal immigrants over established immigrants?

    Complain about this comment

  • 267. At 01:21am on 14 Jul 2010, Neil Stapley wrote:

    Colonelartist. This exactly how the Nazi party actually came to power. "The Jews are here taking our money and our jobs". Now doesn't that sound like the Mexicans are coming here taking out jobs.

    There is no illusion that the system is broken. When you have polical grandstanding, media hype and racist small minded police its not a big leap to think that a simple law can lead to more laws and before you know it Rush Limbaugh is President and the US is invading Poland. (That part was joke)

    The disscussion is not weather the law is needed but weather it will lead to the harrashment of American citizens and it will considering that all the police need is a believe that you are violating state immigration law to stop you, that belief will be as little as you do not look American.

    To solve this problem we need more than political grandstanding on both sides of the isle.

    Complain about this comment

  • 268. At 01:23am on 14 Jul 2010, Tom wrote:

    I would suggest you leave the discussions Colonelartist, you have admitted you do not live in the USA and have no intention of moving to the USA, so why should you even believe it is right to discuss a sensitive issue?

    I am in the process of moving to the USA because it has a diverse culture and I always wanted to learn a foreign language so beleived it would be rather easy to pick up Spanish.

    However, on arrival I expect to have my interests looked after by the government. I want water and food security and Arizona oddly enough is another states that has serious water problems, or lack of water problems.

    You may seem to beleive migration of people is harmless but you can choose to continue to wear those blinkers. You won't have to face the problems with you?

    You can go to bed at night now and believe you are doing the world a favour but I hope you look a little deaper and accept that we do harm to the world even unintentionally.

    Complain about this comment

  • 269. At 02:20am on 14 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    267. At 01:21am on 14 Jul 2010, Neil Stapley wrote:

    "There is no illusion that the system is broken. When you have political grandstanding, media hype and racist small minded police its not a big leap to think that a simple law can lead to more laws and before you know it ..."

    "To solve this problem we need more than political grandstanding on both sides of the aisle."

    ____________

    And the thing is these more-heat-than-light attempts to whip the public into a frenzy occur when America has rather more serious problems to address.

    For example here are two piece of news:

    1. America unexpectedly lost 125,000 jobs last month.

    2. America's trade deficit with China was over $ 40 B last month.
    (At an annualized rate, $ 1/2T per year, or roughly 3 % of GDP)


    It is as if we have learned nothing from the worst financial crisis in 70 years.

    But perhaps a campaign to:

    to shift a bigger portion of taxation from income to consumption;
    to reduce (or better yet, eliminate) the tax deductibility of mortgage interest;
    to tax lending so that it internalizes the risk that cheap consumer credit poses to the economy in general, and to the financial system in particular;
    to impose a tax on interest payments;
    to impose a tax on the use of credit cards;
    to stop taxing interest earned on savings;

    - all measures that would go some distance toward addressing serious financial problems in an economy where households save too little and are addicted to consumer debt -

    is probably not as easy, or as likely to cause voters to forget about the disastrous financial legacy of the Republicans, as getting a mob worked up about illegal immigration.

    Complain about this comment

  • 270. At 02:40am on 14 Jul 2010, BienvenueEnLouisiana wrote:

    Since the day monkeys evoluted to humans..Just in case you didnt notice, our ancestors the primates have different races, we call them species but they are different races of primates, some humans evoluted from orangutangs and others from chimpenzees, while some macaks, the only thing that differentiate humans from their ancestors is the ability to live together, irrespective of their colors , features or ethnicity...
    - Colonelartist

    Oh my God...no wonder you obsess over race issues. This kind of thinking is arcane.

    Complain about this comment

  • 271. At 12:27pm on 14 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    " America unexpectedly lost 125,000 jobs last month."


    IF , didn't you want to write,

    "125,000 illegal aliens have expectedly lost their jobs in Arizona?

    [btw. similar gloomy predictions for California, New Mexico and Texas once those states enact similar legislations as Arizona in the absence of BHO's action on behalf of the Federal Government]

    Complain about this comment

  • 272. At 12:29pm on 14 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    Re #270 BienvenueEnLouisiana



    You can never tell what kind of species hides beneath burka and chador.

    Complain about this comment

  • 273. At 1:31pm on 14 Jul 2010, McJakome wrote:

    267. At 01:21am on 14 Jul 2010, Neil Stapley wrote:
    “...all the police need is a believe that you are violating state immigration law to stop you, that belief will be as little as you do not look American.”

    Human nature being what it is, this might happen, but the way it is stated is a propaganda attack on the law. The law requires that a police officer have a reason to stop someone [i.e. a violation of some kind] before asking for identification. Using a false ID and lying to the police are both possible additional violations.

    So a policeman, having sopped a speeder, given an ID saying Johannes Gutenburg from Peoria, by someone who doesn’t look German and speaks only Spanish, would then have 3 infractions and reasonable doubt, and then would be able to arrest on suspicion of illegality, in addition to the 3 very legitimate charges.

    The potential for abuse is there. Why sabotage your argument by misrepresenting what the law actually says in a propaganda attack?

    Complain about this comment

  • 274. At 1:56pm on 14 Jul 2010, McJakome wrote:

    269. At 02:20am on 14 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner RE wrote RE
    267. At 01:21am on 14 Jul 2010, Neil Stapley
    You did say “perhaps” but these suggestions fall well short of your usual quality:

    “to reduce (or better yet, eliminate) the tax deductibility of mortgage interest;
    to tax lending so that it internalizes the risk that cheap consumer credit poses to the economy in general, and to the financial system in particular;
    to impose a tax on interest payments”

    It seems to me that these would harm the consumer without addressing the problem. If you tax provision of a product or service, the provider merely passes the cost on to the consumer. So how does
    “to shift a bigger portion of taxation from income to consumption” help?

    Oh, I understand the theory that taxing consumption should limit or reduce it, but Americans, at least USAmericans since 1774, have shown a remarkable hostility to being taxed, and this being a democracy with no dirigiste überregime to impose it where would it come from.

    The last two, “to impose a tax on the use of credit cards; to stop taxing interest earned on savings” seem, to me, somewhat contradictory. Taking the money out of one pocket and putting it in another.

    I am a liberal, who believes in government action to help the people, and who is somewhat distrustful of the FOX/GOP/TEA party, but, as a Bostonian, the mantra TAX, TAX, TAX does have me thinking of dumping tea [or rather politicians] into the harbor.

    I do agree that nothing is as easy as getting a mob worked up with simple-minded slogans and snake-oil solutions.

    Complain about this comment

  • 275. At 3:53pm on 14 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Oh my God...no wonder you obsess over race issues. This kind of thinking is arcane.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Race to me is not an issue, race to you has always been an issue..your education system, the so called mainstream education is racist, if you read its history, you will find that your education system is based on studies conducted mostly on whites, and standardised on the whites, and then the same standard tests were applied to other groups without even considering the cultural differences the different groups live and learn..

    Complain about this comment

  • 276. At 4:01pm on 14 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    I am in the process of moving to the USA because it has a diverse culture and I always wanted to learn a foreign language so beleived it would be rather easy to pick up Spanish.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    And of all the places in usa, you choose to settle in arizona and already are against the illegal mexicans..Now, tell me, do you really believe that you wont get a job because of an illegal worker? Settle in some gated community where there is water supply..Lots of areas in arizona where no one even notice the water shortage which somehow is prjected as the illegal mexicans fault.. How many illegal workers have you actually really talked to? before you question me, i have, they unlike you dont have the time or the money to sit in front of computers and write on some blogs..Your compition will be with the legal ones, so I suggest you channelize your energy to those matters..for example you wont stand a chance to get a job if there are legal americans compiting for that job...

    Complain about this comment

  • 277. At 4:29pm on 14 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Your certainly a strange person. You are willing to argue on the rights of illegal immigration but when it comes to children, it's something not to discuss! You don't own the land you walk on, it's loaned to you by your children! If you don't provide for your children then you won't have much of a country when they come to take responsibility.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Illegals also have children.If I start thinking about my children, then first I have to think about their children..I know my children have a head start, they will manage and they will manage better than me, I do own the land I walk on inside four walls of my house and plus acres that surround it..and its not loanned to me by my children, they can own their own places whereever they want to, they can go to america, like you have done...

    Complain about this comment

  • 278. At 5:21pm on 14 Jul 2010, Tom wrote:

    colonelartist:

    #276:

    "And of all the places in usa, you choose to settle in arizona and already are against the illegal mexicans."

    I have decided to settle in the south, Arizona is an option but I will have to research into the matter further. I am against illegal immigration, that includes illegal mexicans. I have to go through a long process for a green card, who in their right mind would be happy for others not to go through the same process?

    Yesterday, you talked about fairness but there is nothing fair about treating a Mexican immigrant and European immigrant differently, legal or not legal.

    "Now, tell me, do you really believe that you wont get a job because of an illegal worker?"

    The difference between going through the legal process and illegal process is that the legal migrants have to have a job waiting on arrival. That's something to consider because what happens to illegal immigrants unable to find work? Desperate people do desperate things.

    "Settle in some gated community where there is water supply.Lots of areas in arizona where no one even notice the water shortage which somehow is prjected as the illegal mexicans fault."

    You've never been to the USA! This is pathetic. Your making up things as you go along. However, considering illegal immigrants do not pay taxes and avoid almost all attempts to be documented, how can governments prepare to provide services to their citizens? 500,000 extra people is alot espeically when it makes 1/7 of the population. That's going to have a noticable effect on resources especially water!

    "How many illegal workers have you actually really talked to? before you question me, i have, they unlike you dont have the time or the money to sit in front of computers and write on some blogs."

    I have worked with one illegal immigrant actually. In the UK you see, foreign students are only allowed to work 20 hour shifts per week and this person worked roughly 40 hours. Your visa becomes invalid and you will face deportation if caught.

    However, what has it got to do with anything? I couldn't care less about how illegal immigrants spend their time. I believe everyone else couldn't really care either.

    "Your compition will be with the legal ones, so I suggest you channelize your energy to those matters..for example you wont stand a chance to get a job if there are legal americans compiting for that job..."

    It does not matter about the qaulity of the legal migrants. If an American is able to do the job in that part of the USA, I can't take it.

    That's how it works. That's how it should work and no matter how you try and use emotional and ridiculous attempts to change your reasons for being pro-illegal immigration, you will always be the minority.

    That's why I am heading to the USA!

    Complain about this comment

  • 279. At 5:29pm on 14 Jul 2010, Tom wrote:

    colonelartist:

    #277.

    "I do own the land I walk on inside four walls of my house and plus acres that surround it..and its not loanned to me by my children, they can own their own places whereever they want to, they can go to america, like you have done..."


    ... oh my god... "You don't own the land you walk on, it's loaned to you by your children." is actually a figure of expression by the NATIVE AMERICANS.

    How much history besides you own were you actually taught? You criticised another persons historic credibility but if you can't even remember some of the most important phrases said by the natives of the America(s) then maybe you shouldn't comment on our educational system.

    The whole point of that expression is that we as people should look after our world at present in order for our children to have something positive to look forward to.

    Complain about this comment

  • 280. At 6:16pm on 14 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Tom, I think you should not head for america, you have yet to go there, and already you want others to do what you think you are doing...Sorry, to say, things dont work that way, in real world. And you are heading for usa, just to be one of the minorities? You dont have to go all that far to expereance being minority, you can go to germany or italy...Feelings of minority guarnteed.

    And that which is a figure of expression is just figure of expression..nothing more and nothing less. they couldnt build wall to prevent europeans from stealing their land, and now all they do is to hear the people who still go to their land from europe in search of greener pasture, is this pathetic figure of expression.No matter how you want to gaurd this world, the history shows that things usually dont work out the way people plan..the natives looked after their land for what? so that others could enjoy it while they live in reservations alloted to them and are expected to be thankful about it..There is plenty of water and there will be plenty of water, dont worry about it, climate change will make sure of it...If in some cities water is consumed by the illegals and create extreme shortage, people will move away from that area, thats what people have been doing since the first time they felt their need of thirst..Every city built near river..not to enjoy the scenery but to be close to water..

    Complain about this comment

  • 281. At 7:30pm on 14 Jul 2010, Tom wrote:

    colonelartist:

    #280.

    Your entire comment has lost all meaning. For your information I am a minority in my homeland, I have also travelled to Belgium, Germany Turkey etc However what has all that got to do with the recent law in the state of Arizona and illegal immigration?

    You earlier criticised a persons educational system about being 'white dominated' and when I start using phrases created by the native Americans, you have no idea what I was talking about! How in the world can you sit on your high horse when your ignorant about the natives yourself?

    Yesterday you also talked about fairness and about a persons right to a better life. Then in this comment you accept that in certain areas lack of water can be a problem and people will be forced to move.

    You have no respect towards the individuals who already live in these areas and are quite happy for problems to be made worse. Having access to clean drinking water is a human right, a real right that is actually law! And your more then happy to break it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 282. At 8:07pm on 14 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    You earlier criticised a persons educational system about being 'white dominated' and when I start using phrases created by the native Americans, you have no idea what I was talking about! How in the world can you sit on your high horse when your ignorant about the natives yourself?
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I can identify with the native indians through my tribal background...it doesnt mean I have to be well versed in their language or their phrases, neither do i expect they be well verse in my expression..
    When it comes to water as being human right, well those humans can move to watery places in search of their rights..It wont kill them to walk a few km to get the water..where I come from, we have been doing it for centuries..no one has died so far because of lack of water..If there is water beneath arizona, it can always be pumped out...When you go to arizona, dont waste the water, the used water from bath, use it to water the grass, dont let the tap running when you wash the face, or brush your teeth.turn it on, only when you use it, or alternatively fill up half a liter jar with water and wash the face and brush the teeth with it..and grow cactus, instead of the fancy flowers which need too much water..When you decide to settle in arizona, i will give you more survival techniques.

    Complain about this comment

  • 283. At 8:15pm on 14 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    I am a minority in my homeland,
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    How can someone be a minority in his homeland..Can someone teach me this trick, minorities of another countries get a lot of sympathy from other countries...all free and even unwanted..

    Complain about this comment

  • 284. At 8:56pm on 14 Jul 2010, sean56z wrote:

    Arizona must be secured from Mexican gangs living across the border. They insist on moving hard drugs, snuff films, and potent alcohol to their customers in the United States. The Chicano mobs cater to heads, necrophiles, and drunks for a great amount of cash. They promise to shoot all police officers or national guard soldiers in their way. Prostitutes are often kidnapped, raped, or murdered at their bizarre parties.

    Complain about this comment

  • 285. At 9:17pm on 14 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    What goes across the border goes across the border.Why dont the arizonians trade with the mexicans, lots of opportunities at a lesser cost..This is what the governor of arizona should have done, lease a lot of land across the border for atleast 150 yrs, and grow all sorts of vegetables corn and the rest for the americans.This way job opportunities for mexicans in mexico..

    Complain about this comment

  • 286. At 10:43pm on 14 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    274. At 1:56pm on 14 Jul 2010, JMM wrote:

    It seems to me that these would harm the consumer without addressing the problem. If you tax provision of a product or service, the provider merely passes the cost on to the consumer. So how does
    “to shift a bigger portion of taxation from income to consumption” help?

    [[By shifting the realtive price of borrowing as compared to saving.]]

    "The last two, “to impose a tax on the use of credit cards; to stop taxing interest earned on savings” seem, to me, somewhat contradictory. Taking the money out of one pocket and putting it in another."

    [[No, they aren't contradictory at all. If we tax interest payments made to credit card companies, we increase the price of consumer credit, and, inevitably, reduce the amount of it taken up in the market. If we then also stop taxing the interest you earn on your savings (up to a reasonable limit reflecting a middle class life-style) we reduce the "price" of saving money - i.e., you are no longer penalized for not spending your money immediately. The combined effect should be to reduce demand for lending, and increase demand for saving]]

    ____________

    There are several problems that have been rolled together. Let's just look at two of them.

    First, an economy that spends too much and saves too little will find that it is short of domestic savings to supply a pool of capital for investment in businesses to create (or maintain) jobs and strengthen the economy. The result of this is that foreign investment will make up the shortfall, with domestic assets inevitably being purchased by foreigners.

    This is not, by the way, necessarily an inherently bad thing. It may be that the foreigners run the company better, and may provide a deeper pool of capital for investment.

    But this is the necessary outcome of running a trade deficit: eventually the foreigners buy your assets if they don't buy your products.

    ____________


    Further, an economy that devotes too much to current consumption will find itself in trouble in the future - people may not have enough saved for retirement, they may not be able to pay off their debts, and so on.

    Failing to save adequately will eventually end up imposing costs on others, either in the form of law enforcement or social assistance, or increased health care costs e.g., through medicare.

    Failure to save can also have the form of over-indulgence in negative savings, i.e., debt.

    Debt is ok where it is backed up by assets that can be liquidated to pay off the debt.

    But when the debt service requirement exceeds the cashflow available to service the debt there is a problem (this is the definition of insolvency) and when, in addition, there are insufficient assets to cover the debt you have bankruptcy.

    Excessive debt affects the confidence of firms and households in the market. There are very real costs to you when too many of your neighbours default on their loans. In the good times there are very real costs to you of too much credit too easily obtained in terms of price inflation.

    It is important for an economy to have a pool of debt available to lubricate transactions in the economy.

    But when credit is over-used, or abused, it causes very severe problems.

    For many, many years we have been progressively loosening restrictions on debt, and allowing more and more dangerous practices.

    ------------

    On the trade deficit point, the first and best thing that could happen would be for the Chinese to let the Yuan float properly. I believe that it is probably 50% - 60% undervalued. But since that was not a condition of WTO entry, and China is masterful at resisting all urgings to do the right thing, that isn't going to happen any time soon.

    So, since we can't fix their wagon, perhaps we should put our own house in order.

    It is hugely and bizarrely anomalous for an economy that has relatively high unemployment to have so much extra cash laying around that it can, simultaneously, go on a spending binge, as reflected by the trade deficit numbers. This makes no sense, at all.

    -----------

    In my opinion there are a number of features that tend unwisely to bias consumer choice toward holding debt, often grossly excessive debt.

    The single worst, stupidest, and most dangerous practice by which the law is biased against financial prudence is to make mortgage interest payments tax deductible for mortgages up to $ 1M. This is insane.

    It is an open invitation to consumers to take on more debt than they can afford. It is a grossly regressive tax provision by which the poorest in society cross-subsidize the richest, and it means that all your fellow taxpayers pay to subsidize your extravagance. It almost guarantees an unsustainable bubble in the property markets.

    It is the crack cocaine of the tax code.

    America's No. 1 financial reform priority should be to eliminate mortgage interest tax deductibility as soon as possible.

    The second worst thing is to subsidize credit cards. First, for every other good or service in society you pay sales tax. But do you pay sales tax on the interest you pay on your loans and credit card balances?

    Why not?

    By taxing every other good and service, but not taxing loans, we are effectively making them comparatively less expensive, and so therefore over-consumed.

    That would be bad enough, but that isn't all.

    Improvident lending and improvident borrowing impose negative externalities on others. So why is not a risk premium that internalizes those negative externalities included in the cost of obtaining the loan, the same way we put "sin" taxes on alcohol and tobacco?

    Further, credit card companies are allowed to impose a contractual condition on vendors that the vendor must not sell for a lower price for cash than if the purchase is made by credit card. It is an indefensible, morally repugnant practice. To my mind, it is the stuff of which anti-trust investigations ought to be made.

    The net effect of these conditions is that everybody who does not use credit is forced to cross-subsidize those who do. For the vendor, the fees it pays the credit card company are incorporated in the price - it is usually 2 - 3 % but can be as much as 6 %. Well, we need to tax credit card transactions so that people who pay cash do not have to bear that comparative 2% or 3% or 6 % penalty.

    Third, a way to shift the relative levels of consumption and savings in the economy is to make consumption more expensive, and saving less expensive. So increase sales taxes, or value added taxes, and reduce income taxes correspondingly. This will shift the balance away from spending and toward saving.

    Fourth, in our society income paid out in interest payments is tax free. But if you keep that income, and invest it productively, you will be taxed on what your savings earn. This is a huge disincentive to savings. Up to some reasonable level, say $ 10,000 to $ 20,000 per year, we should not be taxing interest paid on savings. You have already paid income tax on that money when you earned the capital in the first place. You should not then be doubly and forever more taxed on what that money earns.


    These measures cannot be introduced precipitously, because each of them would, in the short term, tend to slow the economy. But over the long term debt cannot grow indefinitely. So for our long term health we need to end our addiction to easy credit.

    It will be painful, and it will require long term discipline such as has not been seen in North America in over a generation, but in the long term we, and more importantly our children, will be better off.

    Complain about this comment

  • 287. At 01:25am on 15 Jul 2010, McJakome wrote:

    282. At 8:07pm on 14 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote very practical intelligent tips on saving water after an unfortunate remark about just walking away.

    I wonder why the colonel didn't mention a very good way to save energy. Almost every house in the parts of the Middle East I know has a water tank on the roof. In the hot season the water is heated by the sun and needs no extra energy to be hot enough for washing.

    This will come in very useful in Arizona, or similar places. You can also use empty glass wine bottles embedded in an adobe wall as a heat trap to keep rooms warm in winter. This isn't common in Muslim countries, however, as wine bottles are hard to come by legally.

    Complain about this comment

  • 288. At 01:32am on 15 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox has filed a legal brief on behalf of nine states supporting Arizona's immigration law. Cox says states are authorized to enforce immigration laws and protect their borders.

    The Republican gubernatorial candidate said Wednesday that Michigan is the lead state backing Arizona in federal court. Michigan is joined by Alabama, Florida, Nebraska, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas and Virginia, as well as the Northern Mariana Islands.

    Clearly, there are millions of Americans who back the Arizona Immigration Law. I hope that Mr. Cox and these brave, courageous states know that there are many Americans in other states, like myself, my family and my friends in Illinois, that support them.
    We stand with Arizona.

    Bravo to Arizona, Michigan, Alabama, Florida, Nebraska, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Virginia and the Northern Mariana Islands!

    We cannot let the federal govt. take away our states' rights!!!!!

    Stop big govt.!!!!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 289. At 01:38am on 15 Jul 2010, McJakome wrote:

    286. At 10:43pm on 14 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote RE
    274. At 1:56pm on 14 Jul 2010:

    "It will be painful, and it will require long term discipline such as has not been seen in North America in over a generation, but in the long term we, and more importantly our children, will be better off."

    Thanks, that was a lot clearer than Econ 101. I haven't completely digested it and I have one major problem. I was raised to be averse to debt. The only times I have had long term debt were college loans and when I bought my condo. I paid both off ASAP. My mother did not have a credit card, and virtually never used her SEARS card.

    I have and use a credit card but I pay when due in toto, and do not carry interest debt. If I want something I have to have [or anticipate having by next payday] sufficient cash to pay for it. So, I don't understand people buying so much more than they can afford.

    As you said, it seems to be an addiction, and it will be painful and difficult to break.

    Thanks for the refresher course, I hope others take note.

    Complain about this comment

  • 290. At 05:03am on 15 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    JMM:

    Here are some news articles that may help to give you some idea of how difficult it is to adjust the levers of fiscal policy:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-10632492 - US Sales shrink in June

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10596734 - Chinese Property bubble being reined in

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10613812 - Alcoa Sales Up

    http://www.farmfutures.com/story.aspx/usda/confirms/corn/sales/to/china/17/38179 - Improved Corn Sales to China

    http://news.tradingcharts.com/futures/8/7/142175078.html - Railcar loadings well up over previous year

    The first article would make you think that now is anything but the time to introduce restrictions on consumer credit - after all, if sales are shrinking the inference is that business is shrinking and people are losing their jobs. In those circumstances usually you want to pump up demand, not curtail it, so you want to open the taps on cheap money.

    The second article is ambiguous. It could tell you that economic activity in China is cooling, and so the government of China isn't likely to let the Yuan rise any time soon. But it could also tell you that the government of China is deliberately trying to let the air out of a nascent property bubble - which, in my opinion, is a sign of good economic management, and a sign that China means business about keeping its economy on a level keel.

    The third and fourth articles are actually really good news, and they tell you that whatever consumer confidence may be doing, foreigners, particularly the Chinese, are driving demand for the underlying primary industry and raw material commodities we produce. This is good because the jobs that this activity creates are real, full time, well paid, un-exportable jobs, in sectors of the economy where America has a real competitive advantage. Growth in these sectors is likely to be sustained, long term growth. More than 200 years ago Adam Smith put great store in trends in the demand for, and price of, corn, and so do I.

    Finally on that point, strengthening demand for aluminum usually means that there is strengthening demand for aircraft, one of America's biggest manufactured exports. Again, that is often hugely good news in Rodidog's part of the world.

    The fifth article is also revealing. Again, whatever consumer sentiment may be, a lot of businesses are voting with their dollars and shipping product. Trends in railcar loadings tend to provide fairly good signals about the economy.

    The third, fourth, and fifth articles all suggest that the economy is undergoing good, solid expansion in the non-retail sectors of the economy. More reliance on primary industries and commodities, and less reliance on retail sales is just what the Doctor ordered, isn't it?

    So let's go back to the first article. Yes, there is a downward blip in consumer sales. But sales are still up as compared to last year, and it may be that softening reflects increased unemployment and the decisions of millions of consumers to save rather than to spend.

    Having seen these articles, now you need to decide what policy steps to take.

    Is the economy growing or shrinking?
    Is it time quietly to mop up excess liquidity in the markets; time to leave well-enough alone; time to try and boost consumer demand; time to boost industrial demand? Does the economy need further stimulus or not? Is it an appropriate time to try and choke down consumer credit a bit?

    Keep in mind that 1/3 of consumer demand is going to send money out of America. Boosting industrial demand, or building long lasting infrastructure assets drives demand for full time, well paid jobs in America. It employs people, puts money in their pockets, and food on their tables.

    These are tough questions, and they often require knowledge, experience, intuition, and a highly tuned ability to use crystal balls effectively.

    Complain about this comment

  • 291. At 06:01am on 15 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    "Arizona, here I come!" :)

    Complain about this comment

  • 292. At 08:22am on 15 Jul 2010, Malloc wrote:

    President Obama is just being the mouth piece for the democratic party. they know that Mex immigrants will vote democrat so refuse to secure their own boarder and then they scream racism at any who contradict them. The next step will be amnesty as Clinton did in the 90s.

    Complain about this comment

  • 293. At 4:24pm on 15 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    These measures cannot be introduced precipitously, because each of them would, in the short term, tend to slow the economy.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    What you need is to slow down the economical growth, the luxury days are over, no one is going to suffer if economy is just driven in the second gear, instead of fourth or fifth..I think you should all read and reread and remind yourselves the tale about the hare and the tortoise..Or you should simply see from now on, that running a country's eco is like driving a car up the steep mountain on a narrow and dangerous road, like silk road, or karakoran highway, driving in second gear otherwise you overload the engine and it will break down..The world could not take the fast pace of ecomical growth of the past decade...the saturation point came too soon and too unexpectedly..

    Complain about this comment

  • 294. At 4:43pm on 15 Jul 2010, GH1618 wrote:

    "The next step will be amnesty as Clinton did in the 90s." (from Malloc at #292)

    This is revisionist history. The amnesty was signed by President Reagan in 1986.

    Complain about this comment

  • 295. At 4:44pm on 15 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    I wonder why the colonel didn't mention a very good way to save energy. Almost every house in the parts of the Middle East I know has a water tank on the roof. In the hot season the water is heated by the sun and needs no extra energy to be hot enough for washing.

    This will come in very useful in Arizona, or similar places. You can also use empty glass wine bottles embedded in an adobe wall as a heat trap to keep rooms warm in winter. This isn't common in Muslim countries, however, as wine bottles are hard to come by legally
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    the colonel didnt grow up in a house in middle east thats why..where I am from, we had no water in the house and no electricity, if you needed a bath, you either go to a well, pull out a bucket or two of water and wash yourself, if you needed a luxury bath, you go to a mosque, it had a hand pump..In winter, the water early in the morning was quite comfortable to take a bath with, the first gush of water is the most difficult, after that you can manage..in summer, bath at night when the water has cooled down..during winter, you spend most of the time in the common room where the stove only burns, and then you go to the bedroom, which has to be opened windows and all that, during afternoon to take in as much heat and closed as soon as the sun begins to set down...in winter you eat a lot of nuts, always keep them in your pocket...Read all you can during the day light, and in case of emergency reading exams or other office work, again, go to a mosque where they have some bulb or two..

    Complain about this comment

  • 296. At 5:50pm on 15 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    295. At 4:44pm on 15 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    "the colonel didnt grow up in a house in middle east thats why..where I am from, we had no water in the house and no electricity, if you needed a bath, you either go to a well, pull out a bucket or two of water and wash yourself, if you needed a luxury bath, you go to a mosque, it had a hand pump..In winter, the water early in the morning was quite comfortable to take a bath with, the first gush of water is the most difficult, after that you can manage..in summer, bath at night when the water has cooled down..during winter, you spend most of the time in the common room where the stove only burns, and then you go to the bedroom, which has to be opened windows and all that, during afternoon to take in as much heat and closed as soon as the sun begins to set down...in winter you eat a lot of nuts, always keep them in your pocket...Read all you can during the day light, and in case of emergency reading exams or other office work, again, go to a mosque where they have some bulb or two.."

    ------------


    Now that really was an interesting posting.

    Tell us more about this hot and dry(?) land far away.

    What kind of nuts were they? Were there orchards?
    Was it hilly, rugged ground?

    What games did the kids play?
    What was it like?

    Complain about this comment

  • 297. At 6:09pm on 15 Jul 2010, GH1618 wrote:

    Here's a link to a brief history of US immigration law:

    http://www.fairus.org/site/PageNavigator/facts/research_us_laws/

    Complain about this comment

  • 298. At 11:57pm on 15 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    Its no wonder the mosques are so popular in places like where the colonel used to live.

    Luxury baths, but also extra light bulbs.

    Sort of like the Christian churches in USA that also help Americans in need.

    Complain about this comment

  • 299. At 01:13am on 16 Jul 2010, McJakome wrote:

    TO: Malloc, Magic, MAII and others [you know who you are!]. I am sure you will love this.

    Best Propaganda Video Clip Ever

    A number of comments have been made about “perception” and many more about propaganda. This is only the second time I have posted a link, but this is absolutely one of the best propaganda pieces ever! If you love Obama or hate Obama you will love it.
    It could be used by both Democratic and Republican [especially in New Mexico] campaigns.

    If the link doesn’t work, go to youtube.com and enter Viva Obama, then click on the picture of the people in white sombreros [hats].

    http://www.youtube.com/watch

    Complain about this comment

  • 300. At 01:53am on 16 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    The smaller towns are getting in on the action, too.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100715/ap_on_re_us/us_illegal_immigration_english_1;_ylt=AoWd3pyyi6DVkJ3dX8yVgIhH2ocA;_ylu=X3oDMTE2cTY2YTFvBHBvcwMzBHNlYwN5bi1yLWItbGVmdARzbGsDZXYtaWxsLnRvd25z

    Complain about this comment

  • 301. At 04:18am on 16 Jul 2010, zathros wrote:

    34. At 03:33am on 07 Jul 2010, farmerTom wrote: A Great commentary.


    I too am amazed how so much wealth in Mexico is in the hands of so few. The problem is Mexico's and if you are an illegal caught in Mexico, watch out! My sister in law is Mexican. Her life is Mexico was 4th world. I am an American but people often ask me "but where did you come from?", to which I answer, culturally, I am an American, born in America, with parents from Puerto Rico. So, rather instantly, I am confirmed as a Puerto Rican. Most of the nimrods don't even know Puerto Rico is part of America and they can go there with just their drivers license. I speak Spanish fluently, a little German, I understand English and speak American English.

    I am however a great student of the American Civil War and think that Arizona needs to have her face slapped. This is not the domain of states. A criminal is a criminal and in my family there are a couple of law enforcement officers that do not want this extra burden. I have friends that work for Homeland Security and they do not want the local "yokels" in their way.

    I live in New England and recently met a women who said she was from Arizona and was now ashamed to admit that. Blond Hair with Blues eyes, she said she hated what her state was becoming. I assumed nothing as that comment could go either way, then she blurted out, "a bunch of fascist Nazi's".

    If you drive a car in Connecticut without your license in your possession you can be charged a $1000 dollar fine. If you get caught without Insurance, our car is impounded and you are arrested. A background check is done to see who your are, If you are here illegally then the proper authorities are called. This is the job of Immigration and Naturalization. If they don't come for you, then the State cannot hold you, unless it is robbery or a violent crime. The States of Arizona Government is pandering to the baser nature of it's plebiscite.

    I am not for state's rights because I have visited most of them and anyone else who has knows what I am talking about. Some States barely meet the standard of statehood, morally and ethically.

    I don't really care what anyone who support's state's right's in order to project their racists attitudes has to say.

    If you are not a racist, and are a secessionists, then you should be deported, immediately, or thrown in jail. I can suffer a racist, but not a secessionists. who are the ultimate traitors of America. This issue was decided by the "American Civil War", and any American who is stupid enough not to have studied that great tragedy, is a fool.

    Complain about this comment

  • 302. At 5:14pm on 16 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Its no wonder the mosques are so popular in places like where the colonel used to live.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    It is still my permenent home..the first and the last...

    Complain about this comment

  • 303. At 00:28am on 17 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    Arizona should stand tall and proud because they know what it means to be American.

    Americans like myself stand with you in support of your new law.

    I love you, Arizona!!!!!
    I love you, Illinois!!!!
    I love you, USA!!!!!!!!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 304. At 05:20am on 17 Jul 2010, Tiger80 wrote:

    Im for states rights, but Im not saying cede from the union lol. Dont ever call me a traitor. I love my country. My ancestors came over on the Mayflower and have been in every war starting from the Revolution. People are tired of illegal immigrants, its not about racism, its about upholding the laws of the land. Its a great disservice to those who come here legally and to the citizens of this country.

    Complain about this comment

  • 305. At 06:00am on 17 Jul 2010, Tiger80 wrote:

    I hear ya LucyJ, long live the USA.

    Complain about this comment

  • 306. At 3:20pm on 17 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    Re #302

    In some neighborhoods IEDs are even more popular than mosques.


    [This comment after reading the latest from Pakistan. :(]

    Complain about this comment

  • 307. At 3:25pm on 17 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    "assumed nothing as that comment could go either way, then she blurted out, "a bunch of fascist Nazi's".





    Which just shows you how ignorant some blonds can be.

    For there is not such animal as non fascist Nazi.


    And one cannot be a Nazi these days since there is no such thing as NAZI Party.

    [unless some inner city public school product doesn't know what NSADP stands for]

    Complain about this comment

  • 308. At 3:28pm on 17 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    Lucy "I love your Arizona"

    Tiger80 wrote:
    I hear ya LucyJ, long live the USA.




    Fine, as long as Washington doesn't mess up with Texas. :)




    P.S. Here's wondering why inhabitants of New Mexico don't want to join Old Mexico.

    Complain about this comment

  • 309. At 4:58pm on 17 Jul 2010, McJakome wrote:

    307. At 3:25pm on 17 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:
    "And one cannot be a Nazi these days since there is no such thing as NAZI Party."
    For someone so knowledgeable about such things, how could you not know about the American Nazi Party [having renamed itself as the National Socialist White People's Party, and the National Alliance faction], the Arian Brotherhood and the KKK, all of which still, very unfortunately, exist.

    Complain about this comment

  • 310. At 5:04pm on 17 Jul 2010, McJakome wrote:

    308. At 3:28pm on 17 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:
    "Fine, as long as Washington doesn't mess up with Texas. :)
    P.S. Here's wondering why inhabitants of New Mexico don't want to join Old Mexico."

    I offered to give Texas back to Mexico to some Mexican students in my class. They looked interested, but when I told them they would have to take George W. Bush with it, they immediately stated that my terms were unacceptable. Gol' durn, I thought I had a way to liberate the US from Texan occupation and oppression.

    Complain about this comment

  • 311. At 6:39pm on 17 Jul 2010, Tiger80 wrote:

    @ powermeerkat
    Isnt there a saying, dont mess with Texas lol.

    Complain about this comment

  • 312. At 6:45pm on 17 Jul 2010, Tiger80 wrote:

    @JMM
    We won Tx fair and square lol, remember the Alamo.

    Complain about this comment

  • 313. At 7:36pm on 17 Jul 2010, mary gravitt wrote:

    As an African American I understand the point of the Arizona Race Law. It is to Aryanize Arizona. No person of color is safe under this law. It is the old theory of the bus that comes in the morning returning in the afternoon the the next group of racial unwanted.

    However when the economic cost of chasing out the labor that work the agricultural state come home to the pocketbooks of its supporters, some sensible White people will realized it is character, not skin color that matters.

    Racism is still a dirty little secret in the US that determines one humanity.

    Complain about this comment

  • 314. At 8:43pm on 17 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    When the govt. does not do its job, some citizens offer to step in and help.
    http://www.yahoo.com/_ylt=AgXLQP2WpdI1jiBK9Td7dhObvZx4;_ylu=X3oDMTJwazY0b3ZsBGNwb3MDMwRlZAMxBGcDYjNiM2EyNGZkN2JhZDU0YWQ5OGVkZjNjMGY3M2E4MmEEaW50bAN1cwRzZWMDaW5fbmV3cwRzbGsDbndzLXRpdGxlBHRlc3QDNzAx/SIG=1227e3hho/EXP=1279480081/**http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_neo_nazi_patrols






    Complain about this comment

  • 315. At 9:02pm on 17 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    America rants about using billions in afghanistan to help those people all the way across the globe, while in its own neighbourhood, it wants to introduce racist laws and communist chinese tradtion of rating on other people.

    Complain about this comment

  • 316. At 9:43pm on 17 Jul 2010, Mike Stone Sr wrote:

    I am a 11th generation American and I don't believe people around the world can even start to know what is at stake in our country right now. The federal government is in direct collusion with illegal mexicans in an effort to completely alter the "socio-economic" balance of the US! While the last 4 or 5 presidents have also refused to
    secure American borders, I believe most of that was "big business" desire for cheap labor and also "political correctness".Now we have a president that is "anti-american ,anti-capitalist and a "progressive globalist". It has ceased to be just a disagreement between traditionalists and forces that hate Americas' exceptionalism, now the American people are being overrun by invading mexicans! The "eco-progressives"
    are attempting to illegally alter the voting base of the US. With the effort to
    illegally "amnesty" millions and millions of "welfare riding" mexicans obama seeks to acquire a guaranteed "socialist takeover of America which will be empowered by
    foreign votes! I hope Brits pay attention to what is eventually going to happen in America because freedom loving Americans are willing to fight to keep from living under "socialist-fascism"! I AM JUST AN AVERAGE WORKING AMERICAN !

    Complain about this comment

  • 317. At 10:04pm on 17 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    I AM JUST AN AVERAGE WORKING AMERICAN !
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    It is always the average working person who supports such discrimination by the politicians..The politicians have told the working american, the average worker, that its the illegal mexicans who are the cause of lost job, and unemployment...So that the average american's attention is focused on mexicans and not on the government or whoever runs american...Its not illegal mexican's fault, the government is cutting the jobs..Illegal mexicans come to usa, because they hear about jobs in usa, if your government starts being honest and tell the average americans that its all because of the government, illegal mexicans would not come to usa in hope of finding the job..Obama will never legalise mexicans, that one I can gaurantee you..And if he did, then the votes wont be forgeins, they will be american votes..

    Complain about this comment

  • 318. At 11:59pm on 17 Jul 2010, McJakome wrote:

    312. At 6:45pm on 17 Jul 2010, Tiger80 wrote:
    @JMM
    "We won Tx fair and square lol, remember the Alamo."

    Correction, we didn't win it they did [unless you are speaking as a Texan]. The Texans and Tejanos went up against a much larger Mexican army and, albeit with some help from back home, took it down. Nor did they forget the Alamo [despite mythologization of the story], winning the independence of the Texas Republic and capturing El Presidente y Generalissimo Antonio Lopez de Santa Ana.

    My joke was aimed not at Texas but at that Connecticut Yankee in Judge Bean's court.

    Complain about this comment

  • 319. At 01:46am on 18 Jul 2010, McJakome wrote:

    316. At 9:43pm on 17 Jul 2010, Mike Stone Sr wrote:
    “I hope Brits pay attention to what is eventually going to happen in America because freedom loving Americans are willing to fight to keep from living under "socialist-fascism"! I AM JUST AN AVERAGE WORKING AMERICAN !”

    Can you fight someone with your eyes bandaged shut and with one hand tied behind your back? We’ve been divided against each other and dumbed down because our enemies know Americans will fight.

    But how can we fight when we have been deceived into believing that our friends are the enemy and that the enemy is our friend? Honest, hard-working, freedom-loving Americans have been turned against each other. And our enemies laugh all the way to the bank.

    And most of us don't even see it. Some Americans follow leftist pied pipers like Moore and Soros. Others follow Limbaugh, Coulter and others like sheep to the laughter. Sometimes I feel like giving up, but I keep trying to get people to at least take that bandage off, even so the hand is still tied behind our backs, we "small people."

    Complain about this comment

  • 320. At 03:56am on 18 Jul 2010, Summonindeed wrote:

    Inconvenienced, Yes hopefully. This rigorous task couldn't accomplished otherwise. Due to the absurd present conditions, Sacrifice is certainly known throughout the US. Citizens are duty-bound to see this succeed. Countless angles can be cited on this. An occasional inconvenience may be encountered. However, A greater good will be taking place all the while. JFK summarized the appropriate conduct of the Citizenry on this one with his
    "Ask not what your Country can do for you but what can you do for your Country."

    Complain about this comment

  • 321. At 2:25pm on 18 Jul 2010, mahatchma wrote:

    Probably far less than the Fedearal government does. Consider TSA, your (un) friendly neighborhood cops, and other increasingly menacing federal limitations on the supposed constitutional rights fo US citizens inposed by the latest regime.
    Freedom?

    Complain about this comment

  • 322. At 3:03pm on 18 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    JFK summarized the appropriate conduct of the Citizenry on this one with his
    "Ask not what your Country can do for you but what can you do for your Country."
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------
    It wasnt as if before jfk, the americans were just sitting and demanding that their country did something for them...the intention of this line, was to score cheap points in some speech, its not as if americans started doing doing things for the country after hearing these words..such kind of quotes belong in socialist or communist china, where people have to do things for the country or the ruling people so that the rulers get an easy job, like keep an eye on your neighbours or community..However, the quote has become redudant now, the correct quote is, ask not what you or your country can do for you, demand the world what it can do for your country and you.

    Complain about this comment

  • 323. At 9:08pm on 18 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    If the federal govt. does not enforce the federal law, who will?

    Some states are taking action because they want the federal law enforced.

    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2010/07/17/2010-07-17_arizona_gov_jan_brewers_immigration_law_copied_by_five_states_mi_sc_mn_pa_ri.html

    Complain about this comment

  • 324. At 5:14pm on 23 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    JMM - I like you.


    So a piece of friendly advice:


    DON'T MESS WITH TEXAS!"


    Some folks may start parachuting on your roof yelling: "GERONIMO!"

    Before you can cry: 'Santa Ana!" :)

    Complain about this comment

  • 325. At 5:27pm on 23 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    JMM to to meerkat:

    how could you not know about the American Nazi Party [having renamed itself as the National Socialist White People's Party.





    As I said, referring to our public schools, their products don't know what NSDAP acronym means (for nobody taught them German, unfortunately, or fortunately) and therefore may use that Nazi cliche liberally.



    BTW. I've been always amused watching Soviet/Russian troops doing Nazi goose-stepping at their May 9 Victory Parades.



    P.S. If you happen to be Grand Wizzard under sheets it does not mean you're necessarily KKK leader.

    Complain about this comment

  • 326. At 5:31pm on 23 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    tiger80 : We won Tx fair and square lol, remember the Alamo.



    I once had an Alamo-rented car quite nicely sanded by Santa Ana [wind, for the uninitiated]. :)

    Complain about this comment

  • 327. At 5:35pm on 23 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    "sensible White people will realized it is character, not skin color that matters."




    There's no such thing as White people.

    The best I can do during U.S. census is to put 'Caucasian' in a race rubric [although I don't hail from Cacasus], and I AM most definitely a person of colour. [pale cream beige, last time I checked]

    Complain about this comment

  • 328. At 5:40pm on 23 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    Lucy: "If the federal govt. does not enforce the federal law, who will?"





    Considering that federal government may become unable or unwilling to protect U.S. states external borders the right of people to form well organized militias and armed posses shall not be... etc.

    Or something like that. :-)))

    Complain about this comment

  • 329. At 5:46pm on 23 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    Re JFK allegedly scoring cheap points [acc. to 'colonel']...





    Some people don't know, or claim they don't know what it is all about.

    Let them come to HELMAND!

    Complain about this comment

  • 330. At 6:13pm on 23 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    If you are here legally you will notice little difference when this law takes effect,except the streets will be safer for your families,crime rates will fall greatly,schools will improve,more money will be available for Americans who need healthcare assistance,taxes will go down,more jobs will be available, with wages slowly climbing back up.
    The ultimate irony is Phillipe Cauldron telling us our immigration policies are too harsh,why does he not want his own people to stay in their country .Because he does not want to support them.Check out Mexico's Immigration policies for yourself.If you are in Mexico illegally
    you are evicted with the boot immediately.The Mexican people should fight to force their own rich government to support them or at least create jobs for them.No more ripping off American taxpayers.
    And Phillipe call your people home if you love them so much,give them your money for schools education healthcare etc..it is your responsibility.



    Complain about this comment

  • 331. At 6:38pm on 23 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    To 313 Mary gravitt.
    This new law has nothing to do with race or color,it has everything to do with protecting Americans who are here legally,crimes committed by illegals is out of control in this nation, what does it take for you to see this is not about race.As Americans we have the right to protect our borders our families and our way of life,and our immigration laws are in place to insure our citizens are protected from outside invasions like we are enduring now.There are proper channels to follow to become a citizen,if those channels are not followed you are not a citizen,but an illegal alien.The law is not racist because it is directed at anyone from any nationality that is here illegally.

    Complain about this comment

  • 332. At 7:33pm on 23 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    "The law is not racist because it is directed at anyone from any nationality that is here illegally."





    Cf. "Dirty Dozen" expelled recently to Russia.

    Complain about this comment

  • 333. At 10:34pm on 23 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    331. At 6:38pm on 23 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    "To 313 Mary gravitt.

    This new law has nothing to do with race or color,it has everything to do with protecting Americans who are here legally,crimes committed by illegals is out of control in this nation, what does it take for you to see this is not about race. ...."

    ____________

    Dear RHC:

    This is a load of nonsense. We have already been through it over and over and over on this blog.

    One of the funnier ironies is that on one of these recent strings we had some statistics posted by someone like yourself, pointing out how much crime is associated with illegal aliens.

    It turned out that when the data was examined a little more carefully what it really appeared to show was that illegal aliens were actually more law abiding than American citizens.

    The logical conclusion if you are so worried about crime that is "out of control", then, is that the US would be better off by keeping the illegal aliens, and deporting its own citizens.

    ------------

    On the "out of control" point, too, virtually all rates of major violent crimes have fallen by roughly 40% since 1990 in America.

    Crime is not out of control in America.

    What is out of control in America ?
    Right wing social-conservative demagogues.

    Almost every policy advocated by these idiots turns out to be a financial and social disaster when implemented.

    The amount of harm these people have done to their fellow citizens is staggering. You want to deport people, or lock them up? Start with these right wing demagogues.

    For example, although crime has fallen very substantially (by 2/5) due to the aging of the baby boom and the effects of Roe v. Wade, America keeps incarcerating its citizens at higher and higher rates, for less and less serious offenses, despite the fact that incarceration has virtually no effect on crime rate.

    America incarcerates more of its citizens than Russia, for heaven's sake.

    That is an issue that bears some careful scrutiny. Why are rates of incarceration in the US so much higher than in other comparable western democracies ?

    On that subject, there is an excellent article in this week's Economist that you might care to read before making further nonsense postings on crime being "out of control".


    ------------

    If something is a criminal offense, then it should be prosecuted because it is a criminal offense, not because the person committing the crime is an illegal alien. A murder or robbery doesn't suddenly become worse because it is committed by an illegal alien, or better because it is committed by an American citizen.

    ------------

    Finally, by focusing on unquantified and unverified anecdote-driven assertions, what is lost is that illegal aliens who are employed in the United States are contributing quite substantially to the American economy. If they were not doing so, they would not be employed. Their employer is capturing a value from the exchange that exceeds probably by a factor of at least 2 or 3 the amount that they are being paid.

    They would be contributing substantially more, and would be less prone to be preyed upon by smugglers, criminal gangs, and exploitative employers if they were brought out of the black economy and into the legal economy. There are many ways to do this. The Swiss, for example, ran a guest worker program for many years.

    This is a far more logical and effective way to address the problem than to engage in the hysteria and demagogic pandering that characterizes much of the activity presently seen in the US in connection with this issue.

    You need to your head out ... of the sand, let's say, ... and start thinking carefully and logically about what is best for the American economy.

    Complain about this comment

  • 334. At 11:36pm on 23 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    218 JMM
    I will answer your questions that you find so perplexing

    1. When Rush Limbaugh said, "I hope he fails." What was your reaction?
    My answer
    I also hope he fails,his agenda is to create a society dependent on government programs and so far its working.

    2. When the GOP and Blue Dogs vote NO on everything, and refuse any cooperation, what's your reaction?
    My answer
    The democrats are the kings of the filibuster,besides why should the gop vote yes on something they believe to be fiscally or morally irresponsible.

    3. When the "Birthers" claim he isn't American, what's your reaction?

    My answer

    See the clip marked/ Michelle Obama admits barack was born in Kenya /on youtube.com also see/ Barack admits he is from Kenya/,also his grandmother has admitted she was present in Kenya when he was born there. Also see YouTube-/ Obama Admits He Was Born In Kenya.mp4 /This should clear that up for you.


    4. When they blame Obama for what George W. Bush did, what's your reaction?
    Answer
    George was not great fiscally by any means,but Barrack is way in front when it comes to spending,and printing money.We are spiraling toward recession or maybe depression and all he can talk about is taxing the very people who create the jobs we need,I.E CAP AND TRADE.

    5. When they call him a socialist, then criticize him for being in bed with banks, wall street, etc., what's your reaction?
    My reaction he wants socialism in to control the people,those dependent
    on government programs are more likely to vote democrat.
    As far as being in bed with wallstreet and the banks,money is power, one
    need look no further than contributions from lobbyists to see Obama and his demagang recieved more money from oil execs,wallstreet and the banks than did the G.O.P in the 08 election.check the facts yourself
    Yes he inherited some problems as did every president before him,but
    spending trillions of dollars will not fix the problem only prolong it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 335. At 11:38pm on 23 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    The extremist lefts are just as guilty of being extremists as are the extremist rights. They are simply extreme in different ways.

    Two wrongs do not make a right.

    Complain about this comment

  • 336. At 03:11am on 24 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    333. At 10:34pm on 23 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    If something is a criminal offense, then it should be prosecuted because it is a criminal offense, not because the person committing the crime is an illegal alien. A murder or robbery doesn't suddenly become worse because it is committed by an illegal alien, or better because it is committed by an American citizen.

    ------------

    I disagree with Int. For. statement. I believe that a murder committed by an illegal alien is worse than a murder committed by an American because the illegal alien is not supposed to be in the country.

    This makes me think of the Chelsea King case. If the guy who murdered her had still been in jail, she would likely still be alive.

    All crimes, including murder, committed by illegal aliens could have been prevented if our federal govt. had secured our border.

    The number of crimes doesn't even really matter. If it was your child who was murdered by an illegal alien, you would likely feel it was one child too many.



    Complain about this comment

  • 337. At 03:16am on 24 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    Interested Foreigner wrote:

    That is an issue that bears some careful scrutiny. Why are rates of incarceration in the US so much higher than in other comparable western democracies ?

    I can answer this.
    Number One) so the states or feds can make money.
    Number Two) so the states or feds can make money.
    Number Three) so the states or feds can make money.

    Child molesters, domestic abusers and rapists often get less jail time than people caught with marijuana.

    Does this seem right?

    If I could change something about our federal laws, I would make more jail time for child molesters/abusers/child pornographers, domestic abusers and rapists. I would also decriminalize marijuana.

    Complain about this comment

  • 338. At 06:59am on 24 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    re#337


    Number Four: because U.S. police and FBI are more effective than law enforcement agencies in other countries. [e.g. in Mexico]

    Complain about this comment

  • 339. At 5:31pm on 24 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    Alright interested foreigner,
    In post 333 you say it is a load of nonsense that crime in America was out of control due to illegal aliens.
    Well here are some statistics on whats really going on here.
    * In Los Angeles, 95% of some 1,500 outstanding warrants for homicides are for illegal aliens. About 67% of the 17,000 outstanding fugitive felony warrants are for illegal aliens.
    * There are currently over 400,000 unaccounted for illegal alien criminals with outstanding deportation orders. At least one fourth of these are hard core criminals.
    * 80,000 to 100,000 illegal aliens who have been convicted of serious crimes are walking the streets. Based on studies they will commit an average of 13 serious crimes per perpetrator.
    * Illegal aliens are involved in criminal activities at a rate that is 2-5 times their representative proportion of the population.
    * In 1980, our Federal and state facilities held fewer than 9,000 criminal aliens but at the end of 2003, approximately 267,000 illegal aliens were incarcerated in U.S. correctional facilities at a cost of about $6.8 billion per year.
    * At least 4.5 million pounds of cocaine with a street value of at least $72 billion is smuggled across the southern border every year. ..
    * 56% of illegal aliens charged with a reentry offense had previously been convicted on at least 5 prior occasions.
    * Illegal aliens charged with unlawful reentry had the most extensive criminal histories. 90% had been previously arrested. Of those with a prior arrest, 50% had been arrested for violent or drug-related felonies.
    * Illegal aliens commit between 700,000 to 1,289,000 or more crimes per year.
    * Illegal aliens commit at least 2,158 murders each year – a number that represents three times greater participation than their proportion of the population.
    * Illegal alien sexual predators commit an estimated 130,909 sexual crimes each year.
    * There may be as many as 240,000 illegal alien sex offenders circulating throughout America. Based on studies, they will commit an average of 8 sex crimes per perpetrator before being caught.
    * Nearly 63% of illegal alien sex offenders had been deported on another offense prior to committing the sex crime.
    * Only 2% of the illegal alien sex offenders in one study had no history of criminal behavior, beyond crossing the border illegally.
    * In Operation Predator, ICE arrested and deported 6,085 illegal alien pedophiles. Some studies suggest each pedophile molests average of 148 children. If so, that could be as many as 900,580 victims.
    * Nobody knows how big the Sex Slave problem is but it is enormous.
    * The very brutal MS-13 gang has over 15,000 members and associates in at least 115 different cliques in 33 states.
    * The overall financial impact of illegal alien crimes is estimated at between $14.4 and $81 billion or more per year. Factor in the crime as a result of the cocaine and other drugs being smuggled in and the number may reach $150 billion per year.

    Still think illegal immigration is a "victimless crime" and we don't need to control our borders? Remember, about 60% of the crimes being committed are by illegal aliens who were previously deported.

    I would also say that just crossing the border without proper papers is a crime ,so how can any illegal alien be a law abiding citizen
    Oh and you say get my head out of the sand and think about whats good for the American economy,Illegals are bleeding this country dry,with welfare,using the emergency rooms like clinics and never paying,they sign up for every social program they can witch averages out to a 20.dollar an hour living at the taxpayers expence.
    So get your head out of the sand and get your butt out of our country if you are here illegally

    Complain about this comment

  • 340. At 5:36pm on 24 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    336. At 03:11am on 24 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    "I disagree with Int. For. statement. I believe that a murder committed by an illegal alien is worse than a murder committed by an American because the illegal alien is not supposed to be in the country."

    [[The victim is just as dead, and the injury and loss just as great, when the crime is committed by someone who isn't an illegal alien. ]]

    All crimes, including murder, committed by illegal aliens could have been prevented if our federal govt. had secured our border.

    [[That may be true, but it can almost always be said of any murder that the crime would not have occurred if appropriate steps at crime prevention had been taken beforehand.

    For example, let's suppose that we have various public policy choices, and after a few years of careful study we find that:

    (a) we can prevent, on average, 2 murders and 25 woundings for every $ 100,000 spent on urban gun control;

    [[This is, obviously, a guess, but perhaps not a bad one. I wonder what the actual numbers are.]]

    (b) we can prevent 1 murder, and deport 35,000 illegal aliens for every $10m spent on border patrol.

    [[Clearly, it would cost very much more than $10m to deport 30,000 illegal aliens - but, given the actual murder rate by illegal aliens, the ratio is about right i.e., to prevent one murder per year, on average you would have to deport something like 30,000 illegal aliens.]]

    So, is it better to allocate public resources to securing the border, or to advancing gun control?

    or, now add a third alternative,

    (c) you find that by providing school lunches; increased student mentoring in inner city schools to improve literacy and numeracy; very blunt teaching on sex education and better access to birth control; and after-school adult-supervised amateur sports leagues targeted at the highly problematic teenage male demographic (i.e., the "devil makes work for idle hands" theory of crime prevention), at something on the order of $ 1000/student/year, you can not only reduce all sorts of crime across the board in future years, but also dramatically increase the probability of those children growing up to hold steady, reliable jobs instead of going to jail; and to pay taxes rather than to collect welfare; such that on a full cycle cost analysis, the program actually generates wealth and produces more tax money than it consumes.

    So which do you do? Where do you allocate your resources?

    Is your answer different if you are a politician, and, although you know, because you have hard data from statistical studies and scientific research, that choices (a) and (c) are far more cost effective ways of preventing crime,

    but

    if you choose (a) no matter how much the scientific data shows the wisdom of the choice, a mob from the NRA will descend upon your district, will fund your opponent lavishly, and will campaign relentlessly for your defeat?

    or

    if you choose (c) no matter how much scientific data there is to show the wisdom of your policy choice, every right-wing nut and demagogue will smear you, relentlessly, as being a "tax and spend, big government liberal" who is a "soft on crime" "Socialist"?

    ------------

    "The number of crimes doesn't even really matter. If it was your child who was murdered by an illegal alien, you would likely feel it was one child too many."

    [[If it was my child that was murdered, it would be one child too many whether the murderer was an illegal alien, a citizen, or anybody else. We get this same issue with crimes committed by parolees or persons on early release from correctional institutions.]]

    ------------

    [[The big problem with the whole "Tough on Crime" thing is that it has nothing to do with taking well thought-out steps that might actually reduce crime.

    "Tough on Crime" is all about chest-thumping, prejudice, and playing upon people's ignorance and fear, rationality-be-damned.


    For example, we have a "tough on crime" government that is introducing amendments to the Criminal Code and to corrections policy, where almost every amendment not only goes against the best considered scientific knowledge in the field, but is actually likely to make crime worse.

    The government knows this, but is determined to press on regardless.


    You might think that even the most right wing demagogue, no matter how pig-headed, no matter how disdainful of science and education, would at least be given pause for thought when confronted with contrary advice from the most eminent experts in the field, backed up with scientific studies showing that the proposals are at best a waste of money, and worse, will probably, and quite predictably, lead to an increase in crime.

    You might think that, at the very least, have a sufficient understanding of the difference between right and wrong to have the responsibility to adopt a policy of "First, do no harm."

    You might think they would say to themselves "Hold on. If I do this, more people are going to be injured or killed, instead of fewer. And I will be responsible for having made that policy decision."

    You might think that, being as loud-mouthed and ostentatious as they are about their evangelical Christianity, they might shrink from such a decision.

    You might think they would recall something about "... deliver us from evil..."

    But you'd be wrong.

    The prejudice is so great, the determination to stoke, and then to pander to, voter fears is so unlimited, that they don't care whether what they do makes crime worse...

    ... just so long as you don't ever accuse these unrepentant idiots of not being "tough on crime".


    Such is the moral and ethical bankruptcy of the "tough on crime" brigade.

    Complain about this comment

  • 341. At 5:58pm on 24 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    IN POST 333 INTERSTEDFOREIGNER ALSO WROTE

    Finally, by focusing on unquantified and unverified anecdote-driven assertions, what is lost is that illegal aliens who are employed in the United States are contributing quite substantially to the American economy. If they were not doing so, they would not be employed. Their employer is capturing a value from the exchange that exceeds probably by a factor of at least 2 or 3 the amount that they are being paid.

    This does not prove illegals are helping our economy even if you use big words like unquantified.

    What you did sum up in one paragraph,is the fact that illegal aliens are driving American wages down ...

    Complain about this comment

  • 342. At 7:42pm on 24 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    341. At 5:58pm on 24 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    "What you did sum up in one paragraph,is the fact that illegal aliens are driving American wages down ..."

    ____________

    Well there's another lovely non-sequitur.

    What is actually happening is that they are reducing the opportunity cost to their employers of the activities they perform, thus permitting the employer to engage in higher valued activities.

    For example, when a lawyer spends two hours cutting his own grass of shovelling his own driveway, (or, as very frequently the case with highly paid female professionals, taking care of children or aging parents) the market value of that activity is, at most $ 40.

    Instead of doing that, he (or she) could be doing billable work in the same time with a value in the larger economy of, say, $1000., possibly quite a bit more.

    So $ 960 of GDP output is gained that would be otherwise lost as an opportunity cost.

    Assuming that the professional has fixed overheads, on the last marginal hours of the professional's revenue as much as 50% of that $ 1000 would end up as tax.

    The benefit to the illegal alien is, at most $ 40., of which at least some will be re-cycled in the American economy for the illegal alien's rent, food, clothing and transport.

    The benefit to the employer, net of taxes, is $460.
    The gross benefit to the public purse is $ 500.

    The idea that the illegal alien is driving down the market clearing price of those domestic services, and so therefore the market clearing wage, is almost laughable.

    What is rather more likely is that by increasing the size of overall economic output the presence of the illegal aliens is creating demand for other goods and services in the economy, i.e., more jobs overall, and permitting others to engage in higher valued, and therefore higher paid activities.

    As a general rule of thumb, no employer will hire an employee unless the value of the employee's work product is at least three times the employee's wages, because if your raw labour cost exceeds 1/3 of the value of production of the business it is very likely the business is on the road to bankruptcy.

    Thus, in all cases where an illegal alien is being employed by an American individual or business it is virtually certain that at least 2/3 of the benefit of that economic transaction, (and in some examples, e.g. domestic employment, possibly well over 9/10 of the benefit) is flowing to Americans.

    That, in a nutshell, explains both why the illegal aliens are in America (because they would not be in America were it otherwise), and why this issue isn't going to go away anytime soon. The value obtained by Americans, in America, is what drives it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 343. At 03:27am on 25 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    In response to post 342 by interestedforeigner

    Wow that was some economics lesson,but the last thing we need in this country is a lawyer with more billable work.--

    hmm 2 hours of illegal lawn service =1000. dollars to a lawyer
    Id say your reaching on this one.

    But for real,in the circumstance you mentioned the lawyer would not take away from valuable work time to mow his or her grass if there were no illegals available,
    they would simply do it on the weekend or hire an American lawn service that actually has a license and insurance.

    Complain about this comment

  • 344. At 07:32am on 25 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    Re #343

    "FIRST, LET'S KILL ALL THE LAYWERS" :)

    Complain about this comment

  • 345. At 07:39am on 25 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 346. At 08:20am on 25 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    In comment 267 Niel stapley wrote;


    The disscussion is not weather the law is needed but weather it will lead to the harassment of American citizens and it will considering that all the police need is a believe that you are violating state immigration law to stop you, that belief will be as little as you do not look American.

    Well for one ,this law only effects anyone pulled over for a traffic ticket or other infraction where a stop is lawful,in this case a legal citizen would not have to worry because showing your drivers license has always been a routine part of any traffic stop and failure to produce a license usually ends in a court visit where you have to prove you had a valid license at the time but were not in possession of it at the time of the stop.So nothing has changed FOR LEGAL CITIZENS,however... now the officer has the right to ask a person caught speeding who does not speak any english,does not have a drivers license ,does not have proof of insurance,is carrying 10 other non english speaking persons also without any identification if they are here legally or not.

    This is not a new concept,the laws are already on the federal books the feds just refuse or have become so caught up in being politically correct they are not enforced ,Arizonas governor sees a need to protect its citizens and has every right to.

    Why should America be ashamed to have a border the same as every other country in the world does .
    Mexico strictly enforces its border laws ,yet chastises the U.S and says we are discriminating against his people when we try to enforce ours.

    If he even cared about his people he would work towards creating infrastructure and jobs in his own country instead of sending them over here to bilk us.

    And if you want to talk racist just translate La raza it literally means... the race,I mean if thats not in your face racism I dont know what is,oh I forgot only the white man can be racist..

    Complain about this comment

  • 347. At 08:27am on 25 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    Re #345

    Some illegal aliens were recently expelled from the U.S. because FBI has found they broke the law.

    Complain about this comment

  • 348. At 5:17pm on 25 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    In post 301 Zathros wrote

    I am not for state's rights because I have visited most of them and anyone else who has knows what I am talking about. Some States barely meet the standard of statehood, morally and ethically.

    This comment tells me you have no understanding of the U.S. Constitution,
    State rights are all part of the protection of freedoms our founding fathers laid out very nicely for us,
    The 10th amendment for your reading pleasure;

    The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.GET IT NOW

    When you say some States barely meet the standard of statehood, morally and ethically.
    Are you talking of the ones who do not choose to run a sanctuary state and instead feel the need to protect its citizens from those that are here illegally.
    Not one state has refused to hand over hard working Americans tax dollars to support illegal aliens and their families for years,
    What is so immoral and unethical about that except the fact that it has been unfair to the working class taxpaying American citizens

    Complain about this comment

  • 349. At 6:11pm on 25 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    343. At 03:27am on 25 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    "hmm 2 hours of illegal lawn service =1000. dollars to a lawyer
    Id say your reaching on this one."

    "they would simply do it on the weekend or hire an American lawn service that actually has a license and insurance."

    ____________

    If you check around, I suspect you'll find that $ 500/hr is not a particularly high hourly rate in a major urban center.

    No, on the weekend they will be working.
    Generally speaking, for lawyers weekends and holidays are workdays.
    The same applies for Architects, Accountants, some Engineers, ...
    The senior guys in any profession or any successful business tend to work somewhere between 75 and 90 hours/week.

    Yes, they may hire a lawn service. That is not unlikely.
    But who do you think the lawn service is going to hire?
    Here's a hint: it isn't just university and high school students.

    Complain about this comment

  • 350. At 6:32pm on 25 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    IN POST 316 Mike Stone sr. hit it right on the head.

    The illegals are allowed to freely pass our borders for exactly the reasons you pointed out in your post,and yes they know freedom loving Americans are ready to fight for our values and our freedoms this Arizona law is just a start, and they will not have to fight this battle alone as almost every hard working American taxpaying citizen will stand with them,as it is us taking the brunt of this invasion ,it is us paying the bills of people who should not be here in the first place,it is us putting up with skyrocketing crime rates by illegals in our once quiet safe communities. It is not discrimination to have and enforce a border. Well said Mike

    Oh and to colonialartists responce in post 317.

    Your post was borderline illiterate dribble.

    We are losing jobs to illegals why dont you ask an experienced drywall
    hanger or painter how his wages are since the heavy influx of illegal labor,you will probably have to speak spanish to ask him.And I would also like to point out that one job lost to illegal labor that should never have been in the country in the first place is one too many.As now the quality of life of the out of work American has been reduced due to the lawbreakers.As well as the quality of life for ever other American citizen who is paying more taxes to pay for social services plundered by non citizens.

    Complain about this comment

  • 351. At 7:41pm on 25 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    350. At 6:32pm on 25 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    "IN POST 316 Mike Stone sr. hit it right on the head."

    [[No, more likely he has been hit by something on the head, possibly an anvil.]]

    "...,and yes they know freedom loving Americans are ready to fight for our values and our freedoms ..."

    [[Yes, a very large number of freedom loving Americans are enjoying the freedom to pay them for services required in America by Americans, and they are both fighting and voting with their dollars.]]

    "... ,it is us paying the bills of people who should not be here in the first place, ..."

    [[Well, actually, it is inescapable that they are generating a net positive economic benefit for America, but heaven forbid that economic truths should get in your way ...]]

    "... it is us putting up with skyrocketing crime rates by illegals in our once quiet safe communities. ..."

    [[Again, crime rates for virtually every kind of major violent crime against persons or property in America have fallen by 40 % since 1990, so your crime rates are not "skyrocketing". On the contrary, they are falling rapidly.

    And, it appears that the illegal aliens are, person-for-person, in fact more law abiding than American citizens. So if your objective is to reduce crime apparently it would be more effective to for you to campaign for the deportation of American citizens.

    But, again, why let the facts get in the way of ignorance driven prejudice?

    After all, who, other than kooks like Franklin, Jefferson, Adams (father and son), Washington, Lincoln, and FDR, would ever believe that America should base its laws on reason, when you can have laws based instead on demagogue incited, mob rule hysteria?]]

    Complain about this comment

  • 352. At 10:05pm on 25 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    339. At 5:31pm on 24 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    "Well here are some statistics on whats really going on here."

    ____________

    You have not provided a source for these statistics.

    Complain about this comment

  • 353. At 02:23am on 26 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    InterestedForeigner wrote:

    And, it appears that the illegal aliens are, person-for-person, in fact more law abiding than American citizens.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This statement is an oxymoron. It contradicts itself.

    An illegal alien is, by definition, someone who is in our country illegally. This means that any and every illegal alien in our country is not law-abiding.

    Illegal is not a race. Illegal is a crime.


    Complain about this comment

  • 354. At 03:57am on 26 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    353. At 02:23am on 26 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    InterestedForeigner wrote:

    And, it appears that the illegal aliens are, person-for-person, in fact more law abiding than American citizens.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This statement is an oxymoron. It contradicts itself.

    [[No, it doesn't.]]

    An illegal alien is, by definition, someone who is in our country illegally. This means that any and every illegal alien in our country is not law-abiding.

    [[Be that as it may, the posting did not assert that they are law abiding, but rather whether they are more law abiding than comparable Americans.

    Keep in mind that both a murderer and someone who passes bad cheques have committed indictable criminal offenses. Someone who makes an illegal left turn between 3:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m., is also a law breaker.

    Nonetheless, I have no difficulty in seeing that the fraud artist may well be more law abiding than the murderer, and the bad driver may well be more law abiding than either of the others.

    I'm still waiting to hear where those statistics came from.]]

    Complain about this comment

  • 355. At 04:46am on 26 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    If you have a problem with controlling the borders, then make a better effort at controlling the borders. If you want to build and patrol a wall, then build and patrol a wall. Fine.

    If you have a problem with violent crime, then deal with the problem with violent crime. Fine.



    By and large we do not invoke extraordinary law enforcement powers of the state to hunt down people who are not actually doing other people harm, or try to justify that action on the basis of wrong done by other people in other places.


    Using a murder, or a robbery, committed by some person, or even a statistically representative sample size of persons, in California, say, is not a good reason for expecting everybody to get their knickers in a twist about a family of illegal aliens who are slaughtering chickens for a meat packing plant in Arkansas, or who are working as nannies and gardeners in Chapel Hill N.C., and not bothering anybody or causing anybody harm.

    It's like saying "Oh, people who drive with their license suspended are 20 times more likely to be guilty of assault, so let's round up everybody who has ever been arrested for having their license suspended and deport them, because that will reduce crime."


    No. We don't do that.

    We don't engage in collective punishments, where the innocent are punished along with the guilty.
    We don't punish people for things they haven't done.
    We don't punish people for things that other people have done.


    These are really, really basic principles of criminal law.

    That we cleave to these principles is not a measure of who the law-breakers are.

    It is a measure of who we are.



    ------------

    In the past while I have been doing some reading about the "fugitive slave law". The similarities in attitudes and arguments is astonishing.


    When it comes to illegal immigration, just about the only thing that hasn't yet happened is for somebody to be caught on tape singing the song from the movie Borat "Throw the Jew down the well." with the words changed to "Throw the Mexican down the well."



    It is a disgraceful denial of everything that America stands for to attempt to whip public opinion into an unthinking frenzy of prejudice over illegal immigration, so that people forget the most basic principles of justice, and make excuses as to why we should abandon those principles.


    That is what has happened here.
    It is morally and ethically indefensible.
    The intellectual dishonesty of the political leaders who engage in it merits only disgust and contempt.

    ----------

    Deal with problems on their merits, calmly and rationally.

    Allocate public resources to issues of public policy on their merits, calmly and rationally.

    Make laws not in haste, and not in anger, but calmly and rationally.

    Complain about this comment

  • 356. At 1:50pm on 26 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    "Deal with problems on their merits, calmly and rationally."




    That is legally remove all illegals from the U.S. territory.


    Calmly and rationally.

    Complain about this comment

  • 357. At 3:22pm on 26 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    After meeting with recently expelled Russian spies KGB general/premier Vladimir Putin said that "everyone of them had a tough life"
    [poor, poor Anna]

    "First (problem) was to master foreign language as your own. Think and speak it and do what are you told to do for the interest of your motherland for many years without counting on diplomatic immunity," the prime minister said." (BBC News)


    No comment.

    Complain about this comment

  • 358. At 4:34pm on 26 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 359. At 5:33pm on 26 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 360. At 5:48pm on 26 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    We are losing jobs to illegals why dont you ask an experienced drywall
    hanger or painter how his wages are since the heavy influx of illegal labor,you will probably have to speak spanish to ask him
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I will not ask an experienced drywall hanger or a painter when he comes to me or I go to him to inquire about how things are doing about his wages, its not polite to ask someone about his wage...There was a place in west where I was told the following..Never ask woman her age, and man his wage...However if the drywall hanger or a painter tells me, then I will suggest to him to lower his wages and not demand what he used to earn, the market can be tough and if its tough because of illegal workers, then you dont handsup, you stay in the battle..

    Complain about this comment

  • 361. At 5:48pm on 26 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    Just some more facts for you

    A new report published by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) says that the annual cost of illegal immigration at the federal, state and local level is a staggering $113 billion.

    State and local governments get stuck with a chunk of the tab-$84.2 billion-and the feds pick up the rest, according to the extensive national study that also breaks down figures by state. Not surprisingly, border states such as California, Arizona and Texas take the biggest hits and the single largest cost nationally is to educate the children of illegal aliens, $52 billion a year.

    Complain about this comment

  • 362. At 7:06pm on 26 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    In responce to interested foreigners remarks about the costs of illegal aliens
    You so arrogantly said

    [Well, actually, it is inescapable that they are generating a net positive economic benefit for America, but heaven forbid that economic truths should get in your way ...]]

    I am posting these facts for the second time as my last two posts dissapeared

    A new report published by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) says that the annual cost of illegal immigration at the federal, state and local level is a staggering $113 billion.

    State and local governments get stuck with a chunk of the tab-$84.2 billion-and the feds pick up the rest, according to the extensive national study that also breaks down figures by state. Not surprisingly, border states such as California, Arizona and Texas take the biggest hits and the single largest cost nationally is to educate the children of illegal aliens, $52 billion a year.

    Complain about this comment

  • 363. At 7:08pm on 26 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    Hey moderator where did my posts go I think they were numbers 359 and 360

    Complain about this comment

  • 364. At 7:31pm on 26 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    In post 360 colonial artist wrote;
    The market can be tough and if its tough because of illegal workers, then you don't handsup, you stay in the battle..

    That is exactly what we intend to do .
    The job market is flooded with illegals that should never have been allowed here,and the citizens of America are working to eject them.
    Why should we suffer lower wages to accommodate lawbreakers.

    There are proper paths to citizenship in this country, to bypass that process is an insult to every immigrant that has followed the legal channels,learned the language an became a welcome legal citizen.

    Complain about this comment

  • 365. At 7:59pm on 26 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    There are proper paths to citizenship in this country, to bypass that process is an insult to every immigrant that has followed the legal channels,learned the language an became a welcome legal citizen.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------
    And not one of them is a painter or a drywall hanger.

    Complain about this comment

  • 366. At 8:25pm on 26 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    365. Colonel.

    Zzzzing!

    LOL. Didn't know you had it in you.

    Complain about this comment

  • 367. At 9:13pm on 26 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    ZZZING INDEED

    You make a great point colonial artist,they aren't painters or drywallers because the influx of cheap illegal labor has driven wages so far down in these trades.
    It was not that long ago that on American construction sites you did not see illegals,it was all done by Americans workers who took great pride in in their work.
    Funny how the work got done without the illegals then.

    Complain about this comment

  • 368. At 9:17pm on 26 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    362. At 7:06pm on 26 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    "A new report published by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) ..."

    [[Here is the Wiki link for this organization:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federation_for_American_Immigration_Reform

    here is the Wiki link for its founder:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Tanton


    Among other things to which it admits is that it is against immigration “legal and illegal”. It also admits that its lawyer was one of the authors of Arizona’s new law.

    Gosh, no reason to think their materials would be biased. No siree, no reason at all.

    Anybody can read the posting and decide for themselves whether this is an organization whose statements are likely to have any merits as being objective or unbiased, and whether statistics quoted from this organization are likely to have any basis in reality.

    Yeah, that sounds like an internationally respected research organization. Sure. Nice try. Try again.]]

    ------------


    "State and local governments get stuck with a chunk of the tab-$84.2 billion-and the feds pick up the rest, according to the extensive national study ..."

    [[All you are doing is making the economic argument for bringing them out of the black economy and into the regulated economy so they can be taxed directly more effectively, rather than merely indirectly on the sales taxes and income taxes paid on the resultant extra output by those who employ the illegal aliens.

    The funny thing about it is, even at the numbers you quote, which you apparently think are large, the output of goods and services of the black economy in which the illegal aliens are employed, assuming that they earn, on average, no more than $ 15,000/year (which is not very much) is still almost certainly much larger on any reasonable set of assumptions.

    The amount you have quoted for education, alone, by the way, would be more than the cost of sending all illegal alien children to private school. So it looks like somebody's telling a stretcher and some big fibs there. It might also be saying that US school systems are wasteful of public funds, but that is an entirely different topic.]]

    ------------

    [[Right now, the benefits of the presence of illegal aliens are being captured primarily by the private sector, and the negative externalities are being off-loaded on the state, i.e., the public purse.

    Hardly surprising. This is a time-honored tradition in the US. It is found in almost every US economic sector - most notoriously the oil, coal, and trucking industries, but also ranchers who pay laughably uneconomic fees for grazing on public land, those in agriculture who pay nothing like economic rent on the water they use for irrigation, and on, and on, and on. You might say "It's the American way."



    Nothing in your posting indicates how much tax revenue is associated either directly or indirectly with the economic activity generated by the illegal alien population in the US.

    Nothing in your posting indicates how much that tax revenue would likely be increased by bringing these people into the regulated economy as guest workers.

    Nothing in your posting indicates how much the various negative externalities might likely be reduced by bringing these people into the regulated economy, and thereby drying up the demand for all sorts of services now provided by organized criminal gangs, including the reduction in the cost of jailing these people.

    There is nothing in your posting that in any way refutes the economic points I have made on this string. Absolutely nothing.


    There are, however, several items that suggest you are so fixated on, and so blinded by, you hatred of illegal aliens that you are more than prepared to cut off your nose to spite your face.

    Prejudice has always made for bad public policy and bad laws.]]






    [[BTW - I'm still waiting for the source of your earlier "statistics".]]

    Complain about this comment

  • 369. At 9:24pm on 26 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    357. At 3:22pm on 26 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    After meeting with recently expelled Russian spies KGB general/premier Vladimir Putin said that "everyone of them had a tough life"
    [poor, poor Anna]

    "First (problem) was to master foreign language as your own. Think and speak it and do what are you told to do for the interest of your motherland for many years without counting on diplomatic immunity," the prime minister said." (BBC News)


    No comment.
    ____________

    Don't you think that these under-performers were, in reality, being called home by the Kremlin to be hauled on the carpet?

    There is something going on here that does not meet the eye. The US got four important spies back, and in return ten minor league flunkies who couldn't get to first on a base-on-balls get sent home to Russia.

    If the US had spies that inept, wouldn't you hope that the CIA would fire them at the first opportunity?

    Exchange?
    Some exchange.

    Complain about this comment

  • 370. At 9:32pm on 26 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    It was not that long ago that on American construction sites you did not see illegals,it was all done by Americans workers who took great pride in in their work.
    Funny how the work got done without the illegals then.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------
    You have chosen to focus on construction sites, and I will stick to construction..Not long ago, the construction work in usa was slow, its only in past 15 yrs, I am generous here when I say 15 yrs. that construction work in usa along with the rest of the world increased with the speed of light. I am sure you will not see any relation between your fall of housing market, and the slow pace of construction...Without these illegal workers, your consturction market ergo housing market couldnt keep up with the pace at which the banks were lending money to buyers as if they had won the money in the lottery..

    Complain about this comment

  • 371. At 9:57pm on 26 Jul 2010, Mrsdarcy969 wrote:

    Let me just ask if a Scot who had overstayed his Visa and was illegal and a Hispanic were walking down the same street in Arizona - who do you think is going to be stopped and asked for proof of Citizenship. The Scot could be replace by any white illegal foreigner.

    Complain about this comment

  • 372. At 10:06pm on 26 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Let me just ask if a Scot who had overstayed his Visa and was illegal and a Hispanic were walking down the same street in Arizona - who do you think is going to be stopped and asked for proof of Citizenship. The Scot could be replace by any white illegal foreigner.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    If these two people would be walking together, laughing and talking, the police will tell the scot or any replaced white illegal to step aside and question the hispanic..Because in Arizona the law is aimed to keep the mexicans away..

    Complain about this comment

  • 373. At 10:07pm on 26 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    please dont be afraid to throw out that race card there interested foriegner.

    As always,anyone for securing the border of their own nation has to be a racist,that just hates illegals.

    The fact is there is a big problem in this nation with illegal aliens,
    we have laws on the books that are not being enforced we are trying to change that through legal channels, that is not racism.

    If you look at the fair site you will see no racism, just concerned citizens that want controlled legal immigration,and a stop put to illegal immigration.

    In your post number 368 you said

    Nothing in your posting indicates how much that tax revenue would likely be increased by bringing these people into the regulated economy as guest workers.

    And I say,the same amount as if an American worker was to acquire that job had the illegal not been allowed to cross our border.






    Complain about this comment

  • 374. At 10:13pm on 26 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    The fact is there is a big problem in this nation with illegal aliens
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Either get rid of the word aliens, or start using it for legals as well..And then you can if you like, give lecture on racism or tell us about that racist card..

    Complain about this comment

  • 375. At 10:15pm on 26 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Nothing in your posting indicates how much that tax revenue would likely be increased by bringing these people into the regulated economy as guest workers.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Billons time lesser than if your rich and very rich do not get all those tax exemptions that they get..You want the poor to pay tax (in your words mexicans are responsible for your wage fall) and rich to just have tax cuts? Some fine social set up you are promoting.

    Complain about this comment

  • 376. At 11:55pm on 26 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    In post 375 colonial artist wrote

    Eiher get rid of the word aliens, or start using it for legals as well..And then you can if you like, give lecture on racism or tell us about that racist card..

    Here is the wikipedia dfenition of alien.
    Alien (law), a non-citizen inhabitant of a country.
    If you cross a countries border without proper paperwork and permission
    you are an illegal alien.Still nothing racist here.

    Complain about this comment

  • 377. At 03:01am on 27 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    Interestedforeigner wrote:

    [[Be that as it may, the posting did not assert that they are law abiding, but rather whether they are more law abiding than comparable Americans.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Int. For., you try to put up a good argument, but it simply falls flat.

    It is like comparing a native species like a bluegill or trout to a out-of-control foreign invader, like the zebra clams, pythons or the snakefish.

    Int. For. wrote:

    Someone who makes an illegal left turn between 3:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m., is also a law breaker.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Ha! So you want to compare an American who makes a traffic error to an illegal who sneaks into the country? What a hoot!

    Int. For., I would love to hear what you think about Mexico's immigration laws. Ever read them?

    Compare Mexico's immigration laws to USA's immigration laws and I bet you will be quite surprised at what you find!

    Complain about this comment

  • 378. At 04:52am on 27 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    373. At 10:07pm on 26 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    "As always,anyone for securing the border of their own nation has to be a racist,that just hates illegals."

    ____________

    [[No, it doesn't necessarily imply racism, although in this particular instance there is plenty of evidence that a fair amount of it is racism.

    [[What it is, more probably, is a sign of tribalism. All societies that live in fear of the dark tend to fear "the other", the unknown society that is different.

    [[And while you say that it is opposition to illegal aliens, that really isn't it. It is opposition to all "foreigners", (although you might notice that nobody is complaining about tall blonds with Swedish accents.)

    [[The group you referenced isn't complaining about illegal immigration - it's complaining about all immigration.

    [[I suppose that might be a defensible position, at some level, if the group your referenced were made of pureblood aboriginals, but it doesn't seem that way.

    [[The really amazing irony in this is that in a country like America, that owes its vitality and its greatness to the energy and determination of successive waves of immigrants there should be people with such incredibly short memories.

    [[America isn't supposed to be about tribalism. It isn't supposed to be about fear of the dark, shamans, witch doctors, or the evil spirits. America is supposed to be about intelligent people acting rationally.

    ----------

    [[I have provided you with fair basic arguments ground in fundamental principles of economics. You could choose to dispute those arguments, but you don't. That's your choice.

    [[But instead of providing logical arguments, you come back with a set of unreferenced "statistics" in one case, and what are apparently bogus statistics in another. You cite as a reference a group that no reasonable person would consider as an objective source of data.

    I'm figuring lots of people can make the logical deduction about the merits of your argument accordingly.

    You are still free to marshal a logical argument based on economics, or to provide a credible source for your "statistics". You have done neither, and, on the basis of the quality of your postings so far, my guess is that nobody here expects you will be able to do either. So, go ahead, surprise us.]]

    Complain about this comment

  • 379. At 04:57am on 27 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    373. At 10:07pm on 26 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    "The fact is there is a big problem in this nation with illegal aliens, ..."

    -------------

    Actually, that is simply not true.

    We have, proportionately, a fair bit more illegal immigration than the US. There are some very bad apples amongst them. But, by and large, nobody is particularly worried about them. The sky isn't going to fall if we don't deport them all tomorrow. The police eventually catch the bad ones. We have far worse problems that merit much greater attention, much more urgently.

    And, in fact, so does the United States.

    So why don't we have the rabid hysteria we see in the US on this issue?

    ------------

    In terms of the scale of problems facing the United States, illegal immigration simply is not a major problem, no matter how much you and others rant and rave about it.

    Almost certainly it is not in fact a "problem" at all: it is almost certainly of enormous net benefit to the United States. But your mind is so closed, and you are determined at all costs to keep your mind closed to that possibility, that you cannot at any level even admit that possibility, even for an instant.

    And that, sir, is prejudice, however you try to dress it up.

    ------------

    "we have laws on the books that are not being enforced we are trying to change that through legal channels, that is not racism."

    [[We have hundreds of laws that are not enforced, or are enforced only rarely. Why? Because we do not have infinite resources to spend on law enforcement. The police have rightly understood that, in general, there are usually far greater harms that require far more urgent intervention than illegal immigration.]]

    "If you look at the fair site you will see no racism, just concerned citizens that want controlled legal immigration,and a stop put to illegal immigration."

    [[Hogwash.]]

    ------------

    "...In your post number 368 you said

    ""Nothing in your posting indicates how much that tax revenue would likely be increased by bringing these people into the regulated economy as guest workers.""

    "And I say,the same amount as if an American worker was to acquire that job had the illegal not been allowed to cross our border."

    ------------

    [[Again, this is hogwash.

    [[This kind of accusation has been made against successive immigrant groups since at least the 1840's, and it has always been hogwash.

    [[There are many people who are unemployed who remain unemployed even when the economy is at "full" employment. Ever wonder why?

    [[Ever wonder why economists talk about the Non-Accelerating Natural Rate of Unemployment?

    [[Before you start with the shibboleth of "immigrants are taking our jobs", you might consider some of these things.

    [[Your position is based on the facile assumption is that the existing unemployed are equally employable to the illegal immigrants. Clearly they are not, or there would be very little demand for immigrant labour, legal or illegal. There is ample empirical evidence that millions of American employers do not share your assumption.

    [[I might point out that your argument, by the way, is not an argument against illegal immigration, but against all immigration. In a country with an aging population and unfunded social security and medicare liabilities, that is not only to behaviour bespeaking an historical lobotomy, but also economic insanity.

    [[But you go ahead and do that.

    [[And when your social security check gets smaller, or doesn't arrive at all; and when there is no money to pay for your care under medicare, and they turn you away from the hospital, please remember that you have nobody to blame except yourself.

    ------------

    Complain about this comment

  • 380. At 05:08am on 27 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    Here's a different hypothesis. Let's see if it fits the facts better:

    There was just as much illegal immigration during the GW Bush years as there is now, but nobody, and certainly not the Tea Party buffoons, got up and made a big song and dance about it.

    But now, suddenly, it is a pre-eminent national priority?
    Say what?

    There is an economic hangover from the GW Bush years that is worse than anything America has seen in 70 years.
    It was brought on by the incredible stupidity and incompetence of that administration.
    It very nearly brought the US financial system to collapse. It very nearly sent the US housing market into free-fall.
    It came perilously close to setting off a world-wide economic catastrophe of immense proportions.

    President Obama and his fire-fighters only just barely avoided disaster there, and America is still not out of the woods.

    That GW Bush disaster imposed a $ Trillion handicap on the Obama administration before it even got to inauguration day.


    Some people might be excused for thinking that might be a little more important than setting off on some ill-conceived pogrom to waste law enforcement dollars rounding up and deporting people of whom the principle "crime" of the vast majority is to be contributing to the American economy.

    Why now?
    Why all the to-do against President Obama, who, unlike former President GW Bush and unlike Senator McCain, hasn't even presented a program of legislation to introduce a guest worker program, or amnesty, or anything else?

    Why now?
    What is this really about?

    ------------

    American elections have had falling voter turnout for over half a century. This is a by-product of failure to address campaign finance reform; failure to address the rampant gerrymandering the Americans refer to as "redistricting"; and failure to address the relentlessly falling levels of education of Americans in terms of history, civics, and general knowledge.

    When only 50% of the people show up to vote, the easiest way to win elections is not to convince voters of the "other" party to change their minds and vote for you.

    No, the easiest way, by far, to increase your vote is to increase voter turnout of people who are already disposed to vote for you, but who are not sufficiently motivated to turn out and vote.

    The people who abstain from voting tend not to be the people who are most informed and concerned about public affairs, and they tend not to be the people with high levels of general knowledge of history, politics, law, or economics.

    No, they tend to be people who think that the temporary jailing of a Hollywood starlet is "news", and therefore worthy of being carried on broadcast television.

    So how do you get those people to turn out and vote?

    Well, in one election you make a great big stink about "Gay Marriage".

    Now hold on. The country is mired in a trillion dollar war in Iraq, and people think "Gay Marriage" is an important issue? What are they smoking? How exactly did "Gay Marriage" adversely affect any of them? Irrelevant. Doesn't matter. It is a hugely emotive issue that energizes the Republican base. That's all that matters.

    So in that election, even though more people voted against you than in the previous election, you win by a larger margin, because the people who come out to vote against "Gay Marriage", also tended to cast votes for your party's candidates.



    Well, "illegal immigration", as far as I can tell, is the "Gay Marriage" issue of the 2010 mid-term elections. It is how the Republicans are going to energize their voters to get to the polls in November.

    Because while few people seem to have much of a grasp of economics, campaigning against illegal aliens with darker skins than ours is something that you can get even the most illiterate dolt worked up about.

    And the intricacies of financial regulation?
    The things that have really caused your house value to fall by a third?
    The things that threaten your job?

    All forgotten: The calamity that was the George W Bush Presidency is forgotten in a wave of highly selective amnesia.

    -----------

    And so they keep beating the anti-immigrant drum, louder and louder and louder.

    It's demagoguery.
    It is the antithesis of everything for which the founders of America stood.

    The Obama Administration got half way to achieving something that American administrations have tried and failed to achieve for 60 years: the introduction of universal public health care.

    Although they failed to get the whole job done, they at least got it half-way done, and maybe they can finish the job in the future. This is an historic achievement. The democrats ought to be winning a landslide over this. Nope.


    And the financial crisis?

    Apparently, very few people have a sufficient understanding of economics to appreciate that the Obama team did an outstanding job of fire-fighting, under extremely trying conditions in a horrible emergency.

    Since the number of people who understand economics is a lot smaller that the number of people who can be motivated to jump up and down about illegal immigration, President Obama, whose administration behaved heroically in staving off economic disaster, and whose party ought to be looking forward to a landslide victory in November accordingly, is, instead, looking at a huge defeat.

    ------------

    I think the invention of the "astro-turf", private-health-care-industry-subsidized "Tea Party" is all about providing a vehicle for people who are Republicans-in-all-but-name to deny any responsibility for the catastrophic financial legacy of George W Bush.

    I think that "illegal immigration" is the "gay marriage" of the 2010 mid-terms.


    And all of it is bogus, from start to finish.

    Complain about this comment

  • 381. At 10:59am on 27 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    Interestedforeginer asks:

    "Why now?"




    WE, the PEOPLE have finally had it.

    [enough is enough]

    Complain about this comment

  • 382. At 11:28am on 27 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    "The really amazing irony in this is that in a country like America, that owes its vitality and its greatness to the energy and determination of successive waves of immigrants there should be people with such incredibly short memories."





    If memory serves they were LEGAL immigrants, duly processed at Ellis Island and other U.S. Immigration Centers.

    Complain about this comment

  • 383. At 5:40pm on 27 Jul 2010, Bill Baur wrote:

    One future problem the Arizona law will create is the proliferation of counterfeit immigration papers. Just what we need - more illegal activities in the US.

    Complain about this comment

  • 384. At 7:12pm on 27 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    Thanks for letting us know what a great job Obama has done with our economy Interested foreigner,it was hard to tell with all the lost jobs and HUGE deficit spending. I feel much better now.

    You talk down your nose at Americans as if we don't have any grasp of economics,but as you see Obamas poll numbers drop you see we may just understand after-all.You cannot spend your way out of debt.

    Again you have no problem throwing that race card down.
    Im waiting to hear you tell everyone why you think the fair site is racist.Race or color is not mentioned on the site,only immigration issues that need confronting.
    Why is it the Mexican people can storm our streets shouting LE RAZA
    which means THE RACE and no one said that was racist.




    Complain about this comment

  • 385. At 7:32pm on 27 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    In your post number 380 you wrote

    Now hold on. The country is mired in a trillion dollar war in Iraq, and people think "Gay Marriage" is an important issue? What are they smoking? How exactly did "Gay Marriage" adversely affect any of them? Irrelevant. Doesn't matter. It is a hugely emotive issue that energizes the Republican base. That's all that matters.

    This was a democrat strategy that worked to motivate dems, not the other way around as you said.

    INTERESTED FOREIGNER ALSO SAID

    And when your social security check gets smaller, or doesn't arrive at all; and when there is no money to pay for your care under medicare, and they turn you away from the hospital, please remember that you have nobody to blame except yourself.

    I work hard every day ,I don't expect anyone to have to pay my way for anything.I save for my retirement so I do not have to depend on social security,I buy health insurance for my family so we will not be a financial burden on our neighbors.I do not expect others to pay for my medical expenses so I do not receive medicare benefits.
    And quite frankly if an American citizen is in need of these services he or she should not have to get in line behind people from other nations who are here illegally and never paid in a dime to the programs that do offer assistance.

    Complain about this comment

  • 386. At 7:49pm on 27 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    384. At 7:12pm on 27 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    Thanks for letting us know what a great job Obama has done with our economy Interested foreigner,it was hard to tell with all the lost jobs and HUGE deficit spending. I feel much better now.

    _____________

    If you think America is in trouble now, and if you think employment is high now, just imagine what it would be otherwise. America's unemployment is now roughly 10%. If the banks had failed, if GM and Chrysler had gone completely belly-up, and if the federal mortgage agencies had failed America would now be facing 20 % unemployment, or worse, and there would be even more homes subject to foreclosure.

    My parents lived through the Depression.

    It is by the skin of its teeth that America avoided that fate.

    And there are many difficult days still to come, too. They took on debt by the bucketful to pump liquidity into the markets. Slowly, and very gingerly, without causing a market contraction, they are going to have to sop up all that debt. Very difficult task.

    This is just one more aspect of the cost of unwinding the calamity that was the GW Bush Presidency.




    And instead of cursing President Obama's economic team, you should be thanking your lucky stars.

    Complain about this comment

  • 387. At 7:54pm on 27 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    382. At 11:28am on 27 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    "If memory serves they were LEGAL immigrants, duly processed at Ellis Island and other U.S. Immigration Centers."

    ____________

    Nah, you've missed the point.

    GO look at the website.

    These guys aren't just opposing illegal immigration - they're opposing all immigration, which would have included your Ellis Island kind.

    That's right, these guys wish that your ancestors had been kept out, too.

    Oh, yeah, they want it to be just like the good old days when "Irish and criminals need not apply."



    Complain about this comment

  • 388. At 8:16pm on 27 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    In post 383 BILL BAUR wrote;

    One future problem the Arizona law will create is the proliferation of counterfeit immigration papers. Just what we need - more illegal activities in the US.



    The illegals are already running around with forged papers,assumed names and highjacking American social security numbers,and using them as their own.

    Complain about this comment

  • 389. At 8:31pm on 27 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    In post 380 interested foreigner wrote;


    Some people might be excused for thinking that might be a little more important than setting off on some ill-conceived pogrom to waste law enforcement dollars rounding up and deporting people of whom the principle "crime" of the vast majority is to be contributing to the American economy.

    I say;
    If you take notice of what is going on in Arizona,the illegals there are leaving so as to avoid arrest when the law goes in effect.
    So if we also made it illegal to hire those that are here illegally,and impose large fines on those businesses doing so,and also cut off all social services to illegal aliens ,they would necessarily deport themselves,after all the road does go both ways.

    Complain about this comment

  • 390. At 8:44pm on 27 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    384. At 7:12pm on 27 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    "You talk down your nose at Americans as if we don't have any grasp of economics, ...but as you see Obamas poll numbers drop you see we may just understand after-all.You cannot spend your way out of debt."

    ___________


    No, I do not "talk down my nose" at Americans.

    But if you think that a large percentage of the American public can explain either the recent financial crisis, or the recently passed financial reform package, you're dreaming. My guess would be that a fair percentage of the members of the House of Representatives couldn't explain it, either.


    The sad thing is that while people get hot and bothered about illegal immigration, which is doing them little or no harm, the George W. Bush financial crisis is doing them vast injury, and they can't be bothered to pay attention because it's too dull.

    ------------

    No, you cannot spend your way out of debt.

    But when you are facing a panic-induced credit collapse that threatens to set off catastrophic deflation, pouring liquidity into the market with a hose as fast as you can is the classic emergency response.

    This is what America required from September 2008 to July 2009. There is no credible economic body that suggested otherwise. And that is what the US government did. They undoubtedly did the right thing, in term of keeping the patient alive until the situation could be stabilized.

    But now that the immediate crisis has passed America is left with the very difficult long term problem of drying up all that debt. It can be done, but it is going to take a very big readjustment in the expectations of American consumers and taxpayers. That is the legacy of the GW Bush calamity.


    So it's time to climb out of that hole.

    It would help, for a start, if Americans would stop buying Chinese goods, and start investing in American plant and infrastructure. How Americans can complain about excessive public debt, complain that taxes are too high, have a 10% unemployment rate, ...

    ... and yet all the while blithely continue to run a $ 400B annual trade deficit with China, is beyond understanding. It's like drug addiction.

    And you have the gall to suggest that illegal aliens are stealing American jobs?

    What a laugh.

    Americans are shipping their own jobs to China as fast as they can swipe their credit cards. And unlike wages paid to illegal immigrants, virtually none of the benefit of the economic activity driven by that deficit is being recycled in America.

    Next time somebody complains about illegal immigrants "stealing" American jobs, I want to go to their house, or better yet, look at the record of their credit card purchases, and find out how much they spent on Chinese consumer goods in the last year.



    Motes and beams.

    Complain about this comment

  • 391. At 8:50pm on 27 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    384. At 7:12pm on 27 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    "Again you have no problem throwing that race card down.
    Im waiting to hear you tell everyone why you think the fair site is racist.Race or color is not mentioned on the site,only immigration issues that need confronting. ..."

    __________


    What I really had in mind was the incident with the guy telling the Cuban-American reporter that all Hispanics should be deported, legal or illegal.

    There is no question that a very good portion of the current hysteria is driven by racism - just like every previous protest against different waves of immigration going back to the potato blight.



    As for the web-site you cited, I am fully content to let everybody examine the materials provided at those two links and make up their own minds whether that organization is driven in whole or in part by prejudice.



    Complain about this comment

  • 392. At 10:18pm on 27 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    Finally you wrote something we agree on INTERESTED FOREIGNER
    IN POST 390 YOU WROTE;

    It would help, for a start, if Americans would stop buying Chinese goods, and start investing in American plant and infrastructure. How Americans can complain about excessive public debt, complain that taxes are too high, have a 10% unemployment

    ... and yet all the while blithely continue to run a $ 400B annual trade deficit with China, is beyond understanding. It's like drug addiction.

    That could not be said any better,but when we do try to manufacture here the so called environmentalists complain about the emissions or we are devastating the forests ,or we have to hire union labor at inflated costs,meanwhile they turn a blind eye to China .I agree we need tariffs on imported goods that could be manufactured here to offset environmental impact fees, licensing fees,labor costs, insurance costs and costs of doing business here that are not factors in China.

    Complain about this comment

  • 393. At 10:35pm on 27 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    392. At 10:18pm on 27 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:
    This comment is awaiting moderation. Explain.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Tell the legal aliens to enter the work force and work for lesser wages than illegals. This is the best alternative..Definately better than the one that opens doors of racism wide open...usa was a racist state up until 60s, thats just 45 yrs ago..People will have no problem going back to the old ways..the target and the modus operandi would be new, but racism would be same old same old..

    Complain about this comment

  • 394. At 10:48pm on 27 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    It's ironic that Int. For. will talk about USA's immigration laws, yet is seemingly unwilling or unable to compare Mexico's immigration laws with USA's immigration laws???

    Complain about this comment

  • 395. At 10:58pm on 27 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    391. At 8:50pm on 27 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    What I really had in mind was the incident with the guy telling the Cuban-American reporter that all Hispanics should be deported, legal or illegal.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    So you base everything off of one guy?



    Complain about this comment

  • 396. At 11:10pm on 27 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 397. At 11:27pm on 27 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    392. At 10:18pm on 27 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    "I agree we need tariffs on imported goods that could be manufactured here to offset environmental impact fees, licensing fees,labor costs, insurance costs and costs of doing business here that are not factors in China."

    ___________

    Generally speaking, I am not in favour of protective tariffs, because that is also a road to trouble, and, in general, the higher the tariffs, the more you penalize your own economy.

    However, as far as I can tell, the Yuan is probably 50 - 60 % undervalued. It is deliberate. It is not fair or reasonable.

    In a system of free trade, the participants have to observe equitable rules. One of the basic rules is that you have to allow your currency to float so that it has a value that is realistic vis-a-vis other currencies. China is not doing this.

    I am not in favour of provoking a trade war with China, either, but the current situation is not reasonable. Not sure what the best solution is. My guess is that it will involve some kind of sales tax.


    ----------

    Erratum: Yesterday I should have referred to NAIRU - the non-acceleration-inflation rate of unemployment.

    Complain about this comment

  • 398. At 11:52pm on 27 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    377. At 03:01am on 27 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    "Ha! So you want to compare an American who makes a traffic error to an illegal who sneaks into the country? What a hoot!"

    [[I gave three examples of law breaking: murder, violent crime against persons; fraud, non-violent crime against property; and an highway traffic offense, i.e., a regulatory offense that involves neither violence against persons or property nor dishonesty.

    The purpose of the example was to show that "more law abiding" is a relative term, and that being law abiding, or not, needs to be considered along a very broad spectrum.

    You need to decide where illegal immigration lies along that spectrum.

    I did not equate illegal immigration with minor highway traffic act offenses. You did.

    ____________


    "Int. For., I would love to hear what you think about Mexico's immigration laws. Ever read them?

    Compare Mexico's immigration laws to USA's immigration laws and I bet you will be quite surprised at what you find!"

    ------------

    [[This is another red-herring that comes up frequently.

    Let's suppose that some country, Hellhole-istan, punishes illegal immigration by stoning illegal immigrants to death.

    Does that mean that any law we enact is ok, just so long as it is a hair's breadth less barbaric?

    Does that mean that our law can violate our usual norms of justice?

    Does that mean that it is acceptable for our laws against illegal aliens to breach Constitutional protections against arbitrary search and seizure and cruel and unusual punishment?]]

    -----------

    [[There are two fundamental errors in logic at the root of this "argument".

    First, you are implicitly making the yardstick for our behaviour the yardstick established by somebody else.

    Second, and far more importantly, you have taken your eye off the ball.
    The guiding principle for American law needs to be to determine what will best serve the interests of America.

    What Mexico does, or doesn't do; what Iran does, or doesn't do; what Zimbabwe does or doesn't do, is completely irrelevant to the question of determining what America's needs are, and enacting laws that best serve those needs.

    So, you need to keep your eye on the ball: what policies will yield the greatest net benefit to America?

    That's what you need to focus on. The rest is humbug.]]

    Complain about this comment

  • 399. At 11:53pm on 27 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    US cannot account for $8.7B in Iraqi funds
    A U.S. audit has found that the Pentagon cannot account for over 95 percent of $9.1 billion in Iraq reconstruction money, spotlighting Iraqi complaints that there is little to show for the massive funds pumped into their cash-strapped, war-ravaged nation.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/ml_iraq;_ylt=AhRXIAQST1MbF3ekKJe6GHlbbBAF;_ylu=X3oDMTJzZ2c2YnYzBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMTAwNzI3L21sX2lyYXEEY2NvZGUDbW9zdHBvcHVsYXIEY3BvcwMzBHBvcwMzBHNlYwN5bl90b3Bfc3RvcmllcwRzbGsDYXVkaXR1c2Nhbm5v

    These are the things that cause job cuts and not some low wager illegal mexicans..1000s of people work in pentagon, they cant account for the billions of dollars, they cannot even guard their own war logs and memos, I suggest fire all those incompetent pentagon workers and you will have 1000s of new job vacancies...much better paid that the illegal mexicans..

    Complain about this comment

  • 400. At 00:05am on 28 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    389. At 8:31pm on 27 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    "I say;
    If you take notice of what is going on in Arizona,the illegals there are leaving so as to avoid arrest when the law goes in effect."

    [[And Arizona will be the poorer for it.
    When Arizona finds out that its economy has just contracted for no good reason, it will have only itself to blame.]]

    ------------

    "So if we also made it illegal to hire those that are here illegally,and impose large fines on those businesses doing so,and also cut off all social services to illegal aliens ,they would necessarily deport themselves,after all the road does go both ways."

    [[But, at the end of the day, the big question is: why would any rational person want to do this?

    The majority of these people are conferring a benefit on you. Wouldn't it make a lot more sense to bring them into the legal economy where their activity can be regulated and taxed far more effectively; and to deploy law enforcement resources selectively to identify and remove only the ones causing trouble? Wouldn't that yield far more benefit to America?

    But, go ahead, cut off your nose to spite your face.

    France did the same stupid thing when it drove out the Hugenots. And England and the Netherlands were forever more enriched.]]

    Complain about this comment

  • 401. At 00:05am on 28 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    So you base everything off of one guy?
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The guy is not some guy, if he was just an average bitter person we would just ignore him..But he is a bitter racist person who works side by side american border petrol..

    Complain about this comment

  • 402. At 00:20am on 28 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    385. At 7:32pm on 27 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    "This was a democrat strategy that worked to motivate dems, not the other way around as you said."

    [[There's an irony in this, for sure. But once the Republicans realized how much they had to gain, the picked it up and ran with it for all they were worth. It wasn't gays and lesbians who were pushing for all these "defense of marriage" initiatives.]]

    ------------

    "I work hard every day ,I don't expect anyone to have to pay my way for anything.I save for my retirement so I do not have to depend on social security,I buy health insurance for my family so we will not be a financial burden on our neighbors.I do not expect others to pay for my medical expenses so I do not receive medicare benefits."

    "If an American citizen is in need of these services he or she should not have to get in line behind people from other nations who are here illegally and never paid in a dime to the programs that do offer assistance."


    [[Those other people either directly or indirectly pay in to these funds, through sales taxes and fuel taxes, etc., that go to general revenues, if nothing else, and have no way of collecting on them.]]


    [[Whether you, individually, save or not, if Social Security or Medicare (or both) go broke, you are going to face the consequences financially. The impending bankruptcy of those systems really is a genuine issue of critical public importance. Either benefits are going to have to fall; eligibility is going to have to be restricted; or the age of retirement is going to have to rise.


    Everybody knows that the day of reckoning is coming, but members of Congress, (and above all the Republican "no new taxes" and "no reduction in benefits" representatives) are engaged in willful denial.

    Irresponsible?
    Feckless?

    They'd much rather demonize illegal immigrants or spend their days ranting against President Obama. It's much easier and safer than trying to deal with very serious issues of public policy that endanger America's future.

    Complain about this comment

  • 403. At 00:51am on 28 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    He is not being paid by American Border Patrol. He is working for free on public land. Public land means everyone has the right to go there. So he is not breaking any laws.

    I certainly don't agree with all of his stances.

    But do I feel more safe with him patrolling?
    Absolutely. I feel more safe with anyone patrolling- because our borders are not secure. We can use all the help we can get- including any and all American citizens. Let them carry all the weaponry they want.

    However, you should not base everything off of one guy.

    The policies that will wield the greatest benefit for America are the ones which state that no one is above the law.

    Complain about this comment

  • 404. At 1:23pm on 28 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    395. At 10:58pm on 27 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    "So you base everything off of one guy?"

    ____________

    How reminiscent of Andrea.


    In a movement that reeks of prejudice from top to bottom, you would have to be willfully blind to pretend that there is any difficulty in finding any number of examples.

    I notice, though, that in all the I have made on this topic, nobody has posted a credible effort even to respond to, let alone genuinely address in substance, any of the economics points.




    To my mind, that speaks fairly loudly, both about the substantive merits of policy, and about the underlying nature of the protest and the people leading it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 405. At 2:04pm on 28 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    As I understand it, Arizona is one of the states hardest hit by the housing collapse.

    Prices have fallen so far that it is not uncommon for people to be buying up retirement residences there on the cheap. There is one family we know that has just bought a place outside Phoenix, for example (darn sure they'd be illegal immigrants, too, but nobody complains about retired Canadians, even if they're ethnic Chinese.) Apparently they bought it for just over half its original price.

    The thing is, for the majority of people, the single largest asset is the family home. For many people in Arizona the value of that asset has fallen 20, 30, or 40 %.


    In that kind of market, the idea that anyone would be in a hurry to drive people out of the state, and so further soften demand for accommodation, is bizarre, but there you have it.

    ------------

    A very similar thing happened here almost 35 years ago.

    When the Parti Quebecois was elected in 1976 it rapidly brought in legislation that changed the school system. It didn't outlaw English speakers, but it made it plain that it did not regard English speakers as being "true" Quebecers.

    The result was that over the following twenty years there was a net migration of roughly 400,000 people, predominantly so-called "ethnics" from Montreal to Toronto.


    At the time, Montreal and Toronto were roughly comparable in size.
    The populations of Ontario and Quebec were, respectively, roughly 8.2m and 7.0m

    Now the real size of Toronto is roughly double, or perhaps slightly more than double, the size of Montreal.

    The population of Ontario is now about 13m people. The population of Quebec is about 7.6m

    House prices in Toronto have exploded.
    House prices in Montreal have never recovered. Even today, (and yes, in real terms adjusted for inflation), they lag far, far behind.


    Roughly speaking, by following ill-considered, jingoistic, self-indulgent, nationalistic policies - with which Arizona's new law would fit hand-in-glove - the PQ destroyed the residential real estate market in Quebec, and by so doing was able to reduce average household wealth in Quebec by well over 30 %.


    Quebec now has the lowest birthrate, the highest taxes, and the most rapidly aging population in the country.

    And since economic opportunity has migrated, so have young talented Quebecers, whether anglophone, francophone, or allophone.

    In summary, the presence of the PQ essentially killed economic growth in Quebec for a generation.



    But, clearly, the desire to shoot oneself in the foot is not limited to Quebec, as Arizona is about to learn.



    There is a cost, a very large cost, to indulging prejudice, no matter how popular that prejudice may be.

    Complain about this comment

  • 406. At 2:53pm on 28 Jul 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 407. At 5:28pm on 28 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    But do I feel more safe with him patrolling?
    Absolutely. I feel more safe with anyone patrolling- because our borders are not secure. We can use all the help we can get- including any and all American citizens. Let them carry all the weaponry they want.

    However, you should not base everything off of one guy.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    You should not feel safe with a racist guy patrolling your borders..He does it because he is racist...and by supporting him you actually support his views and his agenda..It should have actually opened your eyes about what actually is happening in the name of protecting the country from illegal immigrants...With these laws, he will have a more free hand to promote his own agenda..

    Complain about this comment

  • 408. At 5:50pm on 28 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    A couple of days ago I was making a comparison about right-wing hot button issues, most notably "Gay Marriage" and the various defense of marriage initiatives.


    Here's a news item from today:


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-10780208


    How much do you wager that we won't hear anything from the "Defense of Marriage" groups about this?

    Noisy rallies?

    Referendums?

    Campaigns to change the Constitution to protect marriage?

    Complain about this comment

  • 409. At 7:55pm on 28 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Judge blocks parts of Arizona immigration law

    But for now, opponents of the law have prevailed: The provisions that angered opponents will not take effect, including sections that required officers to check a person's immigration status while enforcing other laws.

    The judge also delayed parts of the law that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times, and made it illegal for undocumented workers to solicit employment in public places — a move aimed at day laborers. In addition, the judge blocked officers from making warrantless arrests of suspected illegal immigrants.


    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_arizona_immigration

    End of this thread?

    Complain about this comment

  • 410. At 8:34pm on 28 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    Here's another news item from today:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-10779151


    Here are some excerpts:


    "Texas Governor Rick Perry called that deployment "grossly insufficient". Many politicians are calling for even more troops.
    But the mayor of El Paso, John Cook, isn't one of them."

    ""The reality is we really don't need the help on this side of the border. We probably have every kind of federal law enforcement agency that you can think of. We're an extremely safe community," Mr Cook says."

    "Despite Juarez's murder toll, in El Paso, local authorities have recorded just two murders this year. In 2009 there were 11."

    ""Logically it would seem that if you have violence on one side of the border then you're going to have spillover on the other side," says Mr Cook. "But the reality is that we don't.""

    "According to FBI crime statistics, El Paso is the second safest city in America. Crime rates there have dropped 36% over the past 10 years."

    "Other cities close to the border, including San Diego in California and Phoenix in Arizona, have similarly experienced declines in violent crime."

    ------------

    "Border historian David Romo says it is a pattern. He's seen politicians fanning fears about the border before."

    "These days, it's Mexicans who fuel unease. Mr Romo says that during times of economic distress, the border and the immigrants who cross it are used as scapegoats. He believes history is repeating itself, and politicians are using the same rhetoric they have for decades."

    ""It happens that every time an election year comes up, they know that creating fear and hysteria about the border will drive a wedge," Mr Romo says."

    ""In some ways it's cheap vote-getting. There is this cycle of kind of nativist hysteria that is very profitable for politicians. Nothing gets votes like the politics of fear.""

    "Mr Romo says he's not seen evidence of violence infiltrating the El Paso community. He argues that the immigrants who make a new life across the border are motivated to act within the law because they fear being deported."

    "While Arizona Governor Jan Brewer blames immigrants, illegal and otherwise, for violent crimes and burglaries, Mr Romo says that, ironically, those immigrants have the most incentive to be law-abiding. They don't want to draw attention."

    _______________

    It's a shame nobody here thought to make postings like that on this blog...

    ... oh, yeah. People did make postings like that on this blog. In fact, they've been doing it for months in the face of scare-mongering.

    Guess they might have been on to something.
    Imagine that.

    ---------------


    The Mayor also points out that all the fear mongering about violence makes it difficult to attract new businesses to his town, even though it is he second safest in America.

    Gosh, doesn't that remind you of fears of Quebec separatism: Businesses stopped wanting to invest in Quebec out of fear. Quebec has paid, and paid, for that.

    But don't let that stop Arizona from being equally stupid ...



    Why govern like intelligent adults when you can stoke up, and then pander to, fear amongst the gullible instead?



    Complain about this comment

  • 411. At 10:29pm on 28 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    If you think Obama did this to help illegals you are wrong.
    He did this because he knows the democratic party is going to be very short on votes in November.
    How long do you think the American people will stand for a government that governs against the will of the people.
    Evidently this judge Bolton thinks illegals should not have to show any papers when stopped,but as American law abiding citizens we have to produce license,proof of registration and insurance.
    Far from over /Come on November


    Complain about this comment

  • 412. At 10:35pm on 28 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    411. At 10:29pm on 28 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:
    This comment is awaiting moderation. Explain.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The judge has judged.....Live with it or take it up with another judge..

    Complain about this comment

  • 413. At 10:49pm on 28 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    What Int. For. fails to mention is that it is suspected that there could be some potential terrorists sneaking across the border.

    Some may say, "Oh, there's not that many. It's a small amount."

    Hello!

    If it was your loved one murdered by a illegal terrorist, it would be one illegal terrorist too many!

    Several of the 9/11 hijackers were in our country illegally!

    Expel the illegals!!!!!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 414. At 11:04pm on 28 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Evidently this judge Bolton thinks illegals should not have to show any papers when stopped,but as American law abiding citizens we have to produce license,proof of registration and insurance.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Are you bitter? Just because the legals will have to show the proof od registeration and insurance? Police stops you only when you violate traffic rules, try to obey the rules and you will not have to show anything...And its not as if you are stopped every day, if thats the case then the police should confiscate your license..

    Complain about this comment

  • 415. At 11:05pm on 28 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    411. At 10:29pm on 28 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    "How long do you think the American people will stand for a government that governs against the will of the people."

    "Evidently this judge Bolton thinks illegals should not have to show any papers when stopped,but as American law abiding citizens we have to produce license,proof of registration and insurance.
    Far from over /Come on November"

    ____________

    Wouldn't it be a whole lot simpler simply for you to admit that this whole anti-immigrant thing, and all the nonsense rationales and spin advanced to support it, are simply contrary to the facts and contrary to economic logic?


    Why can't you simply have the adult maturity to admit that you're wrong, and that the whole thing is a crock?



    That would be the dawning of wisdom for you.
    But I'm not holding my breath.

    Complain about this comment

  • 416. At 11:05pm on 28 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Several of the 9/11 hijackers were in our country illegally!
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Name one..

    Complain about this comment

  • 417. At 11:07pm on 28 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Several of the 9/11 hijackers were in our country illegally!
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    They waltzed their way into usa on legal visas..

    Complain about this comment

  • 418. At 11:31pm on 28 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Obama lost in arizona and it has just 7 or 8 electors...Dont try to give arizona into something bigger than it actually is..Apart from desert it has nothing, except for Border police a private organiztion with hidden agenda which works with extremists...it needs more non white people so that the racists move to some other states..the bible belt states.. or kentucky and maine.

    Complain about this comment

  • 419. At 11:40pm on 28 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    Several came in with legal visas and overstayed the visas without getting new ones, which means that there were several here illegally!

    Overstaying your visa intentionally is just as bad as sneaking in through the border illegally.

    Expell the illegals!!!!!

    Before they steal our country away from us!!!!!!

    If you want to save America, vote out all the Democrats!!!!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 420. At 11:47pm on 28 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    There was no waltzing. More like sashaying and swaying.

    Complain about this comment

  • 421. At 11:57pm on 28 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Several came in with legal visas and overstayed the visas without getting new ones
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    name more than two of them.

    Complain about this comment

  • 422. At 00:10am on 29 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 423. At 00:39am on 29 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    In post 418 COLONIALARTIST WROTE THIS LITTLE GEM ABOUT ARIZONA;

    ..it needs more non white people so that the racists move to some other states..the bible belt states.. or kentucky and maine.

    Now that is blatant racism ,and again shows you think only the white man can be a racist.

    Complain about this comment

  • 424. At 00:55am on 29 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    In post 415 interested foriegner wrote;



    Wouldn't it be a whole lot simpler simply for you to admit that this whole anti-immigrant thing, and all the nonsense rationales and spin advanced to support it, are simply contrary to the facts and contrary to economic logic?
    Why can't you simply have the adult maturity to admit that you're wrong, and that the whole thing is a crock?

    And I say;
    A left leaning clinton appointee voted as expected,not suprised .

    As for the whole anti ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION movement being nonsense and unwarranted;
    These are the words of the very left leaning judge Bolton after the ruling.


    The court by no means disregards Arizona's interests in controlling illegal immigration and addressing the concurrent problems with crime including the trafficking of humans, drugs, guns, and money," the ruling said.

    Complain about this comment

  • 425. At 01:23am on 29 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    colonialartist also wrote;

    Police stops you only when you violate traffic rules, try to obey the rules and you will not have to show anything...And its not as if you are stopped every day.

    Exactly what we were saying about the Arizona law,and goes to answer the question this thread started with,will Arizona Harass U.S citizens,
    and the answer, had the law been enacted is No.
    As you stated legal citizens only need show papers when stopped for some sort of infraction,only then would the officer ask if you were here legally.

    Complain about this comment

  • 426. At 1:46pm on 29 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    424. At 00:55am on 29 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    "And I say;
    A left leaning Clinton appointee voted as expected,not suprised .

    As for the whole anti ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION movement being nonsense and unwarranted;"


    [[You must be related to Magic Kirin?]]


    "The court by no means disregards Arizona's interests in controlling illegal immigration and addressing the concurrent problems with crime including the trafficking of humans, drugs, guns, and money," the ruling said."

    [[There is nothing out of the ordinary in this statement.

    The judge granted a temporary injunction, and a trial of the issues will be conducted in due course. This is a very common, everyday occurrence in the courts. All the court has done is to apply the law in the usual way in what very few people would consider a partisan manner.

    Big deal.]]


    ------------


    [[There is no great "crisis" of illegal immigration in the US today, anymore or less than there was throughout the entire GW Bush Presidency.

    But we didn't see these rent-a-crowd yahoos ranting and jumping up and down then.

    So what has suddenly made this some big crisis?

    No answer. Never any answer.



    And until somebody can provide an honest answer to that question, ...

    ... I say again, this entire song-and-dance, this deliberate, intellectually dishonest, attempt to stir up alarmist mass hysteria, to play on prejudice, to stoke and then to pander to the fears and insecurities of the ignorant and the gullible ...

    ... is a crock ...

    from start to finish.

    America has far more important and far more urgent problems to deal with than the more-or-less non-problem of illegal immigration.]]

    Complain about this comment

  • 427. At 3:59pm on 29 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    interested foriegner, when I said

    As for the whole anti-Illegal immigration being nonsense and unwarranted,
    and posted these words from leftist judge Bolton;

    The court by no means disregards Arizona's interests in controlling illegal immigration and addressing the CONCURRENT problems with crime including the trafficking of humans, drugs, guns, and money,"

    This is the judge herself admitting all the crimes mentioned are concurrent with illegal immigration.

    Complain about this comment

  • 428. At 4:25pm on 29 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    INTERESTED FORIEGNER WROTE IN POST 426;

    But we didn't see these rent-a-crowd yahoos ranting and jumping up and down then.
    When polls across the nation show 57 percent of Americans are for the law and an additional 17 percent think it does not go far enough ..you do not need to hire protesters.
    The democrats are the ones who in the past have been caught hiring protesters as well as in elections busing illegals around the nation to
    vote in different districts.
    The poll numbers I quoted were from a C,B,S nationwide poll.

    Also no one ever answered my question as to why a group calling itself Le Raza is not criticized for being racist,afterall it does translate to THE RACE .
    One can only imagine the fallout if A white group were walking around calling themselves that.

    Complain about this comment

  • 429. At 4:28pm on 29 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Now that is blatant racism ,and again shows you think only the white man can be a racist.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    You need to really know what racism actually is...Wanting racists to move away from arizona by bringing in more non whites is the best way to get rid of racists who come from all over usa so that they can defend their race...the white racists will be able to live happily ever after in main and kentucky or the bible belt area and in Idaho, where they will just see whites all around them...Its another thing that they might start fighting against each other, irish, scots, germans, but atleast they would not bother non whites with their racisn..

    Complain about this comment

  • 430. At 5:15pm on 29 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    427. At 3:59pm on 29 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    "This is the judge herself admitting all the crimes mentioned are concurrent with illegal immigration."

    ____________

    The word "concurrent" means "at the same time".

    Can't see how that can be controversial.

    Complain about this comment

  • 431. At 6:19pm on 29 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    Again COLONIAL ARTIST SPOUTS RACISM AND DOES NOT EVEN REALIZE IT;

    colonial artist wrote in post 429 ,

    bringing in more NON WHITES is the best way to get rid of racists who come from all over the U.S to defend their race.What you left out was Americans were coming from all over the U.S to protect the sovereignty of our nation,not to protect a particular race.

    Like I said before you think only whites can be racist.

    Still waiting for explanation about LE RAZA getting a free ride on the race issue while calling themselves THE RACE ,clearly showing they think their race is superior to others.

    Complain about this comment

  • 432. At 7:04pm on 29 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Still waiting for explanation about LE RAZA getting a free ride on the race issue while calling themselves THE RACE
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    When it starts petrolling with the border guards to keep the whites in idaho, maine, kentucky and other bible belt states, is the time you can ask me this question..

    Complain about this comment

  • 433. At 9:26pm on 29 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    No when LE RAZA started protesting in American streets carrying Mexican flags demanding we give back the southern states, and at the same time demanding equal rights under the Constitution and Bill of Rights OF THE
    United States of America,all the while calling themselves THE RACE,
    Its time to ask if this is a racist organization.

    Complain about this comment

  • 434. At 10:09pm on 29 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    RH, La Raza and the NAACP are protected by the ultraliberals.

    Right now, ultraliberals are running America.

    Often, certain organizations scream "Race!" when they do not get their way. Or they use it to intimidate.

    Like the Black Panthers on Election day. We all know how Obama and Holder feel about that.

    Unless we vote the ultraliberals out of office, things will only become more and more ultraliberal beyond ultraliberal.

    Health care, amnesty, open borders, open gays in the military.

    Something tells me the ultraliberals are saving the best for last and that we haven't seen their full extent yet. They are definitely hiding something that will only be revealed if they are voted to stay in office.

    Complain about this comment

  • 435. At 10:38pm on 29 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    United States of America,all the while calling themselves THE RACE,
    Its time to ask if this is a racist organization.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Up until this la Raza word was posted here, Raza meant a name to me, which actually means contented. however, la raza as in spanish means......and for that i direct you to google...their is a difference between an organization and a racist group...the La Razians arent racist nor they are extremists..To crisitize them first you have to make sure that racists who roam arizona in the name of vigilantes and border patrol are no longer there.

    Complain about this comment

  • 436. At 11:04pm on 29 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    By health care, I do not mean simply health care.

    Obama's plan includes a mandate which requires people to pay for health care. Well, requires everyone, with the exclusion of certain religious exemptions, who may be the only ones who do not have to pay.

    There is no telling how much health care could go up in price and could be mandated.

    What mandates will be next???

    Complain about this comment

  • 437. At 5:56pm on 30 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    O.K GOOGLED DEFINE LA RAZA

    In the Spanish language the term La Raza literally means "the race"
    Were the first words on the page,and is the most common definition of La raza
    Or did you just forget the Spanish language .

    Complain about this comment

  • 438. At 6:15pm on 30 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    In the Spanish language the term La Raza literally means "the race"
    Were the first words on the page,and is the most common definition of La raza
    Or did you just forget the Spanish language .
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Yes. and did you find out which people in spain use this term? and which group of people the people in latin america the word refers to? Whats so bad about emphasizing your race? Look at jews? they dont miss even a minute opportunity to tell that they are jews, even the euro-jews are bending backwords to enter semiteism.

    Complain about this comment

  • 439. At 6:24pm on 30 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:



    Mexico has a law that is no different from the law Arizona wanted that empowers local police to check the immigration documents of people suspected of not being in the country legally.

    Article 67 of Mexico's immigration law requires that all authorities "whether federal, local or municipal" demand to see visas if approached by a foreigner and to hand over migrants to immigration authorities.

    Mexico's Arizona-style law requires local police to check IDs. And Mexican police freely engage in racial profiling and routinely harass Central American migrants, say immigration activists.

    Yet Philippe Calderon has the nerve to stand on the floor of the house and tell us our law violates the civil rights of his people.
    Rep. Tom McLintock got on the floor and spoke up against the Mexican President and did an awesome job summing up the feelings of the citizens of the U.S.
    Here is a link so you can see for yourself.

    http://www.breitbart.tv/outrage-california-congressman-blasts-calderons-lecture-to-lawmakers/

    Complain about this comment

  • 440. At 6:57pm on 30 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Rep. Tom McLintock got on the floor and spoke up against the Mexican President and did an awesome job summing up the feelings of the citizens of the U.S.
    Here is a link so you can see for yourself.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Thats about all reps do..In such occasions they get up and speak against some president or some group and do an awesome job summing up the feelings of the citizens of u.s. We have seen all that for the past 9 yrs..they are extremely good in fanning the flames..and when the fire gets out of control, they just wriggle out of the situation by puting the blames on this or that, simply make up new facts and thats about all.

    Complain about this comment

  • 441. At 7:02pm on 30 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    COLONEL there is nothing wrong with, as you put it, emphasizing your race.
    But to call themselves THE RACE shows they think their race is superior to others,and that is the definition of racism.

    Complain about this comment

  • 442. At 7:14pm on 30 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    But to call themselves THE RACE shows they think their race is superior to others,and that is the definition of racism.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    You are reading to much into the word, le raza...the indians call themeselves, indian tigers, does that mean they are not humans, but tigers, the newzelanderians call them selves, kiwis, does that mean they are real kiwis?

    Complain about this comment

  • 443. At 7:40pm on 30 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    Ill bet you would feel different if a group of white people were marching in the streets of Mexico chanting and holding signs calling themselves THE RACE,demanding anything.

    Complain about this comment

  • 444. At 8:23pm on 30 Jul 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Ill bet you would feel different if a group of white people were marching in the streets of Mexico chanting and holding signs calling themselves THE RACE,demanding anything.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I have seen groups of white people marching up and down the streets in mexico chanting G-d knows what drunk on tequila, and demanding more tequila, even calling themselves, gringos..

    Complain about this comment

  • 445. At 9:11pm on 30 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    When Mexico's President Calderone gave that speech, most of the Democrats, including President Obama, applauded him.

    The ultraliberals are out of control.

    Complain about this comment

  • 446. At 11:22pm on 30 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    And every one of them is there LEGALLY or the Mexican government will have them arrested and then thrown out of the country as he should.

    And LUCY;
    You are exactly right it was a disgusting display of anti-Americanism
    on display in the house that day.
    Every one of those leftist sickoes should be ashamed of themselves
    for selling out their own countrymen,but at least they made it clear who they stand with and therefor clear who they stand against.

    Complain about this comment

  • 447. At 01:54am on 31 Jul 2010, McJakome wrote:

    337. At 03:16am on 24 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:
    RE: Interested Foreigner
    “If I could change something about our federal laws, I would make more jail time for child molesters/abusers/child pornographers, domestic abusers and rapists. I would also decriminalize marijuana.”

    I almost agree with you on this. At the risk
    of “trolling” I favor not “decriminalization” but legalization for a trial period of 5-10 years. If worst come to worst, reimpose sanctions; but if, as very likely, things are better or at least no worse for drug addiction, etc. then the benefits of the tax regime should stay in place:
    1. local production sale and taxation of weed
    [benefit to local economy, jobs, and anti gangs]
    2. reasonable taxes on sale, money to be divided to pay off the state debts, support education [especially drug dangers], support health care [including detox].

    As to the rest, it is necessary to treat abusers of children and rapists very harshly.

    Complain about this comment

  • 448. At 02:09am on 31 Jul 2010, McJakome wrote:

    344. At 07:32am on 25 Jul 2010, powermeerkat wrote:
    Re #343

    "FIRST, LET'S KILL ALL THE LAYWERS" :)

    Tsk, tsk [or tut tut, if you prefer], kill all the lawyers and then who would you send after the doctor that messed up you prostate surgery and made you a soprano? Who would we elect to congress [aren’t 90% of them layers]? Also, is it just coincidence that when you say “lawyer” or “liar” it sounds about the same?

    Complain about this comment

  • 449. At 02:16am on 31 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    USA should regulate marijuana the way that alcohol and tobacco are regulated.

    At the very least, it should be decriminalized.

    Seen Super Troopers?

    Best movie ever!!!

    Love that Jay guy!!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 450. At 02:17am on 31 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    USA should regulate marijuana the way that alcohol and tobacco are regulated.

    At the very least, it should be decriminalized.

    Seen Super Troopers?

    Best movie ever!!!

    I love the Indian-American guy, Jay!!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 451. At 02:42am on 31 Jul 2010, McJakome wrote:

    346. At 08:20am on 25 Jul 2010, RHCracker wrote In comment RE 267 Niel stapley:
    “Why should America be ashamed to have a border the same as every other country in the world does .
    Mexico strictly enforces its border laws ,yet chastises the U.S and says we are discriminating against his people when we try to enforce ours.

    If he even cared about his people he would work towards creating infrastructure and jobs in his own country instead of sending them over here to bilk us.”
    This is where I part company with other “liberals.” It is a clear case of “Do as I say, not as I do.” Leftish Americans and foreigners of all persuasions simply ignore the injustice of Mexico solving its problems by giving its poor a map and instructions to take the problems to “El Norte!” AND they don’t acknowledge the hypocrisy of the Mexican government’s actions.

    Now if WE did something like this they would be all over us in a heartbeat. I like Interestedforeigner, he has interesting things to say. However I wonder how he would react to the US giving our poor people a map and bussing them to the Canadian border in tens of thousands? And how would CanGov. react?

    353. At 02:23am on 26 Jul 2010, LucyJ wrote:
    InterestedForeigner wrote:

    [And, it appears that the illegal aliens are, person-for-person, in fact more law abiding than American citizens.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This statement is an oxymoron. It contradicts itself.

    An illegal alien is, by definition, someone who is in our country illegally. This means that any and every illegal alien in our country is not law-abiding.

    Illegal is not a race. Illegal is a crime.]
    Right on Lucy! On this we [and probably a majority of US citizens] are in total agreement!

    398. At 11:52pm on 27 Jul 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote
    RE: 377.
    Tsk, tsk. IF, you are being disingenuous here. Part of our problem is that Mexico is being hypocritical and demanding that we not do what it does. Mexico sends its problems north. SO, please answer my question above. What if the US gave its poor and unemployed maps to take the problem North?

    Complain about this comment

  • 452. At 2:17pm on 31 Jul 2010, McJakome wrote:

    InterestedForeigner,
    Your formerly logical, fair, clearsighted posts seem to be becoming less so. Why is your attitude changing, has the venom on both sides begon to take a toll on you?

    "France did the same stupid thing when it drove out the Hugenots. And England and the Netherlands were forever more enriched."
    The difference is that the Huguenots were French, and part of the French culture [with the single exception of religion]. It is unlike you to make apples /oranges false equivalencies.

    How do you think Canadian citizens and CanGov. would react if the US tried to solve its present poverty and unemployment woes by giving our poor and unemployed people maps and information pamphlets telling how to get to Canada and apply for public assistance there?

    Your posts critical of American reaction to being victimized by the actions of the hypocritical Mexican government verge on the hypocritical themselves, unless you believe that Canada and Canadians would welcome millions of Americans that our government refused to help [other than telling them to take their problems north].

    Complain about this comment

  • 453. At 9:12pm on 01 Aug 2010, McJakome wrote:

    Criticize the U.S. for actual violation of civil rights, of which there are some. Criticize the U.S. for actual instances of racism, of which there are some. Criticize the U.S. for bizarre or seemingly unfair laws, of which there are a significant number. But to criticize the U.S. for hypothetical or theoretical violations, while ignoring the reality is unpardonable.

    We criticize our governments loudly for such lapses. I do not believe you can find a country where there are NO lapses. Sometimes the lapses are serious and end in death, as happened to an unfortunate Brazilian in London. We don’t loudly berate the UK constantly about such things, nor insist that they and the existence of fringe racist groups there prove that the UK is irremediably racist. This, however seems to be the habit of some in the UK and EU when looking at the U.S.

    Some countries don’t permit the people to complain or even try to change things. As corrupt as the U.S. government has become, it is not as corrupt as many, and is not crushing freedom of speech for citizens or foreigners. I think we know what would happen if China’s or Russia’s minorities were parading through the streets making demands. In fact if foreigners did that in Mexico they would be jailed.

    So, while some negative effects of the Arizona law might eventuate, it is not intended and the legal process here would take care of it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 454. At 00:17am on 02 Aug 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    JMM Wrote:

    "Part of our problem is that Mexico is being hypocritical and demanding that we not do what it does. Mexico sends its problems north. SO, please answer my question above. What if the US gave its poor and unemployed maps to take the problem North?

    ____________

    If the Mexican government is being hypocritical, that is their problem, not America's.

    What they do, or say is irrelevant.

    Think if it were Iran, or Cuba, or North Korea, or the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Remember those days?

    Are you going to let them set the standard for your behaviour?
    Of course not.

    What the government of Mexico says or does is irrelevant.
    (Of course it is not irrelevant as a foreign policy consideration, but it is utterly irrelevant as a matter of US immigration and naturalization policy.)

    The only thing you should care about is "What is in the best interests of the United States of America?"

    ____________

    452. At 2:17pm on 31 Jul 2010, JMM wrote:

    "France did the same stupid thing when it drove out the Hugenots. And England and the Netherlands were forever more enriched."

    The difference is that the Huguenots were French, and part of the French culture [with the single exception of religion]. It is unlike you to make apples /oranges false equivalencies.

    "with the single exception of religion"

    And that wasn't a pretty big exception during the Reformation?
    They were driven out on the basis of prejudice. It makes no difference whether that difference is religious, ethnic, linguistic, or racial.

    ____________

    "How do you think Canadian citizens and CanGov. would react if the US tried to solve its present poverty and unemployment woes by giving our poor and unemployed people maps and information pamphlets telling how to get to Canada and apply for public assistance there?"

    [[Well, for a start, we already take more immigrants per capita, both legal and illegal, than the US does, and nobody here thinks we have any great immigration crisis.

    We have, quite probably, the most egregiously abused refugee system in the world, but, again, while everybody thinks it needs to be fixed, it didn't interrupt the Stanley Cup finals, and there is still cold beer in the fridge.

    And, in fact, people do tell illegal immigrants how to get here, and we almost invariably put them on social assistance while they are awaiting a hearing before the IRB. I find this irksome, and I think our hospitality is often being abused, but it's usually better than the alternative.

    But, be that as it may, whether you provide them with information or not, whether you send them this way or not, whether you even row them across the Niagara river or the St. Lawrence, or not, the only thing that matters in making Canadian immigration policy is a decision on what is in the best interests of Canada.

    ____________

    Keep in mind that Canada has accepted dissentient US immigrants in the past - during the Vietnam war we accepted rather a lot of them. It was somewhat contentious, and people complained about them, but in the end we accepted them all just the same.

    Also keep in mind that we "accept" a great deal of air pollution from the mid-west. This is a bone of contention between the two countries, and one that infuriates us from time to time (not enough, though, to miss the hockey on Saturday night). This is a problem that is a factor in the respiratory ailments of thousands of Canadians, and the premature death of a few of them, every year.

    We very strongly dislike American policy on this, and have made vigorous diplomatic representations for many years. All to no avail.

    We very strongly dislike the flow of firearms from America (which we consider to be inherently a whole lot less benign than the flow of illegal immigrants, by the way). This one actually has us quite hot under the collar, and certainly has caught the attention of every police force in the country. Roughly 60 Canadians per year die (and about 10 times as many are injured) because the US can't figure out which way is up on gun control. For context, roughly 120 Canadians were killed in the World Trade Center bombings.

    We have made very strong representations to the US government on this issue. I suspect you can guess the amount of success we have had in getting the US government to crack down and introduce effective gun control.

    ------------

    "Your posts critical of American reaction to being victimized ...."

    [[Well, whether the Mexican government is being hypocritical or not, nobody has convinced me that the extent of illegal immigration (3% of overall US population) is (a) not, in fact, beneficial to the US economy; and (b) of such a scale that it threatens the US in any way.

    If it were 10% of US population, there might be some cause for concern, and if it were 20%, there would certainly be cause for alarm. But it isn't. It's 3%, and it is economically benign. Big deal. America has a lot worse problems to worry about.

    Complain about this comment

  • 455. At 03:23am on 02 Aug 2010, McJakome wrote:

    454. At 00:17am on 02 Aug 2010, Interestedforeigner
    Thanks for the comprehensive reply. I had heard about the pollution and firearms. That make Canada as well as Mexico a recipient of problems originating in the US. I think that the US government should act to prevent those abuses.

    You are still being a bit apples and oranges on the immigration issue, however as you are looking at national as opposed to regional and state effects. The effects of illegal immigrants on the population of Arizona and other border areas is considerably more than on the nation as a whole.

    The federal government is being not much more careful vis a vis the problems of the border states as it is with respect to the problems you mentioned and which affect Canada and Mexico. Part of the reason is the federal structure, which Arizona has now tried to use against the fed.

    Mexico's government is not just being hypocritical, it is interfering in the internal affairs of the US in ways that it would not tolerate from outside. The Mexican consulates have organized demonstrations, tried to interfere in internal state and federal policy making and enforcement of US laws. Then there is the deliberate policy of sending the poor and unemployed north in order to avoid having to deal with the problem inside Mexico.

    Yes, Canada welcomes refugees, including the Vietnam resisters from the US. But there is no deliberate policy of the US government to send millions of US poor and unemployed to Canada. And I haven't heard that any other country has done that to Canada, though Hong Kong people with British passports did relocate in some significant numbers.

    Your points were interesting, but I still find them less than persuasive.

    Complain about this comment

  • 456. At 4:47pm on 02 Aug 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    Interested foreigner wrote;


    The US can't figure out which way is up on gun control.

    Up is the way that is the will of We The PEOPLE.

    Taking guns away from law abiding citizens only takes away their abillity to defend themselves and their neigbors.
    Criminals do not usually get their guns through legal channels,so gun laws only embolden the criminal.
    Do you think because its illegal to own a firearm,criminals will suddenly throw down their guns.

    I know this is off topic but you did bring it up.

    Complain about this comment

  • 457. At 5:25pm on 02 Aug 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    456. At 4:47pm on 02 Aug 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    ... yet another load of hogwash.

    Over a million people in this country own guns. There is nobody of whom I am aware who has either been prevented from owning a gun or from hunting as they please, subject to obtaining the appropriate hunting license.

    No gun owner has been unreasonably inconvenienced by our laws, and yet we have very effective gun control. Our gun control laws are supported by the vast majority of the population. We recognize that they have saved thousands of lives, and avoided tens of thousands of grievous injuries:

    Our population is about 1/9 of America's. We have about 200 gun homicides per year; America has 13,000 gun homicides, somewhat under 1000 accidental gun deaths (mostly children), and another 16,000 gun suicides.

    Since the end of WWII America has suffered well over 1/2m unnecessary gun homicides (probably closer to 3/4m). Explain to me any civil right that you have, that I don't have that justifies that loss of life, and the 15x that number of persons unnecessarily wounded during the same time period.

    Where is the NRA when it comes to the right to life and liberty of that 1/2m of your fellow citizens?

    Where is the NRA when it comes to taking effective steps to reduce that unnecessary toll of death and injury?


    What a load of hogwash.

    Complain about this comment

  • 458. At 5:29pm on 02 Aug 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    Interested foreigner you wrote inpost 454;


    What the government of Mexico says or does is irrelevant.
    (Of course it is not irrelevant as a foreign policy consideration, but it is utterly irrelevant as a matter of US immigration and naturalization policy.)

    The only thing you should care about is "What is in the best interests of the United States of America?"

    _What? The Mexican government hands out pamphlets with information on the best routes to illegally enter our country,where to go for social services,how to properly bilk these services.
    Mexico has a very wealthy government,it is their responsibility to take care of their poor,to create jobs and to make sure its citizens have what they need,so when it send its poor here instead,that is very relevant as a matter of US immigration and naturalization policy.)

    Complain about this comment

  • 459. At 6:41pm on 02 Aug 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    455. At 03:23am on 02 Aug 2010, JMM wrote:

    "You are still being a bit apples and oranges on the immigration issue, however as you are looking at national as opposed to regional and state effects. The effects of illegal immigrants on the population of Arizona and other border areas is considerably more than on the nation as a whole.

    "Mexico's government is not just being hypocritical, it is interfering in the internal affairs of the US in ways that it would not tolerate from outside. The Mexican consulates have organized demonstrations, tried to interfere in internal state and federal policy making and enforcement of US laws. Then there is the deliberate policy of sending the poor and unemployed north in order to avoid having to deal with the problem inside Mexico."

    [[Interference in the internal affairs of another country is a dangerous thing. But as for the organization of demonstrations, provided they are peaceful and do not otherwise break any laws, you get to protest in a democracy.]]

    [[As for their deliberate policy, well, the deliberate policy of the US government is to do nothing about guns "in order to avoid having to deal with the problem" inside the US (because the US government is either too chicken to take on the gun lobby, or actively panders to it), and to do very little helpful about drugs.

    So we do the best we can under our own laws to deal with guns; and, on drugs, we believe in trade reciprocity: we send B.C. marijuana back the other way.]]

    [[You may have forgotten the Mariel boat-lift from Cuba, where, along with genuine immigrants the Cuban government deliberately emptied its jails and sent the inmates to Florida. It was not a neighbourly thing to do. America dealt with it. The sky didn't fall.

    Jamaica sends us some really violent, dangerous people. We catch them, put them in jail, and then deport them. Again, the sky hasn't fallen. The Jamaican government is sometimes cross - they don't want the trouble-makers back. But we send 'em, just the same.]]

    ------------

    "Yes, Canada welcomes refugees, including the Vietnam resisters from the US. [[And also a whole lot of Vietnamese "boat people"]] But there is no deliberate policy of the US government to send millions of US poor and unemployed to Canada. And I haven't heard that any other country has done that to Canada, though Hong Kong people with British passports did relocate in some significant numbers."

    [[Actually, the problem was that the UK refused to grant passports to HK's 8.8m people as of right. There was significant popular opposition in the UK to large scale Hong Kong immigrations of any kind, by people who were afraid of being overrun by an ethnic Chinese "invasion" of Britain. Sound familiar?

    That was Britain's loss, in my opinion.

    Canada and Australia opened their doors, and, over a period of 25 years, took just about any HK resident who applied. I would guess that Canada, Australia, and New Zealand accepted roughly 2m HK residents between them, possibly more.

    We have probably 1/2m (700,000?) here in town, at least another 1/3m (500,000?) in Vancouver, and more across the country. Canada has benefited hugely from their presence. I have no idea how many illegal Chinese immigrants there are in Toronto, but it would certainly be well over 100,000, probably closer to 250,000. Nobody is complaining about it.]]

    [[There are, probably, something like 1.5m - 2.0m illegal immigrants in this country, maybe more. The area in and around Toronto (approx 10m in the "golden horseshoe" around the western end of Lake Ontario, 6.5m around Toronto itself) accepts about 1/2 of ALL legal immigrants to Canada, and probably the same proportion of illegal immigrants. Almost certainly, more than 1m illegal immigrants live in and around Toronto. Nobody even notices their presence.

    Do you notice visible minorities? Yes, they're everywhere. But so what? This is one of the most cosmopolitan cities on earth. What else would you expect?

    Before I am much older, I am going to be a visible minority in this town, too. We don't have all that many adult white male protestants who were born in this country. I may be the only one on this street.]]

    [[Arizona may have a very high concentration of illegal immigrants. But the fallacy is in assuming that all of these people are causing trouble. Only a few of them are. Those are the ones you need to identify, and deal with. The rest of them are doing exactly what your ancestors did when they came here: working hard to build a better life for their children.]]




    [[Finally, on this note, I am going to comment on my experiences with Hispanic immigration in the US. First, I am amazed by how Spanish-speaking Southern California is. A lot of those towns seem to be majority Spanish-speaking communities. I don't find it threatening, but it is a long way from the 1960's.



    Second, a long time ago I wrote a specification for a certain kind of equipment and sent it out for bids to every company in North America that I had identified as being capable of doing the work. The contract was eventually won by a Mexican-American owned company in San Antonio. Another time I wrote a specification for equipment and the bid was won by a Mexican owned company in San Diego.

    In both cases the companies were family owned and run; the guys I dealt with had "competent" written all over them - young, intelligent, hard-working; they were anxious to obtain the work, and they showed me that by their timeliness, by their sincerity, by their honesty, by suggesting features that would make our design both better and easier to build, and by exhibiting good customer service traits generally.

    The one guy told me that he would meet or exceed any standard we specified, and he did. What's more, he did it at a lower price than any other bidder. These guys wanted out work. They didn't tell me it was important to them. They showed me it was important to them.

    In one of the bidding processes one of the competitors was a company based in Oklahoma. They had a fairly widely known reputation in the business. Their bid was ok, but their main effort to get me to award the contract to them was to attempt to bribe me, including an invitation to go partridge hunting in Kansas with them. I pointed out the company policy on gifts, and invited them instead to come cross-country skiing with me, at my expense, near Algonquin Park. They got the point. They did not win the bid.


    Which company would you have wanted to do business with?
    Which of those bidders was living the American Dream?
    Do I care whether they were there legally or illegally?

    These guys won my respect, and my business, on the quality of their character, not their immigration status.]]

    Complain about this comment

  • 460. At 01:12am on 03 Aug 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    RH, as far as owning guns, there is one very important point to consider: whether people can afford them.

    Doesn't a poor person have just as much of a right to own a gun as a rich person?

    In some states, they are raising ownership and registration fees, requiring classes, raising gun and bullet fees, ect.

    We must always be cautious that it never becomes too expensive to own a gun.

    Complain about this comment

  • 461. At 02:41am on 03 Aug 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    "We must always be cautious that it never becomes too expensive to own a gun."

    ____________

    ... because heaven forbid that the negative externalities of gun ownership should be captured in the price of owning firearms.

    Complain about this comment

  • 462. At 10:52pm on 03 Aug 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    LUCY;YOU WROTE;

    Doesn't a poor person have just as much of a right to own a gun as a rich person?

    In some states, they are raising ownership and registration fees, requiring classes, raising gun and bullet fees, ect.

    Yes everyone has the right to own a firearm in America,unless you are a felon etc..

    One way the lefties are going after our gun rights is trying to drive up the cost of ammo ,adding ridiculous fees for licensing,as well as making us get concealed weapons permits etc..

    To that I would refer to the 14th amendment to the constitution,I think argued properly this would make these laws unconstitutional ,it reads no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the united states .one such privilege is our gun rights and by making us purchase concealed permits to carry our weapon or making it illegal in some states to keep it in your vehicle,
    our rights are being infringed .
    we are trolling on this one

    Complain about this comment

  • 463. At 11:35pm on 03 Aug 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    Interested foreigner wrote;

    Which company would you have wanted to do business with?
    Which of those bidders was living the American Dream?
    Do I care whether they were there legally or illegally?

    If the company was owned by a Mexican American,that would mean he is not here illegally.No problem doing business with him, as long as if he or she is not operating in the U.S,using illegal labor to cut costs.
    And as a consumer this would effect you less than if you were trying to compete in similar business doing it legally.

    Complain about this comment

  • 464. At 02:43am on 04 Aug 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    Speaking of the 14th amendment there is also new debate in the senate about the citizenship part of this amendment.
    It states,
    All persons born or naturalized in the U.S. ,and are subject to the jurisdiction therof,are citizens of the United States and of the state in which they reside.

    some senators are not so sure the amendment's intent was to grant automatic citizenship to children born in the United States to parents here illegally.

    I agree,if the parents are here illegally that means they are citizens of another country and so are their children,regardless of location of birth..
    If the parents have acquired legal citizenship in the U.S ,prior to the child's birth, in my opinion that would make their children Americans









    Complain about this comment

  • 465. At 04:21am on 04 Aug 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    Although I agree that illegals who have kids in America should not have their kids be given citizenship, at the same time, if we change this amendment, I fear what other amendments they might try to change in the future. I do not really want to see politicians take away other amendments, because one thing leads to another.

    Personally, I think that illegals who have children here still should be deported. They can take their children with them or leave them with legal relatives/guardians in the States.

    But it does not seem right that an illegal would get American citizenship just for having a baby here. After all, an illegal could get pregnant in another country, live there almost the full term, then cross the border illegally and have the child here. The child should not be punished. The parent should be punished by being deported immediatly.

    Complain about this comment

  • 466. At 1:57pm on 08 Aug 2010, McJakome wrote:

    465. At 04:21am on 04 Aug 2010, LucyJ wrote a fair and level headed analysis of this very difficult problem:

    Keep this up.

    Complain about this comment

  • 467. At 2:39pm on 08 Aug 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    The issue of citizenship for children of illegal immigrants born in the USA is probably one of the most difficult to solve because of Constitutional considerations and moral issues, but it may be a good idea to remember that most "Hispanic" illegal immigrants in the USA are young, single, people with no children.

    Most of the Spanish-speaking children we see in schools, and public or private places, are children of LEGAL Hispanic immigrants who either entered the USA with a visa, were given political asylum, or whose parents were born in the USA.

    Judging by what I read in blogs like this I believe the anti-immigrant sentiment that currently exists in the USA is influenced by a mis-understanding of the terms non-citizen and amnesty.

    Non-citizens include more than illegal immigrants. Any foreigner living in the USA who has not applied, taken, and passed the citizenship test, and who has not yet become a naturalized citized is a non-citizen. This means that anyone living and working in the USA with a green card is a non-citizen living LEGALLY in the USA. Obviously, this includes all the professionals that enter the USA almost every day with a H2B visa as well as semi-skilled and unskilled immigrants that enter our country in accordance to established quotas.

    Amnesty does not mean a path to citizenship. It simply means that those that broke our immigration laws will be pardoned for that offense and will be allowed to remain and work in the USA under certain provisions or restrictions, such as the proposed "guest worker" program or by applying and getting a green card.

    Complain about this comment

  • 468. At 4:10pm on 08 Aug 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    St. Dom.,

    If the illegals get a pardon, this means that every American citizen should also get a pardon.

    Why pardon an illegal foreign invader for a crime, yet Americans do not get a pardon?

    It is completely biased and one-sided.

    Complain about this comment

  • 469. At 7:23pm on 08 Aug 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    466. At 1:57pm on 08 Aug 2010, JMM wrote:

    465. At 04:21am on 04 Aug 2010, LucyJ wrote a fair and level headed analysis of this very difficult problem:

    Keep this up.

    Nothing wrong with being fair and level headed,however women who are close to term in mexico travel here either illegally or legally on temp visas A.K.A laser visas,to have their children ,not for love of our country or pride in being American,no, it is simply for the social services that the child will then be illegible for,paid for by hard working, law abiding, taxpaying Americans.

    Complain about this comment

  • 470. At 7:34pm on 08 Aug 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    it is simply for the social services that the child will then be illegible for,paid for by hard working, law abiding, taxpaying Americans.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Such a strong wish for accountability when it comes to where the tax money goes to, and in the rest of the affairs, accountablity is non existent..if a small amount of tax goes to illegal children, shouldnt make you climb up the tree and start shaking it wildly..More tax is used to kill people in artificially created wars...

    Complain about this comment

  • 471. At 7:45pm on 08 Aug 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    467. At 2:39pm on 08 Aug 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Most of the Spanish-speaking children we see in schools, and public or private places, are children of LEGAL Hispanic immigrants who either entered the USA with a visa, were given political asylum, or whose parents were born in the USA.

    Over 20 million illegal aliens in our country and you can come to this conclusion.
    If this is the case, it goes to prove the unwillingness to assimilate.
    If they really want to become Americans they would teach their children to speak English,I see it all the time ,parents walking through stores or other public places speaking nothing but spanish to their children.

    How will this help them learn in American schools.

    By the way there is not an anti-immigration sentiment in America .
    You conveniently left out the word illegal.


    Complain about this comment

  • 472. At 8:16pm on 08 Aug 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    colonel ;
    I am for accountability of all tax monies collected.
    A start would be to stop paying for a rich counties poor.
    I also believe we should outlaw lobbyist,and have term limits in congress, so we can disrupt the shady deals that go on and on.
    Ear marked spending is also out of control.
    A look at where stimulus money is being spent will show you some of the pet projects are not going to stimulate anything.
    Here are some examples.

    -A half million dollars for new windows at the Mt. St. Helens visitors center in Amboy, Washington. The building has been closed since 2007 and there are no immediate plans to reopen it.--$6.9 million dollars for repairs to an 1846 brick fort marooned on Dry Tortuga at the end the Florida Keys. Few people can visit this remote national park unless they hire a seaplane or take a four-hour round-trip boat ride. --Creating a museum in an abandoned train station in Glasboro, NJ, at the cost of $1.2 million.--$2 million dollars to send researchers from the California Academy of Sciences to islands in the Indian Ocean to study exotic ants.--A study of dog domestication at Cornell University with a price tag of $296-thousand dollars.--$141-thousand dollars to send students from Montana State University to China to study dinosaur eggs.--$762-thousand dollars to create interactive choreography programs at the University of North Carolina. Dancers would wear electronic monitors to analyze their movements. --$89-thousand dollars to replace sidewalks in Boynton, Oklahoma that were just replaced five years ago. One of them goes nowhere near any houses or businesses and leads directly into a ditch.
    A half million dollars for new windows at the Mt. St. Helens visitors center in Amboy, Washington. The building has been closed since 2007 and there are no immediate plans to reopen it.--$6.9 million dollars for repairs to an 1846 brick fort marooned on Dry Tortuga at the end the Florida Keys. Few people can visit this remote national park unless they hire a seaplane or take a four-hour round-trip boat ride. --Creating a museum in an abandoned train station in Glasboro, NJ, at the cost of $1.2 million.--$2 million dollars to send researchers from the California Academy of Sciences to islands in the Indian Ocean to study exotic ants.--A study of dog domestication at Cornell University with a price tag of $296-thousand dollars.--$141-thousand dollars to send students from Montana State University to China to study dinosaur eggs.--$762-thousand dollars to create interactive choreography programs at the University of North Carolina. Dancers would wear electronic monitors to analyze their movements. --$89-thousand dollars to replace sidewalks in Boynton, Oklahoma that were just replaced five years ago. One of them goes nowhere near any houses or businesses and leads directly into a ditch.

    This is economic disaster not stimulus,especially since this was all borrowed money.






    Complain about this comment

  • 473. At 8:35pm on 08 Aug 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    The budgets and stimulus packages have always certain amount of money for such things..If you ever read your budget, you will find some really funny things which the money is set aside to be used..No need to get worried now, its been like this for decades and decades ago..Due to lack of other activities, experts have broken down the stimulus package and make fun of such things..Dont fall into this trap..Your experts are well that such break down will create even more anxiety among people..Watch out for such experts that you see on tv and the ones who write in newspaper..You sound like you live in afghanistan..or in pakistan..or indian state of bihar.

    Complain about this comment

  • 474. At 9:07pm on 08 Aug 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    colonel;
    It has gone on for decades ,that is why I said earmarked spending is out of control,however this is supposed to be economic stimulus,money,and was taken from taxpayers in the name of creating lasting jobs to stimulate our economy,and is the largest ever of this type.
    Experts do not need to create anxiety,if you were in business here you would know this.


    Complain about this comment

  • 475. At 9:42pm on 08 Aug 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Experts do not need to create anxiety,if you were in business here you would know this.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    If you like me, sometimes just for fun go through the whole budget and such stimulus packages, you will find that sum alloted to such funny things is always a microscopic sum of money out of the total budget..And stimulus pacakges never create lasting jobs, they are just another name of quick fix, the governments are supposed to bail out departments or things or people from going bankrupt..And then, the government has to cater to every city and province or state of the country...If in maine or montana students need to watch ants and the only way to do is to get the government stimulus then the university is going to fight for it...Who knows one of them turn out to be future nobel winner in ant watching...If you went into detail of your budget from 1990 or 1950 or anyother year, you will start blaming those people for not using the money properly...The problem with you people is that every tom, dick and harry considers himself to be an expert and without any reason comes on tv and starts giving you the statistics..and then take his pay, put it in his pocket and wait for the next week to come.

    Complain about this comment

  • 476. At 00:23am on 09 Aug 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 471, RHCracker

    "Over 20 million illegal aliens in our country and you can come to this conclusion."

    According to government estimates the number is 10.8 million, which is a huge number that does not need to be exagerated.


    "If this is the case, it goes to prove the unwillingness to assimilate.
    If they really want to become Americans they would teach their children to speak English,I see it all the time ,parents walking through stores or other public places speaking nothing but spanish to their children."

    The reason many Spanish-speaking immigrants - LEGAL and illegal - do not teach their children how to speak English when they first arrive in the USA is because they don't know how to speak English themselves.

    I think it is also important to point out that many of the Hispanics you hear speaking Spanish speak English fluently, but like many other immigrants they remain intent in preserving their heritage, the same way the three Russian women in the place I get my hair cut speak Russian among themselves, and the same way immigrants from every corner of the world speak their ancestral language when they communicate among themselves. That is common among immigrants, regardless of place of origin, and among first generaton Americans, and it is one of the reasons so many people resent them and believe they are trying to change our society and way of life.

    Fortunately, their children usually learn English in a matter of months and by the time they become adults they speak and behave like most Americans do.

    "How will this help them learn in American schools."

    My three kids were born in Spain. They did not speak English when they arrived in the USA because my wife, who was also born in Spain, did not speak English and because my ability to speak Spanish resulted in us speaking that language at home. My small children learned English within six months, excelled in school, one got a BS in Mathematics and works for a large software company where he has an excellent job, another got an AA and is doing very well in marketing and sales. Sadly, none of them speak Spanish, and shortly after our arrival my wife was forced to attend night school to learn English because otherwise she would not have been able to communicate with her own children!

    "By the way there is not an anti-immigration sentiment in America .
    You conveniently left out the word illegal."

    I apologize, I should have inserted the word illegal in front of immigration.

    Complain about this comment

  • 477. At 00:25am on 09 Aug 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 468, Lucy

    "If the illegals get a pardon, this means that every American citizen should also get a pardon.

    Why pardon an illegal foreign invader for a crime, yet Americans do not get a pardon?

    It is completely biased and one-sided."

    That is one of several reasons why I oppose amnesty. Another important reason is that it would encourage other people to come illegally knowing they will be pardoned once they settle in the USA.

    Complain about this comment

  • 478. At 6:03pm on 09 Aug 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    I think it is also important to point out that many of the Hispanics you hear speaking Spanish speak English fluently,
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Did the euro settlers learn the languages of the red indians, or did they just send the red indian children to far off schools where they would not only learn english but forget all about their heritiage? When the poor want to retain their heritage and language it become THE PROBLEM, and when rich people speak more than one language, its seen as an asset...

    Complain about this comment

  • 479. At 6:14pm on 09 Aug 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 480. At 6:29pm on 09 Aug 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    476. At 00:23am on 09 Aug 2010, SaintDominick wrote:


    The reason many Spanish-speaking immigrants - LEGAL and illegal - do not teach their children how to speak English when they first arrive in the USA is because they don't know how to speak English themselve

    While this is a good explanation,these same people I see speaking spanish to their children in the stores,also whip out their welfare card with the American flag on it to purchase their food.
    Now, if they had just gotten here like you explained,how would they be eligible for welfare already ,I thought only their American born children qualified for assistance.Or is every illegal alien in the country eligible for social services.

    Complain about this comment

  • 481. At 6:34pm on 09 Aug 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    478. At 6:03pm on 09 Aug 2010, colonelartist wrote

    Colonel ,no one said lose your heritage or forget your language.
    What I was stating is,if your kids need to learn english to keep up in school, it is foolish not to speak to them in inglish in everyday life.

    Complain about this comment

  • 482. At 6:43pm on 09 Aug 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    475. At 9:42pm on 08 Aug 2010, colonelartist wrote

    And stimulus pacakges never create lasting jobs

    Thats not what the great community organizer said,this was going to create and save millions of jobs,remember.
    the projects I mentioned in my post 472 were not statistics they were facts and showed wasteful spending in the middle of economic crisis.
    Is there anyone out there still supporting this whacko administration.

    Complain about this comment

  • 483. At 7:21pm on 09 Aug 2010, Ezrael wrote:

    I would like to notify the world that the current view that illegal immigrants are here doing only the jobs that Americans do not want is completely untrue. I have met and seen many illegal immigrants in new trucks, working state jobs and in the ownership of many businesses, from groceries to insurance companies and more. One major problem is a "cultural bubble", a new category in the workforce that panders to illegal immigrants by hiring Spanish-speaking peoples, or people who are bilingual. It has created a large amount of jobs for 1st generation illegal immigrants and their children, while shutting out English-only speaking peoples (read natural citizens of any race). Often you will find job postings, especially within the customer service area that require the person to be bilingual. So that means a non-Hispanic CITIZEN must take a 3 or 4 Spanish course, just for their job? This extends not only to customer service, but police, government workers, etc.. Living in a nation that has almost 10% unemployment and a staggering economy, it doesn't make any sense to continue to allow more migrants in, ESPECIALLY of illegal nature. And that is only a FRACTION of the negative ECONOMIC impact of illegal immigrants. There are a multitude of other reasons.

    Complain about this comment

  • 484. At 7:29pm on 09 Aug 2010, Ezrael wrote:

    Excuse my previous comment where I stated "it has created". It has not created but in fact taken existing job openings and forced new criteria on the applicants, the requirement of being either Spanish fluent or bilingual in Spanish and English.

    Complain about this comment

  • 485. At 7:30pm on 09 Aug 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    What I was stating is,if your kids need to learn english to keep up in school, it is foolish not to speak to them in inglish in everyday life.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Genius, it is foolish...it is so foolish that even educationists dont support it...Parents who do not know the language of the country they migrate to, should never speak that language to with their children, they should always communicate with them in their own language, All the complicated things I will not waste my time to explain to you...Two things are important...The child learns concepts in his own language, and then generalize it to the second language, and parents speaking broken language, say english in usa, teach wrong and incorrect english to the children...What have you been doing with your life, you have no idea about budgests, or stimulus packages, and you dont know about bilingual children...

    Complain about this comment

  • 486. At 7:38pm on 09 Aug 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    And stimulus pacakges never create lasting jobs

    Thats not what the great community organizer said,this was going to create and save millions of jobs,remember.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Are you that gullible? or you just decided to leave your common sense behind the closed doors, when you let yourself so easily voluntarily decived by the community organizer? You could have asked me..the rule is, when something or some statements look too good to be true, its always a lie.

    Complain about this comment

  • 487. At 7:42pm on 09 Aug 2010, Ezrael wrote:

    Another problem with the illegal immigration is that since these are foreigners with normally residing within the country of their origin, but with a high dollar to peso exchange rate, it is common for the illegal residents here to send money to these families. Where that is "good" and we can all agree that it is a moral obligation to take care of ones more unfortunate relatives, it leaves with this problem- tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars are leaving the American economy yearly and going to the Mexican economy. Instead of this money going to American business' and companies, both large and small, and these services and goods being taxed by the government, it is going directly to Mexican citizens living in Mexico who spend that money there. The cycle of money being re-pumped into the American community ends, and in these poor economic times it hurts.

    Complain about this comment

  • 488. At 7:55pm on 09 Aug 2010, Ezrael wrote:

    But in all honesty this could have been avoided if America had focused on making its southern neighbor its main trade beneficiary and not the Chinese, but that is a somewhat different topic.

    Complain about this comment

  • 489. At 8:01pm on 09 Aug 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Mexico was your 2nd largest exporting market last year..But that is also a different topic.

    Complain about this comment

  • 490. At 8:03pm on 09 Aug 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    485. At 7:30pm on 09 Aug 2010, colonelartist wrote:
    Parents who do not know the language of the country they migrate to, should never speak that language to with their children,



    Perhaps if planning to migrate to America it would be helpful to learn some english.especially if you have children that will be going to english speaking schools.

    But most illegal aliens do not want to assimilate ,they want english to be the second language.


    Also thanks for noticing and never forgetting to mention my genius, colonel

    Complain about this comment

  • 491. At 8:19pm on 09 Aug 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Perhaps if planning to migrate to America it would be helpful to learn some english.especially if you have children that will be going to english speaking schools.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ok, here is a thing, people prefer to migrate to usa compared to other developed countries, if given choice that is, because of just one thing, and that is in usa, people can get job, the unskilled jobs, without their knowing the language. The only thing that is on parents mind when they migrate is to get a job and work..In europe, the countries, create social clients because, they emphasize so much on language, in usa, the migrant gets a job without even thinking about learning language first and then looking for job..Picking cucumbers and potatoes in fields, or learning to drive a tractor doesnt need language skills...the day to day communication, the migrants pick up on work..Dont make language an issue, otherwise you will end up like bangladesh, a country created, I think the only country created on the bases of language..and look where it is today...nowhere..All bengalees, speaking the same language all the time..still fighting with each other, and still letting them be exploited by the west...the place once famous for best cotton and jute is pathetically serving the western idustries..

    Complain about this comment

  • 492. At 9:07pm on 09 Aug 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 390, RHCracker

    "Perhaps if planning to migrate to America it would be helpful to learn some english.especially if you have children that will be going to english speaking schools."

    That would be great, the problem is that many of the Mexican and Central American immigrants that enter the USA illegally are illiterate, and sometimes it is difficult to understand them in their own language. Do you honestly believe people who do not know how to read or write, and who live in misery, have the ability or resources necessary to teach their children a foreign language?

    The best we can hope for is that their children can learn English quickly so that they can become an integral part of our society.

    Don't forget that to become a US citizen applicants - who must be legal residents - must be able to speak English, must have a squeaky clean criminal record, and must pass a US history and government test that judging by some of the things I read in blogs like this I am afraid quite a few young American would flunk if they had to take it.

    Non-citizens who reside in the USA legally don't have to meet the requirements mentioned above...but they do not enjoy all the rights and privileges that American born or naturalized citizens do.

    Illegal immigrants do not have any rights and, if caught, they are deported back to their ancestral homeland.

    Complain about this comment

  • 493. At 9:25pm on 09 Aug 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 483, Ezrael

    How do you know those Hispanics that own businesses and have government jobs are here illegally? Did you ask them for evidence of citizenship or did you just assume that because they "look Hispanic" and speak Spanish they must be illegal immigrants?

    I can tell you from personal experience that getting a job with the Federal government is not easy, even for US born or naturalized citizens. I definitely would like to know how those illegal Hispanics that you know managed to get a job with the government.

    I don't doubt that there are successful Hispanic immigrants, but most of them entered the USA legally and, yes, many own grocery stores, restaurants, landscaping and other businesses and are doing quite well. That's one of the things our country offers to whomever comes with the proper documentation, abides by our laws, and work hard.

    If you want to find immigrants that are displacing American workers - or filling vacancies our companies can not fill because there are not enough qualified applicants - you have to go no farther than look at those who get H2B visas. Most of them are medical doctors, engineers, chemists, physicists, mathematicians and other highly skilled professionals. Most work alongside American counterparts, and many go back to their homeland after they achieve their financial goals.

    Complain about this comment

  • 494. At 9:32pm on 09 Aug 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    493 St. D.

    Thanks for all your postings on this string.

    I have grown weary of this topic. You have been indefatigable.

    Complain about this comment

  • 495. At 00:07am on 10 Aug 2010, McJakome wrote:

    488. At 7:55pm on 09 Aug 2010, Ezrael wrote:
    "But in all honesty this could have been avoided if America had focused on making its southern neighbor its main trade beneficiary and not the Chinese, but that is a somewhat different topic."

    I have been saying this for years. Moreover, I have put my wallet where my mouth is. If I see "made in China" next to a similar product labeled "Hecho en Mexico" or Made in Korea, I usually buy the product from a country that is not a totalitarian dictatorship and our once and future enemy.

    Complain about this comment

  • 496. At 4:55pm on 16 Aug 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    494. At 9:32pm on 09 Aug 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    493 St. D.

    Thanks for all your postings on this string.

    I have grown weary of this topic. You have been indefatigable.
    ..............................................................
    This subject is getting boring,if only I were in a different country pretending to know all the ramifications of another countries
    invasion of illegal aliens I would also ho hum the issue,unfortunately I
    deal with those ramifications on a daily basis.

    Complain about this comment

  • 497. At 7:30pm on 04 Sep 2010, RHCracker wrote:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_ScYY__oyk&feature=related

    Complain about this comment

View these comments in RSS

BBC iD

Sign in

BBC navigation

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.