Then they came for the Latinos, and I did not speak out--

If you are the one who doesn't see the relation between this issue and Fascism tactics...you are the one who lives in a unrealistic drama....good job Mc S!

And remember that they are using racial bigots on both sides to promote this hatred,to instigate you,to agitate the sheeple ...we will not be victims through ignorance and hatred. Follow the money trail and you will see an association in the funding and promotion of these different sides of the same coin...thanks for attempting to educate these children to the truth of the agenda...

this is partisim.... democrats are compared to communists, and republicans are compared to nazi's (who oddly enough were socialists). while the arizona immigration law might have several flaws to it so did the HEALTH CARE BILL. what was it i heard, we need a foundation before making adjustments to it.....

The article is based on a slippery slope fallacy:

The Slippery Slope is a fallacy in which a person asserts that some event must inevitably follow from another without any argument for the inevitability of the event in question. In most cases, there are a series of steps or gradations between one event and the one in question and no reason is given as to why the intervening steps or gradations will simply be bypassed. This "argument" has the following form:

1. Event X has occurred (or will or might occur).
2. Therefore event Y will inevitably happen.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because there is no reason to believe that one event must inevitably follow from another without an argument for such a claim. This is especially clear in cases in which there is a significant number of steps or gradations between one event and another.

For example, one could argue that the disregard for human life in terms of abortion will eventually lead to elderly persons being "aborted" for the sake of convenience (like the fetus, the elderly person is dependent upon others for survival). That also would be a slippery slope fallacy.

"Then they came for the Latinos, and I didn't speak out, because I'm black, and I thought I'd let the white people eliminate the competition".

I could not vote in your poll

People have as much compassion as they can afford - poverty is the issue and poor people simply can not care about others

Coincidentally the Nazi's were not socialists - they believed in private (aryan) property. They just used that name for it's marketability; National Socialist is an contradiction - mutually exclusive terms

eriq -- I not long ago read another Viner pointing out that Nazi's weren't socialist because of the private property issue. (zi = zionist)

Not only Dramatic but WRONG...Stinking Thinking.

Have you ever read the AZ Bill 1070? Have you ever been to Mexico? Do you know what it's like to be pulled over in Mexico, been harrassed by the federalies, had to bribe your way back.

First they came for the gringo's and then the gringo's stopped coming ... They could not survive our jails and seeing no judge for 30 days without the dollars...

Sorry we're not weeping over these thieves and common criminals. The propaganda campaign isn't working.

"First they came for the Latinos??"

And the latinos and their supports fought back. The oppressors where stunned.

I am honestly very conflicted over this issue. I am a college-educated, very liberal, New Englander. I know we are a nation built by immigrants. I know my family tree back to our first arrival in the US from Ireland (on both sides). I know that if I were in their shoes I'd be running, jumping, and swimming to get into the US legally or illegally if that's what I needed to do to provide for my family. I sympathize with everyone who has come here illegally, and those who want to.

But... I also see the civil war in Mexico. Yes, it's a civil war. The govt of Mexico has completely and utterly lost control of that nation. The drug cartels, through corruption, intimidation, and violence, have taken control south of our border. The violence is spilling over into our communities every day. So part of me must agree with the people who say "They're called ILLEGAL immigrants for a reason." They have broken the law, right? Granted, I would too if I were in their shoes, but they have broken the law. And considering the total dumpster fire that is Mexico today, I think the US has a responsibility to the security of our own citizens to ensure that the drug cartels aren't the ones crossing the border (tho we know they are).

So... There are ways of getting here legally. Granted they may involve time-consuming paperwork, or asking for political asylum for fear of your country's civil war, or arranging to marry a citizen... so...

I don't know. Honestly. My heart goes out to everyone stuck in the limbo of our immigration policies and our borders. If I were in your shoes I'd be doing the same thing. But please understand, we in the US want to provide a better life for our families too, just like you. That means that we must do everything we can to protect our families from the violence spilling into our nation from points south.

I'm glad I live in Massachusetts, over a thousand miles from that border. Distance gives me (and many of you) the luxury of forming abstract opinions on the matter. But I must admit, if I lived in a border state, I might find it much more difficult to be so sympathetic.

I'm sorry. I really am. I'm sorry your nation is such a mess. I'm sorry that we have wasted 8 years fighting 2 wars on the other side of the globe while ignoring the terrorist threat posed by the drug cartels right next door. I'm sorry we can't give you the life that you want here, but if you haven't noticed, we're not exactly in the best shape ourselves at the moment. Our economy is in the toilet. Recovering, but still iffy. We have high unemployment too. Many of us are struggling just to get by. I'd be happy to shovel every ounce of help we can muster to help those trying to get here, but don't we also have a responsibility to help those who are already here? And don't we have a responsibility to help those who are here legally before we help those who are here illegally?

There is no simple answer to this problem. And I'm afraid it's going to get worse before it gets better.

it seems to me that the opinion of police in this country changes every time something happens. With the issue at Harvard they were called stupid, then after some got killed they were praised as heros, and now this law is passed an their called racist....

F-22-937412: If you're saying that Obama's opinion changes, you're absolutely correct.

1.10: There is a simple answer to the rather 'complex' problem. We just choose to make it complicated because the Government simply refuses to do what needs to be done. It will not punish the businesses, who gains not only in an exploited labor force but in withheld taxes from falsified I-9 forms that the Government do not get. (I wonder where those where the money is?) If you dry up the jobs you dry up the reason that the illegal migrant worker come over the border

Families who have children in the United States, the children are covered under the 14th Amendment. (Repeal the amendment if you don't like it) So those and those alone should be placed at the back of the immigrant line to citizenship, with paying the penalties of back taxes.

Also, we have to look at this from two different perspectives: The illegal immigrates that come for the money to send back to Mexico (or other countries); and the drug cartel/gun runners that jump the border and create a clear and present danger to America.

But it is a damn accurate description of the Right Wing Rhetoric.

"Then they came for the Latinos, and I didn't speak out, because I'm black, and I thought I'd let the white people eliminate the competition".

ROFLMAO!!!

This was priceless. I laughed until tears welled up in my eyes!

Good one and I voted it up! LOL

What thieves and common criminals are you referring to?

That would be ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS.

Notice how that is racially neutral? Of course you don't.

Your poll was a joke.....a very bad one.

If you're saying that enforcing the law means I'm not showing any "compassion" for law breakers? Then, yep...you're right. I'm not.

There is a simple answer to the rather 'complex' problem.

To quote Mencken:

For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.

ILLEGAL IS NOT A RACE.

There are millions of Legal Latinos here.

Stop the propaganda.

+1

One word on this whole subject mcspocky....

ILLEGAL

hi CL. I agree with what you wrote but I do have a problem with a law worded in such a manner that allows police to require "your papers" based primarily on their determination that you look illegal. I have lived and worked in countries where this is the norm and I don't think any of us would want that amount of control...and it would eventually filter out to the rest of us (human nature is still human nature)

Stupid, stupid, stupid people.

Why target the 'illegals'? (because we need a new scapegoat to divide the people, that's why, the Muslims aren't fitting the bill anymore)

*********Make a friggin' law against HIRING them and ENFORCE it with jail and dissolving of the company**********

problem solved!!!!!!!!

I used that poem as an argument about the racial profiling at one time. The answer someone came up with was... this isn't Nazi Germany. I should have followed up with the following saying:

'Those who do not learn from history; are condemned to repeat it.'

Hi D D (may I call you that?) --I fully understand what you are saying and the repercussions. I was just reading Socrates's article on this topic and his statement was 25% of the Az. Mexicans are illegal, and 100% of their illegals are Mexican. I agree with him that if that statement is accurate, then that should be significant in the issue. Part of my attitude comes from having a relative living in the Phoenix area and hearing of the stories and inequities as a result to the legal citizens, as well as dangerous activity.

I read another post of yours elsewhere one time regarding other countries and your experiences, and I agree with how you feel about immigration in general. We are all immigrants. We should be legal immigrants. As I mentioned, though, can it go on forever?? I realize we die to offset the influx, but is the rate of resource available for future use in balance with the usage? Somehow, I think common-sense is going to have to override compassion and altruism at some point, no??

I think you might have misunderstood me (I sometimes don't make myself as clear as I should). I'm all for overhauling the immigration laws and closing the borders. if any provision is made to allow those in the country to stay it should be with stiff penalties and requirements and only available to those with no criminal history here or elsewhere. companies should be fined heavily for hiring illegals and closed if repeat offenders.

at the same time, in a country made up of all races, it's not a good idea to give the cop on the beat the power to say "I think you look illegal, show me your papers". I know I don't want to have to start carrying my birth certificate.

D Demilo, yes, I understood that is what you meant... you didn't want the "law worded in such a manner that allows police to require your papers based on" how you look. I agree - very understandable. I don't think any of us would want that. I thought 'activity' would be associated with the 'suspicion', but I see your point, it might not be.

I suppose if the Az. issue wasn't at hand, and if we all were just talking about immigration laws in general - then we might be looking at this with less scrutiny to proving citizenship. But, given this is such a problem regarding legality, abuse of Democratic principles, corrupt employers, kidnapping, legal citizens having to take a "back seat," et al ... that drastic measures seem in order because the situation has become drastic. If the Federal government isn't going to do as you suggested (and I agree), then the State has the responsibility to protect its legal citizens, don't they?

yes, they do. I only hope we're not opening a door we may wish we hadn't

*********Make a friggin' law against HIRING them and ENFORCE it with jail and dissolving of the company**********

Amen to that, Nearing!!!

5.9 - that is what Senate Bill 1070 essentially states and is aligned with federal law.

OK, I'll go with the folks who focus on one word in this issue: ILLEGAL.

The fact is that businesses in AZ (I lived in Phx for 6 years) have been illegally using cheap labor to avoid paying a living wage to their employees. This illegal behavior has driven the problem that now confronts us. If you look at litigation in AZ (the enforcement of existing law), what you see is a huge case load dealing with the illegals, but only TWO cases brought against companies for hiring illegals...

So, who should we be focussing on with regard to illegal behavior???

If you look at litigation in AZ (the enforcement of existing law), what you see is a huge case load dealing with the illegals, but only TWO cases brought against companies for hiring illegals...

This is what living in a Corporatocracy will get ya.

Honestly - the American value system cares for business, not for people.

I agree Nearing. Although I think I would replace the word "value" with "political". I think the American people have pretty good values -- but the politicians, not so much.

The issue is that the State can not get the employer records. That's why there is only 2 cases so far. I sounds great -- "Just go after the employer" that would work fine if the I-9 employment records could be accessed. Those records can not even be subpoenaed by the state and that loophole needs to be closed or else the feds need to be the ones prosecuting. So one step at a time, the new law has wording that makes it easier to go after the day labor employers, the underground cash operations -- and I believe they will.

If you want to go after the employers -- we need to get politicians to buck the business community and pass legislation with teeth in it. We, the people need to vote the bums out.

desert, the politicians are a reflection OF the American People... you can't take all of our ugly behavior, stick it to politicians and complain that they are the problem. They are us. If we allow them to behave this way, then we cannot claim to be any better...

Yes, business, by purchasing influence in govt, has made it difficult or impossible to prosecute illegal hiring in AZ, so they are forced to focus on the aliens... since the politicians are part of the business community, they will never do anything to erode that base. that is why phoenix has spread so much in the desert that they are now hopelessly short on water.... just make money, don't worry about the repercussions (like hiring illegals, polluting water tables, outgrowing your water supply...

If you have ever gotten a parking ticket, drove faster than the speed limit, drove without your seat belt fastened, smoked a cigarette or had a drink when you were under aged, failed to stop completely at a stop sign, or failed to use your signal light when making a turn, then you were also illegal.

And the folks that are guilty of those actions accept the consequences of those actions, be it a fine or jail time.

YET folks like yourself DO NOT want to require the "illegals" to accept the consequences of THEIR actions, namely enter the country illegally, get KICKED OUT when caught.

So WHY should these illegals have MORE rights than the citizens of this country?

accept the consequences of those actions

No they don't. They go right back out again and speed, drive without their seat belt fastened, etc. Not to mention all of the people who break those laws and aren't actually caught. I would guess that each of us violates at least one law once a month, at a bare minimum.

We want draconian enforcement of the laws we do not violate, but mercy when it is the ones we do.

AdipicAcid

OK, so you are AGREEING that since SOME folks do not consistently obey the traffic laws, that we should just throw the border wide open and let any and everyone who wants to walk in and sponge off the taxpayers of this country just come on in huh?

Because THAT is what the person who brought up the traffic laws was basically saying. That if you go 1 mile over the speed limit you are just as bad(if not worse) than an illegal alien.

No, what I'm saying is that people who have such venom about the matter are garden variety hypocrites who should be ignored. They aren't for "Law and Order", they're for "get those brown people out of my supermarket!" If they were supporting the former, we'd here a lot more about enforcing all of the laws, including those that they themselves break on almost a daily basis, like the speed limit.

McSpocky

So all the people who have not been caught, "accept the consequences of those actions, be it a fine or jail time", should go turn themselves in...just to be fair.

Well at least you are being consistent in your stand.

Those CITIZENS who break traffic laws should turn themselves in, while the ILLEGALS should not be asked to prove citizenship, are NOT asked to turn themselves in, and have a bunch of misguided Kumbya singing idiots wanting to give them MORE rights than the citizens of this country.

What your stand is basically is that "radar guns" should be outlawed, because it's "profiling" speeders, but the speeders will turn themselves in IF you give them an "incentive" like forgiving the offense and NOT writing them a ticket(amnesty).

While I DO realize that it must rub you the wrong way, the LAWS in this country are supposed to be EQUALLY applied to all. Now I do understand that since the growth of "race based" politics that is sliding away and people are looking for "special" laws that ONLY apply to single groups. But just because the "race pimps" out there think this is a good idea, does NOT mean that it is.

LAWS in this country are supposed to be EQUALLY applied to all

The key word is number five. That's the theory. Practice differs and only someone who is deep in denial can't see that.

AdipicAcid

The key word is number five

are?????

WTF?!?!?

OK, so what you are saying is that YOU are OK with different laws based upon skincolor/race?

When you call for 20 year sentences for anyone who knowingly employs an illegal, and massive fines for those who unknowingly do so, I'll believe that that you aren't. Until then, I will assume that since it is only the illegals who should have enforcement measures taken against them, and since the illegals you are most concerned with do in fact have brown skin, that you are mostly concerned with unequally enforcing the law when people look different than you do.

This is the crack cocaine versus powder cocaine situation all over again. The amount of powder cocaine that will put you away for 10 years is literally about ten times more than the amount of crack. Now what is the big difference between those who use powder cocaine and crack? Why not raise the powder cocaine sentences to equal the crack sentences? Every time that has been attempted, it is shot down, and it is transparently obvious that it is because that if that did indeed occur, we'd put a lot of white people in jail. Can't have that. It's the same with illegal immigration: you are willing to be angry as long as it is non-whites who are being severely punished.

Send the employers to jail. Once the jobs dry up, the reason to come here vanishes. It isn't simple, as enforcement on this scale will probably require a Mark of the Beast level national ID system, which will have the evangelical's underwear in a twist, but if you are serious about the problem you cannot just address it from the supply side: you've got to cut the demand for illegal labor.

Until then, I will assume that since it is only the illegals who should have enforcement measures taken against them, and since the illegals you are most concerned with do in fact have brown skin, that you are mostly concerned with unequally enforcing the law when people look different than you do.

See there you go ASSUMING things.

See I personally DO NOT care where they come from, be it Europe, Russia, Asia, the Middle-East, Africa, the Caribbean, or heaven forbid a "Hispanic" country.

IF they are in this country ILLEGALLY I want them gone.

I have held this stance for quite a number of years. When Oklahoma passed it's anti-illegal law I heard all the same claims of "racism". The "Hispanic" groups have tied this law up in the courts for the last 3 years and it looks like it will be a few more before that is resolved.

I said then, and I will repeat the SAME thing concerning the Arizona law, I hope that the FIRST person busted under this law is from ANYWHERE other than a "Hispanic" country. Be it Europe, Russia, Asia, Africa, or anywhere else.

One would think that would shut up those of you who wish to make these laws "racial" because you do NOT want the criminals kicked out of our country, of course I KNOW that it won't shut you all up, you'll just try and find a different way to make it seem "racial".

What is your opinion about the special treatment that Obama's aunt got? We ALL know that was a case of special treatment, and it illustrates quite well the depth of the problem. Folks say that "illegals" DO NOT get "government" benefits, well her case put the lie to that now didn't it? Just like the LIE about "illegals" NOT voting in OUR elections, the airport worker who was busted put the LIE to that tale also.

I fail to understand WHY these "pro-illegal" folks wish to destroy this country, after all it is this country that allows them to spout their rhetoric, yet they are working towards destroying it..............................that kind of defines insanity to me.

As if you don't?

And your silence about the employers remains deafening. If anything they are worse criminals than the illegals they employ, yet your hatred is reserved solely for the latter. That's pretty much racial, or at the very most xenophobia, right there. Put the Americans who hire these folks in jail, and you will go a lot further toward reducing illegal immigration than just deporting the illegals ever will. But again, that means putting quite a few champions of private enterprise in the slammer. I would guess that almost every major campaign contributor in Arizona has hired an illegal at some point or another. Doubly so for those cynically exploiting this issue to get elected.

Put the Americans who hire these folks in jail, and you will go a lot further toward reducing illegal immigration than just deporting the illegals ever will.

There you go, that is YOUR stand in a nutshell.

The citizens of this country should be held accountable to our laws, the illegals should not.

Way to go, thank you for wanting to extend MORE rights to those invading our country than to those born here or naturalized.

No. My stand is that while Americans are held exempt, everyone should be exempt. I'll accept deportations as long as the employers are equally, if not more severely punished. After all, they are the root of the problem, are they not? They are the ones welcoming the "invaders" and providing aid and comfort to the same. Where is your indignation?

After all, they are the root of the problem, are they not?

They are PART of the problem.

The "root" of the problem seems to me to be the bleeding hearts who continue to make excuses and demands on behalf of those folks whose FIRST action upon entering our country is to break one of it's laws.

Kaz, why would they come if they knew there was no work to be found here? Those folks put out the welcome mat far more than the "bleeding hearts" do, yet you don't care to punish them at all.

It's transparently obvious that this is not about "law and order." Your spittle-inflected invective against just the illegals and "bleeding hearts" betrays you. This is about hammering people whose politics do not agree with you. Until you are willing to put your political allies in jail for violating immigration law just as often as the illegals do, we have nothing further to discuss.

Your spittle-inflected invective against just the illegals and "bleeding hearts" betrays you. This is about hammering people whose politics do not agree with you. Until you are willing to put your political allies in jail for violating immigration law just as often as the illegals do, we have nothing further to discuss.

For YOU it is about politics, after all YOUR political masters have been preaching that corporations are the root of all evil in the universe, so of course you just parrot their lines.

It is foolish I guess to attempt to debate this issue with anyone who feels that it is the citizens of this country that are MORE to blame for the actions of the illegals, rather than to place the blame upon those breaking the law themselves.

Have fun in your happy utopia that you wish to create, and don't come looking for those of us who recognize the problem when you are told you are no longer welcome in your own country.

ROTFLMMFAO!!!!!

Typical.........................

I cannot begin to tell you how sick I am of the race card, the nazi-card, the reverse-race card....ad naseum.

What happens if you don't have ID on you? Do you go to jail? Will that make you late to work or maybe miss a day? Would you get fired?

Are the kids with you? What happens to them while you're taken off to jail? Will they miss school? Do you get to call someone to come and get them?

To answer your question,

I never go anywhere without my wallet. The last time I can remember that I forgot it was probably eleven years ago. In my wallet, I carry my driver's license, a state ID, a copy of my social security card, and at least two other picture IDs. I also have both my social security number and my driver's license number memorized. With that and other personal information known, if, somehow, I managed to forget or got my wallet stolen, I'm confident that I could prove who I was. If that's not enough well, even without the AZ law, here in Florida, I'd still risk the chance of being detained until I could prove my identity. Of course, even with the AZ law, the police don't have a right to ask me to prove my identity unless they are either questioning me about another crime, have me detained, or have arrested me. Since I make it a point to stay on the right side of the law, I'm not really worried in any case.

They should have come for the illegals long ago. Now it's too late.

Bingo!

They came for the criminals,

And I did not speak out,

because I was not a criminal.

Then they came for me,

I showed them my ID,

and they left me alone.

LOL!

And every rational, thinking American applauds.

I voted your comment up.

Hahahha. Good one.

For the lame excuse I forgot my ID, cops now can check your id number in their police car.

Memorize your id number. if you are legal, 99 percent you carry your id.

true, but it really is the only way to take care of the problem, short of a civil war.

Make an example out of the criminals HIRING the illegals.

Make an example out of the criminals HIRING the illegals.

Concur. Those convicted of knowingly hiring illegal aliens should face prison terms, or at least the loss of their business licenses and very heavy fines.

Yes, the only way on the employment issue. According to my relative, the illegals come in hiding in trucks et al. There are other issues besides jobs. There is a lot of crime associated with the issue, apparently.

I think that you're one the right track, una, nearing, but let me ask a question. Does this also apply to states that allow illegal aliens to take advantage of social programs normally reserved for citizens? Does this also apply to states that allow illegals to obtain drivers licenses? After all, it's your tax dollars and mine that are supporting them. If they can't get jobs then they won't stay but some couldn't stay as is without support from social programs. Should we not hold federal and state organizations accountable as well, just as you say we should the employers of illegal aliens? After all, both of them are supporting their ability to exist in this country illegally.

Make an example out of the criminals HIRING the illegals

The problem with doing that, is they're the criminals that have already bought the local Govts. They are really hard to nail.

Does this also apply to states that allow illegal aliens to take advantage of social programs normally reserved for citizens? Does this also apply to states that allow illegals to obtain drivers licenses?

That's a fair question and I say no. Just as we cannot let someone who comes to the ER without the means to pay for their care to die, we (the people, by way of the government) cannot allow those that are here to die of hunger, etc.

But these people aren't coming for the driver's licenses, they NEED the license to get to their illegally obtained jobs.

Take away the job, these people go back to the country they came from or apply for legal citizenship.

I agree Randlily, but they are the CAUSE of the problem, they need to be dealt with. Start locally!

I disagree, nearing

If they're starving, all they have to do is locate the nearest law enforcement agency and state that they are illegal aliens. It will mean that they will be deported but it will also mean that ICS will ensure that they are fed and treated well until such time as they are deported. As to your statement of needing a license for their illegally obtained jobs, doesn't that mean that certain states are aiding and facilitating their ability to fool the system? I'm not saying that employers are blameless but if a state makes it easy for an illegal to get a license and then an employer chooses to accept a license as a valid ID then can you blame the employer?

Arizona already has some of the nations toughest employer sanctions against the hiring of illegal workers. Here is an article that illustrates some of the problems with thinking that going after the employer will cure the issue. It is a start though, AZ tackled it early on and were called racist then as well.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2008/11/30/20081130underground1127.html

HereAndGone -- good point on holding states and feds accountable. We can at the ballot box.

I should probably start a whole column on this one bit i'm going to say, but seeing as how you guys in this section are actually talking and not yelling/ namecalling, and acting like adults, wth.

Besides it's 240.

Last week i heard a radio host say most of us/them/whatever have it all wrong, when your boat is leaking, you don't try and bail out the water first (illegal immigration) you plug the hole. (border)

imho i think that's a damn good point!

frankly put, no one cares about the illegal problem. oh they pass "laws", and "boycott", etc, but we still have an unfinished fence, and as nearing pointed out we still have scumbags hiring illegals for cheap labor.

doesn't it strike any of you here funny that we're so concerned about "terrorism" that we have unsecured borders?

the REAL answer, in order of priority should be as follows:

1 seal the border, NOW.

2 prosecute to the fullest extent of the law those that hire illegals.

3 deportation will take care of itself when the illegals leave.

the fact that no one is seriously doing anything about points 1 & 2 shows me that this is all a circus sideshow, and no one gives a rip.

Jeff

Sealing the border is the feds responsibility. It seems like they feel it is a non issue since only a minority of the states are a border state. That's why AZ is taking matters into their own hands. You don't want them to? Then get the feds to seal our borders. I'm all for it.

Actually I would just like to have the govt do it's job. It may be a minority of the states, but it's affecting our entire country, and more than the border states are affected by it.

On a sidenote, any chance you know how to ask multiple questions in a poll?

nearing

But these people aren't coming for the driver's licenses, they NEED the license to get to their illegally obtained jobs.

Take away the job, these people go back to the country they came from or apply for legal citizenship.

Nearing a similar premise was used in the state of California when contemplating issuing drivers licenses to illegal aliens. I've heard this argument before "since they're already here we may as well give them licenses and help them comply with the law."

I asked the question why would an individual who has already demonstrated such blatant disregard for our laws - violation of federal immigration laws by their very presence in the country, by working illegally, by driving without a license and/or without mandatory insurance - essentially give the government a roadmap to where they are so that they can be more readily located for enforcement actions (their address on the DL).

I would guess that many wouldn't, but passing any legislation that assists them while they are currently in violation of ANY of our laws only serves to legitimize their criminal violations, at least in their eyes.

And "we" let people die in this country all of the time. We let them die of neglect, by failing to protect them, by allowing insurance companies to deny needed medical procedures and care which has already been paid for.

Your thoughts on holding the employers accountable is a good point but I've seen agencies who have oversight and are tasked with enforcement flat out refuse to do anything about glaring violations. And there are also companies who merely factor in the cost of doing business illegally into their budget.

There has always been selective enforcement of our laws.

Jeff

I agree with you. It would be far more preferable to get the government to do its job then to have individual states have to step in. To answer your question, though, unfortunately I don't. Of course, I'm not an expert by any means since I still have trouble sending friend requests. I guess that's pretty sad coming from a programmer, lol.

Spocky, you have your head in the sand.

I don't care about statistics. I really don't. I don't think that the US citizens who have been robbed, raped, had their child molested, have to secure their doors and windows against home invasions because they are commonplace, etc care one iota about your statistics either.

1) Illegals use identity theft, that's how they get a lot of the jobs. Yes, that means they pay taxes but it's precious little in comparison to the free social services they suck up and the amount of money being wired back to Mexico rather than being spent here in this country.

2) Many illegals are committing horrendous crimes here in the USA. There are usually several seeds here on the vone alone every day about this problem. Those are only the stories that get seeded here and not the ones that are occurring ad naseum in states like AZ where gun fights, drug running, rape, murder, child molestation etc occur -every single day-. Yes, citizens do those too and because there are more citizens than illegals the stats will say that they commit more of those crimes. Well heck...that's just a no brainer considering this -is- our country that there would be more of us and thus more crimes statistically -by- us. DUH!

3) Illegals also use forged ID's as well.

4) Many illegals have priors in their own countries

Does this mean I think businesses who knowingly hire an illegal should not be fined or whatever? Nope. But your statistics are worthless when faced with the reality of those who actually live in border states like AZ.

I'll try to explain it to you as simply as I can.

And I'll try to explain this as simply to -you- as I can....

I don't care about statistics. I really don't. I don't think that the US citizens who have been robbed, raped, had their child molested, have to secure their doors and windows against home invasions because they are commonplace, etc care one iota about your statistics either.

But your statistics are worthless when faced with the reality of those who actually live in border states like AZ.

McSpocky, it is slanted. In some ways that you could possibly correct, and in some that you can't. You lack an option for "compassion hasn't left the country" or at the very least "no opinion" which increases the unavoidable selection bias present in all Newsvine polls. The polls are great for pop culture columns, where no one will take them very seriously, but are out of place in serious articles as they often do no more than inflame and distract. They cannot bring any real, statistically valid, information to the discussion. That takes a random poll, with the sampling system set up very carefully.

And by the way, I agree with most of your opinions. I just have been waiting to make this comment on an article where I agree with the author, as my attempts to raise this on ones where I do not have been dismissed as attempts to divert the conversation.

Does this help you to understand, "give me your tired, your poor. Your huddled masses yearning to breath free..." When did the USA stop standing for those ideals?

Matthew-480753

Does this help you to understand, "give me your tired, your poor. Your huddled masses yearning to breath free..." When did the USA stop standing for those ideals?

While those are stirring words, they come from The New Collosus, a poem written by Emma Lazarus for the Statue of Liberty. They are not part of the US Constitution, and thus not part of our ideals.

They are certainly part of mine. Then again, I have come to realize that America hardly stands for all it seems to be to others.

Wow UNA_Lion, I am sorry that you don't think that the sentiment expressed by Lazarus captures the American Ideal... (note, I never suggested that line came from the constitution). However, now that I have read your post, I have a much better understanding for why I don't see the USA the same way the right wing sees her. My ancestors came here because of both the constitution and the ideals expressed by Lazarus... I suspect this is the case for most that came to this country.

Wow UNA_Lion, I am sorry that you don't think that the sentiment expressed by Lazarus captures the American Ideal... (note, I never suggested that line came from the constitution).

Appeal to popularity. Is there any evidence that her poem reflects the ideals of most Americans. If you can provide it, I will concede the point. Until then, it remains what I described: Stirring words of a poem.

However, now that I have read your post, I have a much better understanding for why I don't see the USA the same way the right wing sees her.

Never wrote that I didn't share her ideals. Asserted only that her ideals did not necessarily reflect the ideals of all or even most Americans. Indeed, one does not have to dig far into our history to see ground-swells of anti-immigrant sentiment among American citizens. Again, if you can provide evidence to the contrary, I'll concede the point.

My ancestors came here because of both the constitution and the ideals expressed by Lazarus... I suspect this is the case for most that came to this country.

They all came for a myriad of reasons, but that still doesn't answer my original assertion.

UNA:

Appeal to popularity. Is there any evidence that her poem reflects the ideals of most Americans. If you can provide it, I will concede the point. Until then, it remains what I described: Stirring words of a poem.

why do you find the words 'stirring' if they do not capture something of real value to you?

Never wrote that I didn't share her ideals

You wrote, "They are not part of the US Constitution, and thus not part of our ideals." by saying 'our' ideals, you include yourself. That is what 'our' means... you and those that are grouped with YOU!!! Your statement clearly indicates that you and yours do not consider her sentiments as part of your ideals.

why do you find the words 'stirring' if they do not capture something of real value to you?

So you follow up an appeal to popularity with an appeal to emotion? Interesting. As you apparently don't understand either logical fallacy, I'll post what an appeal to emotion is:

An Appeal to Emotion is a fallacy with the following structure:

1. Favorable emotions are associated with X.
2. Therefore, X is true.

This fallacy is committed when someone manipulates peoples' emotions in order to get them to accept a claim as being true. More formally, this sort of "reasoning" involves the substitution of various means of producing strong emotions in place of evidence for a claim. If the favorable emotions associated with X influence the person to accept X as true because they "feel good about X," then he has fallen prey to the fallacy.

As you can see, my own emotional attachment to the poem in question is irrelevant to my initial assertion.

You wrote, "They are not part of the US Constitution, and thus not part of our ideals." by saying 'our' ideals, you include yourself. That is what 'our' means... you and those that are grouped with YOU!!! Your statement clearly indicates that you and yours do not consider her sentiments as part of your ideals.

Written language is an imperfect medium for transmission of ideas, and in this case the "our" was misunderstood - my mistake. As you misinterpreted my intent, the "our" is now modified to "most Americans." Does that serve to clear up the misunderstanding?

The 'our' was not misunderstood. It was the wrong word to express your views (which is why you apologized). Your suggestion that 'your' views represent those of 'most American's' is just that, a suggestion. I choose to disagree with that suggestion, given that people from all over the world come here to escape the injustices delineated by the poem.

You should stop trying to deal with appeals to emotion or popularity and perhaps focus on appeals to logic... the words of Lazarus are compelling (or stirring) because they appeal to logic, emotion and popularity (which means that they are liked by many - isn't that what popularity is about?)

The 'our' was not misunderstood.

Yes, it was, else I'd not have had to modify the word in question in order for you to understand my intent. Or do you now claim to be capable of reading the minds of others?

It was the wrong word to express your views (which is why you apologized). Your suggestion that 'your' views represent those of 'most American's' is just that, a suggestion. I choose to disagree with that suggestion, given that people from all over the world come here to escape the injustices delineated by the poem.

Already admitted that you misunderstood my intent. Certainly, it's a suggestion, or in this case an assertion, and it's based on historical analysis of how Americans tend to react to periods of mass immigration, and this poll indicating that most Americans favor Arizona's tough new law seems to further substantiate such findings. Accurately measuring national sentiment can be difficult, but analysis of historical reaction during periods of mass immigration and polling provide the best possible data for such.

You should stop trying to deal with appeals to emotion or popularity and perhaps focus on appeals to logic

What? You employed logical fallacies, and I called you on them. Logic is the standard used in debate. Surely, you know that.

the words of Lazarus are compelling (or stirring) because they appeal to logic, emotion and popularity (which means that they are liked by many - isn't that what popularity is about?)

They appeal mostly to emotion, as does most politically-oriented speech, and the words contained therein are indeed stirring. That aside, such words do not necessarily reflect the ideals of all, or even most Americans, for reasons already explained ad nausium.

egads, you are great at denial. you used the word 'our' but did not want to include yourself. So, you used the wrong word. I did not misunderstand you, I understood what you wrote, but it did not reflect what you meant.

the word is nauseam (not nausium) ... and your inability to use or understand logic has made me nauseous...

I have had enough of your denial and deflection. good day to you.

egads, you are great at denial. you used the word 'our' but did not want to include yourself. So, you used the wrong word. I did not misunderstand you, I understood what you wrote, but it did not reflect what you meant.

No. Read it again:

They are not part of the US Constitution, and thus not part of our ideals.

"Our," in this case clearly intended to refer to the nation as a whole; and based on your initial misinterpretation of such intent, I replied:

Never wrote that I didn't share her ideals. Asserted only that her ideals did not necessarily reflect the ideals of all or even most Americans.

... at which point the misunderstanding was cleared up ... or should have been, though you inexplicably continued to press the issue - so be it, thus the following reply:

Written language is an imperfect medium for transmission of ideas, and in this case the "our" was misunderstood - my mistake. As you misinterpreted my intent, the "our" is now modified to "most Americans." Does that serve to clear up the misunderstanding?

Really don't know a means to make it any more clear, but if you insist on holding to your misunderstanding at all costs, then feel free to do so.

the word is nauseam (not nausium)

Thank you for the grammar correction, Mrs. Groover.

and your inability to use or understand logic has made me nauseous...

Please point out any flaws in the logic I employed, and I will be happy to concede whichever point you dispute.

I have had enough of your denial and deflection.

As you have not pointed anything specific in regard to either denial or deflection, your statement is inaccurate.

good day to you.

It is late night/early morning here, but your intent is understood. Peace be upon you.

Facts and rationality rarely penetrate irrational fear. Just go to any discussion of vaccines and/or GMOs and you will see the same: you can present the facts till you are blue in the face, but those who have made significant emotional investments in opposition, or who are simply afraid of what you are arguing for, will remain unconvinced.

Sure it does, you just don't happen to agree with it, so therefore it makes no sense to you.

*yawn*

Americans have been picking on the 'new guy' since the country was founded, kinda like hazing.

The difference here is that it is illegal Hispanic people rather than all.

The difference here is that it is illegal Hispanic people rather than all.

Except that there are illegal companies hiring them higher up in the hierarchy. Want to cut off illegals crossing the border?

STOP THE HIRING OF THEM!!!!!!

Why stop hiring them... they make such great wage slaves. I mean, you pocket their taxes that are withheld, work them the hours you want to, work their children if you can. I mean come on, there is not a downside to be seen.

(if you didn't know this was sarcasm by the way, you should see the other comments I have made on the subject)

Alex, Lou KY

All that, and more, is exactly why businesspeople keep hireing Illegal aliens. Exploitable Labor.

And why there is not the appropriate amount of *consequence* of their actions.

sniffles, the point of the law is that AZ feels like there is little enforcement currently ongoing and they suggest this law will change that. See post 5.11 for a summary of how much enforcement effort targets the immigrants vs those that illegally hire them...

Do you know why they don't enforce the employer sanctions?

Yes I do; because it is not good for business and AZ is as pro business as you could find in a state. They promoted the real estate development of the desert to make money, but knew that the water supply could not possibly accommodate the growth. AZ is about making money for the rich (just look at who their senator has been for the last 3 decades!!!), so they are fine with building walls and prosecuting illegals, but DO NOT try to hold businesses responsible for hiring illegals, because that is both socialistic and unpatriotic...

Matthew: You don't have to school me about this law. I live in Arizona. I have read the law word for word and I support it 100%.

My point was that comparing this law to Nazi Germany is disgusting to me (I am not Jewish) and it diminishes the abomination that was the Holocaust. Be respectful of what an unimanginable horror that was. Calling people Nazi's left and right is... I can't even put into words how sick that is.

You may want to read this -- look at paragraph 5 at least. If we could get them to close that loophole there could be sanctions -- until then, not likely any will be prosecuted.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2009/nov/ariz-punishes-zero-illegal-alien-employers

Of course there is much more to the problem than just employer sanctions.

Sniffles, my intent was not to 'school you' about the law, just to highlight the huge focus on the aliens, rather than those that ALSO break the law by hiring them...

Dzonie, read the link, but remain incredulous... I watched every morning on my way to work as contractors (in their beautiful shiny megatrucks) picked up illegal workers waiting at gas stations around the city. To suggest that a significant effort has been made to address the businesses (relative to what we have spent punishing the aliens) is just ridiculous. What your link makes clear is that there is very little desire in AZ to start punishing the economic engine that drives the economy. Ironically, since the law was enacted, the blowback has had serious impacts on the economy. Sounds like the law was a mistake from most every perspective.

I watched every morning on my way to work as contractors (in their beautiful shiny megatrucks) picked up illegal workers waiting at gas stations around the city

Well, that is one of the things the new law does address --- and is the main reason I am a supporter of it.

BS. the old law addressed the same issue... but litigation against employers did not materialize... not because the crimes weren't there. I look forward to seeing the huge increase in businesses being brought down by their propensity to hire illegals in AZ... this is what you expect, correct?

The Jews in Nazi Germany were German citizens, and they were systematically rounded up and murdered. There is zero comparison between that and Arizona's laws targeting illegal aliens, shrill talking points from the extreme Left aside.

the nazi regime under hitler effected far more than germans and jews and the implications I refer to are the need to carry "papers" (more than driver's license and ss card - would include birth cert) and the power given to cops to decide who "looks" or is suspected of being illegal.

(more than driver's license and ss card - would include birth cert)

Not at all. Most states require proof of citizenship before they will issue driver licenses, and those that don't will still record the citizenship status of the driver, be he legal or illegal alien. Police cruisers come equipped with computer systems that tie directly into local, state, and national law enforcement databases, which can quickly ascertain the citizenship status of the driver. Moreover, all legal aliens are required by law to carry identification cards. Get pulled over, and don't have a driver license, then you're subject to arrest, whether you're a citizen, legal alien, or illegal alien.

It never ceases to amaze me, the cavalier way in which the word/term NAZI is used in this country.

When I came to the USA it was required that I carry a form with me at all times; notify the authorities every time I changed address -- including my years in the armed forces which rewarded me with citizenship; was required to be "proficient" in english. That is the short list.

As I read so many of the threads it seems time to publish my papers once again.

It would seem to me that a focus on those who commit crimes other than crossing an imaginary line would be more efficient.

imho

Then it's the blacks , then it's the Jews , then it's the Catholics and pretty soon , we begin to resemble a Fascist Nation.

JaiAllen

How can you compare a Fascist nation with deporting illegals back to their own country? Arizona is trying to get a handle on being overrun with illegal immigrants and it is just absolute bulls**t to compare sending lawbreakers back to their own country where they belong to becoming a Fascist nation. Try to come up with a less lame ass comparison that actually makes sense and maybe people would listen.

Then it's the blacks , then it's the Jews , then it's the Catholics and pretty soon ---

--- all of the illegal aliens will be where they belong -- their home country, trying to get the proper paperwork and come back legally. Nothing Fascist about that.

Legal immigration = good

Illegal immigration = bad

Legal immigration = good

Illegal immigration = bad

Hiring legal immigrants = good

Hiring illegal immigrants = horrible.

I agree with that, too!

Is there a national debate regarding arresting burglars and arsonists that I'm not aware of?

The tax cheats (TEA partiers) I'm aware of.

hmmm... KGMO

I started explaining how I was doing a parody of the opening of this thread.... and then realized, hey... I'm out of my league here.

It's called selective reading, Truett. Unfortunately, many pro-illegals seem to do a lot of that.

Sounds like a law suit that was brough here....the officer was charged with discrimination because in a weeks period he had wirtten 46 tickets to hispanics and only 12 to anglos.....when it came to trial he presented evedence that given the number and make up of the people driving this streach of road he only stopped 2.3% of the hispanic drivers who passed by and stopped 62.7% of the anglo drivers.....the suit was thrown out.....now if you want to carry it on out...it seems the anglos should have a reason to sue this officer.