Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

April 27, 2010

SCARBOROUGH TELLS IT LIKE IT IS.... Credit where credit is due: MSNBC's Joe Scarborough criticized Arizona's new immigration law this morning, and did so in a compelling, persuasive way.

As the former Republican congressman put it, "...It does offend me when one out of every three citizens in the state of Arizona are Hispanics, and you have now put a target on the back of one out of three citizens, who, if they're walking their dog around a neighborhood, if they're walking their child to school, and they're an American citizen, or a legal, legal immigrant -- to now put a target on their back, and make them think that every time they walk out of their door they may have to prove something. I will tell you, that is un-American. It is unacceptable and it is un-American."

I'm not sure if I've ever agreed so strongly with Joe Scarborough.

Atrios added, "I'm not usually one to highlight right wingers saying reasonable things, but I think on this issue it's a positive sign that even Joe Scarborough isn't on board with the Arizona horror show."

Of course, Scarborough is no longer in Congress, and need not worry about offending the Republican Party's far-right base or donors. What I'd really like to see is some current GOP officials speak out this forcefully on the issue. Thus far, according to research from ThinkProgress, only one sitting Republican member of Congress -- Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart, a Cuban-American lawmaker in Miami -- has been willing to speak out strongly against the Arizona measure.

Here's hoping he's not the only one.

Steve Benen 11:20 AM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (65)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

Is it even one out of three Arizonians? It sounds to me like anybody could be asked to produce ID, depending on the discretion of the police officer.

Posted by: jimBOB on April 27, 2010 at 11:24 AM | PERMALINK

I'm not typically a chest-thumping overly patriotic type, but what I find even more reprehensible and offensive is that some of our troops coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan could be subjected to the "show us your papers" treatment after putting their lives on the line for this country. Is that the type of "freedom" their efforts are fighting for? Is this what the tea tantrummers mean when they say they're going to "take their country back"? If so, is that the type of country we really want to live in?

It's good to hear Scarborough, but where are the other current republican legislators that have been crowing about excessive government involvement? Crickets.

Posted by: Jilli on April 27, 2010 at 11:27 AM | PERMALINK

"american patriot" -- how is the America you want different from the former Soviet Union or any police state? Americans have always had the right to travel freely without having to produce papers. Why do you want to change that?

Is that what you imagine George Washington and the founding fathers were trying to build, a nation where innocent people performing no illegal action whatsoever would have to continuously submit papers to the police just in order to travel around? Is that freedom to you?

Posted by: Rathskeller on April 27, 2010 at 11:37 AM | PERMALINK

It's really saying something that the Republican Party is now certifiably dumber than George W. Bush. The GOP is busily painting itself into a xenophobic, just-say-no, anti-everything corner; for all his faults, Bush recognized that the party needed to attract minority votes, particularly among Hispanics.

To be sure, he didn't actually accomplish anything on that front; but he did manage to avoid giving in to his party's worst impulses and thus risk alienating the Hispanic vote for the foreseeable future.

To see how damaging this Arizona nonsense could be for the GOP, look no farther than Lincoln Diaz-Balart, the Congressman from the reflexively conservative Cuban emigre community in south Florida, and the only elected Republican to denounce the Arizona law. If the law is too much for a flag-waver like him, then it's gonna be too much for a lot of conservative Hispanics to stomach.

Posted by: jvwalt on April 27, 2010 at 11:39 AM | PERMALINK

For once, Kudos to Joe.

However, on Hardball, he spoke with an Arizona state rep, who would only spout the RTPs and never answer the simple question of whether anyone can be stopped and asked for their ID. He would only say, "We have laws against racial profiling". He kept bringing up the Law and Order argument.

However, for an example of the misuse of police power, the City of North Las Vegas, in the early '90s allocated $300,000 for traffic fines, whereas, Henderson, NV, which had the same number of residents only allocated around 70 thou. CNLV said it was for law enforcement of drugs. A friend of mine, who was white, was stopped on a regular basis while driving to and from his painting job by the city police. It was always the same. A suggestion of an improper lane change. Then, they checked his proof of insurance and ran him for warrants. In each case, after several minutes, the officer would walk back to his car, hand him his license and insurance papers and walk away without saying one word. Yes, indeed, it is truly wonderful to live in the "The Nasty Boys" world of a police state.

Posted by: berttheclock on April 27, 2010 at 11:44 AM | PERMALINK

The interesting affect of this law will be to push illegal immigrants out of AZ into the rest of the country, they can't stay there for fear of getting randomly stopped and they won't head back to Mexico.

Posted by: Rick on April 27, 2010 at 11:44 AM | PERMALINK

Clearly "American Patriot" didn't read the article or watch the video before he posted his comment. But then, judging by his spelling, I suppose reading is not his strong point.

Nevertheless, he demonstrates the uneducated ranting of his fellow tea nutters. Maybe we should have a law to deport people who can't spell or use the English language. That would rid us of most of these tea party nutjobs.

Posted by: Charles Brown on April 27, 2010 at 11:47 AM | PERMALINK

A country that has no enforced borders is not a country. Illegal aliens are illegal (duh!), and have no right to remain in this country. Then it's strictly a matter of means-whereby as to how to remove them. The Feds refused to do the job, so Arizona will do what it has to do, with or without Joe Scarborough.

Posted by: BooBots on April 27, 2010 at 11:49 AM | PERMALINK

What part of "illegal" don't you understand?

The federal government has failed to protect its citizens and has left the burden on the states.

Morning Joe is off base and so are most of you. If you had to cover the cost of illegals, you might change your tune!

Posted by: Wm Jacob Oriles on April 27, 2010 at 11:53 AM | PERMALINK

I've said this before...

They've lost any hope of the black vote, they lost any hope of the gay vote and now there is absolutely now way in hell they will get any of the hispanic vote, and this stunt in Arizona my just be the type of thing to bring people to the pols in November.

The obstruction of financial reform should blow up in their face as well. So who is going to vote for them, a dying off base of bitter old white racists? November will rise and fall on voter turnout, and the Republicans are beginning to give people a very compelling reason to show up and vote against them.

Posted by: SaintZak on April 27, 2010 at 11:56 AM | PERMALINK

One of the reasons Scarborough is no longer in congress is because he made the mistake of occassionaly saying sane things. I disagree with Scarborough more often than not but he is one of the few Right Wing commentators who seems willing to think before he speaks and will, every once and a while, deviate from the approved talking points to speak his mind.

Posted by: thorin-1 on April 27, 2010 at 11:57 AM | PERMALINK

BooBots,
One problem with this is that it will make it harder for police to investigate more serious crimes. For example, if a husband is beating his wife, it won't get reported, because she knows she will be deported. If a violent crime happens, and the police come to investigate, everybody is going to run as fast as they can. Good luck solving all of those kidnapping cases now. And good luck stopping gang violence.

The problem is that now you put illegal immigrants on the same footing as violent illegal immigrants, or even the same footing as just violent criminals.

Posted by: DR on April 27, 2010 at 11:59 AM | PERMALINK

i've watched the radical reactionary Republican movement grow in Arizona over the past 30 plus years. Hre's a few highlights: I was assured that there were training camps for the Soviet across the border in Mexico. This about the same time people were telling me the income tax was illegal and they didn't have to have a drivers license to drive legally. ANd the people stockpiling weapons and food for a time when the country collapsed.

In the mid 80's I was at an Arizona Republican convention where it was seriously debated whether or not flouride in water was harmful, "The Nazis used it to passify the population."

Then car dealer Evan Mecham was nominated for Governor because the moderate Republicans did not vote in the primary. Mecham was elected and then impeached. In the meantime he saw nothing wrong with such phrases as, "She was so beautiful I just had to hire her." "When japanese people see our gold courses their eyes go round." And of course the Use of a slang term for african american children.

then the reactionary Republicans get enough people together to run for precinct committee persons and took over the county parties.

Meanwhile, the Arizona passed term limits kicking all the experienced legislators out of office so that only people with the time and money (AKA retired or rich or idea driven people) could afford to run for office.

And over the past few years, the state legislature has been giving the state away to businesses and dismanteling its civil service. Plus passing random gun laws which allow anyone to carry concealed weapons.

So now, the reactionary Republicans are in charge trying to bring back the good old days before the progressive movement. When men were men and women women and the poor were oppressed.

Posted by: KurtRex1453 on April 27, 2010 at 12:02 PM | PERMALINK

Hey wm jacob oriles noone is saying anything about allowing ILLEGALS to stay here or come here. What we're talking about is the overbearing,freedom stomping,fascist style law allowing police to just stop people and check their papers because they might look like Mexicans.

Posted by: Gandalf on April 27, 2010 at 12:04 PM | PERMALINK

He might want to read the actual bill, this doesn't put a target on anyone's back, its patterned after the federal statute. Law enforcement has to have probable cause to stop, a drivers license will do for verification of status, says so in the bill. Whats the big deal, I've been stopped in my local town because I had a head light out, same type thing can happen in AZ. Its not a violation of my civil rights.

Posted by: rick on April 27, 2010 at 12:07 PM | PERMALINK

Does Joe think it is OK for Wal Mart to set aside a food section for the Mexicans? I am an old man from NW Missouri and I can't figure out what is going on with the immigrant thing. ......

http://thefiresidepost.com/2010/04/27/latino-food-section-at-walmart-as-seen-by-a-redneck/

Posted by: Ohg Rea Tone on April 27, 2010 at 12:22 PM | PERMALINK

Yes, rick, California stopped me once for a broken tail light - They gave me a warning to have it repaired.

But, have you been stopped for having a head light out while walking? Perhaps, you should persuse the difference between probable and reasonable cause. This is going to evolve into people being stopped on the street, while walking. The City of Las Vegas used to have their PD stop single men walking on any off casino street and inquire where they were going. They would always ask for the man's ID Number, which to them meant your Social Security Number which was never meant to be used as an ID. This practice only stopped when an advocate group had the time, money and the wherewithal to take this egregious act to the Nevada Supreme Court, where it was deemed to be un-constitutional. We are talking about the rights of citizens not having to live in a police state and only being able to win, if they, indeed, have the time, money and wherewithal to address their grievances in court. The City of Las Vegas thought they could get away with their practice, because, they thought the homeless men would never fight them in court. This is about abuse of power and not Law and Order.

Posted by: berttheclock on April 27, 2010 at 12:23 PM | PERMALINK

Some of my coworkers are supportive of the AZ law. I told them that it used to be a conservative position to oppose government spotchecks of ID, that a person should not have to carry ID to buy a carton of milk, etc. Their response? 9/11 changed everything.

Terrorism in AZ? Yeah, right.

Posted by: danimal on April 27, 2010 at 12:23 PM | PERMALINK

@Ohg Rea Tone, yes, I do hate it so when Mexican items are not mixed in with Kosher, Asian or anything from Knorr.

Posted by: berttheclock on April 27, 2010 at 12:30 PM | PERMALINK

Law enforcement has to have probable cause to stop... -rick

That's not true.

The enforcement of the law provides that officers can require the identification of anyone they reasonably suspect is in the country illegally.

The legal definition of probably cause is well established, but reasonable suspicion is not and is far too subjective.

Posted by: doubtful on April 27, 2010 at 12:32 PM | PERMALINK

Keep in mind, that one in three are Hispanic. What about American/Asain Indians, certain carmel skin black people. People like my wife, a quarter Spaniard, and I bet more then half the state has a target. Dark hair, dark eyes and a tan is all it takes.

Now add it cops like Sheriff Joe Arpaio who know no boundaries and any even a lilly white fella like myself could be detained and ran through the system if I lost my drivers license, which by the way I don't think is an actual document that proves citizenship.

No one is off limits, no one.

Posted by: ScottW714 on April 27, 2010 at 12:34 PM | PERMALINK

What about tourism and conventions? This is just a small data point, but I work in the office of a small academic society and if this law holds I doubt we will ever hold a conference in AZ. We have a large and growing international contingent who will likely not attend if they think, realistically or not though I don't think it is too unrealistic, they can and will be stopped by police every time they leave the hotel. Possibly multiple times they leave a day since just because someone is stopped at 10:55 on one street by one cop, doesn't they won't get stopped at 11:05 a block over by a different cop.

No thanks, we'll take our business to some other state and we are not that special.

Posted by: adolphus on April 27, 2010 at 12:43 PM | PERMALINK

Another problem with the law is that it gives a legal cause of action to mouth-breathers such as BooBots, Oriles, and rick to sue local and state municipalities if they feel they are not sufficiently enforcing the law. Imagine the time and money spent contesting every filing, frivolous or otherwise.

Posted by: DJ on April 27, 2010 at 12:45 PM | PERMALINK

I have a co-worker who likes this law and whose parents are in AZ. I think she and many other underestimate how the police are going to use this. She/they say but police can only use this if they are dealing with a suspected crime or crime - they can't just single people out for being illegal (if by illegal you mean hispanic). Sure. If you believe that I have lake front property on Pluto to sell you. Police use what they have been given and sometimes quite creatively.

A few points. First, police are human and some are likely to be very anti-immigrant (legal or otherwise) and will use this a a personal cudgel and they will use this to just flat-out harass. This law just gives them more tools. Second, from what I understand they have given little to no guidance on the appropriate use of this which brings me back to the first point. Third, they could detain someone who is illegal and had committed a crime BEFORE why bother? Was this just a feel good legislation, a cry for help, an signal to DC to "do something?"

Obviously time will tell how this plays out - including the results of the inevitable court challenge. I do see that all legal residence - especially those of hispanic origins - are going to have to carry around more than one form of ID to prove they aren't illegal if for no other reason than to protect themselves.

Posted by: ET on April 27, 2010 at 12:47 PM | PERMALINK

he's going down!

wait til trashy rush here's this

Posted by: Tracy James on April 27, 2010 at 12:51 PM | PERMALINK

Would it offend Scarborough if only 5% of Arizonans were Hispanic?

Sorry - just don't want us to go overboard patting Scarborough on the back.

Posted by: kc on April 27, 2010 at 12:51 PM | PERMALINK

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Illegals don't come here for the scenery, they come for jobs. Period. Make employers do a reasonable background check at hiring time. Any employer caught hiring an illegal will face a large fine the first time(or times, I'll leave the details to the lawmakers) and then serve jail time for subsequent violations. No racial profiling, no unenforceable laws just no jobs for illegals. Most employers wouldn't touch an illegal if they thought jail time was possible.
Oh yeah...Any one caught providing false ID docs to illegals goes to jail - first offence.

Posted by: Warthog on April 27, 2010 at 12:55 PM | PERMALINK

What can really freak you out is the realization that if you happen to get swept up erroneously via this mess, you could well find yourself sucked into the maw of the nearly invisible but horrendous "private prison system" for supposed "illegal immigrants."

The towns leap at the chance to earn some revenue but often discover later that they are on the hook for prison repairs and maintenance. In several cases an investigator asked the town to see the contract they signed and the town clerks had no idea where it was or what it said.

Terry Gross and Fresh Air ran a segment late last year on this. Wackenhut and another corporation are speculatively investing in prisons in remote small towns,primarily in the SWest and immigrants are routinely sent there, far away from families, legal counsel and tragically, even routine health care. There is virtually no government oversight of these programs,the quality of service, the qualifications of those operating the systems.

In fact once someone enters the system, the controls are so bad that it is often difficult to determine whether an individual is in it and if so,where they have been sent.

Posted by: dweb on April 27, 2010 at 12:56 PM | PERMALINK

here's the thing i keep thinking: i'm an American citizen, and i don't have any papers that prove that. i have a driver's license, but that doesn't prove my citizenship, or immigration status. so if someone is a citizen, not an immigrant anymore, then how the hell do they prove it to some cop who demands their "papers."

the law seems predicated on the racist assumption that only white folk are citizens, and everyone else must be some kind of immigrant, running around with their green card.

if that's not "unreasonable search and seizure", then i don't understand what those words mean.

good on Joe Scarborough for speaking his (for once) reasonable mind.

Posted by: els on April 27, 2010 at 12:58 PM | PERMALINK

I normally disagree with Joe Scarborough on just about everything, but today I say "God Bless" to him for having the guts to tell it like it is.

This law makes me ashamed to be an American. None of the people who support the "show me your papers" aspect of Arizona's law ever focus on the effect it is going to have on LEGAL AMERICAN CITIZENS who happen to be of Hispanic descent. Today those citizens are being treated like second-class citizens in the State of Arizona. What a shame, and yes indeed Mr. Scarborough, how un-American. Thank you, sir.

Posted by: Rolf A on April 27, 2010 at 12:59 PM | PERMALINK

Operation Wetback was a 1954 operation by the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) to remove about one million illegal immigrants from the southwestern United States, focusing on Mexican nationals.

The effort began in California and Arizona and coordinated 1075 Border Patrol agents, along with state and local police agencies, to mount an aggressive crackdown, going as far as police sweeps of Mexican-American neighborhoods and random stops and ID checks of "Mexican-looking" people in a region with many Native Americans and native Hispanics.In some cases, illegal immigrants were deported along with their American-born minor dependent children as is standard international practice. This was although the children were by current legal interpretation of the 14th amendment U.S. citizens. Some 750 agents targeted agricultural areas with a goal of 1000 apprehensions a day. By the end of July, over 50,000 immigrants were caught in the two states. Around 488,000 illegal immigrants are claimed to have left voluntarily for fear of being apprehended. By September, 80,000 had been taken into custody in Texas, and the INS estimates that 500,000 to 700,000 had left Texas on their own. To discourage re-entry, buses and trains took many deportees deep within Mexico before releasing them. Tens of thousands more were deported by two chartered ships, the Emancipation and the Mercurio. The ships ferried them from Port Isabel, Texas, to Veracruz, Mexico, more than 500 miles (800 kilometers) to the south. Some were taken as far as 1,000 miles. Deportation by sea was ended after seven deportees jumped overboard from the Mercurio and drowned, provoking a mutiny which led to a public outcry in Mexico.

Posted by: knowurhistory on April 27, 2010 at 1:17 PM | PERMALINK

I certainly hope none of the Hispanic or Latin baseball players trying out for the 15 major league teams conducting their spring training in Arizona are affected by this? With the many fans of those teams, who like to follow them to Arizona in the spring, lots of cash might be deleted from the coffers of Arizona, should Major League Baseball wake up and boycott Arizona, next spring. Geez, some at this site might not be able to attend HoHoKan Field for the tiny offspring of bears or I to Phoenix Muni for the A's.

Posted by: berttheclock on April 27, 2010 at 1:28 PM | PERMALINK

As long as the Guv of Arizona can keep the trains running on time and build a few more Autobahns, she should be OK.

Posted by: berttheclock on April 27, 2010 at 1:30 PM | PERMALINK

So what's the solution? How do you get a handle on illegals crossing the border? I see a lot of anger about the policy, but I see no solutions. Typical.

Posted by: Trina on April 27, 2010 at 1:32 PM | PERMALINK

I wonder if the fact that Rep. Diaz-Balart is not seeking re-election had anything to do with his willingness to criticize the AZ law ....

Posted by: Stu Levitan on April 27, 2010 at 1:39 PM | PERMALINK

Any self respecting county in AZ would succeed.

Posted by: kevin k on April 27, 2010 at 1:50 PM | PERMALINK

europeans can come to USA by just buying a plane ticket, hence, there are more illigal whites than any other set, just check Boston and surrouding areas and you will see what i mean!

Posted by: clinton on April 27, 2010 at 2:07 PM | PERMALINK

Scarborough simply understands the GOP is perilously close to driving Hispanic Americans into the ranks of the democratic party for generations to come.

Terrified of their own base, its craven realists are content to await a court decision that overturns the law in Arizona. It just goes to show how far gone that party is today.

If only the democratic party stood in genuine opposition to the GOP, it could exploit this and a mere handful of other issues, and effectively finish it. But its blue dog brigade, and the timid inclinations of its leadership, lack the will to go for the throat. And that's a damn shame.

Posted by: JW on April 27, 2010 at 2:21 PM | PERMALINK

Just so you know, Washington Post is hyping this issue from the standpoint that angry people blame Washington, not Arizona, and that Arizona has patiently waited for Washington to address illegal immigration. WaPo apparently never met a Republican it didn't like, and is busy throwing itself in front of the bullet.

Posted by: Mark on April 27, 2010 at 2:22 PM | PERMALINK

Hey, Trina!

Well, to answer your rather typical question, the simplest solution is to levy heavy fines against businesses that employ illegal immigrants (followed by the threat of jail time for subsequent offenses). Or if you would have actually read the thread (typical) you would have noticed this exact suggestion has already been proposed in this thread by Warthog.

Posted by: claire's knee on April 27, 2010 at 2:25 PM | PERMALINK

Why are we hiring so many illegal aliens? Could it be that we are exploiting them? They come here to work for lower than standard wages. There is insufficient labor in the country, so we hire illegals, because we need them. They are not criminals or terrorists. They are humble and decent human beings who come here for a better life, kind of like Joe Scarborough's grandparents.

Posted by: efr on April 27, 2010 at 2:27 PM | PERMALINK

My step-brother lived in AZ for a time a few years ago. He has dark hair and he works outdoors on most jobs so he has a dark tan. He said he was questioned a few times about his citizenship because of that. I'm thinking he better stay out of AZ now.

Posted by: Schtick on April 27, 2010 at 2:34 PM | PERMALINK

As long as the Guv of Arizona can keep the trains running on time and build a few more Autobahns, she should be OK.
Posted by: berttheclock

apparently she isn't doing that well, either. she's republican after all, and government is the problem.

Posted by: mudwall jackson on April 27, 2010 at 2:40 PM | PERMALINK

Make it so that Everybody has have papers on them that they are legal and I will go along with this law

Posted by: Parik on April 27, 2010 at 2:45 PM | PERMALINK

Don't forget that a sizable number of Arizonans are Navaho, Apache, Hopi, etc.

"Mexicans" are in fact mainly native Americans from South of the white's imaginary border. A mostly Spanish Mexican would never be challenged unless they spoke no English at all, illegal or not.

Can the original owners ask for the police officer's papers and send the illegal back where he came from, say London or Hamburg?

Posted by: OKDem on April 27, 2010 at 2:48 PM | PERMALINK

It's illegal for people to be here w/o proper documentation. It's also illegal to hire them. Where is the outrage at the hotels, construction companies, landscapers, tree trimmers & farmers who take advantage of these people to increase profits increasing other people's tax burden and depriving legal residents & citizens of jobs.

Posted by: Linda on April 27, 2010 at 3:02 PM | PERMALINK

berttheclock makes an interesting point about MLB.

If some brave Hispanic players (or any other players) were to stand up and say they will not be cross the Arizona state line to play ball, this could really blow up fast.

Not that I expect any MLB players to anything but cash their checks. But it's nice to imagine.

Posted by: Shoryland on April 27, 2010 at 3:11 PM | PERMALINK

"So what's the solution? How do you get a handle on illegals crossing the border? I see a lot of anger about the policy, but I see no solutions. Typical." - Trina

No Trina, I think you're missing the point. In this case, the problem IS the law, and the solution IS to overturn it. We'll move on to how to deal with illegals crossing the border once OUR citizens' basic civil and human rights, as well as everything our constitution stands for are no longer at risk. Fair?

Posted by: Alan on April 27, 2010 at 3:13 PM | PERMALINK

Trina:

"So what's the solution? How do you get a handle on illegals crossing the border? I see a lot of anger about the policy, but I see no solutions. Typical."

Why are the illegal immigrants here? If you don't ask that question then any "solution" that you try will be merely spinning your wheels.

Illegals come here to get jobs, for the most part. Jobs that are thankless, physically demanding, and in some cases dangerous. They send as much of that money back to their families in Mexico.

Why don't they get jobs in Mexico? Because there aren't any. Please understand this: these people are DESPERATE. They are HUNGRY. They are not criminals for the most part.

So dealing with this situation requires two things: 1) penalties for businesses and individuals who knowingly hire illegals, and 2) working with Mexico to improve its economic situation so that there are jobs for its citizens. The latter, in particular, would require a great deal of diplomacy, forward thinking, and time, with no easy solutions.

But as long as people can't feed their families in their native lands, and as long as people here hire them, they will come. Period.

The Arizona "law" will not keep the illegals from coming, but it will result in people who are citizens or legal aliens being hassled. About 1/3 of Arizona citizens are Hispanic. You also have people from various middle eastern countries whose skin is somewhat swarthy and who could be mistaken for Mexicans just by their appearance. I live in Tucson, and I can assure you that our economy is aided by middle class and rich Mexicans who come here for a day or a weekend to shop.

What this law will mean in practice is that if you're out walking your dog, you need to be sure to carry ID. Supposedly a driver's license will suffice, but there are people who don't drive and who don't have one. And do you seriously think that there are no eager beaver cops who won't consider a driver's license to be sufficient proof of citizenship?

I believe that if this law remains on the books, you will get cops who demand to see your birth certificate and who will want to see the original, not a notarized fully legal, computer-generated document that you can get from the county of your birth. The latter is all that I have. I have no idea where my original birth certificate is, or if it even exists any more.

I'm 64, white-haired, pale-skinned, although I have dark eyes. I'm not going to get stopped and asked to show ID. So this isn't personal for me. But I do know people, hard-working, good citizens, who will get stopped.

Bottom line: this law will do little if anything to stop illegals from coming here, but it WILL result in citizens being hassled and possibly spending time in jail. Yes, we need to do something about illegals (although they don't make use of our resources here to the extent that some people imagine). But this law isn't what is needed.

Posted by: Wolfdaughter on April 27, 2010 at 3:19 PM | PERMALINK

The religious community's silence is deafening! They should be ashamed for not speaking out against this law and against the rantings of the "teabaggers."

Posted by: elaine on April 27, 2010 at 3:19 PM | PERMALINK

The "officer's discretion". Hmm like whether or not to taser a cuffed person, or a pregnant women, or a child, or an injured person, or a retarded person, like that kind of discretion. Oh boy are we as a nation in trouble. Save us all from the BadgeTard Bullies.

Posted by: CopDisliker on April 27, 2010 at 3:39 PM | PERMALINK

This is a two blades sword of an issue. If the new Law of Arizona is followed strictly by non-profiling this is one good way to weed out illegal immigrants.
If the new Law carries the "I am above the law and you do as I say" warrant, it is a disastrous consequences of stepping bound anyone's constitutional rights.
By the look of the head of the enforcement law of Arizona when interviewed on TV, he looks like the kind that has the attitude "I am above the law and you do as I say" This remains to be seen.
I believe a time element is a justifiable means how this law will be enforce to judge the correctness of the law or the wrongfullness of how this law was enacted.

Posted by: Prudence Russell on April 27, 2010 at 3:42 PM | PERMALINK

I respect all opinions concerning this issue but to all Americans, we can fix the problem! It's not about Hispanics (thank you for the work force given our country all these yrs.) the problem, we are a people/country of laws and can YOU imagine without enforcement how we would have endured/survived for two hundred-thirty-five+years w/out it!!??
Also, not about Democrats/republicans, it's about the politician's working for a PARTY instead of America, that has allowed this situation to escalate far too long!
Today, NOT six months or a yr., to provide the illegals w/accessible programs---ENGLISH being a priority, to start that process for success of all illegals. What does it say about YOUR country where illegals can gather in one place to protest and law enforcement will not arrest them! The legals I have spoken to resent having to go through the process yet we turn our backs on illegals and they are right, makes now sense and we absolutely can NO longer afford it!!!
As for Joe Scarborough, at one point, was part of the problem and till this day, has nothing constructive to say!

Posted by: Retta on April 27, 2010 at 3:44 PM | PERMALINK

Imagine if you will, a middle-class white guy with a family. He loses his job, can't pay the rent or buy groceries and there are no jobs to be had in the U.S. But, he hears there are plenty of jobs across the border in Canada. He can make a good living and send money home to his family. There isn't a teabagger alive who wouldn't do what was needed to feed his family -- including illegally crossing the border into Canada to find work.

Posted by: kate123 on April 27, 2010 at 3:46 PM | PERMALINK

"The federal government has failed to protect its citizens and has left the burden on the states".


Really? NOW you want the federal government to protect it's citizens and not leave it to the states? Did you say that during the healthcare debate? I just bet you didn't.

Posted by: Laurie on April 27, 2010 at 4:01 PM | PERMALINK

I once told one of the Diaz-Balart clan (can't remember which one) - that to their GOP paymasters in DC, Miami Cubans were nothing but a bunch of spics.

He didn't take it well. But I wonder if he's had pause now to remember the conversation.

Posted by: Brautigan on April 27, 2010 at 4:03 PM | PERMALINK

I believe that while the new law in Arizona is un-American, I find myself asking, "Where was the Hispanic community or any Arizonian of voting age who is offended by this law on voting day? Where were they when the politicians who drafted and enacted this law were voted into office?" If one out of three Arizonians are Hispanic then why isn't their voting power heard at the voting booth? Maybe lessons learned will motivate people to show up and VOTE in 2010.

Posted by: Woody on April 27, 2010 at 4:04 PM | PERMALINK

Are the cops also going to pull over people who look suspiciously....Canadian?

Posted by: Argyle on April 27, 2010 at 4:30 PM | PERMALINK

There's nothing new under the sun! Republicans are reverting back to that ol' Jim Crow formula. Intimidate a non-WASP sector of Americans; Irish, Catholic, Polish, not to mention Blacks. This, coupled with the stained undergarments of the "Palinesque" lynch-mob mentality, and you see the call to "go back to the way it used to be" : DOMESTIC TERRORISM. Racism will never die, but we surely will mitigate its damage by turning out the biggest progressive voting block of all time this November. Enough is enough..

Posted by: Tony Thompson on April 27, 2010 at 4:33 PM | PERMALINK

elaine: The religious community's silence is deafening! They should be ashamed for not speaking out against this law and against the rantings of the "teabaggers."

At the moment they're preoccupied with feticide and teh gay. Besides, you know a lot of the folks in the pews (if not the pulpits) of the GOP-friendly churches are totally down with this.

Posted by: Chet on April 27, 2010 at 5:01 PM | PERMALINK

As for Joe Scarborough attaching himself to position that shows consideration for anyone other than rich white men, even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while. I won't hold my breath for another.

Posted by: Dan on April 27, 2010 at 5:54 PM | PERMALINK

The problem is of course with the corruption in Washington on enforcement of illegal immigration. Doesn't Obama remind you of Robert Mugabe a little?

Another problem is that too many Hispanics are primarily loyal to their race, and only distantly loyal to America. While they could cheerfully cooperate to protect our sovereignty, more likely they would vote out honest politicians in favor of those crooked on enforcement. Clearly politicians are deathly afraid of bracing them because of their dual loyalties. We're heading toward an Iraq type of situation in which we have two powerful ethnic groups that are likely to retain primary loyalty to race over country when push comes to shove in the near future.

Posted by: Luther on April 27, 2010 at 11:18 PM | PERMALINK

Nice racist, fact-free drivel, Luther. You do realize that every single one of your assertions is provably false, right?

Posted by: PaulB on April 28, 2010 at 12:42 AM | PERMALINK

I'm a retired police officer and I can tell you no one will be safe in Arizona. The Police will use this law to stop anyone they want too and use the pretext they were stopped for being a possible immigrant. What this law does it throws probable cause out the window and that is why the courts will strike it down.

Posted by: Michael on April 28, 2010 at 2:19 AM | PERMALINK

This post will be in my head for a very long time.

Posted by: internet marketing on December 28, 2010 at 2:29 PM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly