Lalo Alcaraz for April 28, 2010

poignantly pathetic

CHURCH - Remember that if the government can come after “them” then it can also come after you!

Under the Patroit Act the government can hold anyone they consider a “terrorist’, they never have to say why they consider the person a “terrorist”, they never have to charge them, and they can hold them as long as they want.

Considering how you feel about Obama and the Liberials, the fact that they have this power should scare the s—t out of you, the fact the the GOP had this powre scared the s–t out of me.

The point is that this issue (illegal immigrants) is being used as a straw man to get people angry and keep them from realizing that the real problem is lously government.

America is in a mess not because illegals are taking the low paying jobs Americans never wanted, but because our “leaders” have let Wall Street and Banks run wild and they have destroyed the economy.

No matter which party is incharge it will take years to repair the damage they have done.

I have to agree wholeheartedly with Church on this Nazi comparison. I’m sick and tired of BS partisans on both sides constantly comparing someone to Hitler and the Nazis. Bush was a Nazi, Obama is Hitler, the Dems are Nazis, and now Arizona Nazi-esque.

Get real. The only person who was ever “Hitler” was Adolf Hitler. The only people who were Nazis belonged to the Nazi party. As racist and ineffectual as this law seems to be, it’s not orchestrating the deportation and extermination of 11 million people. It’s not declaring any group of people as a “master race” or inferior. Arizona has no f**king plans to invade Poland!

Lalo, I agree this law is racist, ill conceived, and will fail miserably. That said, your use of Nazi imagery is sick, offensive, and uncalled for.

“at most a legal resident will be is hassled”

I’m sure you’ve never been hassled because of the way you look, Churchie.

I’m am happy to see that this toon has rattled a few fascists like Church and Nandy. They are unaware of the reason why immigrants without documents risk their lives every day to come to the USA.

Jesus’ first sermon in Nazareth and his vision of the “Last Days,” in Matthew 25,show his concern for the poor, the sick, the naked, the hungry, the oppressed, and imprisoned were all he wants us to care about. The Statue of Liberty reminds us that the world sees the U.S. as the place willing to welcome the “tired, the poor, the huddled masses yearniing to be free.”

The condemnations by the above commentators prove what they think about the Bible’s call to “love justice” and walking “humbly” with God. A nation which keeps faith with its values need not worry about protection from the poor.

One final thought about hospitality. Jesus reminds us that the true sin of Sodom was its violation of the “Law” of hospitality.

Actual citizens of all races are being murdered and robbed and raped along the border. And many in Arizona (inc. Hispanic citizens) are fed up and they are for this bill.

A crime is a crime is a crime. Perhaps we should change our terms like the left wing does. They are “criminal immigrants.”

Fascism a. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator (an all powerful central government), stringent socioeconomic controls (control of the banks, companies, health care, etc), suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship( the “fairness doctrine” SEIU thugs, etc.) Who are the real fascists in this country? The left (see above) or the right? zzazzen, you think your definition still doesn’t fit this administration. Think back during the Bush years and compare them to now, “Who is the press in bed with??” And also Obama is continuing all the wiretaps and such. Huh?? Suppression of disent, look across America on college campuses, with PC “police’ , in most major media, who is being told to shut up? The right or the left.

^ I recommend you repent.

Way to go Church - agree with you 100%.. .. This new law is nothing at all like what happened to the Jews as you pointed out so well.

“secure our borders seriously, dealt with those repeat offenders by exporting them to someplace impossible to just scamper back across the border, such as Somalia, the flood of undesirables heading south would solve the problem in a month, at minimal expense.”

Can’t tell whether Andy never heard of Goebbels, or sleeps on a copy of his collected works.

The Nazis felt that the Jews were invaders who were economically exploiting their country and polluting its culture. (Heard any similar arguments about Latino immigrants?)

The minute the Nazis came into power they didn’t just start killing Jews. Little by little they turned up the heat on the ‘invaders’ until they were slaughtering them.

I know our country will never get to that point, but I wonder if laws like this one aren’t a step towards Hispanic-Americans having to wear badges to avoid police harassment or undocumented workers being forced into an even more clandestine and dangerous condition just to be able to feed their families.

I don’t like that law, but I think Alcaraz went a bit far here. It makes being a (legal) latino in Arizona annoying, not deadly.

And I doubt it about the skin used as lampshades bit. Not that I think the Nazis were not sadistic enough to do it, Just that I don’t think that is actually feasible or practical.

Sure, the Nazi comparison is a bit of a stretch, but it’s a slippery slope. The idea that a legal resident will only have to endure a little hassle is suspiciously close to the argument that goes “if you’re not guilty, then you have nothing to worry about.” But the US Constitution protects us against unreasonable search and seizure, and that includes unnecessary “hassling” merely for the sake of identification.

Aside from all of this, the law places an incredible burden on law enforcement and the rest of the legal system. But if that’s how Arizona residents want to spend their tax money, that’s their choice, isn’t it?

Oh, and straytski: Fascism was defined by Benito Mussolini as the perfect union of the government and the corporate. Subversion of the Constitution (i.e. warrantless wiretaps, excessive advocacy of the “unitary executive”, military tribunals for citizen criminals, abandonment of habeus corpus) – Suppression of dissent (telling the public you better watch what you say, confining legitimate protesters to remote fenced-in “free speech zones”) – manufacturing propaganda (i.e. sending fully produced “news stories” to news outlets from the government) – Who does that sound like? The left, or the Bush/Cheney administration?

You can tell the righties have no standing to object to this law when they say things like, “Why are Neo-Socialists so focused on protecting those who have no legal standing…”

If the righties were honest, they’d instead be looking at how this law affects those WITH legal standing, like Hispanic CITIZENS.

But no…once again those on the left worry about the Constitution, while those on the right trample it.

Those on the left say nothing about protecting illegal immigrants. Those on the right (are you listening, ANandy?) say nothing about protecting legal immigrants and citizens.

Meanwhile, Office Escobar realizes the untenable situation he’s been placed in:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/04/29/arizona.immigration.lawsuit/index.html?eref=igoogle_cnn

Puppy, Mexico recognizes dual citizenship, so Mexican Americans can still be considered Mexicans.

You can apologize to “Cave-face”…

Mexico might recognize dual-citizenship; but we don’t. Nice try, Grumbly.

It used to be the case, Puppy, that the USA didn’t recognize dual-citizenship, but things have changed (as someone taught me on these very forums a few months ago):

http://www.richw.org/dualcit/faq.html

Even so, it’s a moot point: If Mexico still recognizes someone as Mexican, and accepts them back with full citizenship, then they’re Mexican, as well as American.

I can go back to Canada (my birthplace) and enter the country as a citizen, and even get a Canadian passport, and come back to the USA as a fully naturalized American.

(Where’d your previous post go?)

Like all “real” situations, there is plenty on all sides to allow any peckerwood who chooses to support one point or the other.

What is missing is “the reality of the times”. Here in the US we have raised a couple of generations of young adults who have been schooled (as opposed to educated) by the overwrought proponents of Haight-Ashbury from the 60s. 1) If it doesn’t feel good, it can’t be right 2) If we don’t agree with it, it can’t be right 3) If you don’t agree with us, wholeheartedly, you can’t be right. 4) Being RIGHT (our way) is not only EVERYTHING, it is the ONLY THING. 5) Shut up and get the Hell out of the way.

From these humble observations you should conclude I support Arizona and its legislative rights and will. My reality parallels that of the morass in this respect; 1) If you don’t like it, shut up and get the Hell out of the way.

Buenas Noches

I too support Arizona in its attempts to deal with the illegal immigrant problem…up until those attempts bump up against the Bill of Rights…which I think this law does.

Want to stop or at least diminish ilegal immigration without so much fuzz? The solution is so simple….

HARSHLY PENALIZE EMPLOYERS.

But noooo, noooo, the emplouyers have the money the politicians want.

By the way, have Arizonians forgotten ALL OF THEM were illegal when Arizona was still Mexican?

Got it?

Seems the only new way they penalized employers was to make it a bit trickier to pick up day laborers.

I find it interesting that the so called conservatives are talking about everything BUT punishing the companies who illegally hire illegal immigrants. Do they not understand the concept of supply and demand that drives capitalism?

Impoverished people continue cross the boarder because they know they can get jobs to send money back to their family in their home country. Companies illegally hire illegal immigrants because they can pay them a pittance and not have to worry too much about all those pesky labor and safety laws. No matter how much you try to end that supply of illegal immigrants, they will find a way around it because it’s a profitable demand for their labor.

If you target the companies who illegally hire illegal immigrants with massive fines, they’ll eventually stop illegally hiring illegal immigrants. Once the illegals realize they can’t get jobs in the US, they will most likely stop crossing the boarder. End the demand, and the supply will dry up. That concept would work equally well for the so called “war on drugs.”

Recieved this in an email.

Let me see if I got this right…..

IF YOU CROSS THE NORTH KOREAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU GET 12 YEARS HARD LABOR.

IF YOU CROSS THE IRANIAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU ARE DETAINED INDEFINITELY.

IF YOU CROSS THE AFGHAN BORDER ILLEGALLY, YOU GET SHOT.

IF YOU CROSS THE SAUDI ARABIAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE JAILED.

IF YOU CROSS THE CHINESE BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU MAY NEVER BE HEARD FROM AGAIN.

IF YOU CROSS THE VENEZUELAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE BRANDED A SPY AND YOUR FATE WILL BE SEALED.

IF YOU CROSS THE CUBAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE THROWN INTO POLITICAL PRISON TO ROT.

IF YOU CROSS THE U.S. BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU GET • A JOB , • A DRIVERS LICENSE, • SOCIAL SECURITY CARD , • WELFARE, • FOOD STAMPS, • CREDIT CARDS, • SUBSIDIZED RENT OR A LOAN TO BUY A HOUSE, • FREE EDUCATION, • FREE HEALTH CARE , • A LOBBYIST IN WASHINGTON • BILLIONS OF DOLLARS WORTH OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS PRINTED IN YOUR LANGUAGE • THE RIGHT TO CARRY YOUR COUNTRY’S FLAG WHILE YOU PROTEST THAT YOU DON’T GET ENOUGH RESPECT

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I HAD A FIRM GRASP ON THE SITUATION…

Liberal communism, eh? Changey, that speaks a lot about your views. Where do you get your definition of those two terms?

“IF YOU CROSS THE U.S. BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU GET • A JOB , • A DRIVERS LICENSE, • SOCIAL SECURITY CARD , • WELFARE, • FOOD STAMPS, • CREDIT CARDS, • SUBSIDIZED RENT OR A LOAN TO BUY A HOUSE, • FREE EDUCATION, • FREE HEALTH CARE , • A LOBBYIST IN WASHINGTON • BILLIONS OF DOLLARS WORTH OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS PRINTED IN YOUR LANGUAGE • THE RIGHT TO CARRY YOUR COUNTRY’S FLAG WHILE YOU PROTEST THAT YOU DON’T GET ENOUGH RESPECT”

Really. I’m pretty sure the person who wrote this has never been an illegal immigrant in the US ;) .

No, not even a weak grasp, Comyics.

The issue here is not the illegals. No one (here) has shown even the slightest inclination to be in favor of allowing illegals to be here. Perhaps if you’d read some posts, rather than just assuming, you wouldn’t have missed the issue as much as your emailer.

The issue is how this law affects both legal immigrants and citizens, especially the ones most likely to be mistaken for illegals…the Hispanics.

Would you like to comment on that?

(You might also like to comment on how an illegal could get an Arizona driver’s licence. Google “Arizona drivers license requirements” and see if you can figure out how it could be done.)

Bruce, I have read the whole thing (after Petergrt was helpful enough to post a link to the PDF on another thread). That’s why I made the comment about employers previous to yours.

I can only assume your last question is rhetorical, since it ignores the fact that the only part I’ve spoken out against is the second, which I feel conflicts with the 4th Amendment.

As does Officer Escobar:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/04/29/arizona.immigration.lawsuit/index.html?eref=igoogle_cnn

Changehashappened, I was a doctor for most of my adult life. Then I went to law school. Only worked for a year (in a workers’ comp firm), and gave it up. Didn’t like it, but I thoroughly enjoyed going to law school. Covered stuff I’d never studied before, and was so much easier than med school.

Oh, yeah, I’m a “he”. I just thought this avatar pic looked considerably more appealing than one of my own ugly mug.

They wrote HB 2162 last night , recognizing that it might be nice, as a state of the union, they at least tip a hat toward that silly “Constitution”, and the rights of CITIZENS. All the emphasis is on illegals, who are illegal, with very little to no recognition of the impacts on citizens, some of whom were living in Arizona when it became a state!!

That’s why I said “here”…which was true until you showed up!

bleeep, Godwin’s Law again. I’m disappointed. :p

obamandy,

do you EVER make a positve statement ?

comYics: In those countries, a person would likely be persecuted, incarcerated, or just plain put to death if they were to criticize the leaders as many here do Obama. If we want to BE better than our enemies, we have to ACT better.

Also, those countries don’t likely have greedy companies hiring illegal immigrants to work in unsafe conditions for less then minimum wage. Why won’t “conservatives” talk about punishing the companies who hire the illegal aliens???? Eliminate the demand and watch the supply dry up.

Did anyone read fennec’s article? It might tone down your rhetoric a notch.

4uk4ata: Interesting, I had the Canadian version of that email sent to me by a Canadian-South African. Gosh, illegal immigrants are a lucky bunch of folks, I wish I was one.

Hey Iran has a law where women can be arrested for having a tan.

It is your duty to report Illegal aliens. Homeland Security will agree.

(I read it, Fennec!)

Arizona has adjusted the new law, now saying a person can’t be required to prove their legal status unless they’ve been noted engaging in other illegal behavior.

This still allows for racial profiling, but doesn’t require it, so it’s a step in the right direction.

http://tinyurl.com/3ywctb8

But it does show they recognized the problem that so many have denied existed.

Federal laws run parallel with that Arizona law.

El-de-porto.

Yes ahab, babylon 2 seems so near, you can almost smell it.

Is it possible you don’t know that “Ahab” is a Jewish name, ComYics?

It’s obvious you don’t know what an oxymoron is.

Actually, I don’t know why I’m asking, since you pretty much ignore any comment or question directed to you.

You make good points, Senor. I agree it’s not a perfect fix; that’s why I said it’s merely “a step in the right direction”.

The original law required police to go out hunting for illegals. The modification requires them to check the status only on people they’ve stopped for other infractions or crimes.

Try to stay focused, Senor.

Does the phrase NEVER AGAIN mean anything to anyone reading this. This is HIGHLY offensive and virulently anti-Semitic and should be taken off the internet immediately.

C’mon, Scinfl. No matter what the “Fair and Balanced” lying righties claim, EVERYONE wants the illegals sent back to Mexico.

The Left (to whom I have apparentlly been added to), merely wish that it be done in a method that doesn’t conflict with our Contribution.

The righties area happy to ignore the Bill of Rights; the Lefties wish to support the Bill of Rights.

And none of the Righties have no argument against this.

Righties: Hate our Constitution.

Lefties: Support our Constitution. (By example, by the righty-hated ACLU).

As in several prior posts, I was referring (not very accurately, in this case) to the people who are engaging in the discussions here, Church.

You’re right…the illegals don’t want to return. Got me there.

Hes late, hes late…

Hes?

English isn’t your first language, right?

Oh, and the thought came to mind that ET would be harrassing me about that.

Anyway, enough attention pimping of mexicans. This is a section for political editorials, not race issues. Seperation of Race and State.

comYics proposed “Separation of Race and State.” As a government policy this was actually tried. A whole group of people i.e. everyone not labelled or categorised white, were disenfranchised and kept separate from each other, mostly. Thus achieving Separation of Race and State. Except if you were white in which case you were the state.

Cool. Another Nazi metaphor. Can’t have too many of those around these days.

Obama’s a Nazi, the Tea Partiers are Nazis, Arizonas are Nazis, Glenn Beck is a Nazi. It wasn’t funny the first time either.

Maybe Lalo should ask a Holocaust survivor how he/she is enjoying a tasteless comparison of their experience with genocide with a popularly-supported piece of legislation well within the jurisdiction of a state.

Disgusting…

The Nazis didn’t start with death camps, they started with laws depriving people of their rights, by organizing mobs to intimidate legislators to give Hitler dictatorial powers, by throwing those they didn’t like into work camps. And don’t be so sure we would not go down that road. The Germans were a highly educated, civilized, modern culture not a bunch of brutes. Read about the KKK, Sand Creek and Wounded Knee and tell me we are not capable of doing great evil.

Don’t forget the Japanese internment camps…or slavery, for that matter.

Wow, I came up with almost exactly the same visual on my blog a few days ago. That’s spooky. http://thetrashwhisperer.blogspot.com/2010/04/new-huffpost-on-immigration.html