Seattle becomes 11th city to boycott Arizona

jimpeel

jimpeel

Well-Known Member
It seems that there may be a few cities which desire to flex their political muscle but as for those who elected these showboats the support isn't there.

SOURCE

Top of the Ticket
Politics and commentary, coast to coast, from the Los Angeles Times

About that boycott of Arizona over its new illegal immigrant law? 82% of Americans say, Nah!
May 27, 2010 | 5:44 am

Despite President Obama's claim that he sees no congressional appetite to address immigration reform this midterm election year, there's more convincing evidence this week that Americans want it.

No White House administration wants to admit that it governs by polls. And this one hasn't. For more than a year now polls have shown the top concerns on American minds are....

...jobs and the economy. As a result, this Obama White House and the whopping Democratic congressional majorities lead by Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi invested those many months in rancorous intra-party debate to obtain broad healthcare legislation.Arizona state Flag

But pollsters keep asking the other questions:

Out Wednesday is a new CNN/Public Opinion poll indicating that even more Americans want:

-- The number of illegal immigrants decreased (76%, up from 73%).

-- Illegal immigrants removed from the country (41%, up from 37%).

-- To halt the influx of illegal immigrants and deport those here (60%).

-- To assign more federal agents to security on the Mexico border (88%).

-- To fine employers of illegal immigrants tens of thousands of dollars (71%).

As you may know, frustrated with federal inaction on border security, Arizona recently passed its own tough new law on illegal immigrants. Asked, "Do you favor or oppose this law?" 57% were in favor of it and 37% were opposed.

Now, how about boycotting Arizona over this new law? Nope -- 82%.
Click to expand...
 
jimpeel

jimpeel

Well-Known Member
spike said:
What makes you think Washington wants them or that they would move for a $50 gift card? This is a bizarre comment.

The general idea here is that the AZ immigration law is an assault on the freedom of all people in or traveling through AZ.
Click to expand...

Washington must want them because they are requiring the state of AZ to accept them.

Who said that they would move for $50? I said that they should hold the ones the arrest and when they have ~500 of them ship them to DC by bus. The $50 Wal-Mart gift car is so the Liberal bleeding hearts can't say that the state of AZ abandoned these people destitute.
 
jimpeel

jimpeel

Well-Known Member
2minkey said:
you do realize that mariachi is not really authentic mexican right, but a creation of US tourism?

i just thought you might wanna know, since some of your best friends are...
Click to expand...

Yeah, yeah, yada yada; but it is the term familiar to most people.
 
jimpeel

jimpeel

Well-Known Member
valkyrie said:
No one has really addressed the real problem with illegal immigration: the difficulty of obtaining a visa to legally work in the US from Mexico. This Arizona law does nothing to address that. The federal government's commitment to send support to reinforce Arizona's borders or throw money into a big fence that causes problems with farmers and ranchers on the US side of the border (cuts into their usable land b/c the fence must be well within our US border), does nothing to fix the underlying problem.
Click to expand...

First of all, the state of AZ cannot issue work visas. Only the federal government can do that and they won't.

Second, we had a workable Bracero program back in the 1960's where workers would come into the Imperial valley to work the fields. The bleeding hearts complained that the workers were not getting minimum wage -- which, at the time, was ~$1.35 / hr. The workers were being paid ~$1.00 / hr or about 8 pesos /hr. They couldn't make 8 pesos per hr in Mexico but they could sure as hell make the equivalent in Yanqui dollars.

So the farmers didn't want to pay the additional money to the workers and the program ended. The workers went home to ear whatever they could scrape up and the bleeding hearts bragged about how they had "uplifted" these people. The same thing was done to the Machiadoras in Guatemala as well.

That started the UFW and Cezar Chavez' efforts to unionize the farm workers. Are you aware that Cazar Chavez was against illegal immigration as it thwarted his efforts to try to form a union to protect the rights of United States citizens?

valkyrie said:
These people are needed to pick the food you eat and work the jobs no one here wants. They send money back to Mexico for their families. They take the money they earn here and go back to Mexico to live. Most of these people are not here to suck off the system. They are here temporarily.
Click to expand...

As for that oft repeated lie, and it is a lie, about Americans not wanting to do the jobs the illegals work at --

SOURCE

The line of applicants hoping to fill jobs vacated by undocumented workers taken away by immigration agents at the Swift & Co. meat-processing plant earlier this week was out the door Thursday.

Greg Bonifacio heard about the job openings on television and brought his passport, his Colorado driver’s license, his Social Security card and even a color photograph of himself as a young Naval officer to prove his military service.

“I don’t want to hassle with any identification problems because of my last name,” said Bonifacio, a 59- year-old Thornton resident of Filipino heritage.
Click to expand...

SOURCE

Title: Crackdown opens jobs for Americans
Source: The Charlotte Observer
URL Source: http://www.charlotte.com/409/story/294983.html
Published: Sep 27, 2007
Author: Mark Krikorian
Post Date: 2007-09-27 13:24:37 by inboxnews
5 Comments


As illegal immigrants leave, unskilled citizens find employment

Immigration hawks have been on a winning streak lately. An unprecedented surge of public outrage at the prospect of amnesty for illegal immigrants led to the defeat in June of the Senate immigration bill.

And that was merely the latest in a series of victories for supporters of tighter controls, including the Real ID Act of 2005, the Secure Fence Act of 2006, proliferating enforcement efforts at the state and local levels and a new package of enforcement measures announced in August by the Department of Homeland Security.

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said that "there will be some unhappy consequences for the economy out of doing this." While the enforcement climate is still too new to show results in government data, Chertoff's prediction doesn't appear to be playing out. On the contrary, there is extensive anecdotal evidence that enforcement is having its desired effects: More illegal aliens are going home, leading to improved conditions for American workers.

The first consequence of stepped-up enforcement is attrition of the illegal population -- a steady decrease in the total number of illegal aliens as more people give up and go home. Attrition is the real alternative to amnesty, and we're seeing it work.

The Arizona Republic ran a story in August explaining how migrants were leaving the state in anticipation of tough new immigration rules. Public radio station WBUR in Boston reported that "in the midst of the debate about immigrants coming to America, something unusual is happening in Massachusetts: Brazilian immigrants are quietly packing up and leaving." And the Chicago Tribune, reporting on the Pennsylvania town at the forefront of the resistance to illegal immigration, has written that "over the summer, when Hazleton officials created the nation's first ordinance aimed at driving away undocumented residents, thousands of people apparently packed up and left."

Far from having "unhappy consequences," these developments are improving the economic bargaining power of less-skilled American workers. The Rocky Mountain News reported that in Greeley, Colo., "the line of applicants hoping to fill jobs vacated by undocumented workers taken away by immigration agents at the Swift & Co. meat-processing plant ... was out the door."

New England Cable News reported that only after a raid on a plant making leather goods for the military in New Bedford, Mass., were Americans and legal immigrants able to get hired. As one new employee said of the raid: "In a way, you know, it's sad, and then in a way it's good because at least it gives people that were not employed for so many years ... a break to be able to work and support their families."

Better enforcement doesn't result only in economic improvements. Tougher enforcement has had a notable effect on gang activity. In an upcoming study, the Center for Immigration Studies reports that using immigration law against gangs has helped bring about a 39 percent drop in gang activity in the Washington suburb of Fairfax County, and Dallas police report a 20 percent drop in the murder rate as a result of the same initiative.

As recent enforcement victories are sustained and expanded, we can begin to document the benefits in other areas: less stress on hospital emergency rooms, less-crowded classrooms, slower growth in government social spending. But the results we've seen so far are clear: We can get illegal aliens to return home, and doing so will improve conditions in American communities.

Why didn't we start doing this a long time ago?
Click to expand...

valkyrie said:
Creating a visa system for these workers and streamlining it would go a long way to helping the states where these workers end up, as well as Mexico. It's in everyone's best interest.
Click to expand...

They come with a visa and they do not go back when the visa expires. What is temporary about that?

valkyrie said:
If you're worried about them popping out a kid that anchors them to the US and gets benefits (welfare, food stamps, Medicaid) then a law needs to be created to change the requirements of citizenship to newborns.
Click to expand...

The Fourteenth Amendment was incorrectly interpreted. Read the FULL LANGUAGE of the Fourteenth Amendment and you will see a little thing that has been widely ignored --

Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Click to expand...

Illegal aliens, regardless of color, political affiliation, or stripe are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. They are subject to the jurisdiction of their home country.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top