Wednesday, April 28, 2010
An Open Debate About Immigration Reform And The Left Wing Riots
I think it would be good to take a good look at all aspects of immigration reform. This is where we left off on an old post. Things are getting out of control in our country and we need to take an open minded look at these issues. Chris said...
Joe said,"First and foremost i do not see a way to distinguish legal and illegal immigrants from citizens and permanent residents and the other way around." You ask for their ID like they do now. And if they don't have any proof of citizenship then they can deport them. Get it? If the fed did their job Arizona wouldn't have to protect their citizens. Did yopu know that Phenix is the kidnap capitol of the nation? Phenix is the #2 in the world. How would you like to live like that? I'll do an open debate about this on a new post. 27 April, 2010 19:26
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
All existing laws, such as the requirement that employers use e-verify, need to be enforced, before we go passing more laws. The problem Arizona was faced with is that the Feds were not enforcing the existing laws. Take it from me, I know someone on the fed side in Arizona. They catch illegals with falsified documents, including Social Security numbers, and the courts look the other way. Very discouraging to law enforcement, both state and federal. Arizona is completely within its rights to defend their borders and to make sure that the laws are being complied with.
ReplyDeleteThe funniest part of this whole debate, in my estimation, is when Napolitano bitches about the cost to enforce the law. Where was she when Obama, Reid and Pelousy were ramming through this health boondoggle that is going to end up costing us trillions and still leave 15-20 million without health care insurance? How about the billions wasted on the "electronic fence"? These hucksters, on both sides of the aisle, should be thrown in jail for fraud.
And Flipper they knew that this obamacare would not make costs go down but go up instead. Why would they put a bill through that makes our insurance more expensive? I don't believe one thing this asshole president or congress says.
ReplyDeleteObamacare Requires You To "Show Your Papers"
ReplyDeletehttp://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2010/04/obamacare-requires-you-to-show-your.html
Remember when Democrats fell all over themselves trying to prove that Obamacare would not cover illegal aliens? When Joe Wilson shouted "you lie" about coverage for illegal aliens, Obama and Democratic leaders assured the nation that illegal aliens would be excluded.
Under the final Senate health care bill signed into law (unlike the earlier House version), illegal aliens are screened out. Only persons who can prove they are "a citizen or national of the United States or an alien lawfully present in the United States" get to participate.
In other words, when you try to buy a policy through an exchange, or seek a subsidy, or receive any of the other supposed benefits, you will be told "show me your papers."
Just like in Arizona now. If you are contacted lawfully by the police. And if the police officer has a reasonable suspicion that you are here illegally. And if you cannot produce any of the specified common forms of identification. And in that case, the officer has to try to confirm your status with the federal immigration authorities.
The burden of producing identification under the Arizona law is no more intrusive than the documentation you need to fly; or ride an Amtrak train; or check into a hotel; or rent a car; or cash a check.
It certainly is less intrusive than the health care mandate, which forces people to spend money or be penalized, and requires that employers and taxpayers report to the government about insurance status. I find it quite interesting that the same people who insist that the federal government can control virtually all aspects of our health care find it so horrid when a state government seeks to protect its citizens by verifying immigration status.
In a perfect world, perhaps we could go through our lives without ever being told "show me your papers." And there would be no problems with foreign drug gangs and terrorist groups. And immigration would be controlled at the border.
But this is not a perfect world, as the people of Arizona can attest.
But it also is not the equivalent of being in Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, or apartheid South Africa, as is being claimed by opponents of the Arizona law. Anymore so than a molehill is a mountain.
If being told "show me your papers" under the Arizona law constitutes the equivalent of any of those evil forms of government, what does that make Obamacare? And the Democrats who voted for it? And the President who signed it? And the bureaucrats who will implement it? And the doctors who will provide services under it? And the patients who will participate in it?
Are they all now Nazis, and Communists, and Apartheidists? Just like the people of Arizona.
Note point on the law in AZ. The law actually doesn't allow law enforcement to randomly choose someone to stop and ask for ID. A person must have committed another crime, like running a stop sign.
ReplyDeleteMark Adams -
ReplyDeleteThe DimocRATS can't hear the facts through all their hysterical wailing, shirt-rending, hair-pulling out, and shouts of racism that fall from their mouths like they suffer from some kind of Tourette syndrome or seizure. Obama said that a guy can be stopped when his family is out buying ice cream so it must be so. After all, this is just a copy of a federal law and he is the expert. I wonder why the DimocRATS don't repeal the federal law that is so darn racist?
"I find it quite interesting that the same people who insist that the federal government can control virtually all aspects of our health care find it so horrid when a state government seeks to protect its citizens by verifying immigration status." Well said Flipper.
ReplyDeleteI'd still like to hear what the DimocRATS have in the way of solutions. All I know is that Obama has come down firmly on the side of the federal fugitives. He is concentrating on protecting a non-citizen's rights above a legal citizen's. What a piece of work this guy is.
ReplyDeleteHere's an interesting article about how Mexico treats their illegal immigrants. It's long so I will just post the title and link:
Mexico Treats Illegal Aliens Very Harshly
From the archives of the Associated Press:
Mexico wants migrant rights in U.S., but is harsh to undocumented Central Americans
By Mark Stevenson
April 18, 2006
http://sweetness-light.com/archive/mexico-treats-illegal-aliens-very-harshly?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+sweetness-light/sURR+(Sweetness+%26+Light+-+Articles)
Off topic (Sorry!) but I couldn't resist posting this little nugget:
ReplyDeletehttp://jammiewearingfool.blogspot.com/2010/04/another-victim-of-deadbeat-democrat.html
Maybe she can dial up Uncle Bill. I hear he's got a couple of bucks stashed away.
Bill and Hillary Clinton's niece, Macy Clinton, 18, is so poor that she's on food stamps, she told "Inside Edition." The daughter of the ex-president's younger brother Roger told the show her father abandoned her. "He wasn't there for prom, middle school or high school. It was very depressing," the Cooksville. Tenn., teen said. The ultimate betrayal was the $20,000 trust fund he promised her: "My father told me that he would have a trust fund ready for me when ever I turned 18 for college, and I don't have any of that money."
He probably snorted it.
Well, at least she's got food stamps to get by on.
"It's hard, because I'm a Clinton, too, but I have to be on food stamps, and I have to sacrifice everything just to make it day by day," Macy Clinton told "Inside Edition" in an interview that aired Tuesday.
Don't worry yourself brother, the law will be overturned. It plainly violates accepted court precedent.
ReplyDeleteChy Lung v. Freeman, 92 U.S. 275, 280 (1875)
Chae Chan Ping v.United States (The Chinese Exclusion Case), 130 U.S. 581, 604 (1889)
Mark do you know that for sure?
ReplyDeletethe way i read this section doesn't say that...
B. FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY
21 OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS
22 STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS
23 UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE,
24 WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON.
The determination of what lawful contact is doesn't show up. You could suggest that, but it doesn't say that.
LOL ... Fortunately for us you aren't a Supreme Court Justice Joe!
ReplyDeleteYes Joe, we all know States don't set immigration laws, that is up to Congress. The two cases you cite have nothing whatsoever to do with AZ. They aren't setting the conditions of immigration, they are enforcing existing laws, such as the law that legal immigrants who are not yet citizens must carry their papers on their person.
Found this little nifty entry as well:
The development of crimmigration law has ushered in a return to a form of concurrent enforcement of immigration law. Beginning at
least as early as 1996, the federal government has encouraged and at times co-opted state and local participation in immigration control.
In 1996, Congress empowered police to arrest felons who illegally reenter the country following deportation.194 That same year, the
Attorney General gained authority to authorize state and local law enforcement to enforce immigration law in the event of an emergency
“mass influx of aliens.”195 The most attention, however, has been attracted by the 1996 grant of authority to the Attorney General to deputize state and local police to enforce federal immigration laws after training and under the Attorney General’s supervision.196 That provision remained quiescent until after the events of September 11, 2001.
After September 11, 2001, the trend toward concurrent enforcement accelerated. The shift from categorizing immigration law and national security as foreign affairs to envisioning them as domestic concerns rendered state involvement imaginable, and even expected.197 Post-September 11, 2001 terrorism-related efforts sought 193. Ato engage state and local law enforcement.198 The U.S. Justice
Department’s Office of Legal Counsel issued an opinion that state and local police have inherent authority to enforce both criminal and civil immigration laws, reversing its previous position on that issue.199 On the basis of that memo, then-Attorney General John Ashcroft urged state and local police to make immigration arrests.
Kind of an interesting topic. Some myths:
1. This movement is solely and Arizona thing;
2. There has been no federal authority granted to states regarding immigration.
3. As long as illegal immigration has security/criminal/public welfare issues, enforcement will not be left solely to the feds.
So what are your suggestions Joe, other than to let people keep breaking our laws?
Joe, you're so passionate about this, are you an illegal immigrant from Canada or something? ;o) LOL
ReplyDeleteIt sure is telling that the Hypocrats get all antsy-in-their-pantsies about upholding and enforcing EXISTING law. They are all about passing more and more laws and regulations rather than enforcing existing laws.
ReplyDeleteLike financial regulations. The Wall Street regulators were asleep at the switch so we need MORE regulations that they can ignore? Nooooo ... we need to hold these regulators accountable for not doing their friggin' JOB!
But Dimocrats need a populist enemy and a crisis to push through their power-grab legislation. Eeeeeevil health insurance companies, eeeeeevil Wall Street firms. Never let a good crisis go to waste!
Things have gone as far down hill as they could go. I feel bad that I voted for these idiots in Washington. But they did change the Democratic Party into the Socialist Democratic Party. The problem is the Republicans aren't any better. At 63 I can't believe what our country has become. How do we fix what the Republicans and Democrats broke?
ReplyDeleteObama’s Director of Office Management and Budget, Peter Orszag, explains how the Independent Payment and Advisory Board (IPAB) will move our health care system from one of quantity to “quality” by aggressively putting forward proposals that will hit economic targets. Also pay close attention to how Orszag describes the high threshold for overriding the IPAB.
ReplyDeleteWe have un-elected bureaucrats that can enact immediate proposals to our health care system based on bending the cost curve downwards, irregardless to our individual health care needs. Furthermore, a super majority in Congress is needed to override these proposals. Too bad our neutered media did not bring this to our attention before the bill was passed.
Palin was right and the Democrats lied about rationing our health care. Me think things will start getting much worse here in America. We will start looking like the EU on the news soon.
Soon we will have 51 states in the union. Good bye conservatives hello Puerto Rico.
ReplyDeleteJoe you know what lawful contact is. The AZ police have too much on their plate to try and borderline their reasoning for lawful contact to perform an immigration check.
ReplyDeleteAlso the Arizona Immigration Law copies federal code already in place and moves it to the state level to allow police the ability to detain until they get and INS return on a persons status. This law does not supersede federal law already on the books, it allows it to be enforced.
Thanks Chi-Chi, was just about to post this.
ReplyDeletehttp://ap-dp.blogspot.com/2010/04/puerto-rico-democracy-act-legislation.html
Congress to slip one under the radar......
The Regime In Power Has One Agenda Item With Illegal Immigrants VOTES. Politcans Have For Too Long Ignored Their Oath Of Office To Protect This Nation/Citizens Which One Would Think Unless Your a Progressive Also Include Secure Borders and Controlling Lawful Immigration Into OUR Nation.
ReplyDeletePoliticans From BOTH Sides Now Are Using This Issue To Get Votes For Up Comming Elections On Both Sides of The Isle. The 535 Elite In Washignton Still Dont Get It. Citizens Of This Country Will Not Stand For Anarchy To Promote Illegals Entry Into This Country.
The Left Can Use Chaos As One Of Their Tools But FACT Remains Immigration Laws Have Been Broken and Ignored And It Must Stop. All The Other Babble From Politicans Is Pure BULL. Citizens Know The RIGHT Thing To Do But Politicans See ONLY Political Points Which In The End Make US A Better Nation HOW?
I'd like Joe to show us where in those two cases this AZ law violates accepted court precedent. Just listing two SCOTUS cases does not really make your point Joe. Let's just call this law "innocent until proven guilty" by you.
ReplyDeleteAlso Joe, did you have any solutions for the illegal immigration problem? I feel like a broken record when I keep asking you for suggestions, but I am interested in solutions after all. After all, the Republicans put forth all those ideas for true health care reform and they were accused of having no ideas. Now here it's the Hypocrat's chance to shine with all their tip-top illegal immigration reform ideas. I can't wait to be dazzled.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteHere is our director of Homeland Security yesterday, refering to the AZ border.
ReplyDelete"I know that border I think as well as anyone, and I will tell you it is as secure now as it has ever been,"
Even though assaults against Border Patrol agents increased 46 percent from 752 incidents in 2007 to 1,097 incidents in 2008.
Says a lot about what they plan on doing about this situation folks.
The Reason Law Enforcement Can Talk To Subject Is Call PC and No Its Not Political Correctness But Probable Cause. In Traffic Violations Alone Legal Stops Are Abundant. Speeding, Red Light,Stop Sign Or Even Broken Tail Light. These Are Legal Reasons For Law Enforcemdent To Stop And Talk To Anybody. That Is Unless You Think Those Laws Should Be Ignored Also.
ReplyDeleteThis Whole Issue Is About Political Rewards and Nothing More. Ignoring The Law or Any Law Creates Chaos and That The Progressives Thrive On. I Have Not Heard ONE Word Uttered From Any Washington Politican Concerned About Citizens and States Rights. Regime and The Elite Are Actually In My Opinion Derelict In Their Sworn Oath To Protect Citizens and To Act To Bring This Mess Under Control. No Where In Oath Do I Remember It Saying Illegal Immigrants Rights Trump Citizens And States Rights.
This Mess Began Decades Ago And There Are Still Some Of The Same Politicans Saying The Same Dam Things But With NO Action. Govener Of Arizona Acted To Protect Her State When Federal Government Failed Its Obligations Period!
JayNey Higgins from Flint,Michigan you need to stop with the threats. I don't mind a little pissiness or some anger. i understand the frustrations that come with political debate but you tend to take things too far all the time.
ReplyDeleteJay-Ney is mad for the same reason many libs are mad. She actually believes the empty promises and outright lies the politicians tell her.
ReplyDeleteThe Democratic vote harvesting program is disgusting.