57% support Arizona law..17% want it even tougher!

[get_involved]

Poll: Support for Arizona Immigration Law Hits 57 Percent - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

A list of the Congressman supporting the latest amnesty bill for illegal aliens!
DAN STEIN // STEIN REPORT 2000-2009® | Federation for American Immigration Reform

 

[The T]

Good deal. And there is movement in Florida and other States to mirror Arizona's Law.

Now I wonder if Obama and Holder will take them on too?

 

[Bfgrn]

Poll: Support for Arizona Immigration Law Hits 57 Percent - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

A list of the Congressman supporting the latest amnesty bill for illegal aliens!
DAN STEIN // STEIN REPORT 2000-2009® | Federation for American Immigration Reform

Sad commentary that shows the ignorance of people that call themselves Americans. We live in a country where too many people can only see freedom and liberty as a weapon instead of a God given right...

Bad laws are the worst sort of tyranny.
Edmund Burke

 

[Luissa]

I wonder how many corporations and contruction companies in AZ want illegals out?
And people have been moving out of AZ for the law few years, maybe they should try to hold on to people. Last time I checked, a business doesn't want to turn away paying customers when they are doing poorly. I have no idea why a state who is economic trouble would want to.

 

[WillowTree]

I don't understand why you people don't want a country. What's up wit dat?

 

[bucs90]

Good deal. And there is movement in Florida and other States to mirror Arizona's Law.

Now I wonder if Obama and Holder will take them on too?

Georgia and South Carolina are next.

The city of Summerville, SC, a Charleston suburb, is voting TONIGHT on a city law that would ban any business from hiring an illegal, and ban any apartment complex from renting to one.

The states and cities are going to take their country back from the globalists in Washington one city and state law at a time.

 

[WillowTree]

Good deal. And there is movement in Florida and other States to mirror Arizona's Law.

Now I wonder if Obama and Holder will take them on too?

Georgia and South Carolina are next.

The city of Summerville, SC, a Charleston suburb, is voting TONIGHT on a city law that would ban any business from hiring an illegal, and ban any apartment complex from renting to one.

The states and cities are going to take their country back from the globalists in Washington one city and state law at a time.

 

[bucs90]

I wonder how many corporations and contruction companies in AZ want illegals out?
And people have been moving out of AZ for the law few years, maybe they should try to hold on to people. Last time I checked, a business doesn't want to turn away paying customers when they are doing poorly. I have no idea why a state who is economic trouble would want to.

If illegals are so great............then why is California bitching about Arizona and making boycott threats?

Seriously. If having illegals is such a BENEFIT to society.......then California should be jumping for joy and running TV ads begging Arizona's illegal popluation to come live in California?

Can one liberal explain to me why states like Cali, Nevada, New Mexico, Colorado, etc, are bitching about the Arizona law when they should instead be in a recruiting war with the other states to aquire Arizona's illegal aliens, right? If they are indeed a benefit to society, then these states should be pursuing the Arizona illegals the same way NBA teams pursued Lebron James.....................right?

 

[The T]

Good deal. And there is movement in Florida and other States to mirror Arizona's Law.

Now I wonder if Obama and Holder will take them on too?

Georgia and South Carolina are next.

The city of Summerville, SC, a Charleston suburb, is voting TONIGHT on a city law that would ban any business from hiring an illegal, and ban any apartment complex from renting to one.

The states and cities are going to take their country back from the globalists in Washington one city and state law at a time.

Quite frankly what we have here is an invasion. Let us call it for what it is. If these people come here I'm fine with it as long as they do it under rule of LAW.

For now? They remain Lawbreakers, and need to go.

For folks that supposedly wish to become a part of a nation built upon self rule with LAW as the guide?

The first step they've taken is the wrong one.

 

[bucs90]

Good deal. And there is movement in Florida and other States to mirror Arizona's Law.

Now I wonder if Obama and Holder will take them on too?

Georgia and South Carolina are next.

The city of Summerville, SC, a Charleston suburb, is voting TONIGHT on a city law that would ban any business from hiring an illegal, and ban any apartment complex from renting to one.

The states and cities are going to take their country back from the globalists in Washington one city and state law at a time.

Quite frankly what we have here is an invasion. Let us call it for what it is. If these people come here I'm fine with it as long as they do it under rule of LAW.

For now? They remain Lawbreakers, and need to go.

For folks that supposedly wish to become a part of a nation built upon self rule with LAW as the guide?

The first step they've taken is the wrong one.

Here is what I can't help but ponder:

What if 1,000,000 poor, peasant North Koreans, all scared, hungry, desperate, fled the tyranny of the North Korean govermnent, and tried to make an unarmed entry into South Korea through the DMZ border. How would the United States act?????? How would South Korea act? How would the mainstream media comment on it?

 

[Bfgrn]

I wonder how many corporations and contruction companies in AZ want illegals out?
And people have been moving out of AZ for the law few years, maybe they should try to hold on to people. Last time I checked, a business doesn't want to turn away paying customers when they are doing poorly. I have no idea why a state who is economic trouble would want to.

If illegals are so great............then why is California bitching about Arizona and making boycott threats?

Seriously. If having illegals is such a BENEFIT to society.......then California should be jumping for joy and running TV ads begging Arizona's illegal popluation to come live in California?

Can one liberal explain to me why states like Cali, Nevada, New Mexico, Colorado, etc, are bitching about the Arizona law when they should instead be in a recruiting war with the other states to aquire Arizona's illegal aliens, right? If they are indeed a benefit to society, then these states should be pursuing the Arizona illegals the same way NBA teams pursued Lebron James.....................right?

Hey pea brain...would you feel the same about this law, if everyone that LOOKED like this was under suspicion and could be stopped and detained???

It behooves every man who values liberty of conscience for himself, to resist invasions of it in the case of others: or their case may, by change of circumstances, become his own.
Thomas Jefferson

 

[bucs90]

I wonder how many corporations and contruction companies in AZ want illegals out?
And people have been moving out of AZ for the law few years, maybe they should try to hold on to people. Last time I checked, a business doesn't want to turn away paying customers when they are doing poorly. I have no idea why a state who is economic trouble would want to.

If illegals are so great............then why is California bitching about Arizona and making boycott threats?

Seriously. If having illegals is such a BENEFIT to society.......then California should be jumping for joy and running TV ads begging Arizona's illegal popluation to come live in California?

Can one liberal explain to me why states like Cali, Nevada, New Mexico, Colorado, etc, are bitching about the Arizona law when they should instead be in a recruiting war with the other states to aquire Arizona's illegal aliens, right? If they are indeed a benefit to society, then these states should be pursuing the Arizona illegals the same way NBA teams pursued Lebron James.....................right?

Hey pea brain...would you feel the same about this law, if everyone that LOOKED like this was under suspicion and could be stopped and detained???

It behooves every man who values liberty of conscience for himself, to resist invasions of it in the case of others: or their case may, by change of circumstances, become his own.
Thomas Jefferson

Well, dumbass, you like Eric Holder must not have read the law. No person can be stopped or detained based on race or ethnicity. Period. So, I have two questions for you:

1- Since the law forbids racial and ethnic profiling, do you also assume all cops will do it anyway? If so, that says a lot about you.

2- Since you assume this law is discriminatory against Hispanics despite it forbidding the use of race................then you must assume that most illegal immigrants in Arizona are Hispanic, no? If not, why would you logically assume it discriminates against any one race over another, unless YOU YOURSELF have already assumed most illegals in AZ to be Hispanic......then preach of the horrors that will occur should a cop make the same assumption in enforcement that you yourself have already made in protest to it?

God-damn liberal hypocrite. A law forbids racial profiling while enforcing laws on illegal immigration. You say it will discriminate against Hispanics. Thus, you must assume most illegal aliens to be Hispanic.........but then protest at the chance a cop may come to the same assumption your racist, hypocritical ass has just done.

 

[The T]

Georgia and South Carolina are next.

The city of Summerville, SC, a Charleston suburb, is voting TONIGHT on a city law that would ban any business from hiring an illegal, and ban any apartment complex from renting to one.

The states and cities are going to take their country back from the globalists in Washington one city and state law at a time.

Quite frankly what we have here is an invasion. Let us call it for what it is. If these people come here I'm fine with it as long as they do it under rule of LAW.

For now? They remain Lawbreakers, and need to go.

For folks that supposedly wish to become a part of a nation built upon self rule with LAW as the guide?

The first step they've taken is the wrong one.

Here is what I can't help but ponder:

What if 1,000,000 poor, peasant North Koreans, all scared, hungry, desperate, fled the tyranny of the North Korean govermnent, and tried to make an unarmed entry into South Korea through the DMZ border.

How would the United States act??????

With the present occupant of the WH? I think you know the answer.

How would South Korea act?

What's The Law in South Korea say regarding the subject?

How would the mainstream media comment on it?

Depends. All I can say is either guard your heart strings...or it is an invasion. Depends upon South Korea's Law.

 

[Brubricker]

It could have 95% support and it would still be unconstitutional. This law has absolutely no chance in court. The Constitution is crystal clear on the issue. States have no authority to make their own immigration policies, period.

 

[The T]

It could have 95% support and it would still be unconstitutional. This law has absolutely no chance in court. The Constitution is crystal clear on the issue. States have no authority to make their own immigration policies, period.

They're not making policy, but bolstering Federal Policy for their own survival as a Sovereign State which has a right to defend itself.

You're off base here. You might as well throw out the 9th And 10th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution.

See: Dual Soverignty.

 

[bucs90]

It could have 95% support and it would still be unconstitutional. This law has absolutely no chance in court. The Constitution is crystal clear on the issue. States have no authority to make their own immigration policies, period.

They are economic policies, not immigration policies. No hiring or renting to illegal aliens. They'll use the case of identification as justification. They'll say that due to local taxes being taken out of a business and apartment, the employee or tenant must have a valid and legal ID from one of the 50 states, or a valid and current passport. Illegals have neither. City will say they can't ensure proper tax collection without knowing who is working and living in a business and apartment.

Either that, or the Obama Admin will suffer through 2 years of hundreds of lawsuits, thus backing themselves into a corner of HAVING to act on immigration..........under a 2011/2012 Republican Congress. Obama has led his admin into a massive trap with this lawsuit. Immigration will be his final blow to a loss in 2012 b/c of the corner he's backing himself into with immigration. You can't sue a state that acted since the fed wouldn't......then as the fed refuse to act.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Poll: Support for Arizona Immigration Law Hits 57 Percent - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

A list of the Congressman supporting the latest amnesty bill for illegal aliens!
DAN STEIN // STEIN REPORT 2000-2009® | Federation for American Immigration Reform

All the polls show a majority support the law and a majority dissaprove of the lawsuit brought by the federal government.

 

[Brubricker]

It could have 95% support and it would still be unconstitutional. This law has absolutely no chance in court. The Constitution is crystal clear on the issue. States have no authority to make their own immigration policies, period.

They're not making policy, but bolstering Federal Policy for their own survival as a Sovereign State which has a right to defend itself.

When you enact new arrest and detention procedures you're making a policy. They are not bolstering federal policy. They are saying federal policy is insufficient and they're imposing a new policy of their own. That's the whole reason why they passed their law.

You're off base here. You might as well throw out the 9th And 10th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution.

See: Dual Soverignty.

Do know what an enumerated federal power is? The 9th and 10th amendments do not apply in cases involving enumerated powers which the Constitution gives to the federal government. Hell, those two amendments both say exactly that! READ!!

 

[Brubricker]

It could have 95% support and it would still be unconstitutional. This law has absolutely no chance in court. The Constitution is crystal clear on the issue. States have no authority to make their own immigration policies, period.

They are economic policies, not immigration policies. No hiring or renting to illegal aliens. They'll use the case of identification as justification. They'll say that due to local taxes being taken out of a business and apartment, the employee or tenant must have a valid and legal ID from one of the 50 states, or a valid and current passport. Illegals have neither. City will say they can't ensure proper tax collection without knowing who is working and living in a business and apartment.

Either that, or the Obama Admin will suffer through 2 years of hundreds of lawsuits, thus backing themselves into a corner of HAVING to act on immigration..........under a 2011/2012 Republican Congress. Obama has led his admin into a massive trap with this lawsuit. Immigration will be his final blow to a loss in 2012 b/c of the corner he's backing himself into with immigration. You can't sue a state that acted since the fed wouldn't......then as the fed refuse to act.

You're just making shit up here. You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. You're just inventing it all on the fly. I hope doing that does a good job of making you feel better about things because it serves no other purpose. The things you just posted here have no earthly connection to the way the law works in the real world.

 

[bucs90]

It could have 95% support and it would still be unconstitutional. This law has absolutely no chance in court. The Constitution is crystal clear on the issue. States have no authority to make their own immigration policies, period.

They're not making policy, but bolstering Federal Policy for their own survival as a Sovereign State which has a right to defend itself.

When you enact new arrest and detention procedures you're making a policy. They are not bolstering federal policy. They are saying federal policy is insufficient and they're adding a new policy of their own. That's why they passed the law.

You're off base here. You might as well throw out the 9th And 10th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution.

See: Dual Soverignty.

Do know what an enumerated federal power is? The 9th and 10th amendments do not apply in cases involving enumerated powers which the Constitution gives to the federal government.

Technically, the law will "detain" an illegal for "criminal trespass". There IS a difference in "arrest" and "detain". A huge difference. Then AZ authorities will simply deliver the "detained" people to ICE. No illegal will face any type of immigration charge in any Arizona state or local court.

AZ is simply making it legal for AZ cops to "detain" someone suspected of being illegal (only after first being stopped for a seperate non-immigration offense), then handing them over to ICE. Before, that "detention" wasn't allowed without other charges. Now, it is. But they won't face a criminal charge from Arizona courts, thus, they aren't "enforcing" any law, but merely making "criminal trespassing" a circumstance in which a cop can "detain", not "arrest", and illegal for transfer to ICE.

It will be found legal. Cops do it all the time for "fugitive from justice" detentions when a person is wanted from another state and they "detain" them as a "fugitive from justice" (it's a circumstance, NOT a charge) to be held until they are handed over to other authority.

Thats all AZ is doing. Rhode Island has been doing it to illegal aliens for years and no lawsuit. Whats the difference in RI and AZ? None......except the lawsuit for some reason.