Sign Up to Receive Email Action Alerts From Issa Exposed



by Brian Leubitz

Today is Cinco de Mayo, the commemoration of a big victory of Mexican forces over the French. So, it’s not so much the Mexican July 4 as the Mexican Armisitice Day that celebrates our victory in the Great War. History lessons aside, I thought I would touch upon the subject of immigration.

Mexico is, of course, the largest source of immigrants to this nation, documented or otherwise. This is particularly true in Arizona, where the Governor just signed a semi-fascist and racist law that requires police to “seek the papers” of anybody they suspect of not being in the country legally. The law threatens and belittles the concept of America as a nation of immigrants (sorry about that Native Americans), and recasts us in a struggle in which we need not engage.

That being said, why am I writing about this here? Because America needs comprehensive immigration reform that includes a provision for same-sex partners. As the law currently stands, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency sees no relationship between even the longest of couples. If I choose to marry a Canadian citizen, I cannot bestow American citizenship like a straight couple. Here’s the basic story from Immigration Equality, an organization that is working to change this situation:

Binational couples are couples in which the partners come from different countries. Nineteen nations allow their citizens to sponsor their same-sex partners for immigration benefits. Unfortunately, the United States does not. Because of the Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as between a man and a woman, even same-sex couples who have been legally married in U.S. states or foreign countries are not able to immigrate based on their marriage. Every day we hear from desperate couples, forced to choose between the partner they love and the country they love, which is why we are fighting to change the immigration law and end this discrimination.

Clearly if the Arizona law does nothing else, it has reopened the issue of immigration and laid bare what will happen as rogue states and politicians succumb to nativist fears. But for our community, the only solution is a federal solution. Whether through a full repeal of DOMA (which should happen anyway) or through a provision in the immigration reform package. Currently, Sen Schumer has brought together a draft reform package that includes immigration equality for same-sex couples. Whether it will remain in the bill and whether a bill will get passed at all in an election year seem to remain the substantive questions, though.

Too many couples are at the whim of a government that forces them to leave the country or break up. That is simply not acceptable.


  • 1. Papa Foma  |  May 5, 2010 at 2:22 am

    The site is an amazing site. It is blazing a trail particularly in the area of Asylum Immigration for LGBT and HIV+ individuals. I hope that the work done here goes far in helping our binational compatriots. PF

  • 2. David Kimble  |  May 5, 2010 at 2:36 am

    In California, where I currently live, immigration has become a hot-topic issue for the GOP. They are mounting a campaign similar to what was done in Arizona – I am aware of this only because my mother is a staunch (almost said starched, but decided to be fair) Republican, as are many, who live in Podunk, California, where we live.

    I really don't understand their thinking, since America is a nation of immigrants – their policy belies the facts and denigrates the entire population of America (save the Native Americans) and additionally striates the existing divide in America even further. Maybe their plan is "Divide and Conquer" – I dunno, but I am infuriated by their actions. <3 David

  • 3. Peter  |  May 5, 2010 at 2:48 am

    While following this site throughout the prop 8 trial, I was waiting for this point to be brought up. It really needs more attention in the cause.

    I'm moving to Spain in a month to be with my (soon to be) husband. I have a great-paying job here, and I'm very close to my family. We would love to live here, and hope to do so in the future, if it ever becomes a possibility. I just can't see how homosexuals can be considered to have the same rights as long as I'm robbed of my right to be with my partner. Pursuit of happiness? Impossible without him!

  • 4. Ronnie  |  May 5, 2010 at 3:22 am

    "Too many couples are at the whim of a government that forces them to leave the country or break up. That is simply not acceptable."

    It's more then not acceptable….its dictatorship, tyrannical, fascist, communist, naziesque, unethical, immoral, disrespectful, degrading, and just plain MEAN….<3…Ronnie

  • 5. Straight Ally #3008  |  May 5, 2010 at 3:26 am

    I have not read through the law, so hopefully someone can enlighten me. Couldn't its sponsors have avoided a PR disaster by using a recognized legal standard like "probable cause" in the wording? They left it wide open to the interpretation that if you "look" like an illegal immigrant (read: dark skin hue) you can be asked for ID. And how did the law change what's currently on the books for identifying those in the country illegally? Please excuse my ignorance on this one, I see debates all over the place but haven't kept up.

  • 6. Matthew  |  May 5, 2010 at 3:35 am

    It's not only binational couples that are affected by the current immigration law (and who would be helped by immigration reform). If both members of the couple are from a foreign country, the same issue applies.

    My husband and I are both Canadian and I accepted a job offer in the US after getting my PhD in Canada, but I can only work here (and my husband can only live here) temporarily. My company can't sponsor me for a green card, because my husband wouldn't qualify as a family member and he would then have no valid immigration status because I would no longer be a temporary worker (which is the only reason he can qualify as a temporary visitor).

    Immigration reform will allow my company to get green cards for both of us and give us some stability here.

    Surely causing hardships like these for highly skilled immigrants is not helping the US economy. If I weren't working here, I would be working in Canada for the same company, but paying all my taxes to the Canadian government, buying housing, food, etc. in Canada, and so on.

    Hopefully immigration reform passes this year and continues to include committed same-sex couples.

  • 7. Anonymous  |  May 5, 2010 at 3:37 am

    I actually commend the Governor and the Republican Party of Arizona for attempting to remedy the illegal immigration situation despite federal inaction. I am quite frankly surprised why there is so much uproar over this law. While I do agree that illegal immigrants should be dealt with by the federal government in the future, I feel that this legislation is appropriate for Arizona in the interim. Arizona does border Mexico, where many people immigrate here illegally. These people are not only Hispanics, but increasingly also Asian, Indian, and others, even European in some cases. In fact, there are a lot of illegal immigrants from Europe in this country, especially from Ireland and England. This is the fault of the Federal government to allow these people to stay. Illegal immigration is detrimental to everyone, and those who immigrate to our country must respect the law of the land. The law is not unjust. The vast majority will agree with me that it is unfair for illegal immigrants to be utilizing our services here in the United States while failing to pay taxes and not bear the burden of everyone else in this country. It is true that most Americans do not have to pay federal income taxes anyway, but their lack of allegiance to our nation and failure of compliance with a law which ensures the safety and security of those legally here, a nation which has so generously housed their illegal activities, is treason and reason enough for deportation. I am definitely not anti-immigrant by any means. As a child of immigrants myself, I am thankful that the United States welcomes people into her borders. I agree with Brian, the nation is a land of legal immigrants. However, illegal immigration must not be encouraged and supported in the face of our currently lax laws. Times have changed since the days of Ellis Island , and we simply cannot just reside in this country by moving here and passing physical and mental inspection. National security and economic justice to our population here is paramount in order to ensure our place in the world economy and for our own protection. It seems as if those critical of this law might just be critical of expulsion of ilegal immigrants. Illegal immigrants are a threat, and their actions are indeed illegal. It is unfair to contrast illegal immigration to other illegal activities at the moment, such as same-sex marriage. The former is fundamentally wrong and the latter is fundamentally right. It seems to me that most of the concern is over the tactic of arrest of these aliens, that is, apparently racist technique. As of right now, I don't feel that the Arizona police will racially profile, as they can only ask for appropriate identification if they are commiting another offense. In fact, it is indeed federal law that all non US-citizens carry their identification all the time. One of my parents, a permanent resident of the United States, therefore carries around their Green Card all of the time. The only addition to this is the ability to ask for one's identification after seeing the person commit an offense. This law is not without its criticisms however. I think that the police should ask anyone of their identification while they are commiting any illegal activity, not just if they have "reasonable doubt." Also, I hope there are safeguards against breaking up the family, where some here are illegal family members of legal immigrants. I am happy for the citizens of Arizona, in that they will have security in the face of illegal aliens commiting illegal and harmful activities, who are hurting our economy and failing to have respect for our nation. Again, this law does not deport illegal aliens in this country who are not breaking any offense, those peaceful ones who will grab opportunity in the future to legalize their residence here. I hope that for those opposed to this law, that it will fuel insistence for federal immigration reform and that in the case that happens, there will be no more need for this law. I hope that in the next few years, the federal government allows illegal aliens who are willing to repent their offences to receive pardon and a form of legal residence permit, the ability of families to stay united if part of the family is here legally and if another part of the family is here illegally, and for the full repeal of DOMA and the ability of legally married or registered same-sex partners to immigrate to the United States without undue hindrances, among many other reforms. We need to tighten the law to ensure that we don't have extremists and those who are harming our well being to remain here, and at the same time welcome those who we are sure will respect our nation. I hope that no one spews vitriol at me for my opinion, and I hope that this web site is a forum for peaceful discourse. It seems that the wall comments here are respectful and polite, so I hope that if anyone find my opinion to be wrong, they politely disagree and point out flaws in my argument for SB 1070. I am not a bigot by any means, and I would additionally hope that the use of the word "bigot" be restricted. Actually, regarding the word bigot: I don't think that all of those against same-sex marriage are bigoted, but perhaps motivated strongly by prejudice. Bigot has a very strong negative connotation. Those against same-sex marriage are not all intentionally homophobic. There are many bigots out there. But I don't think that all of the 52% of people who voted for Proposition 8 are bigots who were knowingly wanting to hurt same-sex marriages. I am not defending them for their beliefs, but I wanted to also address one thing that I think that in my opinion, has driven some of the wall posts and comments on this site to become hateful of those against our cause for equality. I believe that action against hateful laws should be agressive and assertive. But, I still do ascribe to the loving teachings of Gandhi and Dr. King, and I think that all of us for equality should love, and not hate others in our battle against evil and inequality. In my viewpoint, it doesn't help anyone against same-sex marriage to support marriage equality if you label them a bigot. For some, it might cause introspection, but for most in our conservative atmosphere, it would make them incredibly defensive. I'm sure I've digressed and become incredibly verbose, but I just was dying to give my two cents to an audience which will hopefully listen. Thanks, Prop 8 Trial Tracker! :)

  • 8. Monty  |  May 5, 2010 at 3:59 am

    In the future, I suggest using paragraphs. I lost focus about halfway through that.

    One thing I did notice, though: you said "it is indeed federal law that all non US-citizens carry their identification all the time." What about citizens? Should they all be forced to obtain and carry ID to avoid being jailed? You say that you doubt there will be profiling, but what evidence do you have to support that? Racial profiling happens all the time, even when illegal immigration isn't a major issue.

  • 9. Ronnie  |  May 5, 2010 at 4:11 am

    Ok so I had gotten this argument from somebody on FB and it is hilarious and so easily to debunk even though he still disagreed….denial and delusion should be considered two very severe mental disorders:

    "Marriage is a God ordained, holy covenant between a man and a woman, and no country can attempt to change marriage's definition by its laws without incurring God's wrath."

    And I said:

    Ummm…. your confusing Civil Marriage with Religious Marriage which is a God ordained, holy covenant between a man and a woman in your religion not mine. And really? No country can attempt to change marriage's definition by its laws without incurring God's wrath? Canada did, Belgium did, Sweden did, Portugal did, Spain did, The Netherlands did, South Africa did, Nepal is about too, Mexico City did, D.C., New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Vermont, Connecticut, Iowa. Where's gods wrath? Oh wait all those who do not have marriage equality are being bombarded by natural disasters. Please. Get over yourself, you self righteous thumper. Name one LAW in the constitution that says the Bible is American Law? Oh wait there isn't one…..

    Get this he responses with this:

    "You can't outsmart God, and I only seek to share God's point of view on the matter. The only hate I feel is coming from you, but I don't need your love anyway."

    (me) What the F#%K was that?!!!!………<3…Ronnie

  • 10. Monty  |  May 5, 2010 at 4:18 am

    My favorite rebuttal: "Your god has no place in my government." And, as I said in another post, "It's funny how God's will always seems to coincide with your own." And yet another quote: "If God exists, he must be pissed at what all those people are doing in his name." And a bit of Gandhi, while we're at it: "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."

  • 11. Ronnie  |  May 5, 2010 at 4:22 am

    I like that…lol…..<3…Ronnie

  • 12. Anonymous  |  May 5, 2010 at 4:24 am

    Sorry for the omission of paragraphs! Ha, I didn't realize how much I typed either until I pressed "submit." Sorry! Well, I actually definitely agree that everyone should carry their identification if they are above 16 to avoid being jailed. This isn't exactly a reversal of position, but I think that I, in that whole slurry of words, I was trying to say that I agree with the substance, essence, and procedure of the legislation, but only in the interim until there is a major overhaul. I think that the law should be amended that anyone without identification for a visibly legal offense should be apprehended.

    With pragmatic amendments such as the ability to tell police officers that they know, for instance, their driver's registration number, green card number, social security number or some other form of ID, if the suspect does not have it on them. If all forms of identification were given corresponding numbers and kept in a database, then it would ease that burden for everyone to carry around ID. All photo ID might be given a corresponding number already. But if it isn't, then a federal law could fix this. I'm not exactly a psychologist, but this all could lead to perhaps more adherence to the law. Everyone has to have their driver's license anyway when they drive, and I speculate that most of the arrests on this matter will be done on traffic issues.

    Additionally, as for racial profiing, no one can guarantee that it won't happen. It does happen, and might always will unfortunately until the full realization of equality. However, in this case, I don't necessarily understand how police can racially profile offenses. A crime is a crime for anyone. Amendments and proper implementation of this law for offenses which can arrested for under the jurisdiction of the police will lead to meaningful deportation, reducing of harrassment, and hopefully not a large number of people in jail because they didn't have ID. The law isn't perfect, but it is a signal for the federal government to fix this problem so that the police will not have to bear this burden. But, for now, this burden is given to the police because there is too much crime in Arizona driven by illegal immigrants or those who are involved with the transportation of illegal immigrants and goods.

  • 13. Kathleen  |  May 5, 2010 at 4:36 am

    Another vote for paragraphs! I, too, just couldn't follow this post after a while. I tried really hard, but without paragraphs, it was like trying to follow someone's stream-of-consciousness day dream.

    Yes, what about citizens? I'm allowed to walk around my neighborhood without carrying ID. So, if I have dark skin and step off the curb to cross the street in the middle of the block (thus being guilty of the offense of jaywalking while appearing Mexican), how does this law assure I won't be arrested until they determine I'm a U.S. citizen? Or are you suggesting that all U.S. citizens should also carry their "papers" all the time?

  • 14. Andrea  |  May 5, 2010 at 4:40 am

    The United States is not a "jobs-program" for Mexico or India or anywhere else. No country in the world would allow any immigration at all with so many of its existing citizens out of work. None.

    A childless lib goes to buy a sandwich and sees the nice immigrant behind the counter and feels all warm and fuzzy. A parent thinks, "So THAT's why my kid can't find a job anywhere." Every time libs push "amnesty" I am infuriated by their actions. It is seen as a direct attack on our children, because it is.

    ICE ICE baby

  • 15. Kathleen  |  May 5, 2010 at 5:00 am

    Leaving questions of jurisdiction aside (i.e., whether states should be entering the arena of immigration enforcement), here's my basic problem with this law. I keep hearing that the primary impetus for this law is the rising crime rate, a trend believed to be driven by unchecked illegal immigrants. If that's really why people want the law, then it seems to be worse than ineffective; it will be counterproductive.

    Ask any law enforcement officer how it is they solve crime and they'll tell you that in most cases, they rely heavily on cooperation from the community. It's the people living in the community who know where the "drug houses" are, know on which corners the drug sales are taking place, and are the ones likely to have eye witness accounts that can identify perpetrators. As it is now, the police have a hard time getting help in neighborhoods with an illegal immigrant population. Here in California, the police spend a great deal of energy trying assure people that it is NOT their job to enforce immigration and people have nothing to fear in coming forward as witnesses.

    It also makes people afraid of reporting to police when they themselves are victims of a crime — whether it's purse snatching or domestic violence or any number of possibly violent crimes (but then maybe you don't believe people who are here illegally should have the protection of our laws against violence to their person).

    There are already laws in place to combat the crime this law purports to be addressing. I don't see this law doing anything to help; it to seems more likely to make it significantly harder to combat every single crime except that of being here illegally.

  • 16. K!r!lleXXI  |  May 5, 2010 at 5:03 am


    Hopefully immigration reform passes this year and continues to include committed same-sex couples.

    There is an opinion that it's not gonna happen in the nearest future. Immigration reform is in hands of the Congress now, and it is the election year for about a third of all Congress(wo)men. They are not gonna tackle any controversial issues until after the elections. They've had enough with the health care reform. And growing unemployment, homelessness, poverty, etc. among American citizens do not favor easing in immigration policies. So, basically we're screwed for now.


  • 17. Marius  |  May 5, 2010 at 5:03 am

    Hi, I'm so happy for this article, me and my bf are a binational couple, he's from the US and I'm from Norway. Though we plan to get maried it is not easy maintaning a relationship with an ocean between you.
    Luckly for us norway has an equal mariage law, so we can live here, but it is going to be harder for us, seeing he dosn't speake Norwegain, whitch he is basically going too need to do to get a job over here…
    In short things would be alot easyer for us if we could stay in the us, but we try to focus on the challenges ahead and make the best out of ouer position in life

    Love Marius

  • 18. Richard A. Walter (s  |  May 5, 2010 at 5:03 am

    We also need fairness in regards to name changes for same-sex couples, especially in North Carolina. FULL EQUALITY NOW!!!!! Nothing less than this is acceptable!!!!!

  • 19. Marius  |  May 5, 2010 at 5:05 am

    did I by the way mention that Norwegian is named one of the worlds hardest languages too learn???

  • 20. Richard A. Walter (s  |  May 5, 2010 at 5:15 am

    Is it higher or lower on the list than Yiddish and Hebrew?

  • 21. Regan DuCasse  |  May 5, 2010 at 5:18 am

    Ah, I have been spanked and hard for my stance on illegal immigration.
    And it's appalling how specious many gay people are being over this issue. This would affect those who have been marginalized with less legal rights the most. Like gay people.
    Who don't have a lot in some country where they are from. I get that. And there is likely more legitimate reason for compassion for gay illegal immigrants.

    However, there is NO excuse for illegal immigration in the ways that are occurring here and it's not a POLITICAL issue here as much as one of social and national security,.
    Illegal immigrants are acting unethically.
    Being gay is not unethical, nor does it displace what would occur normally in any given culture or society.

    But illegal immigration DOES negatively, directly and immediately have affect.

    And our country doesn't have unlimited jobs, resources or infrastructure to accommodate so many, so fast and without accountability while we're at war with stealthy enemies and black market power that outguns and outclasses our security system.
    The hysteria around what this law 'might do' or 'will do'
    is conjecture as without expansive evidence the way same sex marriage is conjectured.
    Illegal immigration IS destructive, where same sex marriage is not.

    As a black woman, and the daughter of minority parents who lived under Jim Crow, blacks as a minority STAYED IN AMERICA and made it a better country for everyone, although the odds were against such a long tradition of brutal and systemic bigotry.

    Those demanding jobs and a better life from Americans who don't have it, is misdirecting energy best used for changing the countries of their birth.

    Our country needs breathing room. And I honestly don't think any amount of streamlining will satisfy the sheer numbers of people who want to be here.

    I know an man from India, jailed for homosexuality years ago. He now lives in NYC, but his fellow gays and lesbians took the same risks and demanded justice from their government IN INDIA, and now they are no longer subject to such treatment.

    Hooray. It can be done.
    So rather than bitch and moan and incite sedition over this new law, take to who really needs to hear it and be inspired to make changes where they are needed.

    This country is changing too, and is bleeding to death from a thousand cuts because it's all demands and no accountability from a large population uninterested in serving the interests of America, but having it the other way around.

    I could cheat and get into Harvard. I might even do well and graduate.
    But I still did something unethical and displaced the rightful entrant, ESPECIALLY because there ARE limits to how many people can attend Harvard at one time.
    And just because it's a better school than I'm stuck with, is no excuse to cheat to get in either.

    The reality is, we DON'T know who is here, why and where they are. And considering how many Americans are murdered, defrauded, maimed, assaulted and displaced for lack of ENOUGH jobs…this isn't a neutral, victimless and harmless issue, but for big, bad America picking on illegal immigrants and not processing them fast enough for their needs.

    Illegal immigrant activity cheats. It enables and emboldens criminals, and illegal immigrants are accommodated more than they deserve as it is.

    Example: if you'd been found to use a false identity and a stolen SS# for years, YOU go to prison for at least five.
    I've already heard of illegal immigrants doing that, and simply being fired, when the result is actually jail and deportation.

    There is no excuse for our country's government to do that. None.

    And this solidarity for the gay members caught up in the net, is equivalent to throwing out the baby with the bath water.
    Unfortunately that is to say, that said group isn't worth DOING NOTHING and rendering law enforcers useless.
    It's been proven too dangerous to everyone to be that way.

    You think gang members, terrorists…or even a majority of newly minted voters if amnesty occurs will care about supporting your gay asses?

    Don't think so. Gay people are serving their communities, and country, even in uniform…
    and YOU seem to have less political clout than people who can't vote NOW.

    Ponder that, my friends.

  • 22. Monty  |  May 5, 2010 at 5:26 am

    The fact that you generalize "libs" as all the same makes me automatically disregard the rest of your argument. Try again, without fallacies please.

  • 23. Anonymous  |  May 5, 2010 at 5:28 am

    @Katheleen: Yes! I wish I used paragraphs. I think I like to ramble, I'm the lazy writer.

    I should've made it clearer: I think all U.S. residents, nationals and immigrants alike, should carry valid photo identification with them in the interim in Arizona until the immigration problem is dealt with on a federal level. Additionally, I hope that the police should approach those involved in major illegal activities, such as incredible speeding or major traffic violations. I know you were using jaywalking as an example, and while jaywalking does result in fines sometimes, I think that the Governor Brewer should outline offenses exempt from this. Or something.

    I don't know, actually, I'm pretty confused now, and the issue wasn't as simple as I thought, my naive self. In fact, it's quite multifarious. I think the law is appropriate though very imperfect. On one hand I think that constantly carrying papers for everyone might be a civil liberties matter. However, for my prudence, I think that in this hostile world, I should always carry my papers around for my safety and others. That might not necessarily be practical, but still… For my safety. If it comes down to that, the papers matter might be unconstitutional. It might be exaggeration, but for my safety and others I think it's appropriate to carry around papers to confirm my identity. But, of course, we don't want the nation to turn into the Soviet Union, where papers were necessitated to be had all the time…

    In the end, I thank this post for making me reconsider my own opinion, and while I still think the law is appropriate with imperfections, I think there should have been a longer time for amendment-making so that the law could appeal to both conservatives and liberals. And with that, I end my remarks on this post!

    Oh, and also, @Ronnie: Portgual hasn't legalized same-sex marriage yet. While the constitutional court did find the four articles of the marriage bill to be constitutional, (President Anibal Silva did not forward the article which banned same-sex adoption), on an11-2 decision, the judgment still needs to be published in the Official Government Reporter. Then, the president of Portugal has 20 days to either approve or veto the legislation. It's rumored that he might veto it around or near the time His Holiness visits in May, but the president has denied the allegations. If he vetos it, the Prime Minister Jose Socrates says he has the votes in parliament to override the veto, but that isn't a guarantee. But, by July, Portugal might finally join the ranks of nations which have marriage equality, but they still need to progress on adoptions after that.

  • 24. Monty  |  May 5, 2010 at 5:30 am

    Personally, I really don't like the idea of mandatory national identification, but I suppose that's somewhat a matter of personal opinion. That said, I think that a much better way of handling illegal immigration would be to attack it at the source – reduce the incentive to come here in the first place. For instance, increasing the punishment for companies paying illegals less than minimum wage would make it more difficult for them to compete for jobs. Obviously it'd be more complicated than that, but going after the illegals themselves won't stop more from coming.

  • 25. Kathleen  |  May 5, 2010 at 5:31 am

    SA, this is the first law to make being here illegally a state crime. Immigration has always been the exclusive domain of the federal government, with good reason. You think there's a legal mess over all the different states' views over ssm, imagine if every state sets its own immigration law? What's next, you're a US citizen in Maryland, but not in New York? (okay that last scenario is just me being silly, but you get my point)

    If I'm understanding the law, it isn't just targeting people who are suspected of a crime, it "[r]equires a reasonable attempt to be made to determine the immigration status of a person during any legitimate contact made by an official or agency of the state or a county, city, town or political subdivision (political subdivision) if reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who is unlawfully present in the U.S." (emphasis mine)
    See the fact sheet here

    So, if you walk up to a police officer to report that you just saw someone get mugged around the corner, and the office has "reasonable suspicion … [that you are] an alien who is unlawfully present in the U.S." (however it is one determines that!) does that mean the police officer will be required to ask you for your papers and arrest you if you don't have them?

    And one of the provisions of the law is that people can sue local government or agencies if they think it's not being enforced. So, even if a city's police department feels it can best address the crime in its area by not enforcing the law (see my comment below), or that its resources are best spent in other ways, it doesn't realistically have that option.

  • 26. Kathleen  |  May 5, 2010 at 5:33 am

    Drat. Another bad italics move. I only meant to emphasize the phrase "any legitimate contact" … so try to imagine all the rest not being italicized. :)

  • 27. Ronnie  |  May 5, 2010 at 5:35 am

    sorry i thought I typed out that Portugal was on the verge of legalizing it…either way it seams they most likely will….typo….that is what I said to him that portugal was on the verge of legalizing it….<3…Ronnie

  • 28. Monty  |  May 5, 2010 at 5:37 am

    I keep hoping for an edit function, or at least preview. Making it into a forum would probably be even better, but it'd likely be more trouble than it's worth.

  • 29. Marius  |  May 5, 2010 at 5:39 am

    hmm, good question, dont remember, but it was on the top 10 list

  • 30. K!r!lleXXI  |  May 5, 2010 at 5:46 am

    @Regan DuCasse

    I know an man from India, jailed for homosexuality years ago. He now lives in NYC, but his fellow gays and lesbians took the same risks and demanded justice from their government IN INDIA, and now they are no longer subject to such treatment.

    Actually, here we were talking about bi-national couples… How is staying for someone in the country of origin will help this couple of people in love be together and live a happy life? This should not be an issue if the citizen of the US decides to marry a person of one's choice, and this person happens to be a citizen of some other country. It is not illegal to fall in love with someone from abroad — love knows no borders! And I'm talking about real marriages, not those sham scams that so many people use to take advantage of the existing system.

    We're also not talking about illegal immigrants that simply travel to the US to find any jobs and take them away from American citizens who are willing to have those jobs and are agree to be paid as proposed — that is unfair to the citizens, hence there should be some protectionist policies in place.

    I do not think all illegal immigrants should be deported right away — only if they actually harm the economy and the citizens by taking away those jobs (practically illegally — that's why it is important to make the system work on the employment level and make sure that employers hire people who actually are allowed to work those jobs). Otherwise, if an illegal immigrant does not work and is supported by someone else (say, a life partner who happens to be a citizen of the US), then economy only wins — that citizen spends money to buy food and clothes for one's life partner (illegal immigrant). It's a simple logic. Many people have big enough salaries to support not only themselves, but also their life partners and kids, so why create a problem if there is none? why be so defensive and mean? We should never go overboard with immigration policies. Especially in the country of immigrants.

    K, all the way from Russia

  • 31. Monty  |  May 5, 2010 at 5:53 am

    I brought up a similar point in a comment earlier – if you want an effective solution, you need to attack the problem at the right level. As long as companies can hire immigrants at less than minimum wage, they will, and as long as those jobs are better and more plentiful than ones in Mexico (or any other country, for that matter), the immigrants will continue to take the risk.

  • 32. Richard A. Walter (s  |  May 5, 2010 at 5:53 am

    The reason I asked is becaused my husband is an ordained Lubavitcher Hassidic rabbi, so I have been pretty much in an immersion course in both Hebrew and Yiddish, and after 15 months still know very little of it. When he gets in one of his non-English moods, he slings the Hebrew and Yiddish so fast that the only think I catch is what mood he is in. Although I would also like to attempt Norwegian. I have heard it a few times on National Geographic, and it just sounds magical to me.

  • 33. K!r!lleXXI  |  May 5, 2010 at 6:00 am

    Yep, @Monty, it's that simple!

    Turning the country into a police state and stopping everyone on the streets to check for identity is not at all effective and simply insulting for all the residents, whereas making sure that employers follow the law that protects citizens first and foremost is the solution for this problem, one that surely would not cost us more than all those ridiculous proposed measures that simply won't work anyway.


  • 34. Richard A. Walter (s  |  May 5, 2010 at 6:09 am

    Yes, and the main reason the employers will not follow the law is because their penalties for breaking it have not been made stringent enough to affect their bank accounts to the same degree that hiring those who are here legally and must be paid at least the minimum wage would. And the bigger the business, the more they are concerned with the overall profit total.

  • 35. Carvel  |  May 5, 2010 at 6:12 am

    I could be wrong on this, but I don't think the problem is with immigration of people from Mexico. The problem is that illegal immigration does not contribute to the tax basis of our country, they use our limited resources and they add to unemployment. I was involved in a case where an illegal immigrant was driving a truck for a company failed to slow down and then stop when passing a school bus and struck and seriously injured a child. The child has profound brain damage and her life is essentially over as an individual.

    The man did not have a driver's license and he did not have any insurance. The company he worked for only had a one million dollar policy and the problem is that the medical care for life will far exceeed that.

    Illegal aliens get public sevices, don't pay taxes, send money home to relatives, don't show up in courts and commit crimes. I know some illegal aliens who are nice hard working and law abiding people. However, without serious reform and a work visa where a person has to have a driver's license and mandatory insurance and other things that each of us has to have to be out on the streets, then illegal aliens should be taken off the streets.

    If I went illegally into another country they would deport me or throw my ass into jail. Just because we are a melting pot of cultures and ethnic groups means that we have to accept illegal behavor from anyone. I am not out to persecute illegal aliens, but we can have order in our society without excluding most people.

    Right now if you get caught without insurance you go to jail and your car is towed unless you have a valid driver's license. I am not at war with immigrants, but when I travel to another country I don't expect them to support me or give me ajob or unemployment benefits or free medical service. Because of the 14th Amendment any person born here is an American citizen if if their mother was here illegally. the needs to be changed. We can make the change effective for a dat in the future and then we will have closed our borders with one more paper fence.

  • 36. Monty  |  May 5, 2010 at 6:19 am

    And, again, that would be better served by going after the main reason they're here illegally in the first place – jobs. Going after individual people is both inefficient and ineffective.

    In any case, this is not at all an appropriate thing for a state to be doing. At best, it will reduce illegal immigration to Arizona, but that will only increase the rate in other states. So either the other states have to suffer more of the problems the law is supposed to prevent, or they'll have to enact measures of their own, which would inevitably lead to a contest of increasingly draconian laws to see who can be the most hostile toward anybody who looks different.

  • 37. fiona64  |  May 5, 2010 at 6:25 am

    Anonymous wrote: I should’ve made it clearer: I think all U.S. residents, nationals and immigrants alike, should carry valid photo identification with them in the interim in Arizona until the immigration problem is dealt with on a federal level.

    Or make it even simpler — don't go to Arizona, where even citizens will be detained for the crime of being brown in public.

    I guess that my husband and I had better make sure we have our copies of the damned Mayflower Compact at hand to prove our immigration status …


  • 38. Regan DuCasse  |  May 5, 2010 at 6:30 am

    I know you were talking about bi national couples, enough of whom I know personally and very much care about and already said this issue is about not being able to marry to naturalize a spouse, and about asylum because of different risks for gays and lesbians in other countries.
    Especially where homosexuality is a jail sentence and or execution.
    Yeah, I get that.
    But that's not a majority of people ANYWHERE.

    The worst of illegal immigrants shelter under the umbrella you're trying to hold up for gays and lesbians, perhaps you feel it's necessary, but the injustices committed against legal immigrants and citizens are outclassing the ability to anything for anyone that's efficientl.

    The issues of gays and lesbians the world over are going to be a separate one.
    Injustice against gay men and women is evident FOR being gay.
    It's not an injustice to be able to account for who is here and the reason why.

    The sanctuary policy in Los Angeles in effect, gives the ability to those victimized by illegal immigration to supposedly not be exploited by those who know it.

    The point is that there shouldn't be so many illegal immigrants here that such a policy is necessary in the first place.

    The problems of illegal immigration far outweighs the justification for Special Order 40 or anything similar to it.
    And…it is a serious, deadly problem. Not one merely of inconvenience to those here illegally.

  • 39. K!r!lleXXI  |  May 5, 2010 at 6:36 am

    @Richard W
    And because all those big companies have enough money to lobby their own business interests in the legislature, we do not see that kind of stringency in law against employment of illegal immigrants, and that is why they come up with those ridiculous plans to "solve" the unemployment problem — they need to show their constituents that they are doing something, and those constituents generally agree with the Stalin's policy “нет человека — нет проблемы” (“if there is no person, then there is no problem”). Really? We'll listen to Stalin now? What's next? Gunning down those immigrants?


  • 40. Kathleen  |  May 5, 2010 at 6:40 am

    UPDATE: Proponents have filed a motion which indicates they will be offering into evidence some of the items obtained from the No on 8 groups. They say they have a motion ready to offer to the court to ask that additional evidence been entered into the record.

    However, because the material they want to enter is marked "Confidential" or "Highly Confidential — Attorneys' Eyes Only" by the No on 8 groups, they have filed a "Motion to Seal" both their motion to supplement the record and also the exhibits themselves. This is a preliminary move necessary to comply with the protective order in the case, which is in turn designed to keep out of the public record any confidential material. The Motion is available here as Doc 655:

    Doc 656 also filed. It is a Motion in support of Proponents Motion to Seal (Doc 655) by Peter A. Patterson, one of the associates at Cooper & Kirk (attorneys for the Proponents). It is currently in the queue to be uploaded at Scribd. I'll post the line as soon as it's available.

  • 41. Andrea  |  May 5, 2010 at 6:40 am

    The fact that you will "automatically disregard" a valid and well-spoken argument due to the use of one troublesome-to-you noun tells me everything I need to know.

    Go post non-responses on someone else's comments.

  • 42. Kathleen  |  May 5, 2010 at 6:44 am

    Here's the Motion in Support by Peter A. Patterson. No idea why this motion in support was necessary or desirable, but here it is

  • 43. Richard A. Walter (s  |  May 5, 2010 at 6:49 am

    No, because that is not only inhumane, it is immoral, unethical, and if it isn't already, it should be illegal. However, we need to really make sure that the laws limiting what the big corporations can do to influence elections and lobbying are returned to full stringency, and we need to make sure that the ones who pay the fines for using illegal labor are the bigt companies, not the laborers. And those fines should be harsh enough that the companies figure out it is cheaper to hire legal residents and citizens and pay them a living wage.

  • 44. Monty  |  May 5, 2010 at 6:51 am

    The word wasn't what ruined your post (though it certainly told me all I need to know about your mentality on the subject), it was the generalization. Political views can't be neatly divided like that in the first place, and not all people who identify as liberal agree on every issue. For example, because I'm "liberal," most people assume I support stricter gun control. They're wrong. Likewise here – I am not in favor of illegal immigration; I just think this law is absolutely the wrong way to go about fixing it.

    And I'll post on any comments I want, thank you.

  • 45. Andrea  |  May 5, 2010 at 6:51 am

    So the D-I's are moving to keep the No-on-8 stuff secret from the public? This is fascinating.

  • 46. Regan DuCasse  |  May 5, 2010 at 6:52 am

    That is hyperbole. Seriously, that's exactly the kind of statements that deserve ridicule, not respect.

    It was made VERY clear, and it's been this way already, that a person can't be detained just on THEIR LOOKS.

    And I can tell you that major crimes have been solved, or could have been averted if the police were able to inquire about immigration status as they ask for identification.

    In most neighborhoods on a regular police beat, they know who is who.
    Perhaps it's incumbent that good citizens should help the police help them.
    How about giving them a chance to engage the law abiding public with an eye to simple community access and interest in each other's safety.

    All that's going on is vows to defy, complaints and enough pressure so that the peace officers all over again are paralyzed, damned do or don't.

    It's not unreasonable (and it's their job) to pull you over for expired tags, running a red light or if your car is meandering all over the road.
    It's not unreasonable if a bunch of young men (whatever their ethnicity) are loitering around an establishment during hours when most people are at work, and they are harassing passersby or not able to account for who they are.

    What do you WANT? The police to sit there, and not speak to anyone, not increase their skills at spotting illicit behavior?
    Not respond to activity at a house where too many people are in an out at all hours and causing a lot of disturbance? Or if screaming was heard by a woman getting beaten?

    They don't HAVE THE TIME to stop someone just for having brown skin.
    And plenty of police officers (and innocent residents of this country), have been murdered and their killers flee to their home countries, never to be seen again.
    Even Mexico has a for shit extradition policy on dangerous killers. Who THEY don't even jail in the meantime.

    You think the police anywhere, especially in a big city have the time to be DOORMEN?

    Tell you what, why don't YOU ride along, spend some time with your local gendarmes and learn something.

    Better yet, and you're hearing it from someone brown skinned.

    I learned long ago, it's not about beating them, bitching about them and being ignorant of what life is like for law enforcement AND illegal aliens alike.
    It's about JOINING them with community meetings, settings and concerns and committing to positive changes and having some GOOD ideas of your own so you don't the useless statement you just did.

    That's why this straight ally has called out homophobes on the fear and ignorance they throw out from the sidelines and abstract knowledge of gay people. Instead of actually KNOWING gay people on a level that's necessary and needful before they pass judgment.

    That's what I'm hearing here. Fear and ignorance of the police and this law.
    Before it's even in effect and before anyone knows what exactly will happen and to what degree.

    And please, I don't want to hear about incidents that happened to someone who didn't produce their id when asked.
    Or couldn't and what happened after that.
    Mistakes will happen. There are cops who are bad, but that still doesn't excuse illegal behavior of people who OUTNUMBER police on an average in any city you could name.

  • 47. Marius  |  May 5, 2010 at 6:58 am

    Have you ever tryed the rosetta stone program for hebrew? I did it for french and spanish, and its amasing=)

  • 48. Monty  |  May 5, 2010 at 7:02 am

    And the sign said you got to have a membership card to get inside…

  • 49. Kathleen  |  May 5, 2010 at 7:08 am

    It would seem they have to, because the No on 8 groups' classification of the items they're interested in. In the Motion, Proponents' say they don't concede that all of the documents are appropriately designated as confidential, that they're trying to work out disagreements with the ACLU/EQCA, and if they can't, they reserve the right to challenge the designations. To me, this implies that it's the No on 8 groups that want these kept out of the public record.

  • 50. Richard A. Walter (s  |  May 5, 2010 at 7:08 am

    Thanks, Marius. T be honest, I did not know Rosetta Stone had one for Hebrew. Thanks for the tip.

  • 51. David Kimble  |  May 5, 2010 at 7:23 am

    "Illegal aliens get public sevices, don’t pay taxes, send money home to relatives, don’t show up in courts and commit crimes." –

    I disagree strongly they don't pay taxes, as your post insuates – they do pay taxes, but only those taxes that do not involve wages. They pay and contribute to sales tax as well as other taxes, like vehicle tax, etc.

    And just how do you identify an illegal immigrant? On the basis of racial profliling or some other absurd means. They are here, like it or not…the real problem is how do you define "illegal".

    The Arizona law will be challenged in court, as well it should be, since it targets a specific group of people and singles them out, as "unworthy to be here in America". The reality is that some of the people, who came to America, when it was a young nation, were criminals fleeing their native countries to avoid prosecution. <3 David

  • 52. Tim  |  May 5, 2010 at 7:29 am

    Again I completely agree with Carvel!!
    I feel this is a country of immigrants, at the same time, this is also a country of laws. I mean this when I say this, I love the Mexican people and welcome them here legally!

    My husbsnd and myself go to Puerto Vallarta every year. I have a HUGE respect for the Mexican people! They are extremely hard working people that hold true to their families their faith (even if I disagree with it) and their culture! I love the Mexican culture….that being said I do not believe anyone should be here illegally and if they are they shoud be deported on the spot! Not taken to jail or go thru a lengthy court case, deported as fast as they imported.
    I also agree that if a person(s) is here illegally and has a child the three of them are still illegal and I should not have to pay for their actions.
    I've said it before and I'll say it again,marriage should not be used as a means for immigration either.People are getting married to people they do not love so one can stay in this country. But it is not ok for me to marry the one I LOVE because I'm gay? The institution of marriage is not as NOM or miss Maggie portray it to be!
    As for Arizona I applaud their getting tougher on immigration, it may be a little harsh but if one is not doing anything illegal then one has nothing to worry about!
    I realize my opinion is not a favorable one, but I also believe anyone working or living in the United States Of America needs to speak English! Love Tim…

  • 53. Tim  |  May 5, 2010 at 7:33 am

    Again I completely agree with Carvel!!
    I feel this is a country of immigrants, at the same time, this is also a country of laws. I mean this when I say this, I love the Mexican people and welcome them here legally!

    My husbsnd and myself go to Puerto Vallarta every year. I have a HUGE respect for the Mexican people! They are extremely hard working people that hold true to their families their faith (even if I disagree with it) and their culture! I love the Mexican culture.
    That being said I do not believe anyone should be here illegally and if they are they shoud be deported on the spot! Not taken to jail or go thru a lengthy court case, deported as fast as they imported.
    I also agree that if a person(s) is here illegally and has a child the three of them are still illegal and I should not have to pay for their actions.
    I've said it before and I'll say it again,marriage should not be used as a means for immigration either.People are getting married to people they do not love so one can stay in this country. But it is not ok for me to marry the one I LOVE because I'm gay? The institution of marriage is not as NOM or miss Maggie portray it to be!

    As for Arizona I applaud their getting tougher on immigration, it may be a little harsh but if one is not doing anything illegal then one has nothing to worry about!
    I realize my opinion is not a favorable one, but I also believe anyone working or living in the United States Of America needs to speak English! Love Tim…

  • 54. Monty  |  May 5, 2010 at 7:37 am

    But what about people who do love someone from another country? Sure, the system is abusable, but so is pretty much everything else. It's a price we have to pay.

    Legal immigrants have nothing to worry about? What about, say, losing your papers? This law puts the burden on you to prove your citizenship. In any case, the idea that you have to carry around such proof all the time doesn't sit well with me. As much as I hate to invoke Godwin's Law, it seems too similar to the Jews being forced to wear the Star of David to identify them (and yes, I know it's not a good analogy. It just forms a similar image in my mind).

    And as I keep saying, this won't solve the problem anyway.

  • 55. Kathleen  |  May 5, 2010 at 7:48 am

    Here's a novel approach.. micro-chip 'em!

    I'm not advocating people coming to this country illegally. I am, however, advocating putting out resources where they'll do the most good, as in going after the serious illegal activities of violent crime and the exploitation of human beings, and doing it in a way that doesn't trample on our constitutional rights. I believe this new Arizona law doesn't accomplish the former, and too greatly risks the latter.

  • 56. Monty  |  May 5, 2010 at 7:51 am

    Ooh, that's a great idea. Even more expensive, and nearly as ineffective.

  • 57. Monty  |  May 5, 2010 at 7:57 am

    Just realized that could be misinterpreted, so to clarify: I'm referring to the article.

  • 58. Kathleen  |  May 5, 2010 at 7:57 am

    Pat Bertroche, an Urbandale physician. “I actually support micro-chipping them. I can micro-chip my dog so I can find it. Why can’t I micro-chip an illegal?"

    Hope I'm never in a position to have to rely on this physician's compassion.

  • 59. David Kimble  |  May 5, 2010 at 8:00 am

    Hmm…speak English, as a prerequisite to being in America legally. Now here's an idea that is ripe with inequality. When many of our ancestors came to America, many could not speak a word of English, yet they were here legally. There were some, like the Germans and Italians, who remained in cloistered groups. The idea that someone, who wants to come to America should have language equivalence smacks of an elitist view, in my opinion. <3 David

  • 60. Monty  |  May 5, 2010 at 8:03 am

    We made literacy tests for voting illegal for a reason, after all. In this case, such a requirement is especially discriminatory because languages are harder to learn as you get older.

  • 61. Mark M.  |  May 5, 2010 at 8:27 am

    No other country I know of spends as much money and time trying to make every immigrant feel warm and fuzzy…the drivers license test alone is printed in 19 languages, yet road signs are still (thankfully) only in English.

    If I wished to immigrate to another country I would never expect said country to bend over backwards to accommodate me and my needs/wishes….why do so many expect that of the US?

  • 62. Ronnie  |  May 5, 2010 at 8:36 am

    Because America is the Land of the Free to Be Like Me….I mean Land of the Free…. : / …..?!…..Ronnie

  • 63. Monty  |  May 5, 2010 at 8:37 am

    Proficiency with a language can take years of study. Not everybody has that luxury. Besides, they'll start to pick it up once they've lived here for a while anyway. If someone can pass the citizenship test (which the majority of native-born citizens would fail, incidentally), I see no reason to keep them out.

  • 64. Andrea  |  May 5, 2010 at 8:46 am

    I apologize for sniping at you, Monty. I'm having "one of those days" and it came out at you.

    I took a "time out" and counted to ten and now I can see you were actually trying to help me form better arguments. I'm sorry, mea culpa, thank you, and of course…


  • 65. Mike  |  May 5, 2010 at 8:47 am

    I am amazed at the anti-immigrant sentiment expressed by some of the posts.

    Immigration affects LGBT couples as well

    The current immigration law does not allow us to sponsor our foreign-born partners for immigration.

    Those couples live either separated, or in exile.

    If we argue for FULL EQUALITY.
    This argument MUST include passage of the United American Familes Act, or/and its inclusion in any form of Comprehensive Immigration Reform

    Read more at:


  • 66. Monty  |  May 5, 2010 at 8:55 am

    In retrospect, I probably could've worded my first post better, but it's just one of those things that really bugs me.

    On the other hand, one of the things I like about this site is that even the worst posts I've seen (and that wasn't one of them) are still better than >99% of the stuff out there on other sites, on both sides of every issue. I swear, every time I read the comments after a controversial news article, I end up regretting it.

  • 67. Mark M.  |  May 5, 2010 at 9:03 am

    @ Monty: I agree if motivated to do so most people would indeed 'pick up' the language as you put it….however we as a nation continue to make it so they don't have any reason to learn the language of the land as it were.
    Drives me 'crazy'!!!

  • 68. Andrea  |  May 5, 2010 at 9:19 am

    You get the last word, Monty.

    I can't help but notice, that two people almost got into a flame-fest, then bailed out, apologized, and reached a mutual understanding.

    Where are we, and what happened to the internet?

  • 69. David Kimble  |  May 5, 2010 at 9:24 am

    Those who advocate laws, such as is the case in Arizona open a can of worms. One of those worms is this – (I am speaking mostly of hispanics with this one) – when they come to America (most come because there is no work in Mexico for them and they have families to support). The come here at great peril, sneaking across the border – some die during the journey, yet they come because America has always been a country of opportunity. Many work for wages that most in America would not even consider, doing jobs that are very demanding, like the migrant workers. When they have children, who are born in America, their children automatically become US citizens. How do we deal with the children of illegals, not to mention splitting their families apart. I have witnessed first-hand what it means, when families are torn-apart because of immigration issues. (When I lived in Washington State, they were dealing the same problems that come-up, when illegals come to America). The parents can be legally deported, but not the children, since they are legally American. <3 David

  • 70. Monty  |  May 5, 2010 at 9:28 am

    There is a fifth dimension, beyond that which is known to man. It is a dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity. It is the middle ground between light and shadow, between science and superstition, and it lies between the pit of man's fears and the summit of his knowledge. This is the dimension of imagination. It is an area which we call the Twilight Zone.

  • 71. Straight Dave  |  May 5, 2010 at 9:30 am

    I was very impressed by the way Andrea and Monty managed to settle themselves and each other down after an initial spat, while acknowledging their own imperfections or bad days. It speaks to the high character of the individuals and the general tone of this site. Almost anywhere else on the web this would have rapidly deteriorated by everyone throwing more gas on the fire.
    Thank you both for setting a high standard for the rest of us to aspire to. It's one reason I stay here, reading if not always writing. This community is tops! Let's keep it that way.

  • 72. Monty  |  May 5, 2010 at 9:47 am

    Well, I'm off for now. [Exit Monty]

  • 73. Moriah  |  May 5, 2010 at 9:53 am

    I think you may all find this interesting… it seems as though the bill's been revised because of the uproar. Check out this article:

  • 74. fiona64  |  May 5, 2010 at 9:58 am

    Regan wrote: Tell you what, why don’t YOU ride along, spend some time with your local gendarmes and learn something.

    I have, sugar.

    Now, how about this little incident, in which a sweep of people guilty of nothing but being brown-skinned included 42 *citizens* — and that before this racist law even goes into effect?

    Just one of many articles about the matter:

    Tell it to the Marines, sister, 'cause the Army ain't listening.


  • 75. fiona64  |  May 5, 2010 at 10:01 am

    True enough. The vast majority of people to whom I sent this link admitted that they did not know the answers. (I missed one.)


  • 76. fiona64  |  May 5, 2010 at 10:02 am

    Should add — the one question I missed was the name of the naturalization form.


  • 77. Kathleen  |  May 5, 2010 at 10:21 am

    I got them all right, but only because I correctly guessed the naturalization form. :)

  • 78. Richard A. Walter (s  |  May 5, 2010 at 10:38 am

    Mike, you and all other LGBTQQI's involved in binational relationships are partly why I stated in an earlier post that NOTHING SHORT OF FULL EQUALITY IS GOOD ENOUGH! This is why we all need to get together for the Equality Rides. ANd yes, "Let's All Unite for Equality and Ride to Washington DC at One Time" is on Facebook, and we need everybody to sign up for this so that we can get everybody organized in their local areas in order to plan out the schedules and get everybody leaving at times that will see the Equality Rides grow as they move from the West Coast to Washington, and all of us arrive in Washington DC at the same tie, and we need to get this first one done ASAP, preferably before Congress takes their summer recess.

  • 79. Richard A. Walter (s  |  May 5, 2010 at 10:50 am

    I missed two. Not bad considering how long it has been since I was in American History and studied about the naturalization process. I missed the one about which amendment does NOT guarantee voting rights, and missed the one about which form for naturalization. But hey, 18 out of 20 isn't so bad for a native, is it?

  • 80. Ronnie  |  May 5, 2010 at 11:26 am

    Now we all the main argument that they try to use is the Bible and some people are like the Old-T is not the New-T but whatever…someone ALWAYS quotes Leviticus…Well Leviticus says a lot of things…I found this video that points out a few…its quite funny…enjoy…<3…Ronnie Mc:

  • 81. Fluffyskunk  |  May 5, 2010 at 1:29 pm

    Can someone explain to me why it's necessary to include a "provision for same-sex partners" in the immigration reform? Can't we just, you know, repeal DOMA? Or wait and see what comes out of P v. S? Sneaking in language that specifically refers to same-sex couples would only add more fuel to the "gays want special rights" fire, not to mention creating yet another area where we are separate and therefore not equal.

  • 82. christina  |  May 5, 2010 at 6:38 pm

    go watch FOOD INC. this highlights a problem. big cpmpanies recruit illegals…but they dont get punished because they report a small amount of their illegal employees to the INS

  • 83. Sagesse  |  May 5, 2010 at 11:13 pm

    Reality check: there are 12 million illegal immigrants in the US. Over the years (now measured in generations) most of them arrived over the porous US southern border with Mexico, and have not been sent back. Especially in the early years, they arrived and they stayed for economic reasons: the workers looking for jobs and their employers happy with the cheap (often exploitable) labour. US immigration was not hugely successful in keeping illegal immigrants out, nor in sending them back. Many of them have lived in the country for years, have children who born in the US who are citizens.

    Immigration reform has to provide a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants who are productive members of society. The US government has to take responsibility for its years of inaction. To do otherwise would be to blame the victims (those in the country illegally and their families who would be split up). Deport the criminals and the drug dealers, fine.

    THEN shore up border control and enforcement going forward. But the horse has left the barn, and to try to deal with this by wholesale targeting and rounding up and deporting those poor souls who fall into the net is inhumane.

    It's like worshiping the idol of 'traditional marriage' and pretending real families don't come in all kinds of shapes and sizes.

    Oh, and allow bi-national same sex couples the same immigration rights as other families.

  • 84. Matthew  |  May 5, 2010 at 11:22 pm

    The US could give up the 'war on drugs' amd spent a fraction of the money on defending our borders instead of prosecuting petty posession crimes and filling prisons with citizens that come out hardened criminals.

    Not to mention it would eliminate a large portion of border crime and smuggling wars against the druglords. Then there is the local jobs it would create and all the tax revenue that could fund education and public safety.

    If you were in a country where you had very few rights and were in danger of being killed by a drug lord or your family starving to death wouldn't you try to escape to a better place? I've considered movif to Canada myself because of lack of gay rights. But it is very hard to immigrate there. If I knew my life was in imminent danger I would just get in a car and drive there

  • 85. Bob  |  May 6, 2010 at 1:40 am

    Hi everyone. I assume you've all heard the story about Dr. George Rekers, Baptist minister, anti-gay crusader, officer of the National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH), founding member of the Family Research Council, and the man who gave "expert" testimony against same-sex adoption in Florida?

    Florida AG Bill McCollum, currently running for Governor, paid Rekers $87,000 for his testimony against same-sex adoption. Please help us force McCollum to give an explanation by visiting his Facebook page and leaving a message:

  • 86. Mark M.  |  May 6, 2010 at 1:56 am

    @ Sagesse : You say "Don't blame the 'victims' "…what victims are you speaking of? The illigals that got into this country by breaking the law? Since when is a criminal considered a victim?
    Let's STOP being so damn concerned about the criminals and try being a bit more concerned about what theor crimes have done and are continuing to do to our countrry.

  • 87. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  May 6, 2010 at 2:05 am

    thank you Fiona for you comments and concise reality checks! My partner is brown-skinned and I could fill up a whole books of the ways he gets marginalized, looked at, suspected, for having some accent and brown skinned.

    Most of his family are American citizens or permanent residents and come from a distinguished family with prestige. They came the legitimate way, his fathers talents and skills were requested by a LARGE American organization to contribute to our culture and education system. Some of the family could not take the bigotry (word used deliberately) and went back to their very nice country so they could be treated humanely.

    I just cannot see how this Arizona Law is progressive. My partner is already seeing deterioration of attitudes toward him in professional settings. We as a nation MUST come up with a better way to treat fellow humans.

  • 88. Regan DuCasse  |  May 6, 2010 at 2:14 am

    Fiona, sugar….
    I already admitted that mistakes will happen, and the police will miscalculate, didn't I?
    It's still NO excuse to allow half a million people (in AZ alone) to roam around unaccounted for.

    If there were less and less illegal immigrants, such mistakes would be less and less also.

    So, sugar…
    I still didn't hear any better ideas from you.

    In crime prevention, detection and solving, profiling and analysis of 'most likely' are essential for law enforcement to be effective.

    If there is a demographic that has a regularity of certain actions, then law enforcers look for who fits it.

    If American citizens are caught in the net during a wide sweep of necessarily catching certain people, it's not something that shouldn't be unexpected.

    And still doesn't mean that being uncooperative, even during mistaken identity, is prudent.

    Mistaken identity is something that can happen.
    Stolen identity has to be dealt with because it's the job of law enforcers to do so.
    See the difference, sugar?

    Tell it to the Marines?
    In the context in which Roosevelt indeed said such a line in his Pearl Harbor response speech,

    It's so sad that our service members, even National Guard, are deployed in the security of the borders of Afghanistan, Iraq…or South Korea.

    And their own homeland isn't secure from all manner of invaders who are trying to murder, and do, legal citizens and residents everyday.

    Tell it to the Marines, indeed.

  • 89. fiona64  |  May 6, 2010 at 2:43 am

    You know what, Regan? I want to know where your outrage is about the "unprotected" *Northern* border. Why aren't states like New York, Michigan and Minnesota railing against the border-hopping "illegals" from Canada? Where are the "anti-Canadian" laws where someone can be stopped for "reasonable suspicion"?

    Don't you *even* try to tell me that this is not about race, lady, because I will call you out as a liar.

    This is about scapegoating Latinos/as and indigenous peoples, and nothing else. Crime is actually *lower* in the border cities of Arizona than anywhere else in the state, but you xenophobes don't like to admit that.

    I have not forgotten that this is a nation of immigrants, pure and simple. I am pro-HUMAN, and anti-HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS. That you don't care whether citizens, tourists and others are caught up in this disaster speaks volumes about you, and about the fact that this issue has *nothing to do with illegal immigration* in your mind, no matter how you frame it.

  • 90. fiona64  |  May 6, 2010 at 2:49 am

    I really don't want to have to explain the most recent time in history when citizens had to carry an internal passport to travel around their own country …


    PS – I love that song

    And the sign said anybody caught trespassing would be shot on sight
    So I jumped on the fence and yelled at the house, Hey! what gives you the right
    To put up a fence to keep me out or to keep mother nature in
    If God was here, he'd tell you to your face, man you're some kinda sinner

  • 91. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  May 6, 2010 at 3:40 am

    thanks again Fiona for your insight and standing up to bigotry! It has become trendy to scapegoat Hispanics in this country. I work at a college and observe first hand the recent intensity of hate toward brown-skinned persons. My brown-skinned partner has seriously considered staying indoors as much as possible until this blows over to avoid all the animosity we encounter nearly everywhere we go.

  • 92. Mark M.  |  May 6, 2010 at 3:48 am

    As soon as the illigal Canadians start destroying our welfare systems, our healthcare budgets, and raising the crime levels the way the 'southern' illiagals do than we will see the Northern states begin to take action.
    I live in a northern border state and we do NOT have a problem to any extent the way the southern states do.
    This is not bigotry it is FACT!

  • 93. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  May 6, 2010 at 3:52 am

    In Salt Lake City the big Mormon church his being neutral, sort of. Kudos to the Catholic Church however, as they unashamedly outspoken against the new Arizona law.

  • 94. fiona64  |  May 6, 2010 at 3:53 am

    Gregory, any time legislation like this (just as happens with anti-GLBT legislation) is passed, people feel like they have the right to make their bigotry very, very public. They feel that their hatred is now righteous.

    It is disgusting.


  • 95. fiona64  |  May 6, 2010 at 3:57 am

    Really? Do you have a source for your "facts"? I'd be delighted to see it.

    The simple truth is that there is a large population of European (read: Caucasian) illegal immigrants in the US as well, and no one is raising a stink about it. Why? Because they're white and they "blend."

    Do you think there is no crime among the Irish illegals, just to cite an example? As of 2007, there were an estimated 50,000 Irish illegal immigrants in the US, 30K of them in New York. (,0,1081193.column) Perhaps you are familiar with a little group called the IRA, which gets the majority of its funding from the Irish in the US?

    Where is New York's NINA law, hmm?

    "It's not bigotry." Give me a break.

  • 96. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  May 6, 2010 at 4:08 am

    thank you once again Fiona! How many persons have we experienced that use "FACTS" against LGBT!

  • 97. Mark M.  |  May 6, 2010 at 4:26 am

    My husband happens to BE Hispanic so my information is rather first hand thank you very much….
    The facts as I know them come down from living in a border state and not experiencing or seeing the drain on our states resources except by the hispanic population.
    (I work in healthcare so see the results of this every single day)
    You can rale against the truth all you want but the facts are that 12 million hispanic criminals are helping to destry the economy of many many states AZ is just one of the worst hit by this… you thibnk California would be billions in debt if not for housing and feeding and taking care of the millions and millions of illegals there? Hardly!
    And no it is NOT bigotry when it is based in FACT!

  • 98. Mark M.  |  May 6, 2010 at 4:27 am

    Oh and 50,000 Iris hardly equals the 12 million Hispanics now does it…….

  • 99. Kathleen  |  May 6, 2010 at 4:33 am

    do you thibnk California would be billions in debt if not for housing and feeding and taking care of the millions and millions of illegals there?

    Yes, I do.

  • 100. Mark M.  |  May 6, 2010 at 4:37 am

    LOL Head in the sand I see……

  • 101. Marius  |  May 6, 2010 at 5:08 am

    no problem man=)

  • 102. fiona64  |  May 6, 2010 at 5:33 am

    Still don't see any sources for your "facts," Mark. Could it be because you don't have any facts at hand?

  • 103. fiona64  |  May 6, 2010 at 5:42 am

    Nope. CA's budget crisis was actually precipitated in 1978 by a a little thing called Prop 13, which changed how property taxes were assessed. Things got worse thanks to Enron. Then there's that pesky 2/3 majority thing to pass a budget (50 percent plus 1 in the community can vote to take away rights, but we can't have a simple majority to pass a budget?).,9171,…

    It has nothing to do with your alleged 12 million illegal Latino/as (Hispanics are from Hispaniola, or Spain)

    You're welcome.

  • 104. matthew  |  May 6, 2010 at 5:48 am

    There is a big, bold-highlighted line between trying to protect the countries borders and encroaching on basic human rights. Like the right to due process…Do we want to live in a country where 'due process' equals being stopped by police and being ASSUMED to be illegal just for walking across the street to buy a Big Mac. How about police stopping anyone on the roads after last call, regardless if they are visibly breaking any laws? Because you know, drunks drive home after last call so everyone should have to PROVE they aren't intoxicated if they are on the road. That makes sense to me considering alcohol causes way more deaths than umm…'being near illegals'.

    It's 'All men are created equal' NOT 'All citizens of the United States are created equal.'

    Doctors take oaths to do no harm. They don't swear to help citizens of the US. They help human beings. I wouldn't want to ever be treated by a person in the medical field who held such a low opinion of human life.

    Someone earlier posted that the 'illegal looking' guy was damaging her son because he had a job? Seriously? If your son wants to work, there are plenty of open positions on the fields in California….It pays below minimum wage, with long hours and no benefits, but it does help keep the produce thats grown in California actually affordable to the general population. Oh sorry never mind, 'Americans' won't do that kind of labor anymore.

    For the record, I'm white and I really HATE that sometimes I have to press 1 for english. English is our national language, and it should be required learning for anyone who wants to live here. Of course, I also think that learning a second language should be required of all our students.

    I think there has to be some way for people who sneak in to integrate legally. They already pay the same taxes I do except for income tax. I support deporting illegals, but not if a family makes it here and has children. At that point there is a US citizen in the mix and taking his parents away from him is a monstrous act. And last I heard, when you get deported, you go back to your country of origin, which as it happens would be the US for those thinking that sending a child who is considered a US citizen to a place like mexico.

    The governor signed the new law then promptly admitted that she has no idea 'what an illegal alien looks like'. I know she was lying through her teeth, because the first thing that she thought. That law is completely un-enforcable.

    I can see it now in court 'Your Honor. I would like to present exhibit A: A very illegal-looking pair of Nike Airs!' "You see, I noticed the very illegal looking shoes crossing the street and I was pretty sure the wearer might be illegal….because of the shoes. No, his dark skin didn't factor into my judgment at all. What's that? No your honor, I didn't also stop the 40 other white people I saw this week that also had nike airs. They didn't look nearly so illegal-looking on those people.

    In one fell swoop, it shows racial profiling, ethnic favoritism, unequal treatment under the law, AND it violates the law itself giving someone the grounds to sue the officer on grounds of not fully enforcing the law…hello class action lawsuit by 40 white people in nike airs.

  • 105. Fianna  |  May 6, 2010 at 8:51 am

    I agree completely. English is *not* the official language in this country (we don't have one), and so I can't figure out for the life of me why it's considered a requirement for citizenship.

  • 106. Fianna  |  May 6, 2010 at 9:00 am

    "English is our national language"

    No, it isn't. Not legally, in any case; the United States of America does not have an official language. Some states have one (or more, in the case of California) official languages, but the country as a whole does not.

    I do, however agree with your assessment on the inability to "tell what an illegal looks like"–while the law does say that race or color cannot be the sole reason for stopping someone, it does not say that it cannot be used in conjunction with another reason.

  • 107. Fianna  |  May 6, 2010 at 9:07 am

    "Every day we hear from desperate couples, forced to choose between the partner they love and the country they love, which is why we are fighting to change the immigration law and end this discrimination."

    Amen. Someone I love very much is currently married to a male friend instead of to me because I cannot protect her from deportation and he can. She's going through the naturalization process, but that will take years.

  • 108. Kathleen  |  May 6, 2010 at 9:13 am

    …and exacerbated by a financial downturn brought on by speculation by a bunch of (legal) citizens in order to line their private coffers, resulting in a significant devaluation of California's investments and a drastic drop in property tax revenues that would usually come from home sales (the only way property taxes can increase beyond the 2 % per anum permitted by Prop 13).

  • 109. PamC  |  May 6, 2010 at 11:10 am

    I missed the naturalization one. Definitely not an easy test, though.

  • 110. nightshayde  |  May 6, 2010 at 12:05 pm

    Way back in my teenage years, I was on the "send 'em back to where they came from" bandwagon — until I rode a Mexican train from the US border down to Mazatlan.

    I saw corrugated tin shacks in which people lived & just knew that people would bake in those shacks during the day. I saw little kids in dirty torn clothing drinking water from filthy-looking puddles near the side of the train tracks.

    At that point, I realized WHY people come to the US illegally. For most of them, I don't think it's about being able to qualify for public assistance or to live their lives without having to pay taxes. It's about living somewhere with indoor plumbing. Somewhere where their kids can get clean water to drink from almost any faucet they can find (contaminated water supplies near industrial dump sites are a completely different issue). Somewhere where their kids can have a better life than they did.

    Sure — people can apply for legal status and spend years waiting for permission to enter the country. Years during which their kids will be drinking from polluted puddles at the side of the train tracks. Years during which their kids will try not to melt in their corrugated tin shacks.

    As a parent, I'd do anything I could to get my child out of such horrendous circumstances — and yes, I'd break immigration laws to do it.

    I get why they do it, and I can't say I'd do anything different in their circumstances.

  • 111. Tim  |  May 6, 2010 at 8:06 pm

    Give me a break! I don't care if you think English is the "official" language or not, it's the language of this country and you cannot deny that! And yes! it should be a requirement for citizenship, and ,if you don't learn to speak it within a reasonable amount of time you DO NOT become a citizen. PERIOD!

    Nobody can acuse be of being racist ! I haven't got hatred in my heart for anyone! I'm currenty learning spanish because I love to travel to spanish speaking countries! Especially Mexico.I love them and their culture!
    But, if one is to work and live in any country, one Should be required to speak the language of that country.

    I would NEVER EVER move to France to work or live without first learning to speak French. I would NEVER, move to Mexico to live/work with out learning spanish, I don't give a shit if it is the "offical" language or not!

    And there should be a law against displaying ANY international flag without displaying The American flag along with it out of respect for the the USA.

    If I was an American Citizen living in Mexico, I would NEVER EVER display my American flag without the Mexican flag flying right along side. Why? Because I have class, and would show respect for the country of which I call home and/or make my living.
    And I expect the same from anyone that makes their home and living in the USA. PERIOD!
    Thank You and Gracias. Mi amore Timothy/Timoteo…

  • 112. Fianna  |  May 7, 2010 at 3:42 am

    @ Tim (I can't seem to get it to reply to you!): What I meant is I cannot see legally why it would be done. If a language is not first legally established as the official, insisting in other laws that it must be learned seems legally strange. But I am not a lawyer, so I'm sure there are many laws on the book that I would find legally strange.

    Also, I speak four languages (including English!) and sign a fifth. I know that learning English just to be in the country (or Spanish if you're in Mexico, Japanese if you're in Japan, etc) is an important part of communicating with the native population. I also know that learning another language is *hard* and not everyone picks it up quickly. If I found language as difficult as I found geometry, I'd be in some real trouble!

  • 113. Regan DuCasse  |  May 7, 2010 at 3:56 am

    Fiona, apparently YOU picked a cultural/racial/geographical demographic…I didn't.

    I have mentioned illegal immigrants. Period. I don't really care WHERE they are from. And I have expressed already exceptions because the LGBT have minority status, and more dangerous systemic isolation wherever they are from. THAT needs to be adjudicated differently on it's own merits, as it is for gay and lesbian legal citizens.

    You're just being obtuse to spoil for gobsmacking anyone who criticizes illegal immigration.

    Blanket illegal immigration, as I said, poses a myriad of problems. And I've literally said little more than that and articulated why.
    And blanket amnesty would give cover to those who have committed much that is egregious already, just as Special Order 40 and similar laws have as well.

    And as I said before too, I don't think there is any streamlining or acceleration of the immigration process that will satisfy the sheer numbers of people demanding to be able to come to (or stay in) the US.
    Sometimes the problem is the lack of organization or restrictions in their home countries.

    Now, maybe you're seeing and hearing and determined to make up something that isn't there.

    But let's not pretend that, unlike illegal immigration being a problem at both ends for the LGBT, it IS a PROBLEM for this country.

    Some complain it's because of the orientation, some because of the ethnicity. Some because they think this country is being stingy.

    And NONE of this is argued that it's because there ARE limits to how many people can live here efficiently, AND there HAS to be a process of entrance for the sake of identity.
    EVERYONE is subject to that. Even American citizens.

    Don't make this and what I say more than it is, in your need to cast stones.

  • 114. Regan DuCasse  |  May 7, 2010 at 4:10 am

    Might I remind you again…
    I'M BROWN SKINNED…and I'm spending a cruise vacation in Mexico.
    A country, I am entering LEGALLY and as a tourist. And I won't be overstaying. Which, in all the OTHER countries I've visited and loved, I didn't do either.

    And I made no mention of the ethnicity of illegal immigrants, necessarily.
    My outrage is that this problem has grown so large. That people are endangered by it, and that it's argued as if harmless or perfectly ethical to do whatever to enter this country and then commit other crimes exponentially to stay.

    It is GROSSLY unfair to those who DO enter and stay legally. It's showing those who are harmful, the ease involved in hurting the people of this country, and no amount of generosity is enough for some people. Such as in the case of this last terror attempt.
    All this is telling anyone with a brain, that citizenship, and lawful entry means nothing.
    That American credo "Of Many One" means nothing, and that our national security doesn't either.

    We. Are. At. War…with a stealth enemy with an IDEOLOGY.
    And others with interests so selfish that our country is fragmenting.
    And we seem to be capitulating to THEIR game, than the security of our nation.
    You don't know who you're dealing with, because you DON'T know who is here and how to account for them.
    That's ALL I'm talking about.

    And my work is cut out and made MUCH harder than it should or has to be.
    Mores the point, for the law enforcers and peace officers who have to be the thin line between us and chaos.
    And chaos is winning.

  • 115. fiona64  |  May 7, 2010 at 4:25 am

    Regan wrote: Such as in the case of this last terror attempt.

    You mean, the one made by a naturalized citizen who entered this country legally, crossed all the t's, dotted all the i's (just like you wanted) — and then had a mental breakdown after losing his job, his home and his family?

    Regan also wrote: We. Are. At. War…with a stealth enemy with an IDEOLOGY.

    Ideas are bulletproof, Regan. You can't make war on ideas.

    How about if you google a few things like Pinochet, death squads in El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala, the CIA's coup attempts in South America, and a few other goodies. We're the ones who set up the horrific conditions that people south of the border are trying to escape, in case you hadn't been paying attention.

    I don't know why I am bothering to respond, to tell you the truth. Because you will never get it.

  • 116. fiona64  |  May 7, 2010 at 4:27 am

    Regan wrote: And NONE of this is argued that it’s because there ARE limits to how many people can live here efficiently,

    Okay, let's look at this statement. Where is your argument against allowing people to give birth? After all, illegal immigrants are adults who are paying taxes (payroll taxes) even if they aren't paying income taxes, and they are buying things. Children don't contribute jack to the economy and they are an expense/burden to society. Obviously, since there are limits to how many people can live here efficiently (your words), we should also limit how many children people are allowed to have.

    Good god, woman.

  • 117. Tim  |  May 7, 2010 at 6:42 am

    @ Fiona and Reagen!!
    If I may interupt?
    The both of you are making valid points and I see the points you both are trying to make, and I don't think you are going to change the opinion of the other.
    I for one as a person with love for all people(I really do) am also one that follows all laws of whatever country I happen to be in at the time wether I agree with them or not.

    If one is to immigrate illegally to any for whatever reason must be willing to take responsibility for their actions and accept the outcome.

    I personally think this country is loosing it's backbone! It's too worried about offending someone. We must enforce the laws of the land. And if one does not like that law there is an avenue to have that law bannished or changed.
    Regardless if you are conservative or liberal …we must agree, we are letting it happen, what ever IT may be…

  • 118. K!r!lleXXI  |  May 7, 2010 at 7:22 am

    Oh, my goodness! I got only 3 questions wrong, out of 20! For one of them I'm embarrassed: how could I forget how many representatives are there in Congress just days after I talked about Congress and how things happen there with my friend Felyx???

    The funny thing is that I never took classes in American history… This is why I got those other two answers wrong! :(

    Anyway, my result is 85%, which is "Welcome to the United States!" Hehe, if only… if only it was that easy for all those who want to be welcomed there…

    K, as always from his vast Russia

  • 119. fiona64  |  May 7, 2010 at 8:23 am

    Tim, I also understand the point you are trying to make.

    However, it is entirely too easy to sit back in one's privileged armchair and point at the people who are so desperate that they will *literally* risk their lives to get away from a horrific situation. A horrific situation that, south of the border, was set into motion by *us,* the US.

    Who was it here who wrote about their experience of seeing kids drinking polluted water and living in tin shacks? I don't remember which person it was (Nightshayde, maybe). It's all very well and good to say that this country is losing its backbone, but I would remind you that the inscription on the Statue of Liberty doesn't say "Send me your wealthy and light-skinned."

    The horse has already run out the barn door, Tim. The people are *here.* How about if we do the *right* thing instead of the paranoid thing?

    There is nothing to be gained by Arizona's law, which is as racist as the day is long.

    There is a good reason why immigration is a Federal matter. Of course, you may be willing to be re-naturalized to a different state whenever your company moves you — which is the natural extension of allowing states to set immigration policy.

    This law has its basis in angry white people not wanting to see the brown people whom they are scapegoating. If they don't have to look at the scary brown people (who will not be outdoors very much if they can be stopped for any minor infraction and then cited for "reasonable suspicion), then they can hold on to their hegemony for a little while longer.

  • 120. Mark M.  |  May 7, 2010 at 8:57 am

    Some of the 'Facts' that were being requested:
    "The Pew Hispanic Center used Census Bureau data to estimate that the United States had 11.1 million illegal immigrants in March 2005. The center used monthly population estimates to project a current total of 11.5 million to 12 million. "

    57% of illegal immigrants were from Mexico;
    24% were from other Latin American countries, primarily from Central America;[
    9% were from Asia;
    6% were from Europe;
    4% were from the rest of the world.

  • 121. fiona64  |  May 7, 2010 at 9:11 am

    From your article (which I do appreciate you providing): It estimated that illegal immigrants fill a quarter of all agricultural jobs, 17 percent of office and house cleaning positions, 14 percent of construction jobs and 12 percent in food preparation.

    These folks are paying taxes (through payroll) even if they are not paying income taxes. They are contributing to the economy because they buy things.

    Your article also cites that it is actually harder for them to go home than it was to get here …

    Of course, you want to argue that it's all about crime, but crime is *down* in the southern border states, and the border cities of AZ have less crime than the primarily white cities in the state.

  • 122. Joe  |  May 7, 2010 at 10:04 am

    Easy to solve that problem: Let them pay taxes. Right now they're not allowed to pay taxes, and it becomes a self-supporting argument.

  • 123. K!r!lleXXI  |  May 7, 2010 at 10:20 am


    I think it's easier right now to argue that same-sex couples deserve to have the same right to bring a long-term permanent partner over, so long as it does not require marriage (there are lots of people who say gays deserve to have some kind of their own parody on marriage, like DP or CU, so they also deserve this particular federal benefit of marriage).

    If it is done, they can always argue that they even went to that length to allow us, the gays, bring over our foreign national same-sex partners, so we'll not get marriage anytime soon because "it is and always has been between one man and one woman." Ugghhh. Many people will sign up for that reform just to show that they've done "so much" for us, and we are truly the "ungrateful brats."

    I'm just saying that this coin also has two sides…


  • 124. truthspew  |  May 7, 2010 at 10:37 am

    You ought to see the immigration fight I'm having with my father and my aunt. Yes, I'm part Italian and I had to explain to them that my great grandparents (Their grandparents) were in the technical sense illegal immigrants too.

    Not to mention I had to point out the discrimination that Italians faced in this part of the U.S. back in the early 20th century.

  • 125. Regan DuCasse  |  May 8, 2010 at 8:21 am

    Can't stay on point, can you Fiona? If you have to run all over the place with such ridiculous statements about how many children illegal aliens have, and they are paying sales taxes sufficient to compare, then you didn't bring much to this debate.

    You just can't bring yourself to say that it's a problem. You just can't bring yourself to say that acting unethically so that accountability is difficult, or how unfair it all is to legally processed immigrants is wrong.

    You can't bring yourself to say that perhaps some cities really CAN'T accommodate ALL the illegal immigrants who want to come, and perhaps a great deal of legal ones too.
    That's not bigotry, that's preserving the ability to function to meet everyone's needs.

    And you just don't have any better ideas yourself than to complain, name call or use a condescending tone against a fair question about accountability.

    You're right, that the Times Square bomber came legally through the system.
    So did the Ft. Hood shooter. So did Mohammed Atta, remember him?

    That's what SLEEPER cells do. And that's what GANG members do. And that's what smugglers do.
    That's why our legalization process has to give a LOT more scrutiny to people traveling from areas where the most activity of this sort fuels the problems.

    And out of seriously misguided political correctness, our country, and people like YOU think we can handle letting things go, and letting people go, no matter what it's about. It's costing people their lives (on both ends of this) and the security and cohesion of our country.

    I'm brown skinned, you're not. So perhaps I'd be more at risk of getting the attention of peace officers because of that, according to you.

    I work alongside law enforcers. I live in a ground zero city for the kinds of problems I doubt YOU see everyday like I do.
    Being sympathetic isn't cred. And there ARE limits to the jobs, resources and infrastructure some communities can handle.

  • 126. fiona64  |  May 8, 2010 at 8:55 am

    Regan, I didn't say anything about illegal aliens having children. If you go back, you will see l about having children *period.* This is exactly what I said: Where is your argument against allowing people to give birth?

    Where is the outrage, since *you* were one talking about how many people a given area can accommodate?

    Of course, now you want to pretend that I live in some insulated little world and have never seen any problem. Whatever, lady. Go ahead with your fantasy life. I live in the SF Bay Area, and have lived in various parts thereof (including a not-very-nice neighborhood in the East Bay).

    You're a xenophobe. That comes through loud and clear. I have no use for people like you. I wonder where you developed such self-loathing, though, and I pity you for it.

    Good day.

  • 127. Wolfinlv  |  May 9, 2010 at 2:48 am

    I hate to be on the right wing side of this but I am. I work at a store that has day laborers out front. Most of them are undocumented. This takes money out of the tax coffers, they go to ER if they are sick and take money out of the tax coffers. And they frankly harass anyone who so much as slows down. It's against the law in Nevada to be without documentation. IE if I were stopped and unable to produce valid identification I would be cited and possibly arrested. After being arrested or possibly before I would have my name ran for any outstanding warrants etc. Being in the country illegally is just that being here against the law therefore they have broken the law.

    I do agree that we should have equal rights to bring out partners here under the immigration laws. BUT I do think that the police should be able to do something about the guys standing in parking lots gambling, loitering, urinating behind the dumpster and harassing people as they enter our shopping complex. I know of many people who won't shop at our store because of this and we are powerless to do anything about it as they aren't on the stores property.

  • 128. Regan DuCasse  |  May 9, 2010 at 3:13 am

    Okay, whether you were talking about limiting births for legal or illegal immigrants. It was STILL not relevant to the basis of what I'm talking about.
    And a stupid thing to say and indicative of you not being able to stay on point.

    So now, you expect me to have outrage about…the government not limiting the birth rate? Stupid again.

    And I don't have to pretend anything about you being insulated from the problems, but that you're not acknowledging that's there IS a problem.
    And it's also irrelevant where YOU live. I don't care, and I doubt anyone else does to.
    So you've lived in not so nice parts of SF.
    Who cares?

    And expecting anyone who lives here to be identifiable and accounted for, while we have people who exploit illegal immigrants AND illegal immigration is unacceptable for ANYONE.
    That's not xenophobia. It's what EVERYONE else has to do.

    I don't understand why you think committing whatever felonies is acceptable. I don't understand why you think cheating those who have legally processed is unacceptable.
    And I don't understand why the obvious economic destabilization, lack of jobs and enough health care coverage isn't available to who is legal here.

    There ARE limits to resources and infrastructure.

    That's not xenophobia either. But calling names sure is easier instead of having any bright ideas about SOLVING THE PROBLEM.

    And, I highly doubt that immigration reform will help the LGBT in any way. It's going to help STRAIGHT people, and gay folks will be out in the cold all over again, as they are now.

    Get a grip.
    If I were a xenophobe, I wouldn't engage in the volunteer work I do, nor my profession and I wouldn't be allowed to.
    NOBODY gets to commit felonies and not be held accountable for it.
    And someone here illegally shouldn't be able to take on a fake name and ss# and work illegally or HIRE illegally and get away with it.
    YOU wouldn't be able to. So it makes no sense that an American citizen go to jail for doing it, but an illegal immigrant be allowed to walk the streets?!

    That's exactly what's demoralizing about the effects of non enforcement of the laws and unfairly giving benefits and accommodation, where jail and deportation is supposed to be the essential rule.
    DISINCENTIVE to do it.

    If there are no disincentives, if there is no enforcement, then the laws might as well not be there in the first place.

    That's not xenophobia, that's called ORGANIZATION around identity and vetting for backgrounds and qualifications to be here.

    It's sensible for planning around safety and security…and the ability to absorb and assimilate in a timely and effective way.

    I shouldn't even have to be telling you THAT.
    But, taking a cheap shot at me and name calling is only your way of deflecting from the impetus behind what AZ has to do, and what CA and so many other places must as well.

    It's much easier to call me all kinds of hater, instead of WELL QUALIFIED to talk about his because of MY ethnicity, color….and profession and location.
    Even as a civil rights advocate. There's a right way and a wrong way to go about this and there are categories of people who are culturally and ethnically separate from this issue.
    And that would be the LGBT.
    So, it's only comingled in that our laws treat gays and lesbians unequally.

    But that's here AND elsewhere in the world.

    It's still no excuse for the VAST majority of straight illegal aliens who can't be accounted for to not be.

    A VAST majority, who have more majority power and vitality to fight for the economic justice or other social necessities that they deserve from their homelands.
    I can understand if they want this country to support them in that, to give incentives for that.
    To help search and find a respective MLKing who can stir up the masses for change where they are from.

    But to demand that felony behavior and radical subversion of our culture and it's rules of accommodation be ignored or forgiven isn't right and never will be right.

    That's NOT how minorities in this country and during the Civil Rights era did it. They didn't commit FELONIES or displace anyone during a certain process.

    And this country became a better place without displacing it's legal residents, subverting it's culture or the intents and purposes of immigration and accountability here and elsewhere.

    This is very different, this whole situation. Not so much for gays and lesbians here and elsewhere, but certainly for who is marching and making demands at this time.

    Being identified and accountable is something we ALL have to do. THAT is equal treatment under the law.
    If someone doesn't want to adhere to that standard, prefers to commit other felonies to subvert that, and get away with it, THAT'S not equal treatment, that's deferred preferential treatment.
    If it's unacceptable for you and me, it's unacceptable for everyone.

  • 129. Regan DuCasse  |  May 9, 2010 at 3:21 am

    I just realized I had a lot of typos. Did have my coffee yet.
    What I was trying to say is that we DO have limited jobs, health care coverage and other infrastructure to take care of even legal residents.

    And expecting that everyone who is living here NOT be identified and accountable is ridiculous.

    Anyway, I hope you're done. We're done. So next time I strap on a bulletproof vest, or have to go to another incident of rape by coyote or their human contraband (who will never been found) or another dead illegal immigrant whose relatives will never see them again…or what happened to them.
    I'm sure they'd like to know you care…sugar.

  • 130. Regan DuCasse  |  May 9, 2010 at 3:47 am

    Wolfinlv, I can tell you about the street vending that goes on, that undercuts businesses that are operating under code and with overhead to pay. I can tell you about the higher incidence of TB, HepA and bird flu risks because of people keeping farm animals in their URBAN homes, against city regulations.

    I can tell you about rapes, and domestic violence and traffic incidents that occur with illegal aliens who make processing any DNA or fingerprint or name date difficult because of their illegal status.

    I can tell you about the overcrowding of public accommodations and not knowing who is who or knowing of men like you're talking about are sex offenders or other kinds of criminals. Even from where they are from.
    There have been too many cases to count of day laborers assaulting and murdering people who hire them.

    And with the economy the way it is, getting a job is less likely.
    MY first homicide was between such day laborers. The man they killed, was not identifiable because they'd bashed his head beyond recognition. It looked like a smashed cantaloupe. Making any fingerprint or other id impossible because he HAD no other id.
    And the men who killed him, didn't know who he was either. They were all Latino. By their facial bones and physiques, I guessed them to be El Salvadoran (I'm a forensic artist too). Not gang members. They were found only because patrol officers noticed them going into a liquor store, and they seemed to be splotched with blood. So they were caught within an hour of the crime. Literally red handed. There was still blood on their hands. My senior and I went to the jail to photograph them in situ.

    But what if any of them had decided to flee the country? Or the police not inquire or detain them while they were simply getting liquor?

    I say again, MAJOR crimes could have been prevented and are solved by routine traffic, street or commercial detention and inquiry into immigration status.
    It's as much a tool solving or preventing something as enforcement.
    Having the means of identifying individuals goes WAY beyond immigration, legal or illegal.

  • 131. Tim  |  May 9, 2010 at 6:20 am

    I agree! I do not leave my house without my ID. And that should be the same for all…

  • 132. Wolfinlv  |  May 9, 2010 at 1:35 pm

    Regan not sure why that's directed at me. I just said that we all should have Identification on us at all times. What your saying about deplorable conditions happened here as well we fixed it in our country… instead of coming here because we've fixed it stay there and make it better or come here legally.

  • 133. fiona64  |  May 10, 2010 at 1:29 am

    Blah blah blah, Regan.

    You proved my point with this sentence alone: And this country became a better place without displacing it’s legal residents, subverting it’s culture or the intents and purposes of immigration and accountability here and elsewhere.

    I wonder what the indigenous people think about your concepts about subversion of culture, etc. …

    Fiona (who doesn't believe you have ever seen a bulletproof vest outside of television; it's easy to tell lies on the internet)

  • 134. fiona64  |  May 10, 2010 at 1:33 am

    Woflinlv wrote: It’s against the law in Nevada to be without documentation. IE if I were stopped and unable to produce valid identification I would be cited and possibly arrested.

    Nope. US citizens are not required to carry ID.


  • 135. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  May 10, 2010 at 2:00 am

    Thank you again Fiona! You are my hero on this issue, standing up against righteous hypocrisy. Whatever the crimes, problems, issues associated we are still talking about fellow human beings. Punishing MILLIONS of people because of crimes of a few is preposterous. We cannot continue to de-humanize each other or we are doomed as a species. History teaches us how we continually justify ourselves to treat each other badly.

  • 136. Regan DuCasse  |  May 10, 2010 at 2:43 am

    Fiona, apparently now, you had to reach WAY back into a history of this country, and reference the First People of it (with whom I also share close heritage), and yours is another example of not staying ON POINT.

    I'm still more brown skinned than you Fiona, and always will be. And the street cred, you've decided I lied about. Well, I don't know you from the bottom of my shoe either, but I've been far more respectful and civil than you've cared to be.
    I'm brown skinned, I know how it feels to be discriminated against, treated like an inferior and assumed to be something I'm not because of how I LOOK. So, shouldn't I have more to fear from this issue than YOU? Shouldn't I have more feelings of insecurity and undue scrutiny when I leave my house, than YOU?
    Aren't I better equipped to empathize than YOU, being that I'm the daughter of people raised under Jim Crow. Not YOU.
    And despite what you think I still have to be the one that takes more risks, gets my hands dirty and has more direct contact with the more distasteful aspects of this problem, not YOU.
    And all these years, most of my life, advocating for gays and lesbians, doesn't disqualify the separate situation that governs their lives. It will ALWAYS be separate in how they benefit or don't because of minority status.
    They are a minority no matter where they are from, and here. And even THIS situation, won't help them no what kinds of reforms come down the pike.

    I learned about the right way and the wrong way to fight for civil rights. There have to be some ethical standards that illegal immigrants have to be compelled to understand. This is not an issue of equal treatment under the laws, but ignoring another system of laws for EVERYONE entirely, so as NOT to abide by them (or have them enforced) at all. Big difference.

    My family name, because of my ACLU employed uncle, is on a Constitutional precedent every lawyer in the state knows about.

    You could accuse me of lying about being brown skinned, too.
    Why not? That would be cheap and easy to do.

    YOU have no better ideas, but to insult, and throw a churlish cheap shot.
    So, you've stated your opinion, but your actual life, is far more in the abstract of it than mine.

    Hi Gregory from SLC!
    You're right, it IS wrong to dehumanize any population. But that's not what's happening here with my posts, anyway. Personally, I was talking about the chaos created when MILLIONS of people decide that they aren't or cannot be subject to how we organize legal immigration.

    And the results have been direct, negative and dangerous to EVERYONE including illegal immigrants themselves.

    Who offered no essential ideas that would help THIS situation in AZ, no acknowledgment of the negative impact of lack of enforcement or lack of identifying who is here and their condition or intents.
    Lots of rants and hysteria, and inflammatory talking points coming from those who support illegal immigration and illegal immigrants, but no serious reasoning on how to maintain a minimum of mistaken identity or a maximum effective cooperation with the local law enforcers.

    No, pretty much a lot of heat, with no light on this one.
    But at least we're having the discussion. It's been a slice people.

    I only addressed you because we are in accord about that. Being identifiable isn't a punishment, nor is it an act of corruption or abuse by any law enforcer who asks about it.

    And I don't see why any normal person would see it that way.

  • 137. fiona64  |  May 10, 2010 at 3:05 am

    Wow. For someone who claims to be the calm one here, you certainly have a lot of hysterical rhetoric and big capital letters to share …

    You argued that your reasons for being in favor of this prima facie racist law are because of crime — and I showed you proof that crime was *down.* You then tried to argue that it was because there was only so much room in the country — and when I asked you why you weren't arguing for birth limits, since children make no contribution to the economy (which was an argument you also tried to make about illegal immigrants), you sputtered a lot. When I showed you that illegal immigrants *do* make contributions to the economy, you sputtered some more.

    I give respect where it's earned, Regan. Everyone starts out with having 100 percent of my respect; what happens after that is up to them. You're right around 5 percent at this point, just so you know.

    These people are *here already,* Regan. You're advocating slamming the door after the horse has run away. You're advocating racial profiling — you admit it. I don't know what you're trying to accuse me of, other than being a white woman who happens to understand that, whether I like it or not, I am automatically afforded a certain degree of privilege — and yet I manage to be vehemently anti-racist. I wonder why that is?

    In my opinion, your outrage is pointed in the wrong direction. You have continued to blithely ignore the other matters I brought up — such as how it is because of the US' intervention south of the border that so many people are trying to leave. You accuse me of not remaining on point because I bring up the history of the thing while you spout what amounts to racist epithets under the rubric of "I'm brown-skinned so it doesn't count."

    Maybe you are all of the things you claim, Regan. I could be an astronaut and the Queen of Sheba, too. The internet is an easy place to say you are whatever you want to be.

    The idea that I cannot possibly know the first thing about crime or illegals because I'm white? *You're* the one who said that. What a patently ridiculous thing to have said. Sure, you don't know me, either — but you made a while lot of presumptions. Why *shouldn't* I presume you're talking through your hat?

    Here is what I do know, Regan. I stand up against hate speech, racism, anti-GLBT comments, etc., wherever I find them. That includes *here.*

  • 138. fiona64  |  May 10, 2010 at 3:06 am

    PS to Hysteria Queen Regan:

    "Maximum effective cooperation with the local law enforcers" requires community support. Just so you know. How many Latino/a people in the community (citizens or not) do you think are going to rat out their friends to ICE after they've been stopped in public for being brown?

  • 139. fiona64  |  May 10, 2010 at 3:13 am

    From this morning's Sacramento Bee:

    Bashing Immigrants: It's As American as Apple Pie


    On the West Coast, beginning not long after the Gold Rush, the targets were the Chinese, who were excluded by federal law beginning in 1882, and the Japanese who, if they were not similarly shut out, would, in the words of Californians like Bee publisher V.S. McClatchy, "insure … within a few generations, the inundation of the white population in this country by the yellow race." Asians could never become Americans – were genetically and culturally unfit to assimilate, McClatchy said in a brief addressed to U.S. Secretary of State Charles Evans Hughes in 1921. But among the things that made them a particular danger was that in their willingness to work harder than native Americans, they took our jobs and lowered our wages.

    Gosh, some of those arguments look familiar …


  • 140. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  May 10, 2010 at 3:29 am

    I appreciate all for discussing this issue, someone rationally. I do not live Regan or Fiona's life. I can only speak from my perspective. From my standpoint, yesterday I had to endure my families many unintentional racial slurs and endorsements during mom’s day dinner. Some of my family likes the idea of kicking out all the brown people….while somehow overlook that my South American Partner and my Peruvian Nephew in law are sitting at the same dinner table. Sure they seem compassionate and respectful in their tone but have no clue how biases and dominant group centrist they sound.

    It somehow seems the new Arizona Law has given many people free license and encouragement to be overtly racist. No matter the benefit of racial profiling…I cannot see how the cost of my partner and relatives and many others being humiliated further, and illogically discriminated is worth the cost. There MUST BE A BETTER WAY!

  • 141. Richard A. Walter (s  |  May 10, 2010 at 3:38 am

    You are so right, Gregory. There is a better way. It is called compassion and getting to know someone. Racism is never a good thing, and as far as any so-called "benefits" of profiling, I really don't see any benefits at all. When it comes to pofiling, All I see is a world of hurt and heartache. If we really wanted to do something about the problem, we would give the immigrants who are already here who are working a way to get their proper documentation and go through the citizenship process. That would make it easier toprotect the hard working ones while also being able to find the ones who are committing crimes. And before anybody starts about breaking laws before they even get here, I have heard enough of the racist crap, okay?

  • 142. Ronnie  |  May 10, 2010 at 3:46 am

    EAT THIS!!!!!…..<3…Ronnie:

  • 143. Regan DuCasse  |  May 10, 2010 at 3:53 am

    I'm glad you stand up against hate speech, racism and anti LGBT comments. But you didn't hear any from me.
    And I do the same.
    I repeat, I didn't make any racist, anti LGBT comments. I made comments in support of enforcing an important system of laws that helps everyone, including illegal immigrants.
    I live in CA, in Los Angeles. And there have been incidents and serious problems that demand that NO enforcement and NO scrutiny come about.
    THAT is what's ridiculous. That our peace officers, all the agencies and all the people this effects demand that everyone look the other way and forget everything?
    That is ridiculous too.

    So, let's be clear about something Fiona, you put words in my mouth on some things. Especially regarding children. I said nothing about that. YOU did.
    I haven't really specified a nationality or color, YOU did.

    And there aren't unlimited and bottomless resources for everyone who shows up. That's a fact of life. And the rationing of legal immigration has gone on in the last century precisely because of the ease of travel, and requirement to know what a community or individual will need.

    As for 'already here', well…as what? Do you know, have enough information on that? Because there seems to be a blanket generalization regarding what the illegal immigrant population is comprised of.
    And no differentiation as to who is affecting what and how.
    I can't even get past the first hurdle of doing so before having to defend something I didn't do or say.

    As for being stopped for being brown. Well, again, that's an inflammatory interpretation of this new law, but it certainly works to stir up anger and resentment over something that is actually a matter of no exceptions anywhere.
    There shouldn't be.
    Racist law, eh?
    I'll ask you the question that got put out there by those opposed, it seems to ANY kind of laws requiring identification and accountability.

    Even though the law was specifically rewritten to clarify what the peace officers can or can't do.
    As I said, the thing about profiling, is it's now a dirty word and interpreted to mean some kind of breach of privacy or freedom, rather than an essential tool everyone one needs to apply in some way or another.
    But for those charged with yours and my safety, then they have to engage this tool, or get nothing accomplished.

    Well, I'll concede that you being white doesn't necessarily mean you're not sensitive and empathize, but racism and racial discrimination won't happen you.

    And you are seriously mistaken for calling me racist, anti LGBT or committing any form of hate speech.
    In fact, the internet is not only a place where someone could lie, but could also make the egregious mistake you just did by calling me that.

    I was being frank and honest and from a perspective of knowing who is being harmed by illegal immigration, more than illegal immigrants (or legal residents and citizens) being harmed by this law.
    Or ANY laws that have to rectify and reorganize accounting for illegal aliens.

    And what's this 'admit it' demand about advocating racial profiling?
    How can I advocate something that has nothing to do with race to begin with?

    Again, because I haven't mentioned the race, nor made any specific references to a culture or color in the first place. Or at least I've tried to avoid it, because it serves no purpose for getting at the heart of why we are having this discussion in the first place.

    Which is: the damaging affects of illegal immigration. The unfairness to legal residents it represents, and the lack of accountability for who is present in this country, whatever the reason.

    You making this into a screed on racism and so on, is misplaced.

    As for who is 'already here' and what to do. Well, it's still necessary as to what record of activity and what it's done will be important to determine, won't it? Because blanket amnesty will give cover and shelter to some very dangerous people, as sanctuary cities already have.
    We've been burned by that before, without enforcement accompanying that. So that revolving door reentry, even after deportation has been all too easy.
    We can't be having that.

    As for Latinos ratting out other Latinos…
    I didn't say anything about ethnicity or nationality when it comes to that, did I?
    You did.
    But since you opened the door, I'll say this.

    Looks to me like the real rats are those that exploit this situation and are able to abuse, blackmail and violate illegal immigrants enough.
    Which includes some of our elected officials, corporations, trade unions, travel and hospitality, and manufacturers, and so on.

    The captains of industry are just as guilty as coyotes, drug smugglers and others who benefit, but leave you and me, the tax payer to pick up the tab for all the other expenses that this situation requires us to pay for.
    Including the salaries of the law enforcers and immigration agencies.

    If anything Latinos are exploiting Latinos over this, and the moral and ethical implications of that aren't about racism, but hurting those who are the most vulnerable.

    But this also occurs among other immigrant communities as well.

    So, calling me a racist doesn't address who is doing the most harm here. And it's not me, and it's not law enforcement officers…who have to do SOMETHING because chaos is winning.

    So I ask you….you have a better idea?


  • 144. Regan DuCasse  |  May 10, 2010 at 4:05 am

    That's funny. Michael Jackson was someone clearly conflicted about HIS ethnicity.
    I know why his skin became that color. I also have vitiligo, and my dermatologist showed me a book on medical conditions in which someone black or dark skinned, turned white all over.

    Doesn't explain his hair, nose jobs and associations and the children he had, eradicating him being a black man at all.

    I see why he hid his children until the day he died. They aren't black children, therefore, they aren't his biologically.

    Michael Jackson rejected being a black man, even being a man, some might argue.
    But idealized himself as a hero, and an ambassador for race relations.
    Yet, wasn't either.
    And there's a lot of violence in this video. The Native Americans come in shooting.

    Nice try though.

  • 145. Ronnie  |  May 10, 2010 at 4:14 am

    "I can feel what was bothering Marvin…Why his words forever remain…Dealing with these modern day problems…'Cause of ignorance surrounding me and my constituents…Too many infected…Too many lives diminishing…Nobody say Protestants, Jews, Blacks, and Whites, Latinos and Asians…Pray together…Less fight…We better unite…As genocide chemical war…And the rich and the poor…Know that God delivers a cure"

  • 146. Regan DuCasse  |  May 10, 2010 at 4:16 am

    Girl, please.
    You really just can't bring yourself to consider how this situation has flipped and is very different from the issue in this article.

    This isn't a matter of perception, and yours is right and mine is wrong.
    And the reason why abuses, or serious mistakes are possible is precisely because there hasn't been ENOUGH organization around dealing with this problem.

    Why do you keep commenting on this as if it's NOT a problem, or that ANY enforcement is somehow unfair and punitive?

    Tell me in your own words, fiona. Anybody?

    How is it racist, to get serious about illegal immigrants doing things legally?
    Being fearful, or resentful of this law because of who you think will be more impacted, isn't right either.
    They will be impacted as a coincidence of being the biggest demographic in certain areas where there is concentration.

    Would it make you feel better if EVERYONE were detained, just so it doesn't look racist?

    Who deserves to bear the bigger brunt of this situation?
    Legal or illegal immigrants?

    Who do you think is bearing the bigger brunt of NOT enforcing immigration laws?
    That is the most important question, and I really want an honest answer to this last one.

  • 147. fiona64  |  May 10, 2010 at 4:27 am

    Regan wrote: Well, I’ll concede that you being white doesn’t necessarily mean you’re not sensitive and empathize, but racism and racial discrimination won’t happen you.

    Of course, in Regan-land, I won't be subject to any other sorts of discrimination for being female, middle-aged, etc. Those things just never happen, right?

    Regan, everything I brought up was in response to something you said. You said there wasn't enough room, I asked why there was no campaign for birth limits. You insisted it wasn't about race, I asked about why we aren't worried about the Northern border with these laws if that's the case. (BTW, the Northern border, according to security experts, is far more of a concern — just one of many articles, with references, may be found here:…. You didn't have anything to say about that matter; I know, because I went back and looked.

    You insisted it was about crime, and I showed recent data that indicates crime is *down* across all southern border states, and in the predominantly immigrant towns of AZ specifically.

    Sure, not all LEOs are jerks. However, when you consider that Joe Arpaio has been merrily conducting illegal/unconstitutional sweeps long before this law even goes into effect — many of which caught up legal US citizens who, as has been pointed out repeatedly, are NOT required to carry ID on their persons.

    So, yes. I have a better idea. Let's stop the US tradition of scapegoating immigrants for all of our problems. Let's look at *why* the problems happened in their own countries (google Pinochet for a start …) and understand that people are trying to escape conditions that the US put into place. And then let's figure out how to appropriately provide amnesty to people who are already here. You know, the "tired and poor" that the Statue of Liberty talks about.

  • 148. David Kimble  |  May 10, 2010 at 4:29 am

    @ Reagan DuCasse – The reality is this – illegal immigrants are here – how do you propose dealing with them? They come to America seeking work – most are not here to commit crimes (I will acknowledge a small percentage of them do commit crimes). Most do jobs that others in America consider beneath them, jobs like, picking fruit, pruning the trees in orchards, etc. How do you propose keeping them out of America? Fences serve two purposes – to keep things in and to keep things out. I don't believe we should be erecting fences in the first place. There is always a way around fences.
    <3 David

  • 149. fiona64  |  May 10, 2010 at 4:29 am

    Regan, I've answered your questions repeatedly. It is hardly my fault that you don't like facts when they are presented to you.

    It is not one *bit* different than it was in previous times; the only thing that has changed is the skin color/ethnicity of the chosen scapegoats. That you cannot see this shows that you are being deliberately obtuse.

    Good day.

  • 150. fiona64  |  May 10, 2010 at 4:32 am

    Yep. Some 25 percent of agricultural jobs, 15 percent of food prep, 15 percent of hotel jobs (housekeeping and the like) according to a recent article. That means that payroll taxes are being paid. They buy things with their wages. They are trying to better themselves and their situation.

    "Round 'em up and send 'em back" is both naive and wrong-headed.

    I like your comment about fences, BTW.


  • 151. fiona64  |  May 10, 2010 at 4:34 am

    PS to David: the majority of crimes surrounding illegal immigrants finds them as *victims,* as they try to escape from drug-dealing cartels, etc., who hunt them and kill them. :-(


  • 152. fiona64  |  May 10, 2010 at 4:35 am

    PS to Regan, who insists that the issues are different:

    Dear lady, you might want to go back and look at your comments about how US culture is being subverted … and then re-read McClatchy's comments about how the Chinese would never "assimilate."



  • 153. David Kimble  |  May 10, 2010 at 4:46 am

    @fiona64 – Yeppers, I agree – most crimes do find them, as victims. <3 David

  • 154. Regan DuCasse  |  May 10, 2010 at 4:55 am

    And Gregory, SLC
    I feel for you, more than you know. Because I have white in laws that treated me similarly, their racial insensitivity was extremely damaging.

    I would never say anything about 'kicking all the brown people out' and I haven't here. That's not even how I feel.
    I have gay couple friends who are bi national in many ways, where both or one are from another country and without benefit of marrying to naturalize.
    Which is why, for the same reasons as before, this law will largely benefit straight illegal immigrants. Not gay ones.
    I said much earlier that asylum, or separate adjudication is needful because one could argue there is a determined lack of equal opportunity in native countries as well as here for gays and lesbians.

    But that is a matter of what you ARE, not what you're doing TO someone.
    And illegal immigration, directly or indirectly does affect other people.
    We know that our own laws and most prominent issues concerning gays and lesbians are inherently spiteful, and disqualifies a gay citizen from full protection and participation, no matter what they do that's legally and supportive and what all other people are doing.
    There is no accommodation necessary to continue to go on as you are.

    But that's not true of illegal immigration and the degree of impact.
    And the impact is very serious for a lot of different reasons. Not just a few.
    I've named several, but not all.

    With what happens to gays and lesbians is much more personal.
    When it comes to illegal immigration, it's not.
    And especially over the most basic principle of identification and accountability.
    I repeat, especially identification and accountability.
    That is something we have to do the same way. It's what required of all of us.
    To say that illegal immigrants shouldn't be required, or forgiven not adhering to what is a blanket law for everyone, that's not equal treatment.
    And as I said, it's not punitive or abusive to expect it.

    It's preferential treatment to allow and disregard behavior that you and I would go to jail for. To say nothing of unjust.

    So this isn't about what a person IS, but what they do, and giving the agencies, and law enforcers better understanding and better tools with which to get this situation under control.
    And you and I, and fiona and whoever…do no service to this situation with name calling and sniping.

    I have a depth of experience that's very different than yours, but I got put down for having it, instead of being questioned about what I know of the laws, even if not in AZ.
    I have already conceded that there have been incidents of abuse and corruption when it comes to detention by some, and thankfully a few, individual peace officers.

    But that happens too, because of the same nastiness and assumptions that the police are doormen and not the difference between YOU being violated as well.

    I see nobody here wants to help the police NOT make mistakes. Or engage them in more intimate and careful knowledge and sensitivity towards whoever this will affect.
    If I'd heard at all, just ONCE, that perhaps those this concerns the most, should consider ways no mistakes or unnecessary problems will happen by doing what I suggested, then I might think some people here were serious about making a major problem be minimized with less damage all around to trust and cooperation.

    But no.
    More name calling and accusations of racism on the part of the people who wrote this law, and how it'll be enforced.

    Where I volunteer, we get all kinds of young people who have been convicted of misdemeanor hate crimes. Usually they aren't felonies, but these kids are on their way and we are there to intervene and teach them what to do.
    Or, if they are anti law enforcement, the same program applies.

    This thread has been a teaching moment for me at how casually a nasty name gets thrown out. How easily such first resort is taken. Fists up at any challenge to a matter of differentiation when it comes to equal standards of laws and interpretation and affect.
    And the urgency that precipitated all of this to begin with.

    Move along…nothing to see here.

  • 155. Richard A. Walter (s  |  May 10, 2010 at 5:01 am

    And I have even seen cases where the drug cartels would have someone plant illegal drugs in their vehicles while they were at work, then place anonymous calls to the local tip lines just to make sure they were arrested.

  • 156. Regan DuCasse  |  May 10, 2010 at 5:41 am

    Fiona, I know about that article, I read it myself.
    When I'm talking about subverting the culture, it's not a racially insensitive statement, but one from seeing our nation's elected leaders apologizing for what we expect from ALL people who live in this country.

    We shouldn't be having flag wars in any communities. We shouldn't be accommodating ONE language other than English, because it would be unfair for those who speak the many other languages that are brought to this country.
    Ethnic, or cultural identity IS embraced in this country. Anyone is free to speak their language, congregate and associate freely with those that do, create supportive communities that share the same.
    And invite and engage their American neighbors to experience it in healthy and educational ways.
    This all acceptable and we do accept that.

    However, the expectation to never learn how to understand or speak English, not learn the cultural environment of this country and be responsible and accountable, isn't.
    We DO have a culture. We DO expect respect for it, and we DO conduct our government, and it's written laws in English.
    We NEED a unifying and cohesion inducing set of standards that not only everyone can live with, but is expected to.
    We NEED it because we can fragment over such basics as language, and coexistent responsibility.

    It's not racist to expect someone to speak the language of this country. It's not racist to expect that our customs, and cultural standards are understood and agreed upon.

    And we have them. And it hasn't been healthy to pretend like we don't. And our leaders practically committing treason to accommodate the outrageous demands of other countries and it's citizens that depend on us.

    It's not culturally insensitive to expect you to KNOW about our laws and your responsibility to them. We had to learn them too. You and I have to, so treating certain members of residence here like babies, only serves to increase a permanent underclass and separate laws.

    And it's extremely difficult to accommodate a huge wave of people so fast, months and months on end, without relief, who are so dependent, and without the incentive TO adhere to participating in our culture.
    Eventually, there will be a disruption somewhere of just what a community can do to accommodate the limits of language skills and so on.

    THAT is what subverting an American community is. When it's no longer that at all, and the residents aren't conducting themselves, business or anything else in coexistent ways, but completely and profoundly separate ways.

    I've had some interesting experiences with newcomers who don't like blacks. How strange is it to choose to come to a country where blacks are part of the culture ( and it's no surprise), but you don't want to have to deal with any?
    See what I mean?
    This is a country of some passing strange shit as it is.

  • 157. fiona64  |  May 10, 2010 at 5:47 am

    PS to Regan: If you think that I have never been subjected to bigotry because of my skin color, you can think again. While racism is an institutionalized situation (which is why I will continue to maintain that SB1070 is racist), any damned fool can be a bigot.

    One of these days I will tell the story of how the DoD sent me to work for a black woman who resented the hell out of educated white people (like me …) and what came from that. But now is not the time.

    Have a splendid day.

  • 158. fiona64  |  May 10, 2010 at 5:54 am

    You know what, Regan? I have one last question for you.

    Please tell me how this SB1070 law will help stop illegal immigration. I'm curious.

    That said, you wrote: And especially over the most basic principle of identification and accountability.
    I repeat, especially identification and accountability.
    That is something we have to do the same way. It’s what required of all of us.

    WRONG. No US citizen is required to carry identification. Ask one of your "friends in law enforcement."

    This is not something that we all have to do the same way. madame. Legal citizens are not required to carry anything, and illegal immigrants don't have anything. So, how do we differentiate? Everyone just has their constitutional rights against illegal search and seizure violated so that we can maybe, just maybe, we can catch someone doing something?

    I don't think you understand the real implications of what you support. :-(

  • 159. fiona64  |  May 10, 2010 at 5:56 am

    Regan wrote (emphasis added): However, the expectation to never learn how to understand or speak English, not learn the cultural environment of this country and be responsible and accountable, isn’t. We DO have a culture. We DO expect respect for it, and we DO conduct our government, and it’s written laws in English. We NEED a unifying and cohesion inducing set of standards that not only everyone can live with, but is expected to. We NEED it because we can fragment over such basics as language, and coexistent responsibility.

    Yep, no bigotry there at all …

    You do know that it takes *years* to become fluent in English, right? That even naturalized citizens are not always fluent in it? Heck, I could make an argument after visits to some rural locations that there are natural-born citizens whose fluency is a little lacking. (BTW, no one brought up an expectation against learning to speak English … that's why there are ESL classes all over the place … except for you.)

  • 160. Ronnie  |  May 10, 2010 at 6:03 am

    "If you walk the footsteps of a stranger, you'll learn things you never knew"…..<3…Ronnie

  • 161. Richard A. Walter (s  |  May 10, 2010 at 6:29 am

    And even among those who ARE fluent in English, I have seen discrimination. If you don't believe that, look at the recent suicide of a young lady from Ireland who was bullied in part because of her Irish brogue. Then tell me that discrimination is only against those who are brown-skinne or darker. And I have felt the sting of being called bigoted names because of my skin color, and I sunbrun easily. And most of the comments I have endured have come from people who are brown-skinned or even the color of a hHershey bar. So please, get off your high horse and rejoin the real world. You expect empathy fro others you need to show empathy yourself. As an old Native American proverb says: "Never let me judge another until I have walked a mile in his mocassins."
    I absolutely abhor discrimination against others, regardless of what form it takes. And I especially hate it when someone who benefits from an organization that has Jews in its founding membership try to say that those of us who are fair-skinned have never felt the sting of being dehumanized because of our skin tone. That is a bunch of elitist crap, and you know it. In fact, let me take you to some different sites and show you some of the comments from people of color which state "WHITES need not apply." But I guess since it is coming from someone of color, it is not racist. Bull Hockey! NO matter who is degrading or refusing to associate with someone of another skin tone, it is racist. We are all part of one race, and one race only –the HUMAN race. Now, please try to take your anger and channel it into something positive instead of railing against someone who is of a lighter skin tone than you are. Racism is racism, regardless of whose mouth it comes out of or who it is directed against.

  • 162. Regan DuCasse  |  May 10, 2010 at 7:47 am

    Richard, I was personally attacked, and responded to an individual who did so.
    And in being put in the defensive position here, had to show that I do empathize more than I get credit for.

    There is a line here.
    One that is a function of how to identify and account for everyone that lives here.
    And those who refuse to cooperate with the system of laws that provide for it.

    Now, I never said that people of color, gays, even women…haven't been subject to more abuse by some of our laws than others.
    But it's no excuse to allow some to break serious laws, and others to not.
    At first, I didn't specify anything to do with color, or racial or ethnic identity.

    But you forced that, because that's all you're focused on and not the basis of what's happening.

    Richard, who are to talking to?

    Because I wasn't the one saying that it's only brown skinned people who suffer from racist policies. Indeed, this whole discussion regarding the laws in AZ, refer to nothing else BUT darker skinned people being abused by it. And I have not said anything about that at all.

    And I have spoken of nothing else except that it's not acceptable that there are people allowed to NOT INTEGRATE, nor be a part of what life is expected of them in America, whether native or foreign born.

    That there are millions in this country, not held accountable even for identifying who they are, why they here and their intentions for life here.
    I was hoping to keep it there, right where the issue belongs.

    But, being that it's a complex, not simple issue. The emotional screeds kicked in about racist laws, and racist cops and that I'm a bigot for pointing out that we all have to adhere to certain standards and there really can't be any exceptions regarding being able to identify and account for who is here.

    I had suggestions for making this law less abusive, or reducing any mistakes or corruption that might occur, but no….nothing but criticism, complaints, finger pointing and name calling.

    You're right Fiona, there ARE ELS courses all over the place. So…why am I a bigot if, given all that opportunity, there are people who refuse to learn such an IMPORTANT thing as the language of the country you've adopted?
    No is FORCED to learn English, are they? Nor have I advocated or even suggested that they be forced to.
    But just as you're saying there are those born here who cannot grasp English well, what happens is that marginalization is likely.

    And that's obviously what can happen to anyone English illiterate and the danger of being misunderstood and misunderstanding casual or inevitable encounters or situations.Why is it bigoted to know that or say that?

    So Richard, now you're saying you've experienced bigotry from those who are dark skinned, and you DO know what it feels like to have racist sentiment thrown at you.
    I never said that it's impossible for someone of color to not be a bigot. I never said it didn't happen.
    But THIS black woman didn't do it to you, or anyone else.
    And I wouldn't and I haven't. And since you concede that bigotry does come in all colors, then why assume there is no bigotry among the very demographic we're discussing?

    This subject went from a NEED to organize illegal immigrants and standards of enforcement to complaints about who will be most affected by this law.
    Who, in border states will most likely be Latino, but that's not true everywhere and it's not just dark skinned people who will be affected.

    The real world, Richard?
    And suddenly I don't have it now? Because why?

    Those moccasins I have walked in, was learning another language, working in another country as a guest worker, being subjected to harsh work conditions and ruining my hands from repetitive, useless, low paying jobs.

    Losing ten aunts and uncles in their childhoods because of the poverty my field worker paternal grandmother endured. Knowing how Jim Crow punished my maternal grandparents and my parents. Watching my city burn down TWICE because of racial indifference between civilians and the police.
    Seeing Latino children and black children beat and stab each other in race riots in their high schools, prompted by the race riots in the prisons some of their relatives are incarcerated in.
    Walk in their shoes?
    You WOULD get all self righteous about discrimination and bigotry, yet you think you recognize it with me?

    When a person is breaking the laws for unspecified reasons we cannot discern or identify, THEY are not being discriminated against when it's something you and I have to abide by as well.
    What WOULD be discriminatory, is showing preference and deference to those who behave this way, and YOU wouldn't be if you did the same thing.

    As I said before, something you forgot ALL about.
    Harvard is a better, more prestigious college than the one I went to.
    I could cheat and get into Harvard, even do well enough to graduate.
    But I still displaced the rightful entrant, when there are limited spaces at Harvard.
    Now, I could also be someone who wants to be at that school because there are people there who have the money to buy my drugs, and other things I manage to smuggle in there.
    But, unless I can identify myself and be accounted for, NONE of that means anything.
    And a lot of harm was done in other ways.

    All that matters is the rightful entrant was treated unfairly and his efforts rendered meaningless.

    Illegal immigration is unfair and discriminatory to those who processed legally, and it's wrongful to go around our system (as imperfect as it is, but still generous) and not be held accountable when everyone is for doing the same thing.

    Now, you can rant all you want about ME being a bigot for pointing that out. You can criticize the law as unfair, or discriminatory because SOMEONE isn't going to like it, no matter who they are.

    But after all this, you STILL haven't made a suggestion as to what can be meaningful to the concept of legal entry and the importance of it.

    I don't believe you really do know what bigotry and discrimination is. You wouldn't use those words so casually and direct them so wrongfully if you did.

    As I also said before, I don't think we could really accommodate the sheer numbers of people who want to be here, in the time they do and the conditions they expect.
    We couldn't in the best of times.
    And these, are not those times.

    So think again about what this issue is really about.
    The most difficult of gays and lesbians, check. I already said that I know why.
    That darker skinned people might be most affected.
    Check, AZ is a border state to a dark skinned nation, that's inevitable.

    Tell you what, why don't you try working under another name and ss# and not pay federal taxes for a while.
    YOU will have to go to jail. The illegal immigrant who does it. Not so.
    It happened here in Southgate.
    But hey, it's racist to think it wrong that should happen to you, right?
    Or am I not empathizing enough?

  • 163. Ronnie  |  May 10, 2010 at 7:52 am

    "We are the world…We are the Children…We are the one that make a better day…so let's start giving"…..<3…Ronnie:

  • 164. fiona64  |  May 10, 2010 at 8:25 am

    My goodness. Yet another screed, and nowhere in it is the answer to my simple question: How will SB1070 *stop illegal immigration*?


    Regan wrote: So…why am I a bigot if, given all that opportunity, there are people who refuse to learn such an IMPORTANT thing as the language of the country you’ve adopted?

    What makes you so certain people are refusing to learn to speak English, Regan? The fact that they have the audacity to speak their native language among friends and relatives? In public, yet? Perhaps they are not very confident in their English, as is the case with a woman I know who is a naturalized citizen from Nicaragua (her family sought and received political asylum). Because she is embarrassed that her English is not very good, her daughter translates in most transactions so that she may be better understood. But this does not indicate a refusal to learn English. I wonder why you assume that people are refusing when it could be a case like my acquaintance. Or, of course, they could be pretending not to speak English because they are afraid of you … for reasons that I simply can't imagine.


  • 165. fiona64  |  May 10, 2010 at 8:30 am

    Regan said: I never said that it’s impossible for someone of color to not be a bigot. I never said it didn’t happen.

    Really, because you wrote this: Well, I’ll concede that you being white doesn’t necessarily mean you’re not sensitive and empathize, but racism and racial discrimination won’t happen you.

    Hmm. You said I would not be subject to racism (true, since it is an institutionalized matter) or racial discrimination (not true, because I have experienced it). You don't get to have it both ways, Regan.

  • 166. David Kimble  |  May 10, 2010 at 8:33 am

    What's wrong this discussion is that we are all members of the same genus (Human) and why should we have borders in the first place? Borders are a man-made contrivance to place some above others in a society. It should come as no surprise, then that there are citizens of world, who hold a view that others are less than others. It is demeaning and disruptive at best and at worst it is repeating the jewish holocaust all over again. I am personally abhorent of intolerance and the like. Just as, when we were in grade school, there was the bully in the playground. I learned a long time ago to ignore the bullies, as it gives them no voice and their bullying abates quickly, else they lose all respect from their peers. <3 David

  • 167. David Kimble  |  May 10, 2010 at 8:38 am

    oops, instead of "repeating the jewish holocaust all over again" should be "repeating the jewish holocaust and the genocide of races throughout history."

  • 168. Ronnie  |  May 10, 2010 at 8:46 am

    So true David K….The Earth shook when the Berlin Wall came down…Now here in the Land of the Free to Be Like Me…I mean Land of the Free…people are trying to build an "Alamo Wall"…..

    Let's tear down the preverbal wall….<3…Ronnie:

  • 169. Regan DuCasse  |  May 10, 2010 at 8:46 am

    You asked me a question fiona. How this law will 'stop illegal immigration'?
    It's a similar question I already asked you 'how is it racist'?

    Both questions are broad ones. And the answers require conjecture because the law isn't even in effect yet.
    Perhaps they won't stop illegal immigration. Not entirely and not from certain countries.
    Each situation of illegal immigration will likely need many solutions and plans, in addition to this one.
    You're right, there isn't a requirement to carry id with you. But there is when going about certain activity, like operating a car, your job and entering an airplane or when you are in need of medical services.

    There's requirement for identification if you are a foreign visitor or legal resident of foreign birth.
    A requirement of proof you are who you say you are, when entering this country.
    It's not REQUIRED, but it's a good idea to have it to hand, or have it….in case you're asked to prove you are who you say you are.

    How to differentiate?
    In what way do you mean? One can't differentiate a child sex offender from a middle school teacher.
    They can be one in the same, right?
    So, if you're asking in context to illegal immigrants, then one can't really. There has to be OTHER factors beyond looks for a peace officer to do that. If he needs to at all.

    But, for the sake of answering you as thoughtfully as I can, we have a lot of industrial parks, and construction sites and places where day laborers congregate. There are known areas of the city where gangs are entrenched, and it's necessary to start there and at least vet the backgrounds of those involved in criminal activity.
    It's not always just the looks of the person that differentiates them, but their activity.
    Starting with businesses and examining the status of their employees is a place to start.

    Unless a knot of people, engaged in activity that attracts unlawful behavior like drag racing, drug dealing and public drinking, or lewdness, most peace officers really don't have the time to stop people based on their looks alone. Just walking down the street. It's a lot of people to cover, and most places don't have enough officers available to be THAT invasive.

    But once you DO get the attention of a peace officer, whether you're carrying any id or not. The officer might just be asking YOU if you saw something or someone he was looking for, it's not smart to get provocative and surly because he wanted to talk to you. If he asked you your name and where you live, what's the big deal cooperating with THAT?
    Why do YOU have a problem with that?

    Foreign mobs infest Los Angeles like you wouldn't believe. There was a massacre in a small cafe less than a mile from my house (and I live in a nice neighborhood in Studio City) that involved Armenians. Who did turn out to be very shady.
    I pass that cafe almost everyday. I heard about it first on the news, but the details about everything later at work.
    But damn…

    So, I have tried to answer your question as best I can. Knowing from experience, coming from a city that has serious troubles with illegal immigration and the corruption IT breeds.

    The point is that our nation and society is confronted with all kinds of crimes, displacement and lack of organization because of illegal immigrants and illegal immigration. Things that could be prevented, if our government and the agencies did their job. At airports, the borders and other ports of entry as well as the usual work sites.

    Non enforcement, especially if it comes to similar crimes done by Americans, law enforcement comes down harder on Americans.
    That ISN'T right or fair. It's quite unjust. That breeds distrust. It breeds distrust of foreigners, no matter their status. It breeds distrust of peace officers and any agent who is required to detain those not legally here.
    You do certain things in life to id yourself all the time.
    THEY don't have to come up with proof they are who they say they are.
    You and I DO.
    You call that racist? How is that racist to them, and NOT unfair to YOU and every other legal resident?

    Because the ethnicity of the person most likely to be questioned in a border state might be Latino, the response is to cry racism.
    I'm trying to be as clear as possible.

    If our country, only had a very tiny trickle of illegal immigrants, but each workplace or other situation cooperated in accounting for even that many, most Americans could be assured that everyone WAS legal and could be accounted for if necessary.

    But that's not the case.
    And…this issue does insult every National Guardsmen, Marine, Coast Guard or other service member who has risked life and limb and served to secure the borders of Pakistan or Afghanistan and Iraq, yet legal residents are endangered by a lack of the same here in America.

    That is not bigoted, that is a sad and ironic fact.
    That should NOT be happening.

    We CAN'T differentiate. Not because we couldn't or can't, if enforcement were strict and consistent.
    But because we wouldn't HAVE to if it were.

    Very recently, because of budget cuts, a large portion of the state prison population was released. No parole, no probation. There isn't the money.
    There has been a spike in all kinds of crimes. More police chases, more assaults in unlikely places, like Target stores and school yards.

    Now, if the police do some profiling of recently incarcerated people and their known associates, it would make sense.
    And perhaps prevent something awful from happening.

    You asked, and I tried to answer you respectfully. Try and dial down your hostile rhetoric, because it's very hard out there to protect people, no matter where they are from.
    Or how they got here.

  • 170. Ronnie  |  May 10, 2010 at 8:54 am

    "But I see your true colors shining through"….<3…Ronnie

  • 171. fiona64  |  May 10, 2010 at 9:07 am

    Regan asked: If he asked you your name and where you live, what’s the big deal cooperating with THAT?
    Why do YOU have a problem with that?

    Honestly? If I am not engaged in wrongdoing, if I am just walking down the street, I think I have the right to know a given LEO's index for suspicion. The question would be phrased very politely: "Is there a problem, officer?"

    We have a constitutional right to be secure in our persons, and not be subject to unlawful search and seizure.

    My point is and always has been that there is no way to differentiate between an illegal immigrant, a naturalized citizen, a natural-born citizen, a tourist or a person on an H1 (or similar category) working visa. "Reasonable suspicion" is entirely too broad. You know as well as I do that there are people who become LEOs because they are on a power trip.

    "Is there a problem, officer?"

    "Your tail light is broken."

    "No sir, it is not."


    "Prove it wasn't. Now, where are your papers?"

    That is all it takes, Regan.

    "You stepped out into the sidewalk an eighth of a second before the walk light. You're jaywalking. Now, where are your papers?"

    The northern border is a far greater problem than the southern border, but (generally speaking) no one concerns themselves with that. I've brought this up repeatedly, and you do the verbal equivalent of a dismissive handwave.

    I have explained until I am blue in the face why this law is racist — and it has to do with what I just pointed out about the northern border. Latinos/as are being scapegoated in just the same way that the Chinese, Irish, Sicilians and a whole host of other ethnic groups were back in the day. No one is all het up over the illegal Canadians, Russians, Irish or other Caucasian (for lack of a better term) ethnicities that are here — despite ties to crime such as the Irish Republican Army.

    "Why, they don't even speak English! They aren't even trying to assimilate." Haven't you said that a few times so far?

    I have refuted every single point you've brought up, Regan, and yet you continue to insist that I don't know what I'm talking about. It's like facts and figures don't matter to you. I get it now.

    "Hostile rhetoric"? Wow. I guess you're projecting your own attitude here; other people have remarked on it as well, but I guess they don't count for whatever reason.

    ::shrug:: At the end of the day, you will continue to believe yourself to hold the moral high ground, and that's your right.

    I suspect that you would, if asked, consider yourself a Christian. I would like to gently remind you of this scripture, Leviticus 19:34: Foreigners living among you will be like your own people. Love them as you love yourself, because you were foreigners living in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

  • 172. Ronnie  |  May 10, 2010 at 9:10 am


    F….the Po Po….<3…Ronnie

  • 173. Regan DuCasse  |  May 10, 2010 at 10:59 am

    In response, okay Fiona…if you have experienced racism against you, so…for lack of having all the facts, I didn't know that. I didn't have to assume it.

    But I'll do you the courtesy of taking your word for it, because I know it happens to white people.
    Don't assume about me either. Anyone that does, usually makes a mistake.

    As for my statement regarding English, let's be clear there ARE people who DO refuse to learn.

    There are people who are not SKILLED in it, and there are people who have a difficult time learning.
    There's a diversity of levels, the reasons don't really matter.

    It still doesn't take away the fact that facility with languages helps create an atmosphere of more understanding. And should be encouraged. Especially in professional settings.
    And the opportunity is always there.
    And not forced on anyone. And I never suggested it should be. Nor am I suggesting that a person forget their original language.

    But it does marginalize those who don't have the skills. That's why it's important to know the language, not RACIST to suggest that.

    In fact, you're just dropping bait. That's all you're doing now.
    And that was a another cheap,dirty little dig about someone refusing to talk to me in English out of fear.

    I had to really pick and choose who to support, in this particular issue. Weigh who is hurt most by illegal immigration, or how the laws have been formed OR unenforced to keep accommodating millions of people, but with no accountability.

    I weighed in the affect on gays and lesbians who were foreign born, had to remember all the cases and data information and situations regarding law enforcers and their roles in this and what THEIR options were.
    And how illegal immigrants and legal immigrants are affected.
    Negative against positive, against more complex as opposed to simpler issues.

    And NOT supporting illegal immigration comes down to being called a bigot and a racist, instead of someone who understands what responsibility there is to living, traveling or participating in whatever culture they CHOOSE to live in.
    While we are at war with all manner of undeclared stealthy criminals.

    Well, all the homophobes who jump down my throat and do the same exact thing because I'm not on board with banning gay marriage and military service.
    They call me a bigot (against Christians ) and a traitor (against others of my orientation).

    And it's thankless to be involved in law enforcement because someone will bitch and complain about how unfair the laws are to people who want to keep breaking them.
    But don't consider how unfair it is to the law abiding if allowed to go unchecked and unaccounted for.
    But, I'll take the weight, because there is a right and a wrong in this. And I can, because the nature of what I do, requires it.

    And that doesn't make me anything but a person concerned about everything being done in ways that don't foster chaos and distrust.

    And YOU aren't helping, not at all. You didn't even TRY.
    Guess you think I didn't deserve to be helped along in understanding, just called names.
    Great technique you got there, fiona.

    I suppose you'll have to decide who you can afford to offend. And figure if the people you are advocating for can afford it too.
    Up to you.

  • 174. Ronnie  |  May 10, 2010 at 11:13 am

    "You can't stop the beat"…..<3…Ronnie

  • 175. Tim  |  May 10, 2010 at 8:24 pm

    I have great respect for you Fiona and agree with so much of what you are saying. I've just been reading for a few day's and not posting.
    I have a question. You have mentioned a couple times that part of the problem is due to policies that America has put into place. What exactly do you mean by that? I'm very curious.

    I also feel Regan is making some sense.
    Regardless of a difference of opinion, he is being very respectful and is not receiving much in return.

    I have been on the fence between liberal and conservative for years. My sexuality makes it even more difficult.
    I cannot stand what Bush and his faithful assistant did to this country,especially when it comes to the gay community!!

    BUT Like I said before, I feel this country has lost it's backbone because we are so afraid to offend someone.
    There are so many different people of different races,sexualities,religions,lifestyes,creeds,ages,colors and national origins (I'm sure I forgot a few) that it is almost impossible to NOT to offend someone.

    Which makes me feel This country should be a country of laws! And those laws MUST apply to ALL regardless of popularity!
    I must agree with Regan.
    Illegal immigration is a huge problem that needs to be dealt with, even if feelings get hurt.
    Call it racist if you want, but I know I am not racist because I have an incredible amount of respect and love for all people!
    It sounds to me that Regan feels the same way!

    I also have respect for the law and take full responsibility if I break it.
    If one is here illegally( regarless of the reason),than one is breaking the law and I have no symapathy! There are ways to live and/or work in the US or any country for that matter, legally!
    If one wants to get butt hurt because they feel that it is discriminatory than so be it.
    Legal is legal and illegal is illegal. End of story.

    That is why I am doing everything in my power to make sure my marriage is legal under the law.If it is not, than it than it looses value!
    I will not accept that!
    Love Tim…

  • 176. Ronnie  |  May 11, 2010 at 12:31 am

    "It's not racially motivated"

    It just happens to have happened in Arizona after they passed this anti-Ameircan Immigration Law….He spewed out racial slurs…they were arguing over the immigration law…and the white man killed him after saying "go back to your country"….

    NO!!!….this Law MUST be repealed NOW!!!…or do we (America) have to wait until more people die the same way we (America) are waiting until more LGBT people die to have Equality?

    How many lives need to be lost and/or destroyed?….If you are human and have love, empathy, and compassion….you're answer should be ZERO… : ( …Ronnie

  • 177. fiona64  |  May 11, 2010 at 1:22 am

    Tim asked: You have mentioned a couple times that part of the problem is due to policies that America has put into place. What exactly do you mean by that? I’m very curious.

    Just a few things:

    CIA coup attempt against Chavez
    Death squads in Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador
    The contras
    Los Generales in Brazil

    I think that's a good start.

    People are trying to flee conditions for which we, in the US, are responsible because of interventionalist behaviors. Then, we want to go all nationalistic when there is some fallout.

    Racism is systemic, Tim, not individualistic. SB 1070 is racist prima facie.


  • 178. fiona64  |  May 11, 2010 at 1:29 am

    No, Regan, I didn't experience racism — I experienced bigotry. I know the difference. Racism is systemic; individuals are bigots.

    The whole idea of borders is absurd to me, for the reasons that David K. pointed out. They are man-made constructs that serve solely to make some people "more equal than others."

    As I pointed out repeatedly (and have just listed in a post below), the conditions from which people south of the border are fleeing were largely created by the USA. I am not naive enough to believe that SB1070 is about illegal immigration as a whole; it is about Latinos/as. Please don't try to pee on my leg and tell me it's raining, okay?

    We will have to agree to disagree at the end of the day, Regan. You are free to defend institutionalized racism until the cows come home, and I am equally free to stand up against it.

  • 179. fiona64  |  May 11, 2010 at 1:47 am

    I should add that I would think that the so-called free market/free trade advocates would be against SB1070 immediately; labor should be free to follow the work, right?


  • 180. Tim  |  May 11, 2010 at 3:40 am

    Thank You Fiona!
    I'm going to Google each one.I have my work cut out for me.
    I agree with a comment earlier. I don't like borders either and wish we could just tear down that damn fence and let us and them come and go as often as we wish.
    Combine governments and law enforcement and live together!
    I know, that could never happen but it would be nice. 😉
    This earth was givin to US (as humans) and see what we do with it?
    If I could have one wish,my one wish would be, to be able to speak every single language fluently!
    Ok back to reality, have a great day everyone! Love Tim…

  • 181. fiona64  |  May 11, 2010 at 3:50 am

    You're welcome, Tim.

    I think you'll find the common thread in every single item I listed is that the US set up a system that impoverished Latin America — with the exception of some very wealthy elite folks.

    I have friends from El Salvador and Nicaragua. The stories they tell me about what life was like before they managed to escape and get political asylum are horrific. I completely understand why people are willing to risk what little they have in order to get away. My Nicaraguan gal-pal calls her mother every time she arrives at a destination (the grocery, a restaurant, a date) and again before she comes home. Why? Because way too many people never came home when they went out — including one of her brothers. It helps her mother feel safer. Can you imagine such a life?

    I sometimes wish that everyone would read "Les Miserables," by Victor Hugo (even though some parts of it are an awful slog). The folks who insist that "criminals are criminals" might learn something from a book about a man who did 15 years' hard labor because he stole a loaf of bread to feed his starving family …


  • 182. fiona64  |  May 12, 2010 at 2:57 am

    Those of you who want to argue that AZ's law is not racist, or that immigration is 'fair and equal' to all should have a look at this article:

    Quote: A sister born in Mexico applying today to join her U.S. citizen brother has to wait 131 years to get a U.S. immigrant visa. A minor child waits 3.5 years to join a U.S. citizen parent, which is reasonable. But, during the wait, if he turns 21, he has to wait 112 years.

    By the same token, it takes only 9 years to immigrate from Bulgaria (a primarily Caucasian population).


  • 183. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  May 12, 2010 at 3:51 am

    good grief! I had heard it is very difficult to immigrate from Mexico but "ye gads!!" Thanks again Fiona additional information I find illuminating and useful.

  • 184. fiona64  |  May 12, 2010 at 4:19 am

    Yeah, that kind of puts the lie to "all they have to do is go through the legal channels," doesn't it?


  • 185. fiona64  |  May 12, 2010 at 4:20 am

    In case anyone wants to read "Les Miserables," it is available for free on-line:


  • 186. fiona64  |  May 12, 2010 at 7:10 am

    "But Arizona's Policies Aren't Racist," Chapter 3:

    Quote: The crackdown applies to classes deemed to have students who are learning English, mostly as a second language. Federal No Child Left Behind regulations call for students to be taught by persons fluent in English. The determination of fluency is left up to individual states.

    Fiona (who finds it ludicrous that a teacher can be fired for having a discernible accent)

  • 187. Kathleen  |  May 12, 2010 at 7:13 am

    Yet another legislative gem from Arizona:

  • 188. Monty  |  May 12, 2010 at 7:24 am

    My high school chemistry teacher had a very strong Indian accent, to the point where I often had to ask her to repeat things (molarity vs. molality was a nightmare). However, I don't feel that this affected my ability to learn in that class in any meaningful way (with top scores on the AP and SAT II chemistry tests to support that), and I'd say she's one of the better teachers I've had overall. It'd be a waste of talent to send her away just because of the accent.

  • 189. fiona64  |  May 12, 2010 at 7:25 am

    Yeah, I thought I had posted that here (hence "Chapter 3), but I guess I posted it elsewhere.

    No ethnic studies, no teachers with discernible accents (although I doubt that someone with UK Received Diction will be dismissed … ), "papers please …" — but AZ isn't establishing racist policies. No sirree Bob.


  • 190. Monty  |  May 12, 2010 at 7:28 am

    Now, not only is it illegal to be a Mexican, but it's also illegal to talk like a Mexican or even talk about Mexicans.

  • 191. fiona64  |  May 12, 2010 at 7:34 am

    I guess that pretty much covers it, Monty.


  • 192. Regan DuCasse  |  May 16, 2010 at 2:51 am

    When our country shares the border it does with Canada and Central America and Mexico, it stands to reason that the dysfunction South of the border, contributes to the huge numbers of people that will inevitably clog the system of legal immigration.

    I won't deny that American interventions, contribute to that dysfunction, but a good deal of export of our industries has created some of our own.

    What you have done Fiona…is take your argument and fling it ever outward and outward as if there is no responsibility to be borne of this issue by non Americans and illegal immigrants.
    The patronizing and condescension you utilize over this issue is as damaging as the racism you keep crying. As if there is no victimization of legal residents BY illegal immigration itself.
    Let alone illegal immigrants.

    As for the greater issue of national dysfunction by the home countries of illegal immigrants, let's be clear about the same historical and cultural elements of record regarding the civil rights movement.

    The governments of the deep south were just as dangerous, corrupted and deadly as those you describe of the Central Americas in particular.
    I am aware of the murder of a gay Honduran activist that occurred just last year.
    Again, a minority of people like gays and lesbians…like blacks here are of a PERPETUAL minority. Whether they are legal or illegal immigrants.

    But the changes we see in other countries are through the commitment and courage of that minority.
    So where is the same of the larger HOMOGENOUS cultural or national fellows?

    Where is the equivalent to Medgar Evers, Dr. King…Andrew Young of their respective countries?

    There are MORE of them to exact a difference. To engage their governments and fellow activists. There are greater numbers of poor people to rich. Greater numbers of heterosexuals to homosexuals.

    So where IS their commitment to economic and social justice equivalent to the fight put up by a MINORITY in this country?
    And, I might add, with no less dangerous consequences than what had been suffered by blacks and others for GENERATIONS.
    It's not nearly as risky demanding a reward for shoving their way into line ahead of those who DID do their due diligence.

    I think that illegal immigrants are more victims of the vast numbers of them, as much as economic injustice where they are from and there isn't a system that will satisfy any of it.
    They could demand a more streamlined and efficient system in their country of origin too.

    They could make demands for the justice they deserve and we could intervene AGAIN to facilitate it…and then things get messed up all over again.

    I'm not so ignorant of what goes on in other places and the reasons anyone would want to leave them.
    Which is why it IS amazing that more blacks didn't immigrate to Canada or Europe where Jim Crow didn't exist.
    Or maybe not so amazing…

    So if we're going to talk about the inherent nobility of the civil rights era…let's put it in it's proper context. Those who fought it, were confronted with exceptional brutality for doing so.
    And regardless of that, demonstrated willingness to not take up arms or threaten their fellow man in that pursuit.
    Nor demand exceptions in treatment for civil disobedience, but parity with equal treatment AS citizens.
    This is NOT the case with regard to illegal immigrants or their supporters.

    Some things have to be argued on their own merits, because there are differences in expectations for how to control and organize immigration.
    And account for illegal immigrants and enforcement of illegal immigration.

    I don't support singling out any particular ethnic group or nationality.
    But the border states can't conduct enforcement WITHOUT looking at the specific demographic illegally immigrating from that region.
    How stupid not to expect them to!

    The impetus behind this law cannot be called illegitimate. And I won't deny that mistakes in implementation won't be made.

    But SOMETHING has to be done because it IS dangerous to BOTH legal and illegal immigrants.

    And I have noticed that not a single person complaining about this law, the paranoia regarding law enforcers or their supporters has come up with ANY BETTER IDEAS….except to reward the law breakers.
    Therefore giving greater incentive for MORE of the problem. Which is what happened with the first amnesty in 1996.

    And to actually say there shouldn't be any borders, or that such a thing is an offense in itself….well, you lost all cred at that point.
    All of it.
    Because in saying that, you have shown you never believed that there is a cultural, or national difference in any country.
    And if you really believed that, then you wouldn't be going on and on about how dangerous and corrupted some are.

    We're living in seriously bad economic times, predicted decades ago with so many industries leaving America to exploit lower wages and workplace standards.
    And immigrants, legal or otherwise were allowed to compete with what jobs were left.
    That's a recipe for the very economic disasters that create the dysfunctions of any given country.

    When it's all said and done, it's not about racism at all, but the damage caused by too many people and not enough jobs.
    And it's come down to that.
    Here in CA, we have 12% unemployment. And it's a good bet that's an under count because illegal immigrants can't be accounted for in that number.
    So, with that in mind….those illegal immigrants with little English literacy or other skills, who can't find jobs any more than a legal citizen can…then what?
    Illegal immigration has already negatively impacted blacks with the similar skill set. The displacement is profound. Too many people, not enough jobs and those willing to work for less, can easily undermine and stagnate wages.
    Did it not occur to you that a minority like blacks, already struggling with the economic gap still…wouldn't suffer more from this kind of competition?
    As do American or legal gay and lesbian citizens as well?

    Illegal immigration does come at the expense of other people. And with demonstrable negative consequences for those that are legally here.
    And if you REALLY cared about justice…YOU wouldn't support illegal immigration because of that reason alone.

  • 193. fiona64  |  May 17, 2010 at 2:09 am

    Regan wrote: And if you REALLY cared about justice…YOU wouldn’t support illegal immigration because of that reason alone.

    You know what, lady? Emotional blackmail bullshit like this stopped working on me a long, long time ago.

    "If you really loved me," you'd do what I say. "If you really cared," you'd do what I say.

    You ask (paraphrasing) "where is the person in their own country who cares about making improvements." Well, let's see. Ever heard of Ernesto Guevara and what happened to him? He was a well-to-do Argentinian guy, see, a physician — and he was so appalled at the poverty in South America that he decided to do something about it. For this he was murdered.

    I could go on and on, but the people who do try to stand up and do something in their own countries tend to become targets for the CIA and other agencies.

    So, I have only one thing left to say to you.

    Fuck off, Regan. Just, fuck off.

  • 194. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  May 17, 2010 at 2:43 am

    Fiona I'm with you! I can appreciate that Regan sees the world from his perspective, but that does not justify the way the hate has escalated including toward my Dear partner in Utah who is Hispanic and not from Mexico. It does not justify his dear elegant mother, a permanent resident of the United States has lost many church "friends" recently because of her ethnicity and elects to no longer shop in some of her favorite stores because she does not feel welcome. It does not justify the hateful responses put toward this Utah Pastor suggesting Arizona Law is a Racial Sin – <a href="” target=”_blank”> <a…” target=”_blank”>

    Take a day watching Univision, a Hispanic, United States channel and you will see the appalling hate and travesties unleashed on people simply for being Hispanic.

  • 195. fiona64  |  May 17, 2010 at 6:31 am

    Regan wrote: Illegal immigration has already negatively impacted blacks with the similar skill set. The displacement is profound.

    You know, Regan, I know I said I was done — but I'm not.

    How many of your black friends are begging to pick fruit (a backbreaking job that I have actually done)?


    Yeah, that's what I thought.

  • 196. fiona64  |  May 17, 2010 at 8:53 am

    The most recent prevailing wage survey for agricultural workers is here:

    Wages have gone *down* for most fruit pickers. The current rate for strawberries (which just happens to be one of the fruits I picked back in the day) is $1.45 for a 12-slot tray (approx 20 pounds). That works out to be 7.25 cents per pound, which is less than I was making 30 years ago (I got 10 cents per pound).

    Somehow I doubt that there are a whole lot of citizens begging for these agricultural jobs (25 percent of them held by illegal immigrants) which amount to indentured servitude.

    I know, it's an awful thing to let facts inform my opinions. Nevertheless, that's where I come from on this.

  • 197. Smash Cops Heat android free cheat download  |  July 5, 2013 at 3:21 pm

    I all the time used to read article in news papers but now as I
    am a user of internet therefore from now I am using net for
    articles, thanks to web.

Having technical problems? Visit our support page to report an issue!