Althouse: Did Obama drop immigration reform...

April 29, 2010

Did Obama drop immigration reform...

... because that poll showed a majority of Americans support that new Arizona law?

111 comments:

tim maguire said...: It amazes me how clueless the protesters are. I think they could have gotten somewhere by emphasizing the burden on citizens of Hispanic origin.

Instead they pulled an "oh those poor illegals!" campaign. Of course most people aren't sympathetic. What are they thinking?; 4/29/10, 10:57 PM
Anonymous said...: I hope so. I hope he's finally cooling off.

I'm not an Obama supporter, but I hope his presidency is successful... although I don't know exactly what that means.

What I mean by successful: (1) he doesn't blow anything important up, and (2) he leaves office politely when his term(s) are up.

Somehow, I think that this will signal the end of the era of racial and sexual quota politics. At the end of all this, sensible people will realize that Obama wasn't really a god or an ogre... just the usual run of the mill, self-interested hustler.

Then we might be able to dump the black worship. I'm hoping.

We might just be able to say: Black people got theirs for a while. Now it's time for them to get in line and wait their turn, just like everybody else.; 4/29/10, 10:59 PM
chickelit said...: Did Obama drop immigration reform because that poll showed a majority of Americans support that new Arizona law?

No. He dropped it because he read the Tea Party leaves and he reads your blog.

Chuffed yet?; 4/29/10, 11:00 PM
Automatic_Wing said...: That may be the excuse he gives to the illegal immigration enthusiasts in his party, but this wasn't going to happen anyway.

The Dems have already forced one big shit sandwich on the voting public and were never going to press their luck with amnesty during this congress.; 4/29/10, 11:25 PM
KCFleming said...: Like gays in the military, immigration reform will be promised again when it becomes useful to Obama.

He's pragmatic that way.; 4/29/10, 11:49 PM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: People are tired of being called racist.

Brown Calls Female Voter "A Bigoted Woman"; 4/30/10, 12:08 AM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: For those of you/us that missed it the Hunter interview is re-airing on ABC right now.; 4/30/10, 12:13 AM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: Elisabeth found out about the affair just like Woods wife.. via the cell phone.

Could we say the cell phone is like the SUV..

One wrecks homes and the other kills people ;); 4/30/10, 12:36 AM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: Since no one takes responsibility for anything anymore.. lets blame the ubiquitous cell phone.

just saying ;); 4/30/10, 12:39 AM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: After Hunter got pregnant.. she says everything changed.

I don't know.. Hunter is coming across sympathetic to me..; 4/30/10, 12:44 AM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: I think I make a lousy juror...; 4/30/10, 12:47 AM
Fred4Pres said...: It's can't be that easy, can it? Or is it that he realized you can only get away with jamming legislation like health reform down the American public's throat once a term.; 4/30/10, 1:15 AM
reader_iam said...: I think they could have gotten somewhere by emphasizing the burden on citizens of Hispanic origin.

By, for example, pointing out the possibility that in order to give actual, appropriate, constitutional equal protection to those actual citizens of Hispanic origin, the door might be kicked open for a national ID card, for all citizens of the United States, which at various times not just libertarians, but also Republicans and even "real conservatives," as self-described, vociferously opposed, on various grounds (correctly, IMO).

I haven't followed threads closely enough to determine whether anyone here expressed concerned about the potential for the unintended kicking open of that particular door. Did anyone?; 4/30/10, 1:44 AM
reader_iam said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 4/30/10, 1:54 AM
reader_iam said...: Perhaps some folks in power within or allied with the Obama administration camp noticed the same thing. Perhaps they thought something like: "Oh, shit. What if that implied, emerging consensus bears fruit, and we end up with some sort of national ID program?" (Who knows?)

Oh, shit, indeed. Potential petards all the way around, if you ask me.

The federal government has failed over many successive administrations over multiple decades now in one of its essential charges: border maintenance. That's the flat-out truth, and so we have come to this pass.

Now what, sports fans?; 4/30/10, 1:59 AM
reader_iam said...: For those who don't follow links for whatever reason, Lem is, of course, referring to Gordon Brown, the prime minister of the U.K., not Scott Brown, a senator from Massachusetts.

; ); 4/30/10, 2:08 AM
themightypuck said...: I think the problem with the polling is that very few people would have a problem with arresting illegal aliens--hell they are ILLEGAL--but most people would have a problem with being required to show their german accent papers slash german accent. I also don't think very many people would support Mexican looking = reasonable suspicion. The way to sell the law is to alleviate fears of the later two while pointing out the fairness of the former one. This is one of those free society tradeoffs that would be made much simpler if the borders were less porous.; 4/30/10, 2:10 AM
Anonymous said...: Rasmussen reports 63% of Hispanics here in Arizona support SB 1070. I know three Hispanics who have been not just supportive but outspokenly so. They're tired of the coyotes and drug runners and gang bangers and kidnappers, even more than the rest of us, because they are preying mostly on the law-abiding Hispanic population. Obama is shrewd to put this on the back burner.; 4/30/10, 2:14 AM
mesquito said...: Rasmussen reports 63% of Hispanics here in Arizona support SB 1070.

I am not at all surprised. The thing about mojados is they don't move into John McCain's neighborhood(s).; 4/30/10, 3:54 AM
reader_iam said...: Ironically enough, during this particular fitful, sleepless night, I've watched a chunk of the final debate amongst the U.K.'s PM candidates as a well as a chunk of the thereafter coverage and the stuff reported roundabout.

wv: unshypo

"Not shy enough, poor thing"

LOL; 4/30/10, 4:12 AM
Aridog said...: Reader iam said:" Perhaps they thought something like: "Oh, shit. What if that implied, emerging consensus bears fruit, and we end up with some sort of national ID program?" (Who knows?)"

Is it just me, or do we not already have a national ID law on the books, scheduled to go in to effect in 2011?

It is too complex and over reaching in my opinion, but there none the less. Four States and four Canadian Provinces have already made compliant driver's licenses and non-driver ID cards available, as well as the Feds making a Passport Card available for land and water borne travel. The licenses and cards utilize embedded RFID chips that are compliant with the REAL ID Act of 2005.; 4/30/10, 4:31 AM
reader_iam said...: ; ); 4/30/10, 4:40 AM
Anonymous said...: If polls bothered Obama, why did he cram Obamacare down our throats?; 4/30/10, 6:19 AM
Unknown said...: Even without an Assistant Democrat, like Lindsey (call me Arlen) Graham to give them cover, immigration only had about 26 votes, so it wasn't going very far in the Senate. We know The Zero doesn't like homosexuals, so repealing DADT has no chance; what he thinks of Mexicans, I can't say, but this shoots a big hole in RahmBO's plans.

Skookum John said...

Rasmussen reports 63% of Hispanics here in Arizona support SB 1070.

I believe that poll is confined to Mexican here legally.

Aridog said...

Is it just me, or do we not already have a national ID law on the books, scheduled to go in to effect in 2011?

Ever hear of the Social Security Act?; 4/30/10, 6:43 AM
Ipso Fatso said...: Hey isn't Andrew Sullivan an illegal immigrant?; 4/30/10, 6:46 AM
Opus One Media said...: If some of you would read the question asked in the poll “Seven in 10 U.S. adults support arresting people who can’t prove they’re in the United States legally" you would see that it has nothing much to do with the Arizona law at question.

It is sad that some of you just "buy in" without reading the big print let alone the fine print. Arizona law enforcement is opposed and for good practical reasons. You should listen instead of being led my that ring in your nose.; 4/30/10, 6:50 AM
Ron said...: Andrew is one of those derned brokebacks!; 4/30/10, 6:59 AM
Unknown said...: Well...ah...why? Honestly, has he ever cared what the American people want?; 4/30/10, 7:08 AM
Hoosier Daddy said...: If some of you would read the question asked in the poll “Seven in 10 U.S. adults support arresting people who can’t prove they’re in the United States legally" you would see that it has nothing much to do with the Arizona law at question.

Well according to Angus Reid which took the poll, I would say you're wrong. Again. But what else is new.

I suggest hdhouse, so you can try and redeem what little credibility you have, read the so called fine print at the bottom of the page I linked (where it says polling data) to see that the questions asked are directly related to the AZ law.

Have a nice day.; 4/30/10, 7:13 AM
Anonymous said...: The answer is congress should immediately vote on the Democrats stalking horse immigration reform legislation they released. It isn't perfect but it would be a good start. BUT, the Democrats would never support their own legislation. Good, we saw the proposed Democratic immigration reform legislation, LET'S VOTE NOW.; 4/30/10, 7:40 AM
The Drill SGT said...: There was zero chance of passing
"comprehensive" immigration reform (aka amnesty).

When it last came up, it was killed and we were told that 800 miles of fence were authorized and budgeted.

Then instead of a real fence (not to self, the Israeli's can get their fence built and it works), we decided a high tech virtual fence was better.

Then Obama declared the virtual fence wouldn't work, and we needed comprehensive immigration reform.

Any bill that doesn't start with:

Build a Big Bad F'ing Fence First (B3F3) has no chance of passing.

The problem is that the status quo is a wide open border. Without a change in the Congressional/WH leadership, B3F3 can't get passed.; 4/30/10, 7:44 AM
Tank said...: What's with the "reform" business?

Is every change a reform?

We don't need no stinkin reform.

We have laws against people breaking into the country - JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER COUNTRY, INCLUDING MEXICO. Sorry, calm down.

Just enforce the laws for a while. Close up the borders. Enforce laws against hiring illegals. Deport people who've broken in. Let's start with Obama's aunt.

Then, later we can talk about what to do about the XX million lawbreakers already here.; 4/30/10, 7:44 AM
Aridog said...: edutcher said:"Ever hear of the Social Security Act?"

Why, no. Good of you to remind me.

Now tell me how many places accept the SA card as "ID?" Oh, say, compared to a driver's license or passport? Can it be used for boarding a commercial aviation flight? Can it be used as the sole ID for re-entry to the USA by land or water?

The original SSA cards state on the front "not for identification purposes." The newer one don't say that, however, as usage became ubiquitous, the words were dropped in the 1980's.

Now, say if you lose your SSA card, what documents are you required to produce to replace it? Answer: driver's license with photo and/or passport.
Check it out ...scroll down to bottom.

The SSA card is not "ID" It is a record or verification of an "account number."; 4/30/10, 7:46 AM
I'm Full of Soup said...: The answer is no, Professor. The wind vane to predict Obama's moves is "Does it involve re-distribution of wealth"?
Yes -gets his interest including unscripted dumb gaffes.

No - gets blah blah blah and little else.

How many times do I have to explain this to you? It will be on the final! Got it?!; 4/30/10, 7:47 AM
Darrell said...: Didn't he announce that he was giving up on healthcare reform sfter several setbacks? Russians have a term for those fallbacks before a major offensive, but who cares anymore?; 4/30/10, 7:49 AM
Hagar said...: Obama is a messiah, not a politician.; 4/30/10, 7:52 AM
The Drill SGT said...: You'd think that the big government folks would understand that it would be to their advantage to demonstrate effective government by actually enforcing our border security.

Failure to secure the border undermines all faith in government.; 4/30/10, 7:56 AM
Tank said...: Um Drill (and others).

Which "folks" have done a good job sealing the border? Big gov't, small gov't, whatever?

Zero? No.
Bush? No.
Clinton? No.
Bush? No.
Reagan? Ha ha.
Carter? LOL.

Plenty of blame to go around.; 4/30/10, 8:00 AM
Roger J. said...: Drill Sgt makes the fundamental point succintly and successfully--our federal government has failed in most fundamental task: securing out national borders. Plenty of villians to go around on both sides of the aisle, but the most recent villian is Barack Obama who now owns it.; 4/30/10, 8:05 AM
LouisAntoine said...: DRILL BABY DRILL!
DRILL BABY DRILL!
DRILL BABY *[POW!]*
glug glug glug glug; 4/30/10, 8:06 AM
Roger J. said...: oops--RD Kraus beat me to it.; 4/30/10, 8:06 AM
Roger J. said...: Focus Monty--this thread is about illegal immigration, and not the piss poor federal response to the oil spill--hecksofajob, bami; 4/30/10, 8:10 AM
Kirby Olson said...: Illegal immigrants in Mexico get two years' incarceration on first offense, ten years on second offense.

We should learn something from Mexico.; 4/30/10, 8:14 AM
Anonymous said...: http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/95235-democrats-spark-alarm-with-call-for-national-id-card; 4/30/10, 8:15 AM
hawkeyedjb said...: I live down here at ground zero in Racist Nazi Hitlerville, and I take great amusement listening to the shreiks of horror coming from the civilized folks in other states. While I oppose Arizona's SB1070, I would enjoy seeing that same bill put as a referendum in other states. My guess is it would pass everywhere, including California. Then who would they boycott?

wv: lessi, as in 'lessi your papers, bub'; 4/30/10, 8:21 AM
Anonymous said...: "Illegal immigrants in Mexico get two years' incarceration on first offense, ten years on second offense."

Illegal immigrants in Mexico usually get robbed, beaten and/or raped on every offense.; 4/30/10, 8:21 AM
Original Mike said...: HD, this is the internet. We (well, Hoosier) can fact check your ass.; 4/30/10, 8:24 AM
Roger J. said...: Original Mike--while Hoosier does do the fact checking, the bottom line is that HD is an ass and couldnt pour piss out of a boot--it is genuinely difficult to ascribe to HD the ability to think let alone write. He does, however, provide comic relief; 4/30/10, 8:27 AM
Hoosier Daddy said...: DRILL BABY *[POW!]*
glug glug glug glug

I take it you don't drive a car right?; 4/30/10, 8:32 AM
Original Mike said...: "Couldn't pour piss out of a boot if the instructions were written on the heel."

Is that true, HD?; 4/30/10, 8:37 AM
Hoosier Daddy said...: HD, this is the internet. We (well, Hoosier) can fact check your ass.

Honestly I am starting to wonder if hdhouse is a lefty moby because his recent postings are the equivalent of walking around with a Kick Me sign on your back.; 4/30/10, 8:38 AM
roesch-voltaire said...: I am not sure that a poll like this gives much insight into the complex issue of illegal immigration. The poll and the AZ law ignore the role of the companies that recruit and hire the illegals, and the poll ignores the part of the bill that gives explicit permission for citizens to sue local and state government for lack of enforcement. This is boondoggle for lawyers as their fees will be paid by the state. Imagine if one thousand folks accuse their neighbors of being illegal, and as the local sheriffs office is overwhelmed by the numbers, the law suits will fly grinding the system to a halt.
While everybody wants to slow down and be thoughtful about HCR and the financial reform, it seems chasing after this bill is okay. I suspect Obama is wise to let the dust settle on this one.; 4/30/10, 8:46 AM
Moira Breen said...: Obama already knew that the majority of citizens are not happy with uncontrolled immigration, just like Bush, Clinton, etc., before him knew. They don't care, because, like Gordon Brown in the UK, or just about everybody else inside the Beltway, they hold the unshakable conviction that all these people are merely ignorant bigots, whom they occasionally have to pretend to listen to, as they go right on doing absolutely nothing about the problem. Because to them, there is no problem.

Aside, that is, from the minor irritant of those tedious bigots who occasionally make a lot of noise and fuss that requires discrete application of a little bullshit and baling wire. So "reform" or no, the influx will continue, and any attempt at enforcement, or mitigation of the hardships consequent to federal irresponsibility and malfeasance in these matters, will be struck down by the courts.; 4/30/10, 8:51 AM
Anonymous said...: "...Imagine if one thousand folks accuse their neighbors of being illegal, and as the local sheriffs office is overwhelmed by the numbers,..."

Stop using your imagination. Read the actual legislation.; 4/30/10, 8:55 AM
Hoosier Daddy said...: I am not sure that a poll like this gives much insight into the complex issue of illegal immigration.

Why is it a complex issue? Seriously? There are laws on the books governing the requirements to emigrate to the US and to become a legal resident or US citizen. Its quite simple, but there are a significant demographic that chooses to ignore those requirements and significant elememt here that wishes to turn a blind eye to that demographic that not only breaks our laws but threatens violence if we have the gall to enforce those laws.

Physics is complex, brain surgery is complex, following the requirements to be a legal resident or US citizen is not complex.

We either insist that Mexicans and Central Americans be subject to the same immigration requirements as a Pole, Vietnamese or Zimbabwean or just be honest and say that those south of the border get special treatment.; 4/30/10, 9:05 AM
William said...: Doesn't the recent health care "reform" negatively impact immigration "reform"? We are not just granting amnesty to ten or fifteen million aliens; we are also undertaking to pay for their lumbago and eye problems.....There is a kind of de facto punishment in being an illegal alien: they are second class citizens without social security and, now, health benefits. If you take away their second class citizenship, they lose their desirability for employers.; 4/30/10, 9:07 AM
Scott said...: Where are the resident lefty trolls on this one? I wonder why they don't want to weigh in on this? :)

I'm in favor of liberalizing guest worker and immigration policy, AND getting medieval on illegal immigrants. We need good hard-working tile setters, sous chefs, and craftsmen. I have no end of respect for Mexican immigrant labor.; 4/30/10, 9:11 AM
Roger J. said...: Hoosier cuts to the heart of the issue--in addition, the democrats see this demographic as a voting bloc and thus something to be cultivated and encouraged.

I do understand why Mexicans would want to come to the US; Mexico is a shithole, poorly governed and genuinely corrupt. Drug cartels routinely murder what federales there in in the north. Moreover, the migration of millions of impoverished mexicans to the US keeps much of the pressure off the mexican government--we are their safety valve. They will not fix their problem, and their bleatings about the cruel nortes are nothing more than posturing.

As long as the discontented can migrate illegally to the US, the Mexicans will have no incentive to fix their thorougly corrupt society.; 4/30/10, 9:13 AM
AllenS said...: I think what Monty was trying to say, was that we should round up illegals and have them clean up the oil spill. We could tie 10,000 together and use containment, until we catch 100,000 and let them soak up the remaining oil.; 4/30/10, 9:17 AM
Anonymous said...: the AZ law ignore the role of the companies that recruit and hire the illegals

From the law: Sec. 7. Section 23-212, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read: 20 23-212. Knowingly employing unauthorized aliens; prohibition; 21 false and frivolous complaints; violation;
22 classification; license suspension and revocation;
23 affirmative defense 24 A. An employer shall not knowingly employ an unauthorized alien. If,
25 in the case when an employer uses a contract, subcontract or other 26 independent contractor agreement to obtain the labor of an alien in this 27 state, the employer knowingly contracts with an unauthorized alien or with a
28 person who employs or contracts with an unauthorized alien to perform the 29 labor, the employer violates this subsection.

http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070h.pdf

That looks like they are addressing the employer side to me, but I do not have experience reading and interpreting laws.; 4/30/10, 9:27 AM
garage mahal said...: We either insist that Mexicans and Central Americans be subject to the same immigration requirements as a Pole, Vietnamese or Zimbabwean or just be honest and say that those south of the border get special treatment.

What about Cuba? I remember the right throwing a righteous shit fit over a young Cuban illegally here being sent back where he came from.; 4/30/10, 9:30 AM
Opus One Media said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 4/30/10, 9:30 AM
Roger J. said...: If I am not mistaken there are federal statues about hiring illegals, otherwise why require a certificate of citizenship (form I-9, I think)

The issue is that the feds have abdicated their responsibility for border security--the laws are on the books, they are not enforced--; 4/30/10, 9:32 AM
Roger J. said...: Sorry Garage--Elian Gonzalez was not here illegally. Rightly or wrongly the Cubans have special status as regards to immigration. That is federal law IIRC. And the issue was not his immigration status, but his family status. And the Clinton/Reno folks caved. He's now a good little pioneer in the revolution.; 4/30/10, 9:36 AM
Opus One Media said...: Hoosier Daddy said...
"I suggest hdhouse, so you can try and redeem what little credibility you have, read the so called fine print ..."

I turned over a new leaf Hoosier...I didn't just call you shitforbrains to start with.

The poll isn't a "scientific poll" but an "online poll" conducted through springboardamerica.com..which you would have known IF YOU READ THE FINE PRINT. The poll in question represents respondents within their online community. If you join up and take some of their "polls" you will find pushpull tactics abound. But the clue is you have to join their community to take the polls. Hardly RANDOM...

Some of their polls are respected, particularly those dealing with consumer product issues where the anwers are based on experience with a product rather than pure opinion. Others are not. That is their history.

Online polling, and this is light years past the vote.com crap, is still what it is...not representative and you just have to know that going in...for instance, just as cell phones are generally not called during telephone polling because there is no real directory but they constitute a significant percentage of American primary phones, non-internet users are not questioned here either although the 55+ crowd is completely under represented on the internet compared to the 35 and under crowd..in fact only those who register on the site are contacted...so immediately the qualified pool is subject to the limitation of the available sample.

But you go on being a shitforbrains and accusing others of not reading the "fine print". Just keep going. Makes me no nevermind. But I suggest, little fella, that sometime or another you get off that high hobby horse that just rocks back and forth in its own tiny space and try and think some outside your cramped little box.; 4/30/10, 9:37 AM
roesch-voltaire said...: According to the bill: Arizonans can sue government entities, state or local, if they believe those entities aren't fully enforcing the law -- including, of course, this new law itself. The government could be on the hook for penalties as high as $5000 per day. It doesn't take much imagination to see how this could grind law enforcement to a halt. That said, I am all for making sure that folks who immigrate to this country have a job waiting for them and that they go through the visa process just like everyone else, but that means the meat packing industry will have to cooperate, and I am not sure they will.; 4/30/10, 9:40 AM
Roger J. said...: Damn HD House--you actually know something about polling! Especially the issue of cell phones and telephone polls--I didnt think you had a brain, but thanks for setting me straight--at least on this issue! Good job dude; 4/30/10, 9:43 AM
garage mahal said...: Sorry Garage--Elian Gonzalez was not here illegally. Rightly or wrongly the Cubans have special status as regards to immigration.

Technically Gonzalez was here illegally, the wet-foot dry-foot rule didn't apply as he was rescued at sea by fishermen.; 4/30/10, 9:46 AM
Hoosier Daddy said...: But you go on being a shitforbrains and accusing others of not reading the "fine print".

Hi hdhouse! I see that you need to spin your little tirade into now claiming it wasn't a scientific poll. Well fine and dandy but maybe you should have spelled that out in your original post rather than say, and I quote:

If some of you would read the question asked in the poll “Seven in 10 U.S. adults support arresting people who can’t prove they’re in the United States legally" you would see that it has nothing much to do with the Arizona law at question.

Wow. I mean wow hdhouse. I will give you this, you can spin a good one! I mean the link showed the questions in the poll which you referred to and they are part of the law which nicely shatters your original comment.

But when spanked like the redheaded stepchild you are you spin and deflect and now we're questioning the legitimacy of the online poll rather than defend your original defenseless position.

You know at some point you should just be thought of as the fool you are rather than post and remove all doubt.; 4/30/10, 9:49 AM
Roger J. said...: Garage--point taken; by the way, we are finishing the cheese in an omlete tonite. My lady and I both love it. Thanks; 4/30/10, 9:49 AM
Anonymous said...: I think O's plan was to introduce the amnesty bill, then call Reps racists for opposing it.

But it's obvious now that would backfire, so...never mind.; 4/30/10, 9:51 AM
Hoosier Daddy said...: What about Cuba? I remember the right throwing a righteous shit fit over a young Cuban illegally here being sent back where he came from.

Are you saying that Mexicans should be given political asylum?; 4/30/10, 9:52 AM
Hoosier Daddy said...: I mean if you want to make the argument that they're fleeing political oppression rather then for economic opportunity go ahead and make that claim but I would suggest you give that some real critical thinking.; 4/30/10, 9:54 AM
Brian said...: What about Cuba? I remember the right throwing a righteous shit fit over a young Cuban illegally here being sent back where he came from.

A special case if there ever was one. His mother died trying to get him here from a country ruled by a communist dictatorship. He was a minor, and he had family here. And while the right generally wanted Elian to stay, it was far from universal. You had mothers wanting him to stay, and fathers wanting him to go back to Cuba to his dad.

Second, you seem to conveniently forget that instead of the Gonzalez family appeal being heard, Janet Reno sent in the elite Border Patrol SWAT team. Granted the little Havana neighborhood was inhospitable to the agents being there, and family members made statements that attempts to seize Elian would result in people getting hurt, which factored in Ms. Reno's decision. But instead of taking custody of the kid at a later time in a court room, they seized him in the house at gunpoint. That made the government's action objectionable.

But still, it's old news now, an extreme case that should not be used here because we're not talking about the influx of literally millions of 5 year olds from Latin America.; 4/30/10, 10:03 AM
garage mahal said...: I mean if you want to make the argument that they're fleeing political oppression rather then for economic opportunity go ahead and make that claim but I would suggest you give that some real critical thinking.

So, if Mexico went Communist you'd be welcoming them in without question? And as if being from Haiti means you are free and not oppressed.; 4/30/10, 10:06 AM
Opus One Media said...: I wonder if the Arizona police would stop and question a Hoosier who was walking around with his head up his ass. Just food for thought. I mean he would clearly not belong...standing out in the crowd so to speak...

(rented mule comes to mind); 4/30/10, 10:10 AM
Phil 314 said...: The pundits were right: The Tea Partiers ARE racists.

I mean one poll has suggested that TP'ers aren't that different from the general public. And now this study confirms that the general public is generally racist.

Now we can continue forward with the open-minded minority valiantly trying to save the country from the racist majority.; 4/30/10, 10:18 AM
Anonymous said...: "So, if Mexico went Communist you'd be welcoming them in without question?'

Not a problem. If you recollect, communist regimes are very good at controlling ingress/egress by their populations. In fact, if Mexico went communist, it would be Mexico who would build the wall.; 4/30/10, 10:27 AM
Michael said...: I would be curious to know if the left leaning commentators on this site give any thought to sovereignty issues. Do we, or should we, have a border at all? Should we let in whoever has the strength to get here? Does the Federal government owe any responsibility to people living along the border as to their safety or have they made a poor decision on where to live? It is pretty clear that the people coming in from Mexico are Hispanic but I wonder when Hispanic became a race. Different issue, but I am curious about that as well.; 4/30/10, 10:31 AM
Opus One Media said...: Interesting point Michael.

"According to a Pew Hispanic Center report, in 2005, 57% of illegal immigrants were from Mexico; 24% were from other Latin American countries, primarily from Central America;[2] 9% were from Asia; 6% were from Europe; and 4% were from the rest of the world." this is off the net but I've heard similar stats before and it is, of course 5 years old.

As Arizona is the state du jour I wonder if a policeperson confronted by a Mexican, a Peruvian and a German..well who would he ask for papers first?; 4/30/10, 10:37 AM
Phil 314 said...: I haven't followed threads closely enough to determine whether anyone here expressed concerned about the potential for the unintended kicking open of that particular door. Did anyone?

Are you asking for names and addresses?; 4/30/10, 10:37 AM
Hoosier Daddy said...: I wonder if the Arizona police would stop and question a Hoosier who was walking around with his head up his ass.

Ah poor hdhouse. Is that the best you can do? Well I guess it is since you can't actually stick with your original argument.

I mean if you wanted to say the poll was bogus based upon it not being 'scientific' you should have just said so in your original comment. But you didn't and you got called out on it so now the best you can come up with is ad hominem. How so very typical.; 4/30/10, 10:44 AM
Unknown said...: Aridog said...

edutcher said:"Ever hear of the Social Security Act?"

Why, no. Good of you to remind me.

Now tell me how many places accept the SA card as "ID?" Oh, say, compared to a driver's license or passport? Can it be used for boarding a commercial aviation flight? Can it be used as the sole ID for re-entry to the USA by land or water?

That's because it says on the card, "Not for use as identification", but the number is your national ID number. Try living your life without it. You have to give it to qualify or apply for just about anything, not to mention ID yourself to banks, etc. - in case you haven't noticed.; 4/30/10, 10:46 AM
Hoosier Daddy said...: So, if Mexico went Communist you'd be welcoming them in without question? And as if being from Haiti means you are free and not oppressed.

Well garage, if Mexico went communist we wouldn't have an illegal immigration problem since communist regimes (which the left seems to adore) do a pretty damn good job of keeping their populations tightly within the Motherland.

Hati? Last time I checked Hatians are free to emigrate. Hell our very own Pierre Garcon is from Hati. What's your point again?; 4/30/10, 10:47 AM
Hoosier Daddy said...: I would be curious to know if the left leaning commentators on this site give any thought to sovereignty issues. Do we, or should we, have a border at all?

Let me know when one of them answers this QUESTION because I keep asking as well and all I get from the usual suspects is SQUIRREL!!!; 4/30/10, 10:49 AM
Original Mike said...: Let me guess, HD. You would be outraged if she asked the Mexican first.; 4/30/10, 10:52 AM
Original Mike said...: Oh, wait. It's a trick question. You wouldn't ask any of them.

Did I get it right?; 4/30/10, 10:55 AM
Aridog said...: edutcher said: "That's because it says on the card, "Not for use as identification", but the number is your national ID number. Try living your life without it. You have to give it to qualify or apply for just about anything, not to mention ID yourself to banks, etc. - in case you haven't noticed."

As I said, sir, the SSA Card is a record of your national account number, not identification. The number is what you must give for the purposes you cite. Normally, you do not show the card itself as representative of your identity per se.

BTW...as I also said, the "Not for Identification" statement is no longer on the card since the 1980's. In order to qualify for a Pasport Card or Enhanced Driver's License you need to "prove" you have a valid SSN, which may be the SSA card, a pay stub, or tax return, et al...as well as provide either a certified locality government birth certificate OR a valid passport.

In today's world an official "Photo ID" is generally considered de rigueur for identification purposes.

Therefore I am not quite certain what your point is about the SSA card. If I misunderstand your point, I apologize.; 4/30/10, 11:31 AM
GMay said...: Hoosier calling HDH a dumbass and proving it = effective.

HDH fucking himself and calling Hoosier a dumbass = assisting Hoosier.

Where's the intelligent lefty response? garage's red herrings just aren't cutting it for me. RV looks to have made the only decent effort, but muddles it up with the usual lefty nod to the nuance of "complex" illegal immigration issues.; 4/30/10, 11:42 AM
Aridog said...: Lookie lookie here!!

Not content with the over-reach of the REAL ID Act, nor impressed with simplicity of encoding ordinary passport type information, our dear leaders in Congress now want to add biometircs.

As Prince Regent Rahm Emanuel said: Never let a crisis go to waste.; 4/30/10, 12:06 PM
Known Unknown said...: As Arizona is the state du jour I wonder if a policeperson confronted by a Mexican, a Peruvian and a German..well who would he ask for papers first?

Well, you can deal with your silly hypotheticals like the above, and we'll deal in reality.

WV:mankl - "You know, I thought she was pretty attractive, but then I saw her hairy mankles!"; 4/30/10, 12:11 PM
Anonymous said...: "As Arizona is the state du jour I wonder if a policeperson confronted by a Mexican, a Peruvian and a German..well who would he ask for papers first?'

Let's see if this was an airport and we have a dark-skinned turbaned twenty something male, a Japanese business man, and a blue-haired old white lady in a walker, who does the TSA double check?; 4/30/10, 12:37 PM
garage mahal said...: Where's the intelligent lefty response? garage's red herrings just aren't cutting it for me.

To exactly what?; 4/30/10, 12:41 PM
Aridog said...: LarsPorsena....

I hesitate to answer that on the grounds it might incriminate TSA.

Given TSA strip searched a very white octogenarian senior member of Congress a while back, the portent is not good.; 4/30/10, 12:43 PM
Original Mike said...: @Aridog: That's truly schizophrenic. Once we all have national ID cards it's going to be hard for the Dems to insist that the police are not allowed to ask to see them.; 4/30/10, 1:00 PM
Unknown said...: Ari, you mentioned a national ID law. de facto, I believe the SSA is one, or has served as one. If we've been at cross purposes, my bad.; 4/30/10, 1:00 PM
Aridog said...: Original Mike....

Rep. John Dingell took it in stride & good humor. Read the second paragraph. Sadly, it really did happen.; 4/30/10, 1:05 PM
Bruce Hayden said...: I think that right now one big reason that immigration "reform" is dead is that in order to open it up to debate right now would highlight how this Administration (and arguably its predecessor) have fallen down on their duty to control our borders.

A lot of people, and I think even some in Congress, think that control of our borders comes first. It was one thing to argue that this really wasn't an issue. But now we have a mostly unbuilt fence and serious violence crossing the border into this country.

At first I thought that the AZ law might make immigration "reform" more likely to appease the Hispanic demographic. But now I think that the downside of highlighting how badly our government has fallen down in this area more than offsets that. I think that if it passed right now, it would more likely include a real fence, coast to coast, with maybe mine fields and automated weapon systems.

Of course, we shall see what the sentiment of the country is after the planned protests (riots?) planned for Cinco de Mayo (or maybe Uno de Mayo?) It should be interesting.; 4/30/10, 1:34 PM
reader_iam said...: Are you asking for names and addresses?

LOL. Nah.; 4/30/10, 1:52 PM
Cedarford said...: Roger J. said...
Sorry Garage--Elian Gonzalez was not here illegally. Rightly or wrongly the Cubans have special status as regards to immigration. That is federal law IIRC. And the issue was not his immigration status, but his family status. And the Clinton/Reno folks caved. He's now a good little pioneer in the revolution.

Gotta side with Clinton/Reno on that one. Kid was an illegal alien rescued at sea after being taken from Cuba without the fathers knowledge, that was given temporary custody to relatives in the exile community while legal things were sorted out.
Then became a pawn of Cuban exile politics. When the courts said the boy belonged with the father, the realtives - some long in trouble with the law and with felony records - threatened violence if authorities came to take custody per the court ruling.
The Feds responded to the threats of harm to officials enforcing court orders as they always do - massive force.

Like it or not, the US should never listen or right or left wing or religious extremists that wish to put ideology above reuniting children with suitable children and do our best to create international rules that enforce that between nations.
It justly drives us batty when a parent takes a kid to a foreign land like Iran and that parent dies then all the Mullahs and politicians say that the kid must not be returned to Infidel-Land with their good other parent but must be raised in true Islamic bliss and in God's favor. To do otherwise to the American child - the Iranian ideologues for example sincerely believe, would harm the child.
It's not just Iran. Even nations like Sweden have gotten into it. With socialist social workers there saying in a half dozen custody cases that the "best interests of the child lie with staying in a superior nation like Sweden rather than be with a good parent in inferior America"; 4/30/10, 3:05 PM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: Thanks for the clarification reader.. way back @2:08 in the am.; 4/30/10, 3:44 PM
Opus One Media said...: So then in summary those who are opposing big government reaching into the most private aspects of our lives..just plowing right in there and taking over everything...those selfsame folks are now seemingly united behind the government getting everyone's identification, probably prints, dna, who knows, and putting out national ID cards?

I spent most the 80s in the Soviet Union where if you traveled republic to republic you had to have your ID and then you had to get it signed by some official you were seeing on business or just visiting. You had to produce that ID on demand.

HMMMM..yes it makes sense.; 4/30/10, 4:21 PM
Anthony said...: I like the talking newsheads who are constantly telling us that the new Arizona law "makes being an illegal alien a crime". One guy last night sort of got a confused look while reading that, but most of them just dumbly recite the phrase without a hint they see a problem.; 4/30/10, 5:50 PM
Phil 314 said...: those selfsame folks are now seemingly united behind the government getting everyone's identification, probably prints, dna, who knows, and putting out national ID cards?

HD;
Did I miss something. Isn't that what the Dems are proposing?

(Under the proposal)the federal government would increase funding for border security and require all American workers get a new version of their Social Security card that would include a biometric identifier to protect against the creation of counterfeits.; 4/30/10, 6:21 PM
Trooper York said...: "Hdhouse said:
I spent most the 80s in the Soviet Union where if you traveled republic to republic you had to have your ID and then you had to get it signed by some official you were seeing on business or just visiting. You had to produce that ID on demand."

I would think that your Communist masters would have explained the idea behind being in a “Sleeper cell” hd. You aren’t supposed to announce it like that.

Take a lesson from your pal Kim Philby.; 4/30/10, 9:34 PM
Trooper York said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 4/30/10, 9:40 PM
Trooper York said...: I have a different view of immigration from many of my conservative pals. Living in New York City I have met many illegals here from many different countries. Mexico, Ecuador, Peru, China, Russia, Albania, Sicily and Ireland. They would love to become citizens. They came here for what our forefathers came for when they jumped the boat. Economic opportunity and freedom. They love TV, blue jeans, beer and rock and roll. They would make great Americans.

They would be right there with me when we hung traitorous scum like hdhouse from the nearest lamppost. Just sayn'; 4/30/10, 9:42 PM
Revenant said...: Step One: Announce a deadline by which all non-citizens who entered the country illegally (as opposed to overstaying after legal entry) must leave the United States.

Step Two: Pass a law requiring that any person found in the United States after that date, who is found to have illegally entered the country, be fingerprinted, DNA sampled, and placed on a list. Anyone on that list, or descended from a person on that list, is forbidden from acquiring either citizenship or an entry visa by any means for a period of one hundred years, excepting those descendants who had already obtained citizenship or a visa prior to perpetrator's entry to the United States.

Step Three: Penalty for entry to the United States by a person on the list shall be a fine of $25,000 and five years of hard labor. Preferably to be spent building the border wall most Americans want.

No need to round everybody up. No need to send the cops after people. Just establish a draconian "no citizenship, EVER, unless you do it the right way" law and let the problem work itself out.; 5/1/10, 2:04 AM
Fen said...: Libtard: I wonder if the Arizona police would stop and question a Hoosier who was walking around

Mark Steyn: "I'm an immigrant, and it is a condition of my admission to this great land that I carry documentary proof of my residency status with me at all times and be prepared to produce it to law enforcement officials, whether on a business trip to Tucson or taking a stroll in the woods back at my pad in New Hampshire.

Who would impose such an outrageous Nazi fascist discriminatory law?

Er, well, that would be Franklin Roosevelt."

http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/arizona-246688-brown-immigration.html; 5/1/10, 7:19 AM
Fen said...: "For any lawful contact STOP, DETENTION OR ARREST made by a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of this state or a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF ANY OTHER LAW OR ORDINANCE OF A COUNTY, CITY OR TOWN OR THIS STATE where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who AND is unlawfully present in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person, except if the determination may hinder or obstruct an investigation."

/via The Corner; 5/1/10, 9:02 AM
GMay said...: garage asked: "To exactly what?"

Oh, I dunno, the subject at hand?; 5/1/10, 1:03 PM