Arizona bill 1070 - Page 20 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 05-01-2010, 11:17 PM   #286
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,217
Local Time: 05:33 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
Even you must acknowledge that a newborn is not going to live alone or cash the Medicaid check. The mother at least will be given housing support and food stamps. Most states don't even ask for immigration status in housing. That's why our president's illegally in the country aunt came to be living in public housing in Boston during the campaign.
Of course a newborn wont cash the check, but the mother will not get any more in Medicaid benefits above what is necessary for the kid. This is very clear. Try getting Medicaid as a poor American citizen, most claims will be denied, never mind as an illegal. It can't happen. States and the Feds are VERY clear on this.

They will not be given food stamps. Did you read the welfare reforms in the 1990s? It made it pretty damn hard for even legal immigrants to get food stamps.

All states, Massachusetts included, do in fact make sure you have valid ID, and therefore, are an American citizen, when applying for housing. This is standard, my uncle worked for HUD for years and before that, was in housing in Massachusetts and New York. I'll have him write a guest post with all relevant statutes if you'd like.....

But you shouldn't need that... common sense will do here. Public Housing is means tested, meaning they look at your income. If they are looking at income and other eligibility criterion, then they are verifying your name and other relevant information. Sure, they are not immigration officers, but it is the same as a cop further investigating a routine stop who fails to produce ID. The status comes out eventually.

The issue with Obama's aunt is your example? Do you realize that she is under a deportation order?

Next time you are in Boston, PM me and I'll give you directions to the Boston Housing Authority headquarters. You can see first hand how they are all chain smoking, incompetent, politically connected losers who only have the job because the Mayor does not allow drug tests. Meet them, and you wont be shocked that they don't vet too well.

Let me get this straight- these incompetent idiots let "auntie" through the cracks illegally and it was found out and she is under a deportation order.

This proves your point that illegals can legally get government benefits how?


The only reason she is even in this court battle is because of a 2004 directive issued by the Bush administration requiring all deportation orders to be approved at the highest levels. Before that order, in the Clinton years, I remember INS rounding people up quite regularly in my town, including the 2 guys who ran the convenient store at the top of my street.



Quote:
Really, California tried to do just that. Prevent illegals from receiving state benefits and the provision was struck down as "unconstitutional."


So... if illegals can receive no benefits then what prompted prop 187? And if the law never took effect because of the courts then wasn't the status quo maintained?
If you read the ballot initiative, it goes well beyond participation in government programs like Medicaid and public housing.

The reason this was struck down was due to the denial of services like emergency room care and education.

That is where the judges striking it down talk about where it diverges from federal law.

It would not be on health or food stamp benefits, because the federal govt very clearly bars all illegals from receiving these.

And that federal policy, in place for decades upon decades, is not about to get struck down, nor was it ever even taken up to any significant level in the court system. It is non controversial.

What prompted 187?

The same kind of Tea Party mentality that says "lets use those brown people to get our people to the polls."

It certainly was not prompted by any use, legal or widespread illegal, of public benefits like housing, medicaid and food stamps by illegal immigrants.

California's ballot initiative process is a complete joke. Anyone with a concern, real or in this case, perceived by a few nuts, can get their question before the uninformed masses without much trouble.

Part of the reason that state is in as bad a shape as it is now, but I digress....

Look at the numbers, it does not happen.

Here is a question for you.

If Obama and the Democrats are supposedly lining up and rubbing their hands together to give illegals government benefits, then why did they explicitly bar them from receiving help of any kind in the biggest health care overhaul since 1965?

The bottom line, Indy is the small percentage of illegal aliens who get benefits are doing so illegally- that is why they make the news. That does not prove your point that liberals are somehow out to give these people handouts.

What is difficult to understand about that?
__________________

__________________
U2387 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2010, 11:43 PM   #287
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,217
Local Time: 05:33 AM
[QUOTE=INDY500;6747784]

Quote:
Change is good for a society but is all change for the better?

Well, what Irvine is referring to- women in the workplace, increase in Hispanic and black populations, and shock of shocks, horror of horrors, a black President, is undoubtedly the kind of change many people on the streets fear so much.

You will never, ever convince me that a moderate Democrat who rejects black identity politics and seeks common sense, non ideological solutions to problems is what has all of these people on the streets and some of these people ready to take up arms against their government.

For most of these people, the sad reality is they are protesting a black President, out of the b.s. fear that he somehow represents a setback for white people. Most people who voted for him were white!

Quote:
exploding government spending
,

Thank you Reagan, HW Bush and GW Bush.

Obama only spent as much as he did because it was vitally necessary to prevent a depression. Too bad you don't get this. He has said time and again its not what he wanted to do.

Not a word from your 3 guys about spending like drunken sailors. Obama on the other hand has lamented having to do so and has tried to get the adults together to cut some spending- domestic spending freeze coming, farm subsidies cut, ordered all federal agencies to find savings.

Quote:
exploding debt
,

Thank you Reagan, HW Bush and GW Bush!

Exploding debt was not fashionable before Reagan.

"Reagan proved deficits don't matter." -Dick Cheney

Contrast that to Obama's expression of concern regarding the deficit and his passing of the biggest deficit reduction in 17 years with health care reform. Or his restoration of pay as you go, or his creation of a bipartisan deficit panel. Bush did not care what he ran up. Hence why Obama had this mess to deal with.


Quote:
exploding births out of wedlock
Out of wedlock births have something to do with who is President?

Anyone approves of those? Raise your hand if you think out of wedlock births are a good thing!

For what its worth, those spiked under Reagan too, and went down under Clinton.

They've been flat or a slight increase since.

They tend to occur less when there is opportunity and education, and that is not usually under Republicans.


Quote:
the rise of multiculturalism
What is wrong with this?

In and of itself.

You say you are not a racist, hide it a little better. Tip from me to you.

Quote:
Identity Politics
Obama has flat out rejected the kind of identity politics practiced by pimp criminal Al Sharpton and his ilk.

That is why he is President.

Identity politics? You were around in the 60s and 70s, I was not, why would you make such a statement?

Black panthers, Muslim radicals, Feminist radicals(no problem with feminism from U2387, but some of them took it to crazy levels), anti government radicals like the SDS Weathermen.

The Jim Crow South versus the New South.

The Irish/Poles versus the blacks during busing in the 1970s.

Identity politics has been on the decline ever since.

The only increase in identity politics that I see is fat white males who are dumb enough to think they are being victimized in some way by Obama.
__________________

__________________
U2387 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2010, 11:56 PM   #288
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 04:33 AM
Quote:
All states, Massachusetts included, do in fact make sure you have valid ID, and therefore, are an American citizen, when applying for housing. This is standard, my uncle worked for HUD for years and before that, was in housing in Massachusetts and New York. I'll have him write a guest post with all relevant statutes if you'd like.....
you should read this article I found yesterday researching.

Many illegal immigrants live in public housing - USATODAY.com
Quote:
It doesn't include housing funded by state and local governments, where eligibility requirements vary. Massachusetts, where Obama's aunt occupied one of about 50,000 state-funded units, doesn't ask immigration status under a 1977 federal consent decree in a class-action lawsuit that prohibits the state from denying the benefit to illegal immigrants.

Other illegal immigrants may live in public housing without notifying authorities.

Onyango transferred to an apartment funded only by the state, which cannot ask about immigration status under the court order. In November, her attorney said she was staying with relatives in Cleveland and would fight her deportation order.
Would seem to contradict what you are saying.
Quote:
The issue with Obama's aunt is your example? Do you realize that she is under a deportation order?
Yes, and what's the backlog on those? How many tens of thousands of warrants are issued for those not showing up for court dates. How many hundreds of thousands of those with expired work or student visas have we completely lost touch with? Anyway, want to bet Barack's auntie is still in the country as long as he's in the WH?
Quote:
Let me get this straight- these incompetent idiots let "auntie" through the cracks illegally and it was found out and she is under a deportation order.
if only that was a rare occurrence.
Quote:
What prompted 187?

The same kind of Tea Party mentality that says "lets use those brown people to get our people to the polls."

It certainly was not prompted by any use, legal or widespread illegal, of public benefits like housing, medicaid and food stamps by illegal immigrants.
Didn't mention schools or prisons. And plenty of illegals are receiving the other benefits. Through bureaucratic inefficiency and through fraud like identity theft.
Quote:
Here is a question for you.

If Obama and the Democrats are supposedly lining up and rubbing their hands together to give illegals government benefits, then why did they explicitly bar them from receiving help of any kind in the biggest health care overhaul since 1965?
Because, if I had to read the minds of Dems I'd say:
1) They count on the courts throwing out the provision
2) they get treatment anyway, continuing to overload emergency rooms and hospital budgets to which the Democratic answer will be... comprehensive immigration reform with amnesty a path to citizenship.
__________________
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2010, 12:04 AM   #289
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 10:33 AM
This was published in The Trends Journal in the fall of 2009.

Quote:
Not Welcome Here

In 2010, the anti-immigration movement, long building, will arrive and stay in the US and abroad. America and Europe, with their immigrant populations close to double digits, are experiencing an identity crisis.

In Europe, fear and resentment of Muslims has led to huge gains for anti-immigrant political parties. In the US, with mid-term elections coming up, what to do about the “illegals” will be a hot- button issue that will top the political agenda and serve as a galvanizing force for a new party.....
__________________
AliEnvy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2010, 12:23 AM   #290
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,217
Local Time: 05:33 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
you should read this article I found yesterday researching.

Many illegal immigrants live in public housing - USATODAY.com

Would seem to contradict what you are saying.
Nothing contradicts what I am saying.

They are living there illegally, bottom line. "Many" does not constitute a majority or even close to one.

The article you link says itself that they only constitute half of 0.4% of non eligible citizens in public housing.

That to my simple mind says that the number is 0.2%. They're really taking up all those scarce housing units, aren't they?

Ok, so MA can not ask about immigration status, but they are still supposed to check ID's and verify residency and ties to the community they are applying for housing in.

Nothing about that 1977 decree or court decisions prevented the work of the Boston Housing Authority, if properly done, from denying her application or the application of any illegal immigrant.

They can deny any one with or without cause, mostly owing to backlogs in application, failure to meet eligibility, etc.

Most of these court issues with states enforcing immigration law break down along issues of federalism for these justices and not issues of "lets let the illegals stay in order to be politically correct."

For what its worth, the feds do immigration, and they do not like being stepped on here.



Quote:
Yes, and what's the backlog on those? How many tens of thousands of warrants are issued for those not showing up for court dates. How many hundreds of thousands of those with expired work or student visas have we completely lost touch with? anyway, want to bet baracks auntie is still in the country as long as he's in the WH?
OK.

But does that mean they are here and receiving their benefits legally?

NO.

The backlog, the warrants not followed up on, all would have been addressed to a great extent in the immigration reform bill in 2006 that you falsely deride as "amnesty."

The fact that it is his "auntie" will not matter. Obama has not injected himself into this issue one bit, except to say "let the authorities handle it according to all relevant law." Oh, and he returned her campaign contribution.

And guess what?

That is exactly what they are doing. Her violation of the deportation order is non criminal, and these cases are handled outside of the court system in private hearings.

No special treatment has been given to her yet.

She is the half sister of Obama's father who left him when he was 2. Its not like he keeps close tabs on her life and can be held accountable for her behavior.



Quote:
Didn't mention schools or prisons. And plenty of illegals are receiving benefits. Through bureaucratic inefficiency and through fraud like identity theft.
Illegals can not receive benefits like housing, health care and food stamps. That is the end of the discussion.

Point remains, what the judges had in mind were services similar to emergency room care and education.

No issue was taken with bans on health care and food stamps, as these are part of federal law.

Again, bureaucratic inefficiency and fraud does not mean that they are legally receiving benefits.

Liberals and Conservatives both agree, that should be cracked down on.

But Conservatives would be the first to bitch about taxes raised or money taken out of Iraq to hire more investigators.

Another funny thing- McCain-Kennedy did just that.
Quote:
Because, if I had to read the minds of Dems I'd say:
1) They count on the courts throwing out the provision
Wow.

Tell me again where a court anywhere has even come close to throwing out denial of health care and food stamp benefits to illegal immigrants.

They most certainly did not write the health care bans, simply an extension of long time non controversial federal policy, thinking the courts would throw them out.

Quote:
2) they get treatment anyway, continuing to overload emergency rooms and hospital budgets to which the Democratic answer will be... comprehensive immigration reform with amnesty a path to citizenship.
Illegal immigrants make up nowhere near a majority of the uncompensated emergency room care pool.

If anything, they fear the doctors and avoid them at all costs for fear of being turned in.

The increase in emergency room care is due to the health care crisis, not illegal immigrants. They are not the ones overloading emergency rooms.

You are a bad mind reader. "They get treatment anyway." First off, nowhere near the same level of treatment as a health care plan would provide, preventive, etc. Second, why did the Democrats just spend 2 years and risk their entire hold on power passing a health care bill that will for the most part end reliance on emergency room care among the uninsured? Because they want illegals to be on it? See the lack of logic?

Comprehensive immigration reform is for the gazillionth time, not amnesty.

Amnesty means you get off free, you are forgiven, like you never sinned.

How is this amnesty?

-Pay a fine.

-Pay back taxes

-If you are a criminal(even ran a red light), get the f out of here.

-Get in line behind all the other legal people.

You are an ideologue pure and simple.

You can't see facts, and you seem to think that the Democrats are somehow scheming to get illegals all kinds of good deals at your expense.

That is just absurd.

No Democrat supports illegal immigration.

Comprehensive immigration reform, and I am sorry if you think its amnesty, was once upon a time a bipartisan idea. Say back in 2006, with George W Bush leading the way.

It is, for the gazillionth time again, not the preferred approach of anyone, only the most realistic after both parties have failed for many, many years to secure the borders in the 1st place.

It is a temporary measure to get people out of the shadows who are here already.

2 years after it goes into effect, all "fine and get in line" deals are off and you are getting deported.

Sorry you think the Democrats are calculating behind your back to help out the illegals, but its just not true.

The ultimate answer to all of this uncertainty is comprehensive immigration reform, Reagan got it, Bush got it, Crist gets it, McCain got it at one point, Lindsey Graham gets it, Marco Rubio gets it, the list goes on of non liberals who get it.

1.)Secure the border- much better funding and technology.

2.)Get the people who are illegal and here already out of the shadows and paying up for their past indiscretions, including living in public housing illegally without paying taxes to help support it.

3.)Make sure the entire deportation process is streamlined, efficient and effective. (1)done well will insure that this is easier as they wont have so many to keep up with. Ditto for the legal immigration and visa process and the tracking of expiration dates, etc.

4.)Fine the hell out of illegal employers.

These are the 4 main points of comprehensive immigration reform.

So tell me what is wrong with those as opposed to saying its "amnesty" and thats why its evil.

In other words, discuss like a person interested in the facts, not an ideologue.
__________________
U2387 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2010, 12:30 AM   #291
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 04:33 AM
Thanks for pointing out that this is a problem for most of the First World. It isn't 1900 anymore.

The social welfare systems we built to care for the sick and old now acts as a magnet for immigrants from poorer countries. And because immigrants are less diverse (Muslims in Europe, Mexican in the U.S.) and because multiculturalism dictates that we can't teach the superiority of our culture, control who comes here or insist that they learn our language; the need to assimilate is almost nonexistent.

So are we surprised at the homegrown jihadists, the French car burnings, Geert Wilders in Denmark, cartoon riots, the swiss vote to ban building of minarets or now the Arizona bill?
__________________
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2010, 12:46 AM   #292
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,217
Local Time: 05:33 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
Thanks for pointing out that this is a problem for most of the First World. It isn't 1900 anymore.

The social welfare systems we built to care for the sick and old now acts as a magnet for immigrants from poorer countries. And because immigrants are less diverse (Muslims in Europe, Mexican in the U.S.) and because multiculturalism dictates that we can't teach the superiority of our culture, control who comes here or insist that they learn our language; the need to assimilate is almost nonexistent.

So are we surprised at the homegrown jihadists, the French car burnings, Geert Wilders in Denmark, cartoon riots, the swiss vote to ban building of minarets or now the Arizona bill?
Teach the superiority of our culture?

The Nazis did that. No thanks on that one.

Teach our values, teach how we are a great country focused on freedom, equality, opportunity, hard work?

You are damn right, and we do it in our schools from a very, very early age.

The notion that Mexico's poor come here for a welfare check is just not true.

Ditto for our housing discussion, Indy.

Many more people like auntie are denied than approved for public housing. Any housing authority doing their proper vetting in other areas would put auntie at the back of the line on the "next to impossible" list.

Also, everyone in our schools learns English. Immigration reform bills make it a requirement for those who are on the path to citizenship.

Was assimilation more common among past immigrants? Of course.

Is it too bad that these people feel no need to identify as Americans or care to speak English in places where their grandparents would have?

In my opinion, yes it is.

However, it is just not true that you can get away with not learning English if you go to school here.

And given the American culture we are exposed to as part of our curriculums, odds are they will assimilate to that as well without even realizing it.

They come here to work. Illegally, and that is wrong and needs to be addressed, but no one travels thousands of miles from their families for welfare benefits they can not get. Again, try being an American citizen and trying to get a cash hand out.

It will not happen.

You have to work
__________________
U2387 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2010, 01:11 AM   #293
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,217
Local Time: 05:33 AM
Indy, before we both fill this page up with endless bickering, can we just agree-

1.)Any illegal immigrant getting any kind of taxpayer benefits that are not emergency room care or primary education is doing so illegally and no one of any party or ideology has stayed up late at night plotting how to make their lives easier.

2.)We of course disagree on how to go about punishing illegals and resolving the situation, but we can agree that both parties have people working in good faith to get something done.

And just one more question that I will not judge in any way your answer to!

3.)If not comprehensive immigration reform, then what? The status quo of ambiguity over who is to enforce the law and illegals here without us really knowing about it until they make the news? Are mass deportations, in your view, realistic? If so, where is the money coming from?
__________________
U2387 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2010, 04:32 AM   #294
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,217
Local Time: 05:33 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2387 View Post
If not comprehensive immigration reform, then what? The status quo of ambiguity over who is to enforce the law and illegals here without us really knowing about it until they make the news? Are mass deportations, in your view, realistic? If so, where is the money coming from?
I actually want to ask everyone here this question.

Arizona is but one law in a long line of many that have nibbled around the edges of this issue.

Even if it is effective and implemented with minimal legal trouble, it still will not address the core problem.

So we will keep coming back. A few yrs ago, it was Hazelton, PA. Now, it is Arizona.

Then it will be illegals are working on Mitt Romney's house again.

You all get the picture.

Where do we go from here?
__________________
U2387 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2010, 10:27 AM   #295
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,494
Local Time: 05:33 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluer White View Post
Irvine, I like ethnic restaurants too.

i hope you demand to see the papers of everyone who brings salsa to your table, and if they don't have them, you get up and walk out of that restaurant and go to the other Mexican restaurant in Maine run by the other 3 Mexicans.



Quote:
We are a nation of laws, not restaurants.

Your post has nothing to do with federal law or Arizona law.
and laws are only passed when they are in the best interests of the American people not because they are used to appease certain portions of a political base or because they are advantageous for politicians.

after all, the greatest threat to America in 2004 was gay marriage, which was why it was on the ballot in several critical swing states.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2010, 10:32 AM   #296
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,494
Local Time: 05:33 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
Oh, you make it sound like this has never happened before. Compare our country in 1969 to 1944 (no jets, no pill, Jim Crow south, no TV, 48 states, a unified country at war, pre-atomic age and no major league baseball team west of St. Louis. I mean c'mon.

oh, you're absolutely right. this is nothing new. the nativism you're advocating -- cultural superiority! -- has been around since the 19th century and "No Irish Need Apply" signs, and it often raises it's ugly head in things like WW2 Japanese internment camps.

fortunately, we do move on.


Quote:
Change is good for a society but is all change for the better? Include me in with those that don't count exploding government spending, exploding debt, exploding births out of wedlock, the rise of multiculturalism & Identity Politics and Autotuned pop music as "positive' change in the past 25 years.

change is simply inevitable. multiculturalism is absolutely a good thing -- we get ethnic restaurants! that's all my fat ass cares about! -- and to take something like the debt and say that the few benefits derived by a few illegal immigrants is somehow comparable to, say, defense spending or our historically low taxes or Medicaid, is to identify an easy Spanish-speaking cultural scapegoat for a much more complex problem.

and as for debt, it's your GOP presidents who've done the most damage by far, as for births out of wedlock, you're the people who would rather teenagers be kept ignorant of basic contraception and care more about a fetus than a woman's body, and i think Ke$ha is not that much of a plague on our ears.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2010, 02:14 PM   #297
Refugee
 
Bluer White's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Maine
Posts: 1,886
Local Time: 05:33 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
i hope you demand to see the papers of everyone who brings salsa to your table, and if they don't have them, you get up and walk out of that restaurant and go to the other Mexican restaurant in Maine run by the other 3 Mexicans.
I'd refer you to U2387's posts a few pages back regarding the law and racial profiling.
__________________
Bluer White is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2010, 05:34 PM   #298
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,294
Local Time: 05:33 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post

Change is good for a society but is all change for the better? Include me in with those that don't count exploding government spending, exploding debt, exploding births out of wedlock, the rise of multiculturalism & Identity Politics and Autotuned pop music as "positive' change in the past 25 years.
Why is multiculturalism a negative thing?

What a strange thing to say.
__________________
anitram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2010, 06:13 PM   #299
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,685
Local Time: 04:33 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
The social welfare systems we built to care for the sick and old now acts as a magnet for immigrants from poorer countries. And because immigrants are less diverse (Muslims in Europe, Mexican in the U.S.) and because multiculturalism dictates that we can't teach the superiority of our culture, control who comes here or insist that they learn our language; the need to assimilate is almost nonexistent.
This is the problem right here...






























































of the Tea Party mentality.
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2010, 07:02 PM   #300
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,494
Local Time: 05:33 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
Why is multiculturalism a negative thing?

What a strange thing to say.


i know, right? it's not at all about racism or cultural discomfort or the fact that someone is speaking (likely about you) in a language you didn't bother to learn.

as ever, Frank Rich nails it:

Quote:
Arizonans, like all Americans, have every right to be furious about Washington’s protracted and bipartisan failure to address the immigration stalemate. To be angry about illegal immigration is hardly tantamount to being a bigot. But the Arizona law expressing that anger is bigoted, and in a very particular way. The law dovetails seamlessly with the national “Take Back America” crusade that has attended the rise of Barack Obama and the accelerating demographic shift our first African-American president represents.

The crowd that wants Latinos to show their papers if there’s a “reasonable suspicion” of illegality is often the same crowd still demanding that the president produce a document proving his own citizenship. Lest there be any doubt of that confluence, Rush Limbaugh hammered the point home after Obama criticized Arizona’s action. “I can understand Obama being touchy on the subject of producing your papers,” he said. “Maybe he’s afraid somebody’s going to ask him for his.” Or, as Glenn Beck chimed in about the president last week: “What has he said that sounds like American?”

To the “Take Back America” right, the illegitimate Obama is Illegal Alien No. 1. It’s no surprise that of the 35 members of the Arizona House who voted for the immigration law (the entire Republican caucus), 31 voted soon after for another new law that would require all presidential candidates to produce birth certificates to qualify for inclusion on the state’s 2012 ballot. With the whole country now watching Arizona, that “birther” bill was abruptly yanked Thursday.

[...]

The angry right and its apologists also keep insisting that race has nothing to do with their political passions. Thus Sarah Palin explained that it’s Obama and the “lamestream media” that are responsible for “perpetuating this myth that racial profiling is a part” of Arizona’s law. So how does that profiling work without race or ethnicity, exactly? Brian Bilbray, a Republican Congressman from California and another supporter of the law, rode to the rescue by suggesting “they will look at the kind of dress you wear.” Wise Latinas better start shopping at Talbots!

In this Alice in Wonderland inversion of reality, it’s politically incorrect to entertain a reasonable suspicion that race may be at least a factor in what drives an action like the Arizona immigration law. Any racism in America, it turns out, is directed at whites. Beck called Obama a “racist.” Newt Gingrich called Sonia Sotomayor a “Latina woman racist.” When Obama put up a routine YouTube video calling for the Democratic base to mobilize last week — which he defined as “young people, African-Americans, Latinos and women” — the Republican National Committee attacked him for playing the race card. Presumably the best defense is a good offense when you’re a party boasting an all-white membership in both the House and the Senate and represented by governors who omit slavery from their proclamations of Confederate History Month.

In a development that can only be described as startling, the G.O.P.’s one visible black leader, the party chairman Michael Steele, went off message when appearing at DePaul University on April 20. He conceded that African-Americans “really don’t have a reason” to vote Republican, citing his party’s pursuit of a race-baiting “Southern strategy” since the Nixon-Agnew era. For this he was attacked by conservatives who denied there had ever been such a strategy. That bit of historical revisionism would require erasing, for starters, Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms, not to mention the Willie Horton campaign that helped to propel Bush 41 into the White House in 1988.

Op-Ed Columnist - If Only Arizona Were the Real Problem - NYTimes.com
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:33 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com