jump to last post 1-16 of 16 discussions (71 posts)

The Media Keeps Bashing Arizona for Taking Action to Protect Arizonans

  1. MikeNV profile image73
    MikeNVposted 7 years ago

    Below is copied from another article comment section.  It makes perfect sense.  Why does the media insist on inflaming the public at large and not explain what is actually contained in the Arizona Law?  The law doesn't target Hispanics... the law puts teeth into the enforcement of illegals.

    -------------- Comment that makes Sense-----------------------

    At first, I wondered why so many articles leave out the work illegal and just say immigrants. I have also noticed that many articles have left out the full information regarding this law. The Arizona law states that they can only ask for an id if someone has already done something unlawful. Then, if that person cannot provide id and is suspected of being an illegal immigrant for reasons other than race, the authorities can jail them and turn them over to the feds, for breaking the federal law. I believe that current law states that police can ask for id from USA citizens, if they are involved in unlawful activities, also. So the Arizona law is merely enforcing the federal laws.

    This makes perfect sense. If someone is doing something unlawful, they should provide id. The Arizona law says nothing about Hispanics and specifically states that the law cannot target someone for race.

    Now I realize that the media is extremely biased, because not only are they not giving the full information, they are specifically leaving out the word "illegal" on purpose. Its no wonder hispanics are worried. The media has distorted the law so much that unless you actually read the law yourself, you would not know the truth.

    In a day and age where terrorists run rampant, we must control our borders. If we do not secure them, we are opening Pandora's box and we won't have any idea of who is in this country. No amnesty.

    If the federal govt. is unwilling to enforce the law, then states should have the right to enforce federal laws. Because if neither the federal nor state enforces the law, we would be lawless. ........

  2. profile image0
    Brenda Durhamposted 7 years ago

    Yes we must control our borders.
    But politically-correct liberal dummies don't give a whit about anyone except themselves and their circle of politically-correct friends.

    1. lovemychris profile image79
      lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Business owners are politically correct liberal dummies? (nice Christian sentiment btw)

    2. Daniel Carter profile image87
      Daniel Carterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Honestly, Brenda, that is such a knee-jerk, predictable response. I would have thought you wouldn't fall into that same trap.

      Generalizations don't solve problems.

    3. Ron Montgomery profile image59
      Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      That "circle" includes the cities of Flagstaff, Tucson, and Phoenix; all of whom are suing the State of Arizona.

  3. JON EWALL profile image46
    JON EWALLposted 7 years ago

    HUBBERS
    The problem is that our government is actually breaking the law of the land. President Obama, the Justice Department and Congress all have taken an oath to the constitution.  They are guilty, it is difficult to understand why our government don't obey the laws. How many times have you heard some politician say '' We are a country of the rule of law ''.

    No new laws should even be proposed until the flow of illegals are stopped. The governments solution is to catch and release, release where, back to the border. That process don't work simply that no punishment for breaking the law is administered.

    HOW ABOUT INTERNMENT CAMPS ALONG THE BORDER. FIRST OFFENSE 1 YEAR + ???????

    The president and other elected officials are condemning the Arizona Law, what a bunch of hypocrites. This nation is in deep trouble when one can break the law and our politicians defend the lawbreakers.
    In corrupt Washington today, right is wrong and wrong is right. That's not the America that I knew. Citizens break the law they are punished, non citizens break the law they don't get punished.
    Our country stands on the premise that justice must be served.

    Contact your public servant, request that he obeys the law of the land.

    1. rhamson profile image77
      rhamsonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      The thoughts and opinions of your elected officials are bought and paid for by the lobbyists and their handlers.

      Why would someone expose themselves to criminal charges and possible imprisonment unless there was a good reason?  The payoff is very great and how many presidents have been convicted of anything?  The congress knows if they allow the president to be compromised then where will they stand with regards to criminal prosecution?  The good ole' boys on the hill protect their own.

  4. theirishobserver. profile image57
    theirishobserver.posted 7 years ago

    Paper never refuses Ink, todays newspaper is tomorrows chip bag, they who shout lowest do so to conceal their own crimes......these are just some of my views on the mainstream media........ smile

  5. Ron Montgomery profile image59
    Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years ago

    The law does nothing to protect me or my fellow Arizonans.  It helps conservatives stir fear in their dim-witted base, and brings the Repubs some votes...I guess that's what really counts.

    1. rhamson profile image77
      rhamsonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I applaud Arizonas efforts to do something about the illegal immigrant situation in their state.  I lived in Phoenix for about three years and worked in the construction boom of the late '70's. 

      There were many Mexican laborers there and when a green van came on site you could hear the howl of the wind over any machinery noise that had occupied the site.

      The problem with the Arizona law is that it punishes the powerless and not the powerful who employ these people.  Americans are denied a living wage while the employer cashes in on the profit enjoyed by paying less.  The employer who hires illegal workers also is much more competitive in his pricing because he cuts out a competitor who pays his employees a fair wage.  That induces the competition to break the law as well to survive.

      The problem is not with the illegal immigrant worker but the employer exploiting the cheap labor to line his own pockets and uncaringly weakening the American workforce through this practice.

      What if the INS was able to fine an employer say about $50,000 for every illegal he hires.  When the green van pulls up you may here the howl of the employers lawyer instead.

      1. Sab Oh profile image57
        Sab Ohposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        There is no INS anymore

        1. rhamson profile image77
          rhamsonposted 7 years agoin reply to this
          1. Sab Oh profile image57
            Sab Ohposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            LOL! Take another look at your link! LOL!


            LLC?

            Nice to see you are so up to date!

            1. rhamson profile image77
              rhamsonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

              Still don't get it do you.

              I guess being argumentative is all you have to offer.

              1. Sab Oh profile image57
                Sab Ohposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                Did you even look at the link you yourself posted?

                1. rhamson profile image77
                  rhamsonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  Your statement was there is no INS.

                  While argumentative at best there are still the INS forms you must submit to become naturalized.

                  I understand that the INS was absorbed into Homeland Security but the context I employed was referenced to the post I made about the times the INS raided job sites while I was in Arizona.

                  Maybe your thought patterns are too literal and you should try to not live on the individual words but concentrate on the context more.

                  1. Sab Oh profile image57
                    Sab Ohposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                    Oh, you're getting closer. Have you googled the name of the government agency you are thinking of? Are you too embarrassed to admit it?

                    The "you should not live on the individual words" bit suggests you are looking for a way out...

                    Just accept it. The shame will be fleeting if you don't drag it out.

  6. Ron Montgomery profile image59
    Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years ago

    The law has <0 chance of ever being implemented.  The sponsors, who are slightly more intelligent than the idiots who voted them into office, are well aware of this, but hey... why let convenient, baseless fears go to waste?

    1. tony0724 profile image61
      tony0724posted 7 years agoin reply to this

      You sound like Rahm Emanuel

      1. Ron Montgomery profile image59
        Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        You sound like tony0724 which is much worse.

  7. Greek One profile image76
    Greek Oneposted 7 years ago

    What about all the American college girls from Buffalo who invade Canada to take advantage of our lower age drinking limits, yet don't give me the time of day???

    1. Sab Oh profile image57
      Sab Ohposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      If you can't get drunk, underage college girls to give you the time of day you have bigger problems than immigration.

      1. Greek One profile image76
        Greek Oneposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        which is EXACTLY why i got married smile

        1. Sab Oh profile image57
          Sab Ohposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          That is one solution

  8. tobey100 profile image60
    tobey100posted 7 years ago

    What part of the word 'illegal' are people having a hard time understanding????

  9. Daniel Carter profile image87
    Daniel Carterposted 7 years ago

    There have been immigration laws in place throughout the 20th century. Why were these so woefully conceived that they require new laws that border on a witch hunt? Why are the present laws inadequate and uninforcible? It seems to me that unless the present laws truly are lacking, such new laws are mostly just overkill and scare tactics.

    Fear because of terroristic types of raids is not something we need more of. Prosecuting those who hire illegal aliens and being aggressive about *that* would go a long way to alleviating illegal alien status in this country. Prosecuting illegal aliens is obviously also very necessary, but it's about instilling respect for the law, not scaring the hell out of everyone. The two do not have to be synonymous.

  10. Rafini profile image88
    Rafiniposted 7 years ago

    The question I have is:  Why is our government afraid to enforce our immigration laws?  If they weren't afraid, enforcement wouldn't be an issue...

    1. rhamson profile image77
      rhamsonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      This is a liberal source but the findings make sense.  Here are a few excerpts:

      The equation to explain the whys of illegal immigration into the US is simple:

      Add: Widespread abject poverty and starvation in Mexico after US corporations relocated their cheap-labor plants from the US-Mexico border to Asia, and after Mexican banks and telecommunications were privatized, creating dozens of instant billionaires and plunging millions into poverty.

      Add: An extremely porous, under-enforced US-Mexico border.

      Add: US employers anxious for more profits, and willing to exploit the poverty and fears of illegal immigrants to do so.

      Add: The federal government anxious to curry favor with , and garner votes from, business owners and the Hispanic community...thus, willing to under-enforce borders and immigrations laws, and ignore illegal hiring by employers.

      Add: The Social Security Administration dependent on taking in $7 billion annually of contributions from illegal immigrant workers who will never receive benefits from the system.

      http://usliberals.about.com/od/immigrat … Immi_4.htm

  11. Ron Montgomery profile image59
    Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years ago

    Your reference is dated.  Support in Arizona is falling like a rock.  easy come easy go.  You can generate initial support using scare tactics, but it isn't lasting.

    1. Sab Oh profile image57
      Sab Ohposted 7 years agoin reply to this
    2. profile image0
      Madame Xposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      "Opinion polls show broad support for tough Arizona immigration law"

      April 30, 2010

      http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/20 … ration-law

      1. Ron Montgomery profile image59
        Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        Are you and TK on the same computer or are you making the same mistakes independently?

        1. profile image0
          Madame Xposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          No, we're telling the same truths independently. Go back to your silly cupcakes.

          1. Ron Montgomery profile image59
            Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            Past-tense truths perhaps.  The fear mongering did garner support for the bill initially, but support is rapidly fading as these people wake up to the consequences of acting without thinking.

            1. profile image0
              Madame Xposted 7 years agoin reply to this

              April 30th is hardly "past tense"

              1. Ron Montgomery profile image59
                Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                When the numbers have dropped from 70% support to about 53% in a week, yes April 30th is ancient history.

                1. profile image0
                  Madame Xposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  Proof?

                  And you forgot to mention the 12 other states that want to draft similar legislation.

                  1. Ron Montgomery profile image59
                    Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                    Offered several posts ago, along with that proof that exists if you simply look at up to date polls.  I didn't forget the other states, I just dismissed them as equally misguided and futile.

  12. Ron Montgomery profile image59
    Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years ago

    Same date, same problem.  Here, let me help then you can get back to your trolling, while I get back to work:  Spolier alert 52 is less than 70.

  13. Sab Oh profile image57
    Sab Ohposted 7 years ago
  14. profile image0
    Madame Xposted 7 years ago

    Washington – As the Obama administration considers a potential legal challenge to Arizona’s tough new immigration law, a professor who helped draft the bill is defending the state measure as supportive of existing federal statutes.

    “I think the critics who are claiming the bill will not withstand legal challenge need to read the bill,” said Kris Kobach, a law professor at the University of Missouri-Kansas City.

    “The bill will withstand any preemptive challenge,” he said, because it reinforces existing federal immigration laws and creates no new immigration crimes.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20100428/ts_csm/297367

    1. JON EWALL profile image46
      JON EWALLposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      80Madame Xposted
      YOU SAID
      Washington – As the Obama administration considers a potential legal challenge to Arizona’s tough new immigration law,

      The jokes on the President ,he should know that there is a federal law on the books that isn't being enforced by him and the attorney general.
      We are a nation of the rule of law, established for US  citizens. Those who break the law go to jail. The feds catch the criminals and send them back to the border, what kind of punishment is that.

      For that reason the illegals have no fear of punishment, they get a free ride to the border and in some instances get released before going back to the border.
      Shame  shame Barak Obama, Attorney General and Congress for not enforcing our laws.
      Arizona isn't the problem, Washington  surely is the violator of our laws.

      1. rhamson profile image77
        rhamsonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        I agree with you that Arizona is not the problem when it comes to this illegal immigration labor debacle.

        I wonder why Arizona did not go one step further and heavily fine and possibly incarcerate the offending employers!  This is at the crux of the matter. 

        Without the money for the illegal workers to come too,  there would be little or no problem that would exist.

        1. Ron Montgomery profile image59
          Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          Arizona does in fact do most of what you suggest.  A law was passed in 2007 that requires employers to use E-Verify to insure that every worker on their payroll is legally entitled to work in the U.S.  Employers caught knowingly hiring illegals face a corporate "Death Penalty", the Arizona Corporations Commission revokes their business license.

          1. rhamson profile image77
            rhamsonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            One has to wonder how stringently the law is being enforced and if there is some type of pay off taking place that circumvents the law.  Revoking a business license for someone who is operating illegally in the first place is a mere inconvenience. 

            I can't imagine all the illegal immigrants coming to Arizona to take in the sites and sunshine.  If they were passing through to other states then they should just let them pass on through and let the Federal Government not do their job elsewhere.

            1. Ron Montgomery profile image59
              Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

              One of the problems is that the Federal government has stepped up efforts elsewhere.  The security is much tighter in California and Texas.  It was assumed that the Arizona desert was much too hostile an environment for immigrants to cross, and in fact many have died doing so.  People have adapted to this deadly environment, and some think that a fence will stop them?

              The bottom line is that these workers are needed here, and they will always find a way to get here; it's a matter of survival.  Calls for "get tough" policies without comprehensive reform are just pissing into the wind.  It may feel good for a moment, but the results will not make the pisser happy.

              1. rhamson profile image77
                rhamsonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                If the law needs to be changed to fill the needs of the Arizona employers then so be it.  But the new law hardly addresses that issue.  The two are opposing patterns and there needs to be some clarity so a comprehensive plan can be put in place.

                Another more important question that should be adddressed with this situation is why illegal labor is needed to fill the workforce?  Is it because most employers are hiring illegals to be competitive and it is just the normal process now or are they hiring them because no legal workers want the jobs?

                1. Ron Montgomery profile image59
                  Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  In many instances, they are the most qualified, most productive workers.  They sre more highly motivated than many natural-born citizens.

                  1. rhamson profile image77
                    rhamsonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                    No doubt that the conditions you cite would make an illegal more enticing to a potential employer.  The reward may outweigh the risk the employer is willing to take.  Under current laws maybe the penalty is acceptable and after a short period of downtime and loss of the business license the employer is up and running again and free to rehire the same person.

                    But is it legal and is the new law a quicker way to circumvent the shortcomings of the situation?   

                    It would seem Arizona legislators need to s*&t or get off the pot!

      2. profile image0
        Madame Xposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        He does. He is ignoring it for political purposes.



        Yep.

  15. Sab Oh profile image57
    Sab Ohposted 7 years ago
  16. leeberttea profile image55
    leebertteaposted 7 years ago

    If as a business you hire someone and they present false identification that indicates they are citizens or legal residents, what should the consequences be? What steps should a business take in order to verify that the person applying for a job is the person they claim to be? Isn't it a bit unfair to ask business to do what the federal government is supposed to be responsible for?

    1. rhamson profile image77
      rhamsonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      It is unfair to expect the employer to police the identification process to cover his butt.  The ID situation should be made more dependable but if the fine and or penalties are rather stiff, you will find a greater number of employers being more hesitant to hire someone they suspect rather than shrugging it off on the government to prove later.

 
working