Arizona: Been There, Done That (Poll Discussion Topic)

The following, From GOPUSA is an excellent read. Take this week's poll and share your thoughts on this issue.
Arizona: Been There, Done That
By Harris Sherline
May 6, 2010

Here we go again, thousands of people marching in the streets, protesting immigration laws.

Attempting to deal with the problem of illegal immigrants has now made Arizona the poster child for the self-righteous moralizing of much of the rest of the country.

While the flow of misinformation about Arizona's Senate Bill 1070 has circulated throughout the media, commentators and politicos of every stripe have weighed in on the issue, including the presidents of Mexico and the U.S: The law discriminates against people from Mexico, it's unconstitutional, it's unfair (presumably to the illegal immigrants), it can't be enforced without violating the civil rights of the people who are stopped and asked for documentation to show that they are legally in the country, it's racist.

The bill is only 17 pages long and is not the tangle of legalese that we have come to expect from legislators. However, it appears that most of those who are so vocal about criticizing the law also have not bothered to read the bill.

Sophia Tareen commented that "...activists, families, students and even politicians marched, practiced civil disobedience and 'came out' about their citizenship status in the name of rights for immigrants, including the estimated 12 million living illegally in the U.S."

My question is: Just what rights do illegal immigrants have or should they have? They are not U.S. citizens and they are not here legally. So why are they marching for their rights? The problem is, they represent a potential voting block for the Democrats, who are encouraging them to take to the streets and demonstrate. We went through this a while back, and I remember seeing thousands of people in the streets of Los Angeles and elsewhere around the country demanding, not asking or requesting, but demanding their "rights". I was offended by it then, and I am offended now, and I am not alone. There have been reports that roughly 70% of Arizonans agree.

As for the Arizona legislature, they haven't done anything more than codify U.S. immigration laws that already exist. However, perhaps the most important issue in the Arizona situation is one we are not hearing about, and that is the question of what constitutes a nation. Is it the people or a common culture, or perhaps ethnic uniformity, as the Chinese or Japanese, or a common religion, as Christian or Muslim, or is it based some natural resource, such as oil.

A country that cannot establish and protect its borders risks its sovereignty.

Mexico is a prime example of the sort of draconian immigration laws for which its president Calderon is aggressively criticizing in Arizona. Following are just some examples:

Being in Mexico illegally can land you in jail for up to two years, as can alien marriage fraud.

Law enforcement officials at every level are required to cooperate to enforce Mexico's immigration laws.

Every Mexican citizen is required to carry an ID card. Without it, they are subject to arrest as an illegal alien.

Political speech by foreigners is prohibited, and those who are not Mexican citizens are not allowed to participate in "the political affairs of the country."

Mexico is noted for its abusive treatment of illegal aliens from Central America who are caught crossing Mexico's southern border.

Since most of the school children in Arizona are now Hispanic, it's clear that they will dominate the state's society in the future. However, Europe's experience clearly demonstrates that mass immigration does not work to the advantage of the nation that accepts them. For example, in Germany, three times as many of the Turks are welfare dependent and, on average, they retire at age 50. The situation with the immigrants in France is similar.

Another overlooked consequence of the uncontrolled immigration in Arizona is the impact it has on the carbon footprint of the state, in addition to the demands that the increased population places on government. Arizona has been forced to expand government to service greater numbers of residents. In short, the massive and uncontrolled influx of illegal immigrants in Arizona is breaking the state financially.

The torrent of negative commentary and threats of litigation that Arizona's actions have generated has failed to take into account that the state has already successfully defended its immigration laws on three previous occasions. In 2005 the Arizona began requiring proof of citizenship for voting and restricted benefits to illegal aliens, in 2006 they defeated a challenge to its human smuggling law, and in 2008 the state made it a crime to knowingly employ an illegal immigrant.

Regardless of what the pundits and naysayers may assert, Arizona's latest foray into immigration legislation will prevail again. They've already been there and done that.


Read more of Harris Sherline's commentaries on his blog at


Note -- The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, and/or philosophy of GOPUSA.

Views: 36

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Ok, call me a conspiracy theorist, but I believe the socialist revolutionaries are attacking the United States on all fronts; from the South Lawn of the White House to the Southern Border to the West Coast. If you haven't seen it already, check out this video of a L.A. teacher calling for a Mexican Revolution in the United States (courtesy of La Raza). Between Obama, La Raza, El Qaida, George Soros, and SEIU, the "former" Soviets will have taken over without ever having fired a shot.
Good morning Comrades all. Isn't it a lovely day in the United Marxist States of America? Why isn't RAZA investigated by the FBI as an anti American, subversive Marxist revolutionary group trying to overthrow the government of the United States of America? I have an answer to that and so do you.....Hell is at the gates. And it is WITHIN.
Chipper this morning, aren't we?

Sadly, this is too true. Even the federal government -- and my faith in their ineptness is near boundless -- is not this incompetent. Only intent and deliberate inaction can explain why we have this problem. With dereliction of duty so blatant it seems to me this is near treason, and certainly should be the subject of criminal investigation.

One spill in 20 years and the federal government drags corporate titans through a ringer. The spill over the border has gone on for more than 20 years -- where is the outrage?
Yes, and our mantra ought to be "control the border". We can't allow the liberals to make this a discussion about "comprehensive immigration reform" because this is code for amnesty.
What do we do about those who are here illegally they will say? Our response should be two things: first the federal government, since the Founding, has always had the authority to control the border. That's their job; no bill is necessary. Second, if we do that then the problem of the few million people who are here illegally will resolve itself over time. No more action is needed.
If the moonbats really want to pass a bill then let's pass one holding employers accountable for employing illegal aliens and include a mandate for state issued IDs to have a proof of citizenship on them. That will be enough to cause many of the illegals to self deport. If that is still not enough then we can look at extensions to the guest worker program.
The human problems that have been created by the failure of the federal government can be solved without granting amnesty, however disguised, to those who came here illegally. That's what we should demand.

Newt's weekly newsletter commented upon this topic and I paste his missive below.

May 12, 2010 · Vol. 5, No. 19Follow us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter Printer Friendly Control the Border First

"Control the border first" ought to be the battle cry of every citizen who is tired of leftwing elites trying to use charges of racism to blackmail us into accepting perpetually unsecured borders and amnesty for millions.

"Control the border first" is the legitimate demand of Americans concerned about national security and personal safety.

The President, as Commander in Chief, has a constitutional obligation to control the border.

However, instead of executing this duty, he has actually blocked the limited efforts of the Bush Administration, stopping the construction of a "virtual fence" until more studies can be done as to its effectiveness.

The fact that President Obama refuses to fulfill his national security obligations and instead is trying to arouse public fear and divide the country is a dereliction of duty and a betrayal of his Oath of Office.

The left, led by the Obama Administration, is lying about the Arizona immigration bill and attempting to create a new racial divide to prop up the Democratic Party in the election.

If the Arizona law established the ethnic profiling and harassment of innocent people as the New York Times and the left describes, virtually every American would oppose it.

Yet by 61% to 27%, the American people support Arizona's efforts to eliminate illegality from their communities. There is a deep belief in America that asking people to obey the law and to be law abiding citizens is a legitimate requirement of a free society.

Americans overwhelmingly favor legal immigration. We look with pride on first generation immigrants who work hard and make America a better, more prosperous and more interesting country.

Americans overwhelmingly support efforts to assimilate first-generation immigrants from virtually every country in the world into learning English, learning American history and earning the right to be good citizens.

This has been our national heritage.

However, for over 30 years we have been trapped in a deliberate failure by the federal government to do its job to control the border.

I went back to the diaries of President Ronald Reagan (The Reagan Diaries, edited by Douglas Brinkley) and found entries beginning in 1981:

"Met with Senator Simpson re immigration. He had a great collection of fraudulent S.S. cards, drivers licenses, union cards, etc. -- oh, also phony food stamps. How can we stop this kind of counterfeiting." pp 22, June 1, 1981

"We've lost control of our borders." pp 271, October 9, 1984

"It's high time we regained control of our borders and his bill will do this" (on Simpson's bill) pp 445, October 16, 1986

I voted for and President Reagan signed the Simpson-Mazzoli immigration act of 1986 because we were promised:

1. Control of the border;
2. A practical, viable guest-worker program to offer a legal avenue to economic opportunity; and
3. A tough policy with American employers who broke the law for their own enrichment.

In return, the Simpson-Mazzoli Act was supposed to grant amnesty to what was then estimated to be 300,000 people.

The total number of people amnestied turned out to be 3 million.

Having given amnesty and gotten nothing in return, the American people are increasingly angry about their federal government's failure to do its job.

The Arizona law was a reaction to Washington's failure to protect America and keep Americans safe.

Consider Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer's ad responding to President Obama's dishonest comments.

The Border Can Be Controlled

Those who doubt that real border security is possible should consider two border patrol sectors in Arizona: Yuma and Tucson. Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl sent me statistics about these two case studies this weekend. They are proof that the right resources, properly applied, can get the job done.

Yuma and Tucson both received more National Guardsmen as part of Operation Jumpstart in 2007, as well as fencing and other technology multipliers. However, Yuma has also robustly applied Operation Streamline, a program where most illegal crossers are prosecuted with either a petty offense or misdemeanor and then sent to jail for somewhere between 15 and 60 days.

Both sectors have seen improvement, but much more so in Yuma, with apprehensions dropping from 118,000 in 2006 to 7,000 in 2009.

When you can get a 92% reduction in illegal crossings it is clear the border can be controlled.

If Washington would do its duty on securing the border first, the country would then consider common-sense reform.

Don't blame Arizona. Instead, petition your U.S. House and Senate members to do their job so the Arizona law becomes unnecessary and irrelevant.

Your friend,
Newt Gingrich's Signature
A lot of folks badmouth Newt, but as a spokesman he is always clear and precise and has practical solutions to difficult issues. What he lays out here is a perfect example of what he does best; cuts to the heart of the matter and pins the responsibility on the actions (or inaction) of others.

These type changes DO work. Oklahoma passed new laws just a couple of years ago to punish those that hire illegals (even day-workers), and within six weeks or less the illegal population began to dry up. More would have been done except for the election of a Democratic governor in 2000 that was a knee-jerk reaction to try and fund education needs through an ill-advised lottery and legalized gaming program. The social-liberals are still howling and filing law-suit upon law-suits over the immigration issue ... but in the meantime other states are coming to Oklahoma to find out how best to pass and implement these changes. They are doing so for one reason - they see it works.

Thanks for the comments and participation in this ongoing difficult issue.
There is a key lesson for all of us in your post -- LOCAL elections matter too. Let's make sure we put people with good conservative values into state office in 2010 and beyond.
That a country's president actually chastises another country for not wanting THEIR citizens who entered illegally? Isn't that like someone being shocked if my kids snuck out a window, slipped into a neighbors house, and when the neighbors seemed dumbfounded when I didn't want them back, and instead, seemed irrate that they didn't want to keep and support them?
Dear Reader; "Illegal Immigration" and the Catholic Church???
1. Does anyone else see the connection of the "Extreme Left Faction" of the Catholic Church (Dioceses) of North America, Mesoamerica and South America, which have strayed away from the principles of the Vatican, and their relation to the "Illegal Immigration" issue???
2. Is there a connection between the Mexican President and his denouncement of the Illegal Immigration issue, and the millions upon millions of unaccounted for dollars pouring into his country from the 18,000,000 illegals every month???
Respectfully; John Wayne
In Alinsky's own words: "The issue is never the issue. The issue is always the revolution."
In the dedicatory page of "Rules for Radicals", Alinsky praises Lucifer as being the first rebel: "lest we forget, an over-the-shoulder acknowledgement to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins - or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom - Lucifer."

Once you understand what the objective is, and Obama AND Hillary Clinton are disciples, and you understand exactly who is held up as first radical of the world, you cannot be surprised at the WAR being waged against the establishment, no holds barred. Like Lucifer, the true radical is a shape shifter, a lier and will do anything it takes, including murder to reach his/her ends. It is a destructive power grab with only one goal in mind. POWER! The persuasive means to achieve that end is deceit. That is why we need to see that this war is being waged using slogans such as the HAVES and the HAVE NOTS. Everything is based on the equalizing force of socialist and community engineering, regardless of the evidence history has passed down to us that it is a genocidal process and spawns poverty, hopelessness and dictatorship. Those who are sucked in by the language of "social justice" need to understand exactly what that means and the Machiavellian means being used to disguise it as something it is not.
Indeed, some churches are being bought by the progressives to further their agendas. It is the most troubling aspect of these threatening socialist tactics today.





© 2018   Created by Earl B.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service