A factual account
The fear mongering diatribes of Brewer and Arpaio don't square with the facts. Thankfully we have a judiciary equipped and willing to stop this madness.
Factual, huh? In the very first sentence the article states that Bolton declared the Arizona law unconstitutional - not true. It may not survive a court case, which is why it will now go to court, but Bolton cannot make that decision without a trial.
It also states that Bolton said it infringes on federal jurisdiction - same thing. As usual in such articles facts are twisted, spun and generally distorted to the point they no longer have any value.
You have misquoted the article. Facts win again!
"When U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton ruled on Wednesday that key provisions of Arizona's new anti-immigration law were unconstitutional, she could have also declared them unnecessary"
Misquoted? At most you could quibble about the term "provisions", but if part of it is unconstitutional it makes the whole thing unconstitutional.
No, you're not paying attention to well reported FACTS. The bill was written with seperate, independant provisions that each must be ruled on seperately.
Read the FACTS and show me where they are wrong.
I have read the bill. It is one bill, passed with one collective vote. Yes, the courts will probably rule on separate clauses separately as a method to indicate just why it is wrong and perhaps to help Arizona make a different one.
That does not change the FACT that Bolton can not make such a declaration without a trial. Your article is just more spin.
You seem to be making the point that the hyperbole (rampant crime caused by an invasion of the dreaded Mexican horde) is true; and the FACTS - reduced violent crime and illegal crossings, are just spin.
...Have you considered hosting a show on Fox?
You misunderstand the thrust of my comment, Ron. When an article presents obvious falsehoods to help the spin on what they are presenting it throws the entire article in doubt.
Has the number of police officers increased during the period in question? What is the percentage of illegal aliens vs citizens in the jails or deported for violent crime?
It is well documented that illegals are leaving Arizona after the passage of the bill - how much of the decreased illegal crossing is due to increased efforts by various law enforcement?
All questions that are germane to the article, but never presented. The whole article is an effort to present only one side and to emotionally convince the reader that that side is correct. It is well disguised by so-called facts, figures and statistics, but all those facts are really thrown into serious doubt with the use of so much spin and falsehood.
Show a falsehood.
The claim made by Fox and friends (and blind followers) is that the situation is getting worse and it's Obama's fault.
That argument crumbles when it encounters the FACTS
"Show a falsehood"
I claimed a falsehood and you said I misread.
I posted, via cut and paste, the falsehood; you said is was not pertinent.
I repeated the fact the Bolton can't do what the article said she did; you ignored it and suggested I go on Fox.
Now you again ask for the same falsehood I've shown twice and you ignored while introducing additional emotional arguments about Obama and again claim the article contains only facts.
The appearance (which I do not claim to be fact) is that you have found an article that agrees with your own emotional assessment of the problem and you accept it in toto without evaluation or consideration of the opposite viewpoint.
It is not a method of problem solving I choose to endorse. I have instead done considerable research on the effects of illegal immigration and found that the figures above are spun so badly as to be meaningless - some of the questions I asked earlier are indeed pertinent and need to be considered. There are, in addition, more aspects to the problem than simple violent crime statistics.
Have a good day, Ron.
This topic will not even be discussed in full and with a correct eye toward what is going on in AZ.
Since anything one posts in relation to crime and its true brutal nature in AZ.. Will probrably get me, or any other, suspended from here.
Opinions based on fact don't demonstrate a "correct eye".
Fearful ignorance is the correct basis?
Do you understand HP policies and the circumstances that lead to banning?
Brutal crimes happen in all 50 states, but less so in Arizona than say...
Florida. They are also much more likely to be committed by US citizens than undocumented lettuce pickers.
I garauntee you I could post articles with facts... and in minutes I would be gone for a week if not more.
And that, is just a fact.
The admin here are biased as to what part of this story can be shown. As with some other topics.
That, is just another, "fact".
As what happened when I posted the, "facts", about beheadings at the border. One side is allowed to be shown on here... so?... you can continue your propaganda, ron.
We all know the real facts... at least those of us who do not limit our knowledge of the situation to the Leftist MSM.
I cannot even post a link in regards to this topic for fear of the censorship axe falling from the admins on my neck.
I've been banned twice for the exact same reasons you have been banned. Neither time involved a posting of facts, but rather letting things get personal and out of hand.
You get banned for violating the rules, not for stating your case.
I was banned for posting a link they didn't like.
That is just a fact. I bet if I posted it right now I would be gone.
Jim was there... he saw the censoship first hand.
Bias.. is what that is called.
Also... I have been banned for telling someone "they were playing stupid".
That is pointing out a tactic used by the left in debates... and they didn't like that I would point it out.
You get to close to the truth... and your gone.
Jim wasn't there as you claim? Did it even happen?
Yes Jim. I got suspended for that.
Read the forum rules. Your violation was obvious and the banning was legit.
That's a FACT
So I won't post a story because it has pictures you all might not like. Sort of limits immensely my ability to back my side of the issue. Couldn't be the reason eh.
Not the rules I take issue with... it is the application of said rules.
If you can't make your case without posting graphic pictures that violate the rules...
...do you really have a legitimate case to make?
I cannot help the pics are a part of the article.
So yes I have a case.
But god forbid I use an article because it has a pic the admins do not like.
I even stated a clearly as possible that certain people may not want to go to it because of its graphic nature.
Even if I were to paste the article, you all would cry about copyright, and no link for back-up.
"They were playing stupid" is a personal attack and will get you banned.
How is that a personal attack?
Playing stupid is way different than being stupid.
The full quote in context will provide an explanation.
Show the entire post. It will demonstrate why you were rightfully banned.
If you can't follow the rules go to a different playground.
I was told why I was banned.
And you know I don't really care what you think about me or my opinions Ron. Hahahaha...
Oh your to funny.
Have a good day, ron.
Watch out TM Ron will correct your spelling.
He's a stickler for detail.
John McCain invented this term for political reasons and of course it spread like a virus among the throngs of reactionaries who are too lazy to research things for themselves.
Anyone who wants the FACTS of the matter can begin their research with the article I posted. I can't do all of the work for them, but I can get them started.
So it doesn't have anything to do with the fact that kidnappings have gone up 200%plus?
From the article:
It is true that Phoenix has in recent years seen a spate of kidnappings. But in almost every case they've involved drug traffickers targeting other narcos for payment shakedowns, and the 318 abductions reported last year were actually down 11% from 2008. Either way, the figure hardly makes Phoenix, as Arizona Senator John McCain claimed last month, "the No. 2 kidnapping capital of the world" behind Mexico City. A number of Latin American capitals can claim that dubious distinction.
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article … z0vBbcZ7R7
Here's a fact.
Committing crimes against criminals is still a crime.
kidnapping has surged from 48 reported cases in Maricopa County in 2004, to 366 in 2008 and 359 the year before.
I really don't trust an article that downplays who a crime victim is.
And 318 in 2009. Reductions in violent crime show progress, not an out-of-control situation as the fear mongerers claim.
FACT vs. hyperbole
318 kidnappings is not a serious matter?
Thats not an out-of-control situation?
I wonder how many kidnappings in Duluth Minnesota?
As long as they are criminals kidnapping each other... then it wouldn't matter about Deluth.
Ah the logic is mind-boggling
Nothing to do with the thread really TMM but how do you manage to post so much but hang around 1-15 for hubscore? Is it one of those quantity doesn't equal quality things?
I reside in Arizona and honestly I have not heard much about kidnapping in Arizona. It still appears to be minimal to me.
My brother lives in Phoenix and he says it is out of control and the news media does not report the truth to all of the country nor all of the facts. My brother says it is very scary to live in Phoenix. His wife will not leave the house, and she panics when he leaves which he has to do daily, he works in security for a major hospital, so I beleive him over any others especially the above who is down playing this major invasion of criminals. When did we give preferential treatment to law breakers? Does it really matter if there are more than 5 or more than 300 kidnappings up 1% or 5%, fact is any kidnapping for any reason is one too many! A lady I know and her daughter had to run from Arizona and hide because the daughter "messed" with the Mexicans! They had actually kidnapped her and she escaped after the guard fell asleep, barely getting out in time because they were ready to execute her and another female. I can assume what she did but I don't have that fact so I won't bother, but isn't it enough that these Mexican thugs are using 3rd world tactics on our soil and no fear of retribution, does that alone not open some of your eyes to the future if we don't stop the flow of these criminals and send back the worst of the worst at least make it harder for them to move about and run amok? Seriously it will be in your town tomorrow if not already there.
Jim Hunter said: "
Its funny how facts differ from other facts.
One of the differing facts has to be fiction."
Not necessarily. Two people can look at the same situation, or experience the same experience,and report it differently. My reality (and to me, it IS reality) may not be the same as your reality. Just as your reality is 100% authentic to you, but may be only partially authentic to me.
Both of our realities may (or may not be) based on facts.
Who is to say my facts are fictionalized? Or that yours are?
Besides, how can we trust any information coming out of any media or the government (federal, state or local) to be factual?
Ah. But who is to decide which facts are the "fact facts" and which set are the "non facts"?
That would be a capital idea, if we could really trust that our fact-checked sources were any more truthful!
Do we not tend to rely on sources that reinforce what we already believe to be facts? How many "fact-checkers" among us truly search a broad cross-section of sources vs. amassing "proof" from a limited set of sources we know to see things like we do?
Surely public education went to a great extent to train us to trust the sources without cross-checking. There is only one correct answer to every question, right? All other answers are heresy. Just choose the right source, and you have all the right answers.
And yeah, it seems natural for us to cherry pick facts that support our opinion and to "not notice" those that don't
This could quickly turn into a Seussian rhyme!
My name is Jim and I pick facts.
Who picks facts?
Jim picks facts!
How come only Jim picks facts?
Why not Mighty, or Misha, or Moe?
Can't they pick facts like Jim, we aks?
They can't because they are not Jim.
All the facts belong to him.
Not to Mighty, Misha or Moe
But only to him, the him named Jim.
Okay, Jim, what did you do? First TMM got them attacking him on his low hubber score?!
And now you got them trying to insult you in rhyme...
KEEP IT UP!
It's very funny!
They can't attack you on your POV with real facts as wilderness has shown so they pick on something else.
And that's a fact!
Agreed. Her posts were fine examples of parroting hyperbole.
Glad we agree.
Well, I'm not sure Mighty Mom would appreciate that. But hey, it's your call.
I have to defend Mighty Mom Ron, very undemocratic of you to throw her under the bus.
Obama, is that you?
She isn't even paying attention. The picture of the mini-sombrero got her all hot and bothered.
Why are you aksing me, Jim?
You are the declared declarer of facts.
I don't know what is a fact and what is not.
Is it a fact???
Nah, I'm good. Thanks, tho!!!
I will eagerly await your return with a full investigation -- including credible sources cited -- of the facts.
So when you say you are going on a fact-checking mission, do you really mean you are going to have a conversation with yourself?
Ohhh... THAT'S what they mean when they say to put a little hat on your thingy!
I can picture the marketing campaign now:
woven straw... for your pleasure... and hers.
http://www.politifact.com/texas/stateme … ital-worl/
The vast majority of stories on this are from 2009. If you look at 2010 stories they refute the claim. Some even go so far as to call the AZ governor and Senator McCain "liars."
"The Los Angeles Times more specifically reported that Phoenix "police received 366 kidnapping-for-ransom reports" in 2008 and that they estimate "twice that number go unreported," according to a Feb. 12, 2009, article."
Seems the dispute is whether or not Phoenix is the kidnapping Capital.
None of you seem to notice that in 2004 there were 48 reported cases of kidnapping, in 2007 there were over 300, 2008 more than 300, 2009 more than 300.
I thought you were more worried about Duluth.
Well you know, we can't compare Arizona's kidnapping rates with other states, we have to compare it with Latin American countries...?!
Fine - we are all for going after the drug cartels that work across the border. Do you think this law will discourage them?
If the problem is drug gang violence, why are you going after undocumented lettuce pickers?
What Ron showed with his post is that GENERALLY crime is down in AZ - and has been going DOWN while the population of undocumented workers rose. Now you want to make the discussion about drug & gang violence, which the bill won't even incidentally address.
It will address it if the bad guys are illegal, which most of the Mexican drug cartel members in the US are.
Glossed right over that didn't ya?
The feds are targeting the cartel members and other violent offenders.
WHICH IS WHY VIOLENT CRIME IS DECREASING
Wasting resources to keep migrant crop pickers and landscapers out is what Brewer tried to do before a sensible person (Bolton) stopped her.
Jim said -"It will address it if the bad guys are illegal, which most of the Mexican drug cartel members in the US are.
Glossed right over that didn't ya?"
Lacks critical thinking skills..
Example - If we stipulate that all the guards at Auschwitz were Christian - then it stands to reason that all Christinas are mass murderers.
Even you can see the falicy in that (I hope.)
If you were prosecuting the genocide of Auschwitz, you would target the specific offenders. In this example, the offenders by class were Nazi SS soldiers stationed at Auschwitz. In the same manner, if you identify that you are trying to prevent kidnappings in the US done by Mexican drug cartels, you target that group - to obtain the greatest benefit for the lowest cost.
The problem the wingnuts claim to be solving (crime) doesn't exist as they describe. Where it does exist - the kidnapping issue - isn't going to be addressed by the bill they wrote. Think about it - the cartels are sophisticated and they have money - they can produce phony documents for their memebers. After devoting endless resources on chasing hispanics with no papers - who are not the problem - the only group unaffected will be the most violent and best funded group - the cartels.
Wow. Where do you even begin?
Oh I know...
"The problem the wingnuts claim to be solving (crime) doesn't exist as they describe. Where it does exist - the kidnapping issue - isn't going to be addressed by the bill they wrote."
The crime exists unless you are going to tell me illegals in Arizona are not killing,raping, or committing some other heinous crime.
Your answer is to take away any tool at all to identify and deport the illegal.
Your fear of a poor innocent ILLEGAL non member of the cartels being captured and removed from the country he/she illegally entered is bizarre.
Why are Americans supposed to foot the bills illegals are creating?
Thanks for posting this, Ron. A lot of what AZ is doing is a solution in search of a problem. The real motive is building a (hysterical) base for tea-baggers. President Obama (and President Bush) have tried to get everyone together to address a comprehensive solution. That makes sense. However, it doesn't serve the purposes of the wingnuts who would have to COMPROMISE in some areas in order to get agreement in other areas.
The actual answer - addressing the problem rationally - is DOA in DC.
The bill has always been about politics, not an actual problem. Scroll up, I provided local news links showing the Governor running away from her mistake.
I read the links, it seems she is wondering if she should basically reword the bill.
Seems a rational thing to do.
And answering a stupid question isn't a mandatory thing.
I wonder if maybe the bad guys are dumping the bodies further in the Desert than ever before.
Maybe they are being taken back into Mexico to be killed.
*Help, I've been thrown under a bus, and it's heading to Phoenix, and I'm afraid I'll get kidnapped, or beheaded, or something... Somebody, please help me. Please....*
by Susan Reid 7 years ago
Every day we hear from hubbers about how Obama is out to destroy the Constitution. Across this great nation there is a movement of very vocal, very serious "pro-contitutionalists."The Constitution is suddenly quoted and defended like the Bible.It's all the vogue -- ALL OF A SUDDEN.My...
by tobey100 8 years ago
I support the Arizona Immigration Law and I'll gladly tell you why....I've read it. All of it. I've been slammed from every corner for supporting profiling. I always ask my critic, "Have you read the law?" the answer is usually a resounding yes yet, when I ask them...
by TheSituation 8 years ago
What do you all think about this one? Seems like some good fodder for my fellow hubbers.
by TMMason 8 years ago
A California congresswoman is pointing the finger at white supremacist groups, who she says have inspired Arizona's new law cracking down on illegal immigrants.Rep. Linda Sanchez, D-Calif., told a Democratic Club on Tuesday that white supremacist groups are influencing lawmakers to adopt laws that...
by Anna Erwin 8 years ago
Go ahead I am all ears. Tell me what parts are facts, which ones aren't and how you know the difference.
by bannedforwhat 5 years ago
Hi everyone. This is my first post here.I made an account and made my first hub and I did absolutely nothing against the rules. I wrote that article myself and there wasn't any sort of conflict with HubPages TOS.Next day I saw that my hub is only visible to me and when I checked my account it says...
|HubPages Device ID|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Google Analytics|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel|
|Google Hosted Libraries|
|Google AdSense Host API|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels|
|Author Google Analytics|
|Amazon Tracking Pixel|