Posts Tagged ‘arizona’

…that John McCain will be a hawk on immigration.

As everyone knows I have a lot more fondness for McCain (due to his critical part in the Iraq war victory) that my friend Barbara Espinosa who has spent the last several months effectively laying out the case against him.

As I mentioned yesterday I certainly would prefer him to the democratic alternative but people need to go into this election with their eyes wide open. If republicans in Arizona choose McCain over J. D. Hayworth (who is always described as a “radio show host” rather than the congressman that he was by the media) then you deserve all that you get from him during the next congress.

You have absolutely no excuse, there is no way you can be deceived unless you let yourself. McCain is going to turn on a dime once this election is done, so when he does I don’t want to hear one word of complaint from republicans who support him.

It’s your choice not mine. I hope you make a wise one.

according to this report:

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in a television interview in Ecuador this month that the Obama Justice Department “will be bringing a lawsuit” against the controversial Arizona immigration measure signed into law earlier this year.

The Lonely Conservative has this to say:

You’ve gotta love Jan Brewer. She’s sticking to her guns, and she has public opinion on her side.

Doug Powers hanging at Michelle’s place notes something:

You can’t help but wonder what the cost to taxpayers of this lawsuit will be, and how much fencing and additional border security the money could have paid for. Then again, if the Obama administration gave a damn about border security, drug smuggling and illegal aliens in general (known to the DNC as “potential voters”), they wouldn’t be filing the lawsuit in the first place.

The weekly standard can count:

While this might help Democrats with Latino voters, the law is supported 60/40 overall. This can’t be a fight Democrats want to have before Election Day, right?

While Captain Ed is amazed by the method of letting this out:

Wow … just wow. What a tremendously incompetent manner in which to announce the decision. The Obama administration informed the Ecuadorian people of this decision before the White House informed Americans. I’m not sure if that’s Hope and Change, the New Transparency, or Smart Power.

Gov Brewer is not amused either:

“This is no way to treat the people of Arizona,” said Brewer, who recently set up a legal defense fund to combat challenges to the law. “To learn of this lawsuit through an Ecuadorean interview with the secretary of state is just outrageous.”

“If our own government intends to sue our state to prevent illegal immigration enforcement, the least it can do is inform us before it informs the citizens of another nation,” Brewer added.

And that not the only promise not kept reminds Nice Deb

He was supposed to let her know what he decided on sending National Guard troops to AZ to protect the border. The two weeks were up, yesterday, revealing yet another empty promise from Obama

Nice Deb, being nice wouldn’t do that.

The Big question is why on earth would a US president be suing a US state of a law that mimics US law that a majority of American support? Repeat after me. If you start from the idea

One thing that has really struck me about the Arizona Law has been the almost united media reaction of how dare they.

They are beating their breasts, calling them Nazis, vowing not to do business in Arizona and posturing themselves to prove how pure they are on civil rights by bravely standing in opposition to the people of Arizona and their police.

Yet they won’t show a clip of Southpark without censoring Mohammed’s image.

That is why I call them the media human shields. Like the one’s in Iraq they “bravely” stood up to American troops fully knowing that they were in no danger from them. The media likewise will bravely stand up to Arizona police and voters because they know their “bravery” puts them in absolutely no danger.

They will however not stand up to radical Islam for the same reason why those same human shields would not go to Israel during rocket attacks nor during China during protest. They know the difference between real danger and posturing and won’t risk their necks.

My arch enemy friend Chris asked a reasonable question in comments on my Bryon York post. To Wit:

Pete, what circumstances would give an officer reasonable suspicion that a person was not a legal resident?

It’s the type of question that the media is all over today, it deserves an answer so here it comes.

You are asking the wrong person, let me explain why:

One of the things you learn in a job is how to recognize signs, for example, when debuging a system certain performance signs or browser actions will indicate a spyware issue. Others will indicate that temp files haven’t been cleaned out since sometime the Red Sox won the Series. I’ve found after a decade of doing this that I can watch a system for several minutes and have a pretty good idea what is going wrong.

This is true in any good profession or hobby. Mike the butcher can recognize the differences between different grades of meat in the shop. Bob the hardware guy knows a good door from a cheap one. Marge at ZuZu’s Petals knows a good flower from a bad one. Bill at the Border Grille & Bar knows the difference between a tomato that can be used in a salad, a sandwich or a salsa and one that is only usable during a bad performance onstage.

Likewise a police officer who has been trained in law enforcement and spending years or decades in an area where they’ve had to deal with illegal immigration on a daily basis would recognize things that you or I, not having having had said experience would not even think of looking for.

But Pete you say, we can’t trust the police to enforce the laws fairly. We can’t? Look at the record. Do you feel intimidated by the police in town? Do you feel scared or worried. They have all kinds of legal authority over you yet you don’t quake in fear? Why are you so ready to trust your local police but are unwilling to allow people from Arizona that same courtesy? Because they are different from you? Because they are republicans and/or conservatives? Because they are as Larry Baer called the tea party people “Stupid White People”? Talk about profiling!

Lets look at the record in one high visibility area. The police forces in the United States in cooperation with Federal and Homeland security have managed to successfully defend this nation from terrorist threats without the curtailing of individual rights particularly of American Muslims.

Can the American Muslim community honestly say their ability to work, or worship or live have been curtailed over the years? I think not. Can anyone rightly say that their ability to protest the war and call out President Bush was unreasonably restricted? It is to laugh.

I also think it is facetious to think that with national attention upon them said police are going to act capriciously when their jobs and futures are at stake, particularly in this economy. The ACLU, La Raza, Al Sharpton, The Free Muma, ANSWER, ACORN et/al and other who make their living ambulance chasing are drooling at the chance to catch them overstepping their authority. These cops know the score if you don’t realize that the you have not paid attention to our litigious society nor to the politics of the left.

So no I don’t know what would constitute a reasonable suspicion but the officers enforcing the law will, and if anyone is victimized by an officer going overboard there will be a plethora of lawyers and media to go after them that Ken Gladney never has and never will see after being beaten on film.

That’s why I and others don’t take people who are willing to call Arizona a police state seriously. They wouldn’t know a police state if it hit them upside the head and are only interested in feeling better about their self righteousness. Perhaps they should take a closer look at what is happening just across the border these days.