Obama slams 'misguided' Ariz. immigration bill

[Guest]

It just keep getting better and better with this clown. States are being overrun with illegal’s and when they finally start passing laws to do something about it, Obama opposes it.

It may violate their civil rights he says? Last time I checked they are law breakers not to mention the crime and drain on state government budgets.

They need to be arrested and deported when they are found and that’s what AZ is trying to do. Obama wants amnesty for all of them so he can get new customers for the government aka new voters on the government take. Or dare I say more people to be ruled and taken care of by our new socialist government.

[Guest]

by the Arizona governor.

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/national/southwest/view/20100423ariz_governor_signs_immigration_enforcemen t_bill/srvc=home&position=recent

[Guest]

"They are lawbreakers" - yeah, the illegal aliens are.

I, on the other hand, am not.

I was born in Providence, Rhode Island. However, due to the fact that I was illegally adopted and my name changed without paperwork, I could not produce proof of citizenship. No paper-trail would lead to a birth certificate.

It took me TWENTY YEARS to fix this problem - and it was only because of some interesting notes my adoptive mother put into my social security records when I she applied for my card back in the mid 1970s that I was able to finally get enough paperwork together to have my name 'legally' changed to what I've been going by for more than 40 years. After THAT court procedure, I went and 'fixed' my driver's license (since my adoptive mother changed my birthdate as well) and finally had everything I needed for a passport (my personal 'holy grail' of ID).

Having said that, I certainly agree with the aim of this bill. The interesting part is going to be how a cop determines "reasonably suspicion" that someone is an illegal alien. If they just start rounding up 'brown people', there'll be hell to pay.

This does sound like we're getting closer to having to hear "Your papers, please.." from people in uniform.

I wonder how they'll detect illegal Canadians? (Targeting just Mexicans could be a violation of the Equal-protection-under-the-law part of the Constitution)

[Guest]

I hear what you're saying but I spent the better part of my life 30 miles from the border in San Diego.

Call it profiling or whatever you want but that's just the way it is. Do we really need to search 90 year old grandmothers from Iowa just to be fair to terrorists of a certain origin?

I lived on the "expensive side" of San Diego and you better not leave anything unlocked or unattended or it will disappear and cross the border faster than you can blink. Ask me how I know... numerous times.

Do others commit crimes? Of course they do but if you live close the the border in AZ, CA, TX you pretty much know where to look most of the time.

Crime is out of control and getting worse. Whole sections of the city are basically trashed. It's costing cities and states billions. It's the Federal Government's job to protect our borders. Can you say yet another EPIC FAIL?

Our boarders need to be locked down tight and the illegals rounded up and deported. Yes, show your papers. I'll gladly show mine.

[Guest]

I hear what you're saying but I spent the better part of my life 30 miles from the border in San Diego.

Call it profiling or whatever you want but that's just the way it is. Do we really need to search 90 year old grandmothers from Iowa just to be fair to terrorists of a certain origin?

I lived on the "expensive side" of San Diego and you better not leave anything unlocked or unattended or it will disappear and cross the border faster than you can blink. Ask me how I know... numerous times.

Do others commit crimes? Of course they do but if you live close the the border in AZ, CA, TX you pretty much know where to look most of the time.

Crime is out of control and getting worse. Whole sections of the city are basically trashed. It's costing cities and states billions. It's the Federal Government's job to protect our borders. Can you say yet another EPIC FAIL?

Our boarders need to be locked down tight and the illegals rounded up and deported. Yes, show your papers. I'll gladly show mine.

This is a democracy founded on the rights of the individual. Such a society does not solve the kinds of problems you refer to having occurred on the "expensive side" (read: "privileged"), of San Diego, or anywhere else, by ramping up law enforcement to the level of a police state. It's no different than establishing a military which eventually usurps greater power than the people it is supposed to protect. History has recorded how governments of people always perish with the rise of governments of force. (read: Nazi Germany).

I appreciate your frustration with the fact that there is a real problem with illegal immigration, but you are advocating the serious harassment and total disrespect for the rights of Hispanic citizens who will be swept up in the search for illegals.

And if the whole idea isn't unconstitutional enough, how will the Arizona law facilitate anything but racial profiling? If the Arizona police decide it's too hard to determine who might be an illegal Canadian, perhaps they will have to search out a bunch of blonde Scandinavians to balance out the number of Hispanics in custody.

[Guest]

This is a democracy founded on the rights of the individual.

It's also a democracy founded on the rule of law. They are law breakers, illegals. They must be caught and sent back. How do you propose to find them? Hold a little block party and ask them to return home? They are law breakers.

Racial profiling is a joke and nothing but liberal political correctness BS. I'll say it again, do we really need to search 90 year old grandmothers from Iowa just to be fair to terrorists of a certain origin?

How about the harassment and total disrespect for the rights of American citizens?

Go spend 48 years living close the boarder and then come talk to me.

[Guest]

It's as silly an argument as saying you are profiling when you use a sobriety check point. Some of the drivers are allowed to go after showing their license, registration etc. and no obvious signs of being impaired. Others, who show signs of driving in an illegal manner, are asked to perform other tests. If they fail the test they are arrested.


Now why is someone who is showing no outward sign of impairment asked to stop in the first place? What if I forgot my driver's license or some other scenerio you can imagine like djplong's story. Doesn't it give the police an opportunity to harrase minorities? Isn't it a slippery slope? I say...pardon my language....BS It isn't a perfect world. But if you aren't breaking the law, you have anything to worry about.

Prince William County, Va. where I lived for two years did something very similar and every group in the country protested.

[Guest]

Here's a little story. Last year I got pulled over in downtown Nashville for driving about a half a block with no lights. The cop asked if I had been drinking. I said no (Just a side note, I don't drink alcohol). He asked for my "paperwork" and then took me to the back of my car and made me take a sobriety test. I passed of course and he sent me on my way. I do believe my civil liberties were violated. He said when you forget to turn your lights on, most of the time it's because you are drunk. Wow, I may have been profiled.

The difference between me and some others with differing opinions, I'm glad they were out looking for drunk drivers. Maybe save a life or something silly like that. I thanked to the officer for being out there protecting the rest of us from drink drivers. Gave him my paperwork, took the little test and went on about my business.

[Guest]

The United States is under attack from illegals. We must secure our borders and deport people of all shades if they are here illegally. What is so hard to understand about that?

[Guest]

Stephen Kruiser says it better then I could:

http://stephenkruiser.com/2010/04/23/arizona-mans-up/

[Guest]

I think he nailed it when he said people who don't live along the border don't have a clue what they are taking about. Live it for awhile then let's hear what you think.

[Guest]

jusluvit, since you're in disagreement with enforcing the laws, what's your solution to the severe problems the border states have to deal with due to the failure of the federal government to enforce our laws and our borders??

[Guest]

"It's funny, isn't it: liberals love to talk about the "rule of law" when they are trying to create never-before-seen "rights" belonging to enemy combatants. But where is the "rule of law" when the laws relating to immigration are studiously ignored, if not deliberately undermined?"

Read the whole thing here:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/


Every time Bush talked about immigration his ratings went down. Liberals said it was the war that brought his ratings down.

[Guest]

Arizona poll:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections2/election_2010/election_2010_senate_elections/arizona/70_of_arizona_voters_favor_new_state_measure_crack ing_down_on_illegal_immigration

[Guest]

...It took me TWENTY YEARS to fix this problem...Our procedures for admitting people to citizenship are a wonderful thing.

My neighbor, a Brit who married an American woman, has had to put up with the inconveniences and expense of the U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Department for many years. Please note that this man has no criminal record, owns two houses in the U.S., pays U.S. taxes as required, the whole five yards.

Thus far he has been living in the U.S. with a visitors visa. On a couple of occasions, the Immigration Department told him he would have to return to England because they had not processed a renewal of his visa in the time they said they needed to do so. I don't remember the cost of the visa and renewals, but I do recall thinking it was extraordinarily expensive when he told me. One one occasion, he was not able to return to the U.K. for his mother's funeral because his visa was still being processed and he was afraid that if he left the U.S., he would not be permitted to return to his wife because of the expiration of his visitor's visa.

Yesterday he told me he is applying for U.S. citizenship. Out of curiosity, I asked the process and the cost. The process takes several months and will require he and his wife to drive from The Villages to downtown Orlando 3-4 times for various interviews, the citizenship test, etc. He said the cost of becoming a U.S. citizen will be $1,800!

If I ever had any question why immigrants stay illegal...and why there probably is a crying need for some sort of amnesty program to encourage them to become citizens...it's been the experience of my neighbor.

Ridiculous!

[Guest]

Please note that this man has no criminal record, owns two houses in the U.S., pays U.S. taxes as required, the whole five yards.


I much prefer to hear the inspirational stories like the "Boat People" from Vietnam who risked their lives for the opportunity and honor to live in such a great country. Or maybe the Cuban people who construct make-shift rafts to to make the dangerous trek for freedom knowing full well that the odds are against them.

[Guest]

I much prefer to hear the inspirational stories like the "Boat People" from Vietnam who risked their lives for the opportunity and honor to live in such a great country. Or maybe the Cuban people who construct make-shift rafts to to make the dangerous trek for freedom knowing full well that the odds are against them.How many of them do you think took the time and spent the money to become U.S. citizens? Or how many are here "living in sin"?

[Guest]

How many of them do you think took the time and spent the money to become U.S. citizens? Or how many are here "living in sin"?

Immigration laws are certainly not my forte but didn't the Boat People from Vietnam have political asylum? I know of a few that came here and are very successful. They were our friends before and after we deserted them.
Theoretically speaking, if I wanted to be a citizen of another country bad enough, money would not be a deterrent.

[Guest]

"On April 30, 1975, “the fall of Saigon” ended the Vietnam War and prompted the first of two waves of emigration from Vietnam to the United States. Vietnamese who had worked closely with Americans during the Vietnam War feared reprisals by the Communist party. 125,000 Vietnamese citizens departed their native country during the Spring of 1975.

"They were airlifted or fled Vietnam on U.S. military cargo ships and transferred to United States government bases in Guam, Thailand, Wake Island, Hawaii and the Philippines, as part of “Operation New Life.” Subsequently, they were transferred to four refugee centers throughout the United States: Camp Pendleton in California, Fort Chaffee in Arkansas, Eglin Air Force Base in Florida, and Fort Indiantown Gap in Pennsylvania.

"Initially, Vietnamese immigrants were unwelcomed by the general American populous. A poll in 1975 showed a mere 36% of Americans were in favor of Vietnamese immigration. Fortunately, the Ford Administration supported the arrival of Vietnamese immigrants and passed the Indochina Migration and Refugee Act of 1975. This Act established a program of domestic resettlement assistance for refugees who fled from Cambodia and Vietnam.

"In 1977, a second wave of Vietnamese refugees began fleeing Vietnam. This wave of emigration lasted until the mid 1980s. The second wave began as a result of the new Communist government’s implementation of economic, political and agricultural policies based on Communist ideology. These policies included “reeducation” and torture of former South Vietnamese military personnel and those presumed friendly to the South Vietnamese cause, the closing of businesses owned by ethnic Chinese Vietnamese, the seizing of farmland and redistributing it, and the mass forced relocation of citizens from urban to rural areas that were previously uncultivated or ruined during the war. During this time approximately two million Vietnamese fled Vietnam in small, overcrowded boats. This group of refugees would come to be known as the “boat people.” Most of the “boat people” fled to asylum camps in Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, the Philippines or Hong Kong and awaited acceptance by foreign countries. To assist Vietnamese refugees, Congress passed the Refugee Act of 1980 which reduced restrictions on entry to the United States. The Refugee Act of 1980 provided a definition of a refugee, created the Office of Refugee Resettlement, set the number of refugee admissions at 50,000 per year (unless in cases of an emergency), and allowed a refugee to adjust his or her status after one year to become a permanent resident and after four more years, to become a United States citizen. In addition laws were also passed to allow children of American servicemen and former political prisoners to enter the United States. In total, the United States accepted 531,310 refugees and asylum seekers from Vietnam between 1981 and 2000...

"Additionally, as refugees, Vietnamese Americans have one of the highest rates of naturalization among all immigrant groups."


http://www.ailf.org/awards/benefit2005/vietnamese_essay.shtml

[Guest]

"On April 30, 1975, “the fall of Saigon” ended the Vietnam War and prompted the first of two waves of emigration from Vietnam to the United States. Vietnamese who had worked closely with Americans during the Vietnam War feared reprisals by the Communist party. 125,000 Vietnamese citizens departed their native country during the Spring of 1975.

"They were airlifted or fled Vietnam on U.S. military cargo ships and transferred to United States government bases in Guam, Thailand, Wake Island, Hawaii and the Philippines, as part of “Operation New Life.” Subsequently, they were transferred to four refugee centers throughout the United States: Camp Pendleton in California, Fort Chaffee in Arkansas, Eglin Air Force Base in Florida, and Fort Indiantown Gap in Pennsylvania.

"Initially, Vietnamese immigrants were unwelcomed by the general American populous. A poll in 1975 showed a mere 36% of Americans were in favor of Vietnamese immigration. Fortunately, the Ford Administration supported the arrival of Vietnamese immigrants and passed the Indochina Migration and Refugee Act of 1975. This Act established a program of domestic resettlement assistance for refugees who fled from Cambodia and Vietnam.

"In 1977, a second wave of Vietnamese refugees began fleeing Vietnam. This wave of emigration lasted until the mid 1980s. The second wave began as a result of the new Communist government’s implementation of economic, political and agricultural policies based on Communist ideology. These policies included “reeducation” and torture of former South Vietnamese military personnel and those presumed friendly to the South Vietnamese cause, the closing of businesses owned by ethnic Chinese Vietnamese, the seizing of farmland and redistributing it, and the mass forced relocation of citizens from urban to rural areas that were previously uncultivated or ruined during the war. During this time approximately two million Vietnamese fled Vietnam in small, overcrowded boats. This group of refugees would come to be known as the “boat people.” Most of the “boat people” fled to asylum camps in Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, the Philippines or Hong Kong and awaited acceptance by foreign countries. To assist Vietnamese refugees, Congress passed the Refugee Act of 1980 which reduced restrictions on entry to the United States. The Refugee Act of 1980 provided a definition of a refugee, created the Office of Refugee Resettlement, set the number of refugee admissions at 50,000 per year (unless in cases of an emergency), and allowed a refugee to adjust his or her status after one year to become a permanent resident and after four more years, to become a United States citizen. In addition laws were also passed to allow children of American servicemen and former political prisoners to enter the United States. In total, the United States accepted 531,310 refugees and asylum seekers from Vietnam between 1981 and 2000...

"Additionally, as refugees, Vietnamese Americans have one of the highest rates of naturalization among all immigrant groups."


http://www.ailf.org/awards/benefit2005/vietnamese_essay.shtml

Very good BK. At one time I knew alot of that info. Amazing what we forget. Thanks the refresher course.

[Guest]

Here's a little story. Last year I got pulled over in downtown Nashville for driving about a half a block with no lights. The cop asked if I had been drinking. I said no (Just a side note, I don't drink alcohol). He asked for my "paperwork" and then took me to the back of my car and made me take a sobriety test. I passed of course and he sent me on my way. I do believe my civil liberties were violated. He said when you forget to turn your lights on, most of the time it's because you are drunk. Wow, I may have been profiled.

The difference between me and some others with differing opinions, I'm glad they were out looking for drunk drivers. Maybe save a life or something silly like that. I thanked to the officer for being out there protecting the rest of us from drink drivers. Gave him my paperwork, took the little test and went on about my business.

If you are driving without lights on, there is a REASON for stopping you. What you are advocating is stopping people with the REASON being that they are Hispanic. That is over the line, Period.

[Guest]

by the permissive population? Brown, black, white or what ever. If they were affecting you, your space and your loved ones you would be insisting the law do what ever it takes to protect you and yours.
When there is nothing invested there is little to lose or any experience to base an opinion on.

If they are illegal then so be it. If they stop some innocents....so be it....no different the 99% of us innocents who are stopped at the airport....NONE!!

btk

[Guest]

Notice where this took place:

http://asia.news.yahoo.com/afp/20100424/twl-mexico-crime-police-4bdc673.html


Also,

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8642452.stm

[Guest]

If you are driving without lights on, there is a REASON for stopping you. What you are advocating is stopping people with the REASON being that they are Hispanic. That is over the line, Period.

Nobody said that, only you.

[Guest]

of being selective without hurting the feelings of those who would defend against a "perceived" infringement. If a crime is committed by a Hispanic and they are looking for a hispanic, just what method would not offend the permissives?????

If someone was murdered in your neighborhood, or raped somebody in your neighborhood....very close to your house and it was observed/reported to be a hispanic/black/white guy with one ear......who would you be suspicious of out in front of your house.

Until it gets personal, most espouse opinions they would trash in a minute if they or their loved ones were at risk or in potential harms way.

I say keep the politicians, special interest and media hounds out of the equation and let law enforcement do what it takes to fight that which IS ILLEGAL......do what ever it takes!!

btk

[Guest]

Nobody said that, only you.

I totally support immigration reform, my person opinion is that until we remove the citizenship by birthright things will never change.

http://www.numbersusa.com/content/learn/baby-chaining/anchor-babies.html

But I understand the fear generated by the Arizona bill, and you don't have to live on the border to really understand this problem one state over is close enough. So how do I get to that understanding, as I still work most weeks I travel to some hospital to work on a problem...To do that I have to fly at least twice, for the past 5 years I get the full treatment each time I fly. The drill goes like this, I unload my 2 computers and my CPAP machine and walk slowly to the metal detector because I have 2 artificial knees the machine pings and I proceed to the cage. Right about that time a TSA official points to my CPAP and says they need to check this for explosive material. Then another official comes to pick me up and complains about the number of bins I have on the belt...then its off to the wanding station...followed by the pat down. Then I have to put everything back together. I have to go to the airport at least 10 minutes earlier due to this every week. I am profiled and treated like a terrorist every time I fly. It is NOT fun. Please bring on the full body scanners.....

But the point here is I am NOT nor will I ever be a terrorist....they spot me because of the metal in my knees. How do you spot an illegal alien? Many US citizens will be required to show some kind of documentation...what do we show? Will we have to carry a passport? Is a National ID card coming?

[Guest]

I do not think that the cops will abuse their powers. There are still people who love to sue. I just think this sways the pendulum a little more the other way to correct the politically correct nonsense that cost everybody time and money.
Let us not handcuff the good guys.

[Guest]

I live 238 miles from Montreal. I lived, for a time, in Boston. Boston used to have a huge illegal alien problem. FROM IRELAND. Now it's illegals from the Caribbean. In Lowell MA, it's illegals from Cambodia and Thailand. Here in Southern New Hampshire, we're having problems with Brazilians. In the north country (Coos county here in NH, the Northeast Kingdom in VT) it's Canadians.

I think it all boils down to how it's enforced. Like I said before, if they just pull over 'brown people', the state will go broke being sued for violations of civil liberties. If it's used as a method to get additional charges against suspected lawbreakers (like you arrested someone for holding up a liquor store, then on top of that you demand proof of citizenship) I think that'll pass 'Constitutional muster'.

Don't think, however, that just becuase this law gives me the creeps (because of it's ability to be misused) that I'm in favor of the polar opposite. For example, the idea of allowing illegals to have driver's licenses is just LUDICROUS to me. In-state tuitions rates? An insult to everyone who 'followed the rules'.

Actually, sure, let them come apply for driver's licenses. I had to prove residency and then some to get MY driver's license in NH - had to have my social security card and school records since I had no birth certificate. If they can't prove what needs proving, oh well, sounds like deportation to me.

My best friend came here LEGALLY from South Africa. The procedures he's had to go through to become a citizen were borderline ridiculous (inept government workers giving him plenty of misdirection along the way). Ask HIM what he thinks of immigration reform :)

[Guest]

Everyone is jumping to conclusions about what Arizona is actually doing with the Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act.

Unlike the nearly 2400 page unreadable and almost impossible to understand Health Care Reform bill, or the 1,400 page financial reform bill, the Arizona bill and the governor's orders for law enforcement training ar very readable.

The bill and training orders give direction for funding directed to greater border surveillance.

According to the bill: A person is presumed to not be an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States if the person provides to the law enforcement officer or agency any of the following:

1. A valid Arizona driver license.

2. A valid Arizona nonoperating identification license.

3. A tribal enrollment card or other form of tribal identification.

4. A valid United States federal, state or local government issued identification.



The bill clearly outlines that the state of Arizona's regulations for immigration enforcement will mirror federal laws on discrimination. The bill also establishes a board to "Provide a list of specific forms of identification that provide a presumption that a person is not an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States."

The board will establish the guidelines for training by May 21, 2010.


According to the Arizona Governor's Executive Order "Establishing Law Enforcement Training for Immigration Laws" ....

"Whereas, Senate Bill 1070 requires a law enforcement official or law enforcement agency of this state, county, city, town or other political subdivision when lawful contact is made and reasonable suspicion exist that the person is an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States, to reasonable attempt, when practicable, to dertmine the immigration status of the person, except if the dermination may hinder o obstruct an investigation and

"Whereas, Senate Bill 1070 provides that the immigration enforcement police agencies shall be implemented in a manner consistent with federal laws regulating immigration, protecting the civil rights of all persons and respecting the privileges and immunities of United States citizens; and

"Wheres, Senate Bill 1070 prohibits a law enforcement official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state from solely considering race, color or national origin in implementing Senate Bill 1070 except to the extent permitted by the United States or Arizona Constition; and

"Whereas, the Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training Board (Board) was established by law to address the need of uniform peace officer selection, recruitment, retention and training standards, and to provide curriculum and standards for all certified law enforcement training facilities; and ....

"3.The course of training established by the Board shall provide clear guidance to law enforcement officials regarding what constitutes reasonable suspicion, and shall make clear that an individual's race, color or national origin alone cannot be grounds for reasonable suspicion to believe any law has been violated.

"4. Provide a list of specific forms of identification that provide a presumption that a person is not an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States.

"5. The Board shall report to the Governor in writing its timeline for promulgating the new course of training materials no later than May 21, 2010..."




http://azgovernor.gov/dms/upload/EO_201009.pdf

This is a link to the actual Senate Bill:

http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/legtext/49leg/2r/summary/h.sb1070_03-30-10_maps.doc.htm

[Guest]

I lived in the suburbs of Washington, DC, in Prince William County, Va., when the county enacted tough new laws on illegal immigrants about three years ago. The laws on Prince William County's book regard not only arrests of illegals, but social services and public education.

It is one of the fastest growing counties in the US with the seventh largest immigrant population in the nation.

The year before the Prince William County, Va., Board of Supervisors passed the new law, the US Congress failed to overhaul the existing immigration laws with a comprehensive bill which pretty much tossed ball to the states and counties most affected by the presence of an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants.

Opponents and proponents cried the same rallying chants we are hearing now. Only the sky didn't fall. It is all very interesting.

"The boom in the Washington region's population in the past few decades, transformed little known suburban communities such as Prince William and Loudoun counties from rural islands to vast suburbs, lined with shopping centers, million dollar homes and gridlocked with traffic," according to an article in Medill Reports Washington.

"Growth and affluence made the entire Washington region a magnet for immigrants – legal and illegal—making the region with the seventh largest immigrant population in the nation.

"Prince William County experienced explosive economic and population growth for the better part of this decade, attracting thousands of construction workers and day laborers to help expand the community. The county had the fourth largest Hispanic growth rate in the country from 2000 to 2006 and grew by almost 150 percent, according the U.S. Census Bureau.

"The phenomena turned Hispanics into the major ethnic group in the county. The Hispanic population grew by 183 percent from 1990 to 2000 and by 2007 was roughly 19 percent of the county population. The white population grew by 7.7 percent.

"Overcrowding was an unavoidable consequence of the exponential growth the county experienced. The county welcomed more than 75,000 new residents since 2000. And in the span of fifty years, the population increased seven-fold, from 50,000 to more than 380,000. The demographic stress started to push resources and services and local politicians to the brink."




Here's a old Washington Post story about the law:


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/10/AR2007071002093.html

[Guest]

It's amazing to me that so many of you show a complete mistrust for government overreach yet support this law. Why is there nothing in this law to punish those who hire these illegal aliens?

[Guest]

What is it that so many are prepared to accept and condone that which is ILLEGAL?

I do agree that those who hire the ILLEGALS should be fined and I mean substantially. I would go so far as to offer a bounty to those who point out the ILLEGALS to get them out of the system.

Would you like to witness what you might consider over reach? Just go South of our border and do something illegal by Mexican law. Then see what happens to you and your rights. Ditto for almost every other country on the planet....except running the Mexican border in the US.

Obama supports it because they fit his agenda of promoting entitlements for people of color.....translation= VOTE FOR ME BECAUSE.....

btk

[Guest]

Arizona Poll

The latest telephone poll taken by the Arizona Governor's office
asked whether people who live in Arizona think illegal immigration
is a serious problem:

29% responded, "Yes, it is a serious problem."

71% responded, "No es una problema seriosa."

:beer3::beer3: