Whew Go Arizona!

[Darunia]

http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2010/0...ds/?hpt=T2

This is one of the biggest and most conservative of my stances. Every year our culture is watered down by this unchecked exodus from Mexico and South America. I like my country the way it has been. I want immigrants to respect our laws, learn our language, and adapt to our customs. The government bending over backwards to extend to these CRIMINALS all manner of welfare assistance, and lending them interpreters at their invariable court dates... makes me see red.

/Stands by for the inevitable leftist diatribe from ASM.

[Unreadphilosophy]

I am a huge supporter of keeping illegals out of this country.

Daruina, I don't know if you remember this, but there was some info detailing the government's involvement in a group of Minutemen that were doing a great job at keeping illegals out of this country. A few months back, Obama ordered the group to cease their actions. Of course, the President--or any other member of the government--has the authority to state such an action.

Honestly, if there's one thing that I've learned from the government's actions in "attempting" to stop illegal immigration, it's that everything they've done has failed. Bush wasted billions in tax payer dollars when he built that shit wall. Looking at Obama, we know that nothing is going to be done. Barrack is smart enough to know that illegals looking for welfare will not hesitate to support him. From what I can see, state enforcement of illegals has done more to hinder the process than any government program.

[Unreadphilosophy]

/Stands by for the inevitable leftist diatribe from ASM.

If I were you, I would be more worried about the junk that Falcon has in his trunk.

[A Black Falcon]

Illegal immigration... very difficult issue, really. There are a lot of complex factors involved that make deciding what is best really hard.

I do not support extreme measures like building giant walls on our borders. It won't really work, as people will still find a way to get in, it's hugely expensive, it looks bad, and it's environmentally destructive. The ideal way to reduce illegal immigration is for the countries people are coming from (Latin America) to improve enough that people aren't as attracted to coming to the US but think they can do things at home instead. A central part of our illegal immigration issues are things like how Mexico is in such awful shape, who wouldn't want to get out of a country as wracked by drug violence as Mexico is... or the poverty of countries south of that.

Whatever we do on the border though, people are going to come in. And that's when it gets really, really hard. People who say "zero tolerance", etc, such as Lou Dobbs -- here's what I want to know. What are you going to do, arrest Hispanic people at random hoping that some are illegals? That would be awful, and is illegal as well of course for good reasons. Enforcing immigration law on employers, that is punishing them severely if they hire illegals and actually enforcing it, is a policy that has promise, but would be expensive and intrusive and states and companies would protest strongly, so it probably wouldn't pass with many teeth. I'm not sure whether I'd oppose such a law or not, it would depend on the specifics.

Anyway, the most complex problem is what to do with illegals here. I guess the goal is to make it harder for them to get work so that they just decide to go home on their own or something, right? Because forcible evictions are NOT going to work and are a terrible idea. Kicking parents out of the country while allowing their children to stay looks horrible, and is. But on the other hand, just giving them citizenship or something doesn't really work either. For one thing anyone who actually waited in line, often for years, for the right to immigrate to the US legally would rightfully be pretty angry if people who cut in line and came in without documentation. It doesn't seem right to give people rewards for cutting like that... but we can't really punish them either, because they're people and you can't just act like they're awful people or something. There's a reason Lou Dobbs got so criticized, and the Minutemen Project broke down -- the racist implications of what they said, even when trying to keep it out of it, got to be too much of a problem (note that Hispanic is of course not a race, but a cultural group, but I don't know of a better term than "racist" for this).

Oh, and most illegals are not doing things that legal citizens want to do. This is very much true -- most aren't displacing legal workers. What is happening is that they are being exploited. Employers do not have to pay them decent wages, house them humanely, give them any benefits, and more... these things are terrible, and should not happen if there's anything we can do about it. This is why enforcement against employers seems like the best path, they are the ones hiring people so if they are dissuaded from it that would take out a lot of the problem.

Of course, they would argue that many things can't be done affordably without illegal labor, but that's a different problem, and not one that should stop the right thing from being done. As long as they're illegal, undocumented, whatever words you want to use, conditions for those workers are not going to improve, I think... and merely saying "well, it's better than what they have at home" isn't good enough. That may be true, but by our standards it's horrible and that's what matters. I'm terrible at economics though, so I really can't say anything much about this very important part of the issue. I'd need to hear the statements and opinions of more knowledgeable people about the issues before I could say anything certain about these subjects.

Of course though, just legalizing a lot of them isn't going to solve it either, which is why I said it's such a tricky problem... and even if you do what do you do with the ones that come afterwards? You can't just make anyone who makes their way into the US a legal resident. Whatever else is done people aren't just going to all leave, though, and that's why I said it's such a difficult issue. The various goals of what I'd think immigration reform should do appear to conflict, and I have no idea how to reconcile them. Somehow people need to be treated humanely, people who have lived here for many years shouldn't all have to leave, undocumented workers need to live and work in places that meet American legal standards, and more should probably be done to discourage employers from using undocumented labor... but how do we do all those things? Don't ask me.

Overall I think that the immigration reform effort from a few years ago was a pretty good one. Immigration was the one issue that President Bush was good on -- he was not in favor of isolationist, anti-Hispanic wall building, to his credit. It's too bad that his own party sabotaged the effort.

On that note, go ahead and keep hating Hispanics and treating them like they're scum... all that it's doing is continuing to drive a large and growing block of the American people into the Democratic party. The Republican Party seems to think that somehow it can win forever with a "WASPs First" policy, but it can't last forever, not with America's demographics. :)

Oh yeah, and finally, Hispanics that stay integrate into American society, as have all other groups. It takes a few generations, but by the third generation or so people are American like anyone else. The issue is just that there are so, so many first generation immigrants that a lot of people lose sight of this fact.

[Dark Jaguar]

ABF, I agree with some of your points and actually go further on a few things I'll get into in a sec, but I will say this. Illegal immigrants almost certainly are taking jobs legal citizens want when we have as high an unemployment rate as we currently do. Certainly they aren't jobs you or me would do, but when you don't have much of a choice, or your skills are limited, that's what you do.

That said, there is ONE sort of job that only an illegal immigrant CAN take, the one that pays well below minimum wage. It's not that that legals couldn't take them, it's that when they do, they have the law as an option (though not all are going to be in a good position to take advantage of it). An illegal immigrant doesn't have that option, they'd be found out. As much sympathy as I may have for that, a job market for such low salaried employees certainly does take possible jobs from the legal citizens.

Oh, just investigating any "suspicously hispanic" people is not just illegal, it's downright racist. I do believe it's plausible for someone to dislike illegal immigrants purely on the standpoint of not paying taxes and being outside the system in many other ways. However, the more I talk with the average person I meet that doesn't like the illegal problem, the more I realize that the majority of them really are just plain racist. They go on and on about how much they hate their various ways of life, families packed into small houses and so on (things I would add I don't honestly care about). The big hot button end-all argument seems to be "it hurts my property values".

I'd like to say something about that. After thinking about this for a long time, I've finally decided that I DON'T CARE ABOUT PROPERTY VALUES. Property values aren't an actual thing, they're just the value the public at large puts on your stuff, and if I don't care that a lot of people are suddenly unwilling to buy one company's record players because Sony's new CD just destroyed that intellectual property's value, do you really think I'm going to care that your house probably won't sell all that well? That's the least important thing when it comes to that. I care if a neighbor is doing something that literally damages property, or endangers people, or even simply is very annoying like playing music really late at night. However this big huge argument that "my property is being devalued" as though they are literally stealing money, is complete nonsense. Yes, I can see you being upset, but it's not them, it's the racist people that wouldn't want to live NEXT to them. You can't blame someone for someone else decided they don't want to live next to them. It's an idiotic argument and a cheap excuse to want "those people" out.

I would also add that the argument from ANY company that they can't do business without breaking the law holds no water with me. Let them fail if they can't find a business plan that doesn't involve paying employees below a decent income. There's plenty of other businesses failing that have perfectly legal business plans. I seem to remember another time in our nation's history where businesses made the argument that without really cheap labor they couldn't stay in business... Remember how that turned out?

Darunia, I can respect that you don't like tax money going in any way to help people who aren't paying taxes, but the fact is, legal representation is a guarenteed part of our legal process, and it IS to be applied to anyone being tried in our courts. It makes no distinction saying if they aren't a citizen, those rights can be violated. If the courts need to appoint a lawyer in their defense, so be it. The same would be done for a legal citizen brought to court who never paid any taxes (I happen to know such a person).

As for them not learning English, well everyone's got an opinion on that, but if you ask me, it's not something the law needs to care about. It's a social issue. It's in any immigrant's best personal interests to learn American English. That's for sure. Also, it certainly is awkward to speak with anyone that doesn't know the language. That's also true. However to be downright MAD at them, that's really not going to help anything, is it? If a business wants to provide a spanish translation for things, that's the open market responding to the needs of a growing demographic. What's wrong with the free market responding like that? Sometimes you go to a restaurant and the person taking your order doesn't speak English. Don't get mad at the immigrant, get mad at the business for making a poor business decision, but it IS their decision to make. :deal: If you go to an area where most people speak spanish, guess what? You're the outsider, and you can't expect too much. If most of them are illegals, you have the annoyance compounded with them not contributing tax money, yes, but again the language barrier is a social issue.

Society does change over time. If we made every single illegal a legal immigrant, a lot of them are still going to speak spanish. At first, it's really in their interest to learn English, and some will. There is also a chance that enough of a spanish community will develop that within it, a lot of people don't need to learn english, and they can live their whole life speaking spanish, a language they DO need to live in that sub culture. It's really no different than what most english speakers already do. In the end, one or the other will become dominant in our society, and there is a chance, small though it may be, that spanish MIGHT just win. Then in the future that'll just be how it is. It's just the natural progression, things change, and if we reach that point where most people speak spanish, though some still speak english, do you really want to be so stupid as to argue "well they should all learn english" even though some people will say "those people just need to learn spanish, it's what everyone else speaks, and it's so annoying ordering a burger from some englishman who can't speak a word of spanish" but they wouldn't say it like that, because that sentence was english.

My point is, whatever happens should just happen as a natural result of social interaction. Sometimes you'll be inconvenienced by someone who doesn't speak clearly in your language, but that's just how it goes. No need to bother the law about that. It's the legal status of the immigrants that's actually the issue here.

The way I see it there's a few options. The first is to expedite the immigration policy. If anyone in Mexico can become a citizen in a process that takes weeks rather than years, then we should have nearly entirely legal citizens coming in from Mexico. Maye that'll just make the cultural "problem" explode, the biggest issue being what economic impact so many would have, but really I doubt it'd be that much worse considering that when most can't get in legally, they just get in anyway. At least this way, they are paying taxes.

Another would be some sort of actual aid with the Mexican government. The Mexican society DOES have well off people, and the bigger cities do have plenty of middle class, it's the sheer difference between their middle class and their poor, far greater than the difference in our's, that is the bigger part of the problem. Their ability to control crime is another big factor, and their organized crime is gaining a larger foothold in some of the southern states. If a concerted effort was used to help bolster the Mexican police force so they could actually squash their organized crime, and perhaps if they could start helping their own poor, they wouldn't feel the need to come here.

Of course, another option I've wondered about is this. What about our nation offering to start gaining a few more states? Canada's a nice candidate for starters. They're basically our attic anyway. We could then focus on expanding our basement. I'm not talking about conquest, I'm talking about starting some sort of negotiations. If Mexico IS America, the issue becomes moot. They're reduced from illegal immigrants to... Okies.

I admit the expansion idea is appealing to me for one more geographical reason. If we did that, no longer would it sound so egocentric to call ourselves "Americans" when there's more to North and South American than just the US. It would just be an accurate description for the whole thing. We'd be the Federation basically. Face it, the UN is a toothless organization, more of a peace conference than any sort of acting body. Forming an ACTUAL global government, one deserving nation at a time, is a big step in the right direction. There'd be some requirements, the place up for candidacy must respect certain rights and already have a certain level of infrastructure in place before being considered.

We Earthicans would then all be united... under the GREAT TASTE OF CHARLESTON CHEW!

[alien space marine]

/Stands by for the inevitable leftist diatribe from ASM.

[Weltall]

Acquiring Mexico might actually be the only ultimate solution. Mexico's history has never been one that any reasonable historian would consider 'stable'.

[Fittisize]

Acquiring Mexico might actually be the only ultimate solution. Mexico's history has never been one that any reasonable historian would consider 'stable'.

That's just a terrible reason to annex a country!

[alien space marine]

That's just a terrible reason to annex a country!

Then they will become gringo's too!

[Unreadphilosophy]

Acquiring Mexico might actually be the only ultimate solution. Mexico's history has never been one that any reasonable historian would consider 'stable'.

With the way the Drug War has thrown that country into chaos, I don't think that would be the best idea.

Oh, just investigating any "suspicously hispanic" people is not just illegal, it's downright racist. I do believe it's plausible for someone to dislike illegal immigrants purely on the standpoint of not paying taxes and being outside the system in many other ways. However, the more I talk with the average person I meet that doesn't like the illegal problem, the more I realize that the majority of them really are just plain racist. They go on and on about how much they hate their various ways of life, families packed into small houses and so on

From what I've seen, immigration enforcement--both at the state and federal level--has done a solid job at deporting the right people. I've never heard of legals being kicked out of this country before.

Now, on to the reason for not liking illegals. First off, I would like to say that the social, economic, and ethical traits of illegals coming from Mexico are not the reason I don't like them. You're right: that is racist. I would also like to add that I do not support the opinions of those people.

The first reason that I don't like illegals relates to what Dark said: jobs. At a time when Americans are struggling to make ends meet, it's not fair that people who violate our laws are able to obtain jobs without a hitch. Do some of those jobs suck? Yes. However, when you need money, you'll do anything for work.

The second problem is the welfare state. Illegals are the main source of substance needed to keep the welfare system in gear. Many people say it's taking from the rich and giving to the poor. In reality, it's take from working Americans and giving to people who think they can live off the money that's forcibly taken from others. Private sector speaking, it's one of the biggest forms of theft around.

Those are the reasons I don't like illegals.

[Weltall]

>However, when you need money, you'll do anything for work.

I think most Americans would rather take up welfare or unemployment benefits than pick cabbage or swamp out septic tanks.

[Unreadphilosophy]

On that note, go ahead and keep hating Hispanics and treating them like they're scum... all that it's doing is continuing to drive a large and growing block of the American people into the Democratic party. The Republican Party seems to think that somehow it can win forever with a "WASPs First" policy, but it can't last forever, not with America's demographics. :)

Excuse me. *Goes to bash his head against the nearest wall* Seriously, Falcon? That's the argument that you're going to use? It's as I said to you in a previous rant: the left's use of the race card is getting old.

[Unreadphilosophy]

>However, when you need money, you'll do anything for work.

I think most Americans would rather take up welfare or unemployment benefits than pick cabbage or swamp out septic tanks.

Go watch Dirty Jobs on the Discovery Channel when you get the chance. You''ll be quite surprised what you see.

[Weltall]

I think it's funny how Democrats say that, when Democrats possess near-total political dominion over every inner-city ghetto in the United States. This includes Richmond City near me, and considering how much of said city looks like a bombed-out hellhole now and has looked like a bombed-out hellhole for far longer than I've been alive, I have to say that Democrats are wonderful administrators to minority populations!

Of course, Republicans are somehow to blame for these lifetime Democratic constituencies being awful places to exist in the fifty or so years that Democrats became the so-called 'minority-friendly' party.

[Unreadphilosophy]

^Uh, duh. Welfare is the ultimate ideal in the progressive reality. In fact, if you asked Dems to create a philosophy on the morality of welfare, they would come up with this: "The ultimate morality for this country is the willful surrender of people to the collective. For such an ideal to manifest itself, the individual self--an abhorrent and unnecessary representation of people--must be destroyed and replaced with an altruist reality that is so potent, that it finally parallels the "I" with the "We."

Ayn Rand went against such a morality in her work, Anthem.

[A Black Falcon]

Excuse me. *Goes to bash his head against the nearest wall* Seriously, Falcon? That's the argument that you're going to use? It's as I said to you in a previous rant: the left's use of the race card is getting old.

It's not a card, aside, or anything else. It's a fact, and it is what has happened to the Republican party over the past five years as they have pushed their anti-immigration platform that so many Hispanics find racist.

As I said, George W. Bush tried hard to win the Hispanic vote. He supported immigration reform, spoke Spanish, had been a governor in a state with a large Hispanic population, and more. It's one of the only issues he understood, really, and he was rewarded with fairly significant numbers of Hispanic votes. People like W. and Karl Rove realized that the Republican Party had to expand its base to keep winning, because minorities are an increasingly large part of this nation and Hispanics are one of the largest and by far the most rapidly increasing part of that. Republicans can't win for much longer if they keep hating Hispanics.

However, the right-wing base of the Republican party hated that idea. A lot of them are racists (sorry, but we all know it's true, even if you aren't), but either way many Hispanics get offended by the anti illegal immigrant hatred that inevitably seems to spread to general Hispanic hating. By 2008, the Republican party had bowed down to these forces and immigration reform was off the table, and anti-immigrant language was in the Republican platform.

What was the result?

Predictable, of course. John McCain won a significantly smaller percentage of the Hispanic vote than W. had in either 2000 or 2004, despite also being from a state with a lot of Hispanics in it, Arizona, and the anti-Hispanic fervor in the Republican party was the reason why.

So as I said, long-term, the more Republicans say how much they don't like Hispanics, the more they alienate a huge block of American voters and make their future chances for electoral victory more remote. At this rate even Texas will turn Democratic eventually, thanks to the Hispanic vote being mostly Democrat.


And I mean, as Bush shows, it's not like Hispanics are automatically natural Democratic voters. They are mostly Catholic so dislike for abortion and such is strong, for instance, as with the Republican Party. But when the Republican Party is doing everything it can to alienate them, the results are going to be obvious.

Go watch Dirty Jobs on the Discovery Channel when you get the chance. You''ll be quite surprised what you see.

Most Americans would not take those jobs. That some do doesn't mean most would, even if they had no other place to look for work!

Also, one other argument that has been made by the agricultural industry is that most Americans do not have the proper skills for farm work, while Central and South American people, mostly from small villages, do. And that's a good point, really, and how many of those people get in on visas every year... but this is why immigration reform is needed, those big farms then exploit those workers terribly.

"The ultimate morality for this country is the willful surrender of people to the collective. For such an ideal to manifest itself, the individual self--an abhorrent and unnecessary representation of people--must be destroyed and replaced with an altruist reality that is so potent, that it finally parallels the "I" with the "We."

That sounds like Communism, not socialism. Communism doesn't work, certainly, because it doesn't have much relation with the way human beings actually are.

Socialism, though, as they have it in Europe (which is the best model) does work, and certainly is not incompatible with free enterprise. That kind of scaremongering is ridiculous.

[Dark Jaguar]

It's not like we have to pick between socialist nightmare or anarchy. It's possible to be IN BETWEEN those.

I think assuming someone is guilty until they prove otherwise if they "seem" like they are not from 'round here is, well, unconstitutional. Also, it's downright inconvenient. Wrongful arrest anyone?

[alien space marine]

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/37Q5cDj1zL4&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/37Q5cDj1zL4&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

If this was made today, It would be met with protest as its pretty obvious what this cartoon is really about.

[Darunia]

Hella ya there'll be protest--that cartoon sucks. It depicts illegals not only intruding, but stealing from Americans? In a light-hearted and fun sense, and the evil American is trying to stop them, but they outfox him? I don't like that one bit. But the stereotypical Mexicanesque mice? Yea, that'd be chewed apart. You won't be seeing any more of Speedy.

[Weltall]

You won't be seeing any more of Speedy.

Actually . . .

[Unreadphilosophy]

^I have just lost faith in humanity.

[Dark Jaguar]

Speedy wasn't in syndication for a while, but he's back baby. Darunia, you have a very uninformed view of "political correctness", the sort of childish view of it "destroying everything we love" that was all the rage in the 90's. The fact is that while various companies did restrict this or that for being "offensive", as time goes on it's made very clear that, at least as it applies to really stupid things, it's all just temorary fads.

You also don't seem to understand the difference between a company caving into pressure and the government actually restricting free speech. Companies are not branches of the government and are free to not show whatever they want to not show.

[Unreadphilosophy]

You know, the more I look into this bill, the more I'm beginning to hate it. The fact that the bill allows the police to question whoever they want simply on the basis of immigration stats can lead to the abuses of a police state. Look at like this: the fifth amendment to the Constitution states that no citizen has to self-incriminate themselves. If a minority who is a legal citizen starts being questioned by an officer on personal matter--residency, family, status, etc.--that to me inquires the beginning of a Police State.

Another thing that I am afraid of is that it could lead to a fourth amendment violation if the officers feel that they can search legal minorities without a warrant. Such a thing can happen. Just look at what happened with the PATRIOT act.

Do I believe something needs to be done about illegal immigration? Yes. However, I feel that this isn't the right way to go.

Here's Judge Andrew on the matter:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/judge-napoli...80%99.html

So, yeah, I'm highly skeptical of this bill. This is not the right way to go.

[Fittisize]

Yup, fascism through and through! But it seems to be the only way to come to terms with the views of a large segment of the ultra-nationalist population which despises illegal immigrants on principal and considers any Mexican-looking and Spanish-speaking person un-American and probably illegal anyways.

[Unreadphilosophy]

^Fascism, New World Order, Police State, One World Government--all of it applies to what's happening in today's world.

[Fittisize]

I'm not sure if I entirely agree with what you're saying but I love the enthusiasm!

[etoven]

I say it's about fucking time someone got off there ass Arizona! Way to go..
The thing that really pissed me off is that the illegals are all like, this shit ant fair..

Like we did some shit wrong.. No what isn't fair is that illegals violate our borders, DONT LEARN ANY FUCKING ENGLISH!, and live tax free, and then bitch about it when we try to put a stop to it.

[A Black Falcon]

You know, the more I look into this bill, the more I'm beginning to hate it. The fact that the bill allows the police to question whoever they want simply on the basis of immigration stats can lead to the abuses of a police state. Look at like this: the fifth amendment to the Constitution states that no citizen has to self-incriminate themselves. If a minority who is a legal citizen starts being questioned by an officer on personal matter--residency, family, status, etc.--that to me inquires the beginning of a Police State.

Another thing that I am afraid of is that it could lead to a fourth amendment violation if the officers feel that they can search legal minorities without a warrant. Such a thing can happen. Just look at what happened with the PATRIOT act.

Do I believe something needs to be done about illegal immigration? Yes. However, I feel that this isn't the right way to go.

Here's Judge Andrew on the matter:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/judge-napoli...80%99.html

So, yeah, I'm highly skeptical of this bill. This is not the right way to go.

Obviously your paranoia about America turning into a police state isn't entirely accurate, but you are right that this bill is constitutionally very questionable. The growth of government surveillance power over the past decade has been extremely troubling, and one of the worst things about Obama is that he has not revoked most of Bush's impositions onto the Constitution in the world of surveillance and beyond. That has been not entirely unexpected, but quite disappointing. We have rights for a reason, and Obama's "I will not punish anyone or pursue any trials for anything done wrong during the Bush Administration" policy is horrible and implicitly condones their unconscionable behavior. It's very, very sad that he's done that, the Democratic party should be better than that! You can't just ignore widespread, upper-level criminality, it tells everyone "in the future, doing this stuff is fine, all that'll happen is you get repudiated later. You won't actually have to suffer or be tried for it or anything like that.", and this country should be better than that.

Anyway, this obviously goes way too far. You can't just arrest people at random because you think they might be illegal. There's no way this is constitutional, I think.

[Dark Jaguar]

I say it's about fucking time someone got off there ass Arizona! Way to go..
The thing that really pissed me off is that the illegals are all like, this shit ant fair..

Like we did some shit wrong.. No what isn't fair is that illegals violate our borders, DONT LEARN ANY FUCKING ENGLISH!, and live tax free, and then bitch about it when we try to put a stop to it.

etoven, legals are also upset. That's the problem. Perfectly legal Mexican immigrants are going to be forced to provide papers on demand pretty much whenever police feel you aren't "local" enough. That's the gist of the bill. A law that hurts innocent people is wrong. What part of that don't you understand?

[etoven]

etoven, legals are also upset. That's the problem. Perfectly legal Mexican immigrants are going to be forced to provide papers on demand pretty much whenever police feel you aren't "local" enough. That's the gist of the bill. A law that hurts innocent people is wrong. What part of that don't you understand?

All state and federal governments have taken all necessary precautions to minimize the impact on legals, there was even a special training program on how to approach suspected illegals with out racial profiling. Personally I tend to believe that the precautionary measures will be antiquate until I have good reason to believe otherwise. The claim that the bill will effect legal Mexican immigrants rights is nothing more than a scare tactic to protect all the illegals in this country.

[Unreadphilosophy]

Here is a copy of the bill in question:
http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070h.pdf

According to the bill, police need to have "reasonable suspicion"--I believe that means "probable cause"--before they can actually arrest someone. If that's the case, then it looks like the fourth amendment does stand.

The bill also states that people cannot be picked-up simply because of their skin color or nationality. That lifts some of the skepticism off my shoulders.

Now, here's what I don't like:
"ANY
27 PERSON WHO IS ARRESTED SHALL HAVE THE PERSON'S IMMIGRATION STATUS DETERMINED
28 BEFORE THE PERSON IS RELEASED."

I don't quite understand that. Why do they have to have their status determined before they are released? Doesn't that bring up guilty before proven innocent? I mean, if the person is illegal, then I don't give a shit because the Constitution doesn't apply to that individual. However, if they are legal, and you arrest and detain them without having a trail, then from what I can see, you've just violated their right to due process.

DAMN, MAN! This is confusing as shit. I will say this: I do not like illegals. They have no right to be here, and I believe that states have the full authority to kick them out. However, the thing that I worry about is detaining people who are legal. The fact that the bill says that their immigration stat. has to be determined "after" they are arrested does leave some question up in the air.

[Unreadphilosophy]

From subsections 30-34:

A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY,
31 CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE MAY NOT SOLELY
32 CONSIDER RACE, COLOR OR NATIONAL ORIGIN IN IMPLEMENTING THE REQUIREMENTS OF
33 THIS SUBSECTION EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY THE UNITED STATES OR
34 ARIZONA CONSTITUTION.

[Unreadphilosophy]

Hmmm.

[Weltall]

There really doesn't seem to be a 'good' solution. You really only have four choices:

1: continue to ignore the problem of illegal aliens until it reaches a dangerous head

2: make them all legal, which is essentially rewarding criminal behavior

3: racially-profile hispanics, because your targets are almost exclusively among their number

4: regular checks of the immigration status of any and all Americans, which would mostly be a waste of time and effort, but avoids the appearance of racism. This is how we handle airport security, so Grandma Myrtle has to be checked for bombs and weapons as often as any guy named Mohammed.

[Weltall]

Socialism, though, as they have it in Europe (which is the best model) does work

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/pXoUJN1O8i0&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/pXoUJN1O8i0&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

The most awesome part about European Socialism is how there is NO EXCEPTIONS, NO EXCUSES, NO ESCAPE! (This one is from the U.K.)

I mean, do we really want to slide into Orwellian existence like the mother country, where your every movement is on camera and your every behavior legislated?

[A Black Falcon]

According to the bill, police need to have "reasonable suspicion"--I believe that means "probable cause"--before they can actually arrest someone. If that's the case, then it looks like the fourth amendment does stand.

The bill also states that people cannot be picked-up simply because of their skin color or nationality. That lifts some of the skepticism off my shoulders.

It means that Hispanic people in Arizona better be carrying around multiple forms of ID, preferably including their passport and/or birth certificate, at all times if they don't want to end up in jail. It also means that Hispanics in Arizona, up to this point one of the most pro-Republican Hispanic blocks in the country (still majority Democrat in votes, but Republicans had gotten more Hispanic votes in Arizona percentagewise than in most other states), will now move dramatically in favor of the Democrats. Polls have already shown this movement happening, Democrats are already going way up among Hispanics in Arizona... maybe for now the benefit (to sating the anti-immigrant right) will be more than the penalty, but Arizona's going to be one of the first majority-minority states in the lower 48 -- it might happen as soon as 2015. Good luck for holding the state for long after that, Republicans. And as I've said several times, great job at shooting yourselves in the foot. You didn't even need any help to do it, either. :)

(And again, within a couple of generations Hispanics Americanize just like any other group. People who say that this is not the case are fearmongering. The issue is just that so many are first-generation immigrants -- and no matter where they come from, first-generation immigrants usually keep their original language as their main language for the rest of their lives. Their children speak both their parents' language and English. THEIR children mostly speak English. That's pretty much how it goes.)

[Weltall]

MSNBC, you so silly.

[Unreadphilosophy]

^Wow. That's an epic fail. Then again, it is MSNBC.

[alien space marine]

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/YEuHf6npQiI&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/YEuHf6npQiI&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

[A Black Falcon]

MSNBC, you so silly.

Many liberals prefer "undocumented" to "illegal" and you know it.

[Unreadphilosophy]

^That's just a nicer way of saying your ass is here unlawfully.

[Weltall]

Many liberals prefer "undocumented" to "illegal" and you know it.

Sure you do. It ignores the pressing reality of the situation, but gosh darnit, it sounds so much nicer!

[alien space marine]

If I were you, I would be more worried about the junk that Falcon has in his trunk.

Darunia doesn't know me at all and assumes that I am like this.



I dont really think we as "Canadians" can rightfully comment on the situation the U.S faces, The only way people come here illegally is by boat hiding inside a cargo crate, (although quite a few thousand Chinese have managed to do it every few years), We get so few "undocumented" Hispanics up here that they are still considered exotic.

[A Black Falcon]

Sure you do. It ignores the pressing reality of the situation, but gosh darnit, it sounds so much nicer!

I think the idea is that people who call it that don't think that illegal immigration is anywhere near as big a threat as you do.

I'm not sure what I think myself, the issue has little direct impact on me (remember that Maine is the whitest state in the nation, and neighboring New Hampshire and Vermont are second and third), so it's not something I've thought a huge amount about. There are good arguments on both sides... but I do strongly think the things I said above about exploitation, and that illegal workers get exploited terribly and how wrong that is. So more workplace enforcement probably would be a good thing, though whether it would be good for the economy or not is debatable.

Of course also deporting illegals with criminal records makes quite a lot of sense, no question there.

On the whole it's a really complex problem though, with lots of factors, most of which I don't understand well enough to state much of anything authoritative on... like, on how many illegals do pay in to social security (via their stolen or faked SSI numbers), but don't draw anything out, so on that the government benefits but they lose, while on the other hand I'm sure they make use of emergency room service as their only health care, on which hospitals, and the state, lose, and they do too because they're not getting any other care. But they're illegal, so what else could you do about that? Not much it seems...

Walls, crazy racist laws that infringe on the Constitution like this Arizona law, etc. though are not going to work, and antagonize people as well. Sure, we need some immigration reform, but certainly not the repressive kind that anti-immigrant people want. Hispanics do not threaten the existence of America or something...

Which reminds me of a good cartoon I've seen before, which says that pro-immigration Americans think that America has been made great by immigration, while anti-immigration ones think that it was made great by Northern European immigration from up until the early 20th century. That is, draw a line, anyone after this date isn't a "real" American... but America is a country that does allow assimilation into our culture, so that attitude just doesn't make sense. Of course I can understand why there is a big clash of cultures going on right now, but if you look back into history, you see these things regularly when there is a wave of immigrants coming -- think, for instance, of the experience of the Irish in America in the late 1800s. Ever heard of "No Irish Need Apply"? Racism against immigrants has a long history in America... but so far, each group has eventually ended up gaining acceptance, and changing itself in some ways to fit in. There is no evidence that that is any less true with the current Hispanic wave of migration than any other.

The exception, of course, is people who aren't planning on staying, but are only working here for a few years to make a lot more money than they would at home. The hopeful long-term solution there would be to make the situation at home better, or have some kind of program that could work for people like that so that they don't end up treated so terribly here. Setting up something like taht would be hard though, you'd need the companies to prove that Americans really wouldn't want the job... and they'd need to pay people better, which would break down part of the whole point of why they do it (to artificially hold down costs below where they really should be in order to make things cheaper for the American public, who want everything as cheap as possible). I mean, I do agree in principle that American citizens should have the preferred position, and it does look bad when companies want to bring in lots of lower-cost foreign workers instead of looking for more higher-cost Americans. Their excuse is that there aren't enough Americans who have the right skills or would do the job. The question is, is that true or not? Honestly I have no idea, it could be either way I think.

... Eh, I don't know, very complex stuff that I do not fully understand. I'll stop here.

Darunia doesn't know me at all and assumes that I am like this.

http://fc05.deviantart.com/fs30/f/2008/1...14_bis.jpg

I dont really think we as "Canadians" can rightfully comment on the situation the U.S faces, The only way people come here illegally is by boat hiding inside a cargo crate, (although quite a few thousand Chinese have managed to do it every few years), We get so few "undocumented" Hispanics up here that they are still considered exotic.

On that note, around here (remember that Maine is on the Canadian border, not the Mexican one; Maine borders two Canadian provinces and a third is nearby across the Gulf of Maine, but only borders one US state; on the other hand though, the majority of Maine's population (including me) lives in the southeast corner, not up north near Canada... but still.), the main immigration-related issue these last few years is how stupid it is that you now need a passport to go to Canada... you didn't used to, but the US government has strengthened the rules now, so now you need one. It's so pointless, Canadians are not a threat.

[Unreadphilosophy]

http://www.infowars.com/corporate-media-...anta-cruz/

This is why I don't watch the corporate-controlled media.

[A Black Falcon]

http://gawker.com/5529952/arizona-republ...upremacist

Arizona's State Senate leader's official Twitter follows two white power hate groups, including Stormfront's. That's the white supremacist hate group Stormfront.

I'm sure it's just a complete coincidence, considering the kind of bill that Arizona just passed... yeah... (Not really)

[Dark Jaguar]

From subsections 30-34:

A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY,
31 CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE MAY NOT SOLELY
32 CONSIDER RACE, COLOR OR NATIONAL ORIGIN IN IMPLEMENTING THE REQUIREMENTS OF
33 THIS SUBSECTION EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY THE UNITED STATES OR
34 ARIZONA CONSTITUTION.

You're right, it is WRITTEN like that. But what sort of clues would they be looking for if not those? What? Anything I can think of that wouldn't violate that is already proof they are illegal, thus negating the entire PURPOSE of such a law.

Down here in reality, the actual EXECUTION of this law is going to involve bothering perfectly legal citizens for racist reasons, and just jamming in a clause like that won't change that.

[Unreadphilosophy]

^I'm not saying that wouldn't happen, DJ. It's one of the reasons why I'm remaining skeptical toward the bill. The rights of the individuals who are here legally can still have their rights violated.

[A Black Falcon]

No response for anything in my last few posts? How shocking.

[A Black Falcon]

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/05/12/a...index.html

More anti-Hispanic racism from Arizona. Very sad.