Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Immigration as an emerging electoral issue?

1. Immigration, thrust into the national consciousness following the passage of an Arizona law deemed by many to be the most restrictive in the country, is emerging as a potentially potent political issue this fall.

In Gallup's survey of the most important problems facing the nation released Wednesday, those naming immigration jumped from two percent in April to 10 percent in May -- a rapid rise that made it the third most commonly cited response.

Not surprisingly, the Gallup data showed that self identified conservatives (12 percent calling it the biggest problem) and Republicans (14 percent) were the most likely to see immigration as a major issue confronting the country.

On the heels of the Gallup data came a national poll from NBC and the Wall Street Journal that suggests that a near-majority of Americans strongly support the Arizona immigration law.

Forty-six percent offered strong support for the measure while 24 percent were strongly opposed -- a major passion disparity that will surely be noticed by strategists in both parties trying to game out how the immigration issue will affect turnout this fall.

(Worth noting: The NBC/WSJ poll question on the Arizona law explained it thusly: "The Arizona law makes it a state crime to be in the U.S. illegally. It requires local and state law enforcement officers to question people about their immigration status if they have reason to suspect a person is in the country illegally, making it a crime for them to lack registration documents.)

While the NBC/WSJ poll would suggest that politicians in swing areas -- particularly culturally conservative House districts -- would be better off backing the Arizona legislation, there remains political peril in doing so among Hispanic voters. Among that group, nearly six in ten strongly oppose the Arizona law and another 12 percent somewhat oppose it.

Given the rapid population growth of Hispanics -- and their expected development into a major political force in coming elections -- voicing support for the Arizona law could cause politicians some long term pains. But, if the NBC/WSJ and Gallup numbers are right, it may be in the service of some short term political gains.

2. With just five days to go in the special House election in Pennsylvania's 12th district, the race has become a cause celebre for numerous conservative groups who are heavily outspending their liberal counterparts.

The investments on the Republicans side range from the tiny ($704 from the Move America Forward Freedom PAC) to the more substantial ($100,000 from the Chamber of Commerce). But one thing is obvious: they all want a piece of the hottest race in town on Tuesday.

According to FEC reports and media accounts, more than half a dozen third-party groups have now weighed in on Republican businessman Tim Burns's behalf, and that doesn't include the $959,000 the National Republican Congressional Committee has spent on the race in independent expenditures.

In addition to the spending by the NRCC and the Chamber, the Eagle Forum PAC has spent $4,500, the National Republican Trust PAC has spent $8,000, Americans for Prosperity has spent $64,000, and former Sen. Norm Coleman's (R-Minn.) American Action Network is spending another $26,000 on a radio ad, according to Federal Election Commission reports filed last night.

Including the NRCC's money, GOP-aligned groups have spent more than $1.1 million -- a large sum but not the millions that some might have expected given the import of the race to Republicans hoping to build momentum heading into the fall. Still, the overall spending on the GOP side is significantly outpacing the spending of Democratic committees and aligned groups.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has spent $767,000 in independent expenditures in support of former congressional staffer Mark Critz (D) and the Alliance for Retired Americans PAC has dropped another $38,000 -- for a combined $805,000 in pro-Democratic spending.

Both sides see the race as a must-win but, in truth, it is a muster-win for Republicans who have to prove they can emerge victorious in seats like this one -- Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) carried it in 2008 -- to make a reasonable case that the majority is in play this fall.

3. A new automated poll in Kentucky shows ophthalmologist Rand Paul leading Secretary of State Trey Grayson by 16 points with just days remaining in their Republican primary fight for the Senate nomination.

Paul, the eldest son of Texas Rep. Ron Paul (R), took 49 percent of the vote to 33 percent for Grayson in the Survey USA poll. (Worth noting: Survey USA conducts automated phone call interviews, a methodology that remains somewhat controversial in the polling community.)

Those numbers are consistent with much -- although not all -- of the other publicly released polling in the race.

A survey done for the Lexington Herald-Leader last week showed Paul up 44 percent to 32 percent over Grayson.

But, Grayson's campaign has released two surveys -- and the American Future Fund, an conservative outside organization based in Iowa has released another -- that shows the race far closer.

Most neutral observers see Paul, who has benefited from the strong backing of the tea party movement nationally, as the favorite. Grayson, while carrying the support of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) and Rep. Hal Rogers (Ky.), has struggled to find attacks that stick to the frontrunning Paul.

While it has drawn less attention, the Senate Democratic primary may wind up being the far closer race.

The Bluegrass poll showed Lt. Gov. Dan Mongiardo at 38 percent and state Attorney General Jack Conway at 37 percent. Less than a week ago, Mongiardo held a seven-point edge in the Herald-Leader survey.

ALSO READ: The Post's Amy Gardner on how the Paul-Grayson race is a McConnell proxy war.

4. A week removed from Wisconsin Democratic Rep. David Obey's retirement, Republican candidate Sean Duffy is up with his first TV ad.

In it, Duffy plays up his profile as a father of six, lumberjack sports athlete(!) and prosecutor (no mention of his stint on the "Real World"!?), and focuses on recent news that a Harley Davidson plant may leave the state -- all in a recognizable Wisconsin accent.

"You send me to Washington, I'm going to work to keep our businesses open, to create jobs right here in the great state of Wisconsin," Duffy says in the ad.

The early ad buy serves notice that Duffy is ready for a fight before the other candidates can even get off the ground. Duffy raised more than half a million dollars before Obey bowed out while Democrats have to start from ground zero when it comes to raising money.

Duffy currently faces primary opposition in September from 2008 nominee Dan Mielke, who lost to Obey 61 percent to 39 percent. Democratic leaders have coalesced around state Sen. Julie Lassa as their candidate.

The open seat race has climbed up the GOP's target list, though the district remains Democratic-leaning. It went 56 percent to 42 for President Obama in 2008 but the two previous Democratic presidential nominees carried it by a narrower margin

The Cook Political Report rates the race a toss up while the Rothenberg Political Report sees it as a leaning Democratic seat.

5. Hours before Florida Gov. Charlie Crist submitted paperwork formally changing his party affiliation from Republican to "no party affiliation," a spokesperson for his campaign said that he would not be returning any donations made while the governor was still a Republican -- a reversal from late April, when Crist told MSNBC's Joe Scarborough the morning after his party switch that he'd "probably" give donors their funds back.

Former state House Speaker Marco Rubio (R), whose rise drove Crist from the party, issued a statement Wednesday night accusing the governor of "going back on his word to Floridians." Rubio's campaign will also launch a web video on the issue to today set to the classic tune "Take the money and run" (natch).

National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman John Cornyn (Texas) wrote a letter to Crist stating that he was "disappointed" with his campaign's refusal of donors' refund requests. And the Club for Growth has been pushing Crist to return the funds, in an effort similar to its successful campaign when Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.) made his own party switch last year.

Crist isn't legally obligated to return the money -- and with money a major question mark in his fledgling independent candidacy he appears to have made the decision to take the short term public relations rather than run the risk of giving back large chunks of his warchest.

As of the end of March, Crist had $7.6 million cash-on-hand to Rubio's $3.9 million and Rep. Kendrick Meek's (D) $3.7 million.

With Deputy Fixes Aaron Blake and Felicia Sonmez

By Chris Cillizza  |  May 13, 2010; 6:00 AM ET
Categories:  Morning Fix  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Thune steps into the spotlight
Next: The Washington Post Political Blog Network is here!

Comments

US Constitution Article 4 Section 1 Clause 1:
"Section 1 - Each State to Honor all others"

"Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the *public Acts*, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof."

Arizona has acted publicly under Article 4 Section 4:
"The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence."

Other states, their citizens, and their city councils have violated US Constitution Article.

Posted by: borderraven | May 14, 2010 12:33 PM | Report abuse

A predictable outcome following the passage of Arizona law SB1070 amended by HB2162 is the reflexive response by the many politicians who rose up to oppose it, regardless of constitutionality or the dire situation arising in Arizona. The next few elections will be like playing a game of Whack-Mole -- which appropriately rhymes with guacamole. They jumped up, lashed out against a state in the union (treason and sedition) and put their names and faces in the media archives for voters to read before elections. Yes, election reactions to Arizona, will be along racist lines, of those who either defend the US sovereignty or surrender to the Third World cesspool.

Judging by responses on YouTube, it seems many people are either uneducated, unaware or foolishly mislead and think immigrants (non-citizens in the USA legally or illegally) somehow are entitled to more human rights than the United Nations already provides, and the USA provides under treaty per COTUS Article 6.

US Attorney General Eric Holder, following orders of president Obama, is said to be investigating Arizona. Yet we can read on the DOJ website, a legal explanation of what Arizona is authorized to do.
Google:
"US Department of Justice, Criminal Resource Manual, Section 1918 Arrest of Illegal Aliens by State and Local Officers"

>COTUS Article 4 Section 4: "Every state in the union, is responsible to every state in the union, for securing our union against INVASION."

>COTUS Article 1 Section 10 Clause 1 "Every state in the union may, without consent of Congress, engage in war, if invaded."

>COTUS Article 6, w/ Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo Art 5, allows TX,NM,AZ, & CA fortify border w/ Mexico.

>32CFR215.4(a) Allows US president to suspend Posse Comitatus Act and order Martial Law, if states fail to act as Arizona has.

Arizona is a sovereign state, and a member of this union of states, and is acting responsibly to secure the union from invasion and protect us all from harm.

Look at your local, county and state governments and ask is this Mexico, yet?

Posted by: borderraven | May 14, 2010 8:48 AM | Report abuse

When you see someone advocating for "immigrant rights", you better ask them: What is the immigrant you feel needs more rights? You need to get a grip on the situation. The propagandists are playing with words. They may say "immigrants", but they mean to say "illegal aliens".

Would you grant your civil rights to non-citizens?

Isn't that like surrendering US national sovereignty?

Would you advocate the dissolving of the USA?

Would you burn the Constitution?

THINK!

Posted by: borderraven | May 14, 2010 3:01 AM | Report abuse

Arizona has done nothing wrong. Sure SB 1070 caused an uproar, but with so much criticism,Arizona quickly found the glitch and passed an amendment, slight tweaking, in HB 2162.

First Obama cried, then Holder said he would investigate (didn't read it). It is an abysmal failure of the USA to witness such protest over a state actually doing just what the US Constitution demands of all states in the union.

I can only hope this will get people, the voters, involved in politics, but I'd hope they would do their own reading, research on their own, and not listen to the here say.
Read Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (1848) , ARTICLES V, IX and XVI.

Google:
"US Department of Justice, Criminal Resource Manual, Section 1918 Arrest of Illegal Aliens by State and Local Officers"

>COTUS Article 4 Section 4: "Every state in the union, is responsible to every state in the union, for securing our union against INVASION."

>COTUS Article 1 Section 10 Clause 1 "Every state in the union may, without consent of Congress, engage in war, if invaded."

See 32CFR215 (32CFR215.4(a))

Posted by: borderraven | May 14, 2010 2:51 AM | Report abuse

Unbelievable!
AG Holder was forced to admit today at congressional hearing under questioning by Cong. Ted Roe that he had NOT yet read the Arizona law about which he had been railing against over the last week or so and that he had not had even been briefed by anybody on his staff who may have read it (unilkely event).

He said, I'm not making this up, that he got his info second-hand about the law from....NEWSPAPERS and TV accounts!!
Cong. Ted Poe offered to give him a copy of the law to read.

This is simple incompetence and misfeasance by him and his lazy staff.

Posted by: philpost1 | May 13, 2010 11:20 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: shrink2 | May 13, 2010 9:54 PM | Report abuse

Poor lonely Ped.

Posted by: Moonbat | May 13, 2010 9:41 PM | Report abuse

Suzy

I think LA gets some of its water from Arizona - the Colorado River - however that is governed by a Compact.


Someone should just sue LA for discrimination against US citizens -


I simply can not believe that the hispanics are fighting with the objective to get our immigration laws to be NOT enforced. AND THE DEMOCRATS ARE ON THEIR SIDE.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 9:17 PM | Report abuse

@Suzy, yes, absolutely. I emphatically agree that downwardly-mobile retirees who cant' afford to travel anywhere shoukld boycott Los Angeles. That'll show'em. I mean, a movement that can't even muster a decent-sized crowd at their rallies, wow, I beat LA city council is panicking at their mistake.

As for Rubio, I forget what his position on the law is today. But yeah, he should join Daffy John and lurch further and further right, that's got to be a winning strategy.

Posted by: Noacoler | May 13, 2010 9:08 PM | Report abuse

The market speaks...

No doubt other states will hasten to show how tough they are too.

Posted by: Noacoler | May 13, 2010 8:38 PM


And so will the people. Any city/company/etc that boycotts Arizona will have counter boycotts.

Marco Rubio should take a tip from McCain on this one and speak out strongly in favor of the law.

Posted by: SuzyCcup | May 13, 2010 8:59 PM | Report abuse

...however I didn't know enough about where LA got its water to make a comment.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 8:49 PM


37, I don't either, but I read somewhere they do get some water from the Colorado River.

Posted by: SuzyCcup | May 13, 2010 8:54 PM | Report abuse

SuzyCcup


That thought about the water supply did occur to me - however I didn't know enough about where LA got its water to make a comment.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 8:49 PM | Report abuse

suzy

Isn't LA trying to solve their perceived discrimination... with discrimination?

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 8:32 PM


37, it doesn't matter. From what I've read, California is the next Greece. They've been paying Arizona with nothing but IOU's all along anyway. The boycott amounts to nothing.

Maybe Arizona can play dirty and cut off the California water supply from the Colorado River.

Posted by: SuzyCcup | May 13, 2010 8:41 PM | Report abuse

The market speaks:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/12/AR2010051203317.html

"The city risks losing as much as $90 million in hotel and convention business over the next five years because of the controversy, according to city estimates released Wednesday. The state's hotel and lodging association has counted 23 canceled meetings for a loss of between $6 and $10 million. On Wednesday, Los Angeles became the largest city to join the boycott. "

So while Governor Brewer fingers herself in the mirror over how tough she is and teabaggers celebrate the crackdown on brown people, hotels and restaurants bear the burden.

No doubt other states will hasten to show how tough they are too.

Posted by: Noacoler | May 13, 2010 8:38 PM | Report abuse

suzy


Isn't LA trying to solve their perceived discrimination... with discrimination?


They have directed the law against US citizens from Arizona - which HAS to be unconstitutional.

Again, the very thing they claim to be railing against.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 8:32 PM | Report abuse

"When I see everyone doing their own housekeeping, odd jobs, etc..."

12B, I feel bad, people call about "their Mexicans" needing work. They know I am a doctor, we get cold calls from people vending (illegal) services. A couple years age at a neighborhood association meeting, two guys agreed in a side bar conversation about a culvert problem on a shared private road, "I'll get my guys and you bring yours and we'll get this thing done." They were talking, of course, about their illegals.

Well bye for today, I am out there, just like granny, pulling my own weeds (most people think they have to pay to "work out") and not shopping at Sprawl Mart.

Posted by: shrink2 | May 13, 2010 8:31 PM | Report abuse

Hahaha, how embarrassing for Los Angeles. The Los Angeles Times is currently conducting an online poll on what people think of the city's Arizona boycott. A whopping 93% of respondents say the city should mind its own business. Mozy over and vote for yourself. All you libs, here's your chance to skew the figures.

http://opinion.latimes.com/opinionla/2010/05/boycott-arizona-immigration-poll.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+OpinionLa+%28L.A.+Times+-+Opinion+Blog%29

Posted by: SuzyCcup | May 13, 2010 8:20 PM | Report abuse

shrink2


The country HAS decided on an immigration law - a certain amount of people are let in LEGALLY every year.


There are waiting lists in every country for the right to come in LEGALLY.


The illegals have jumped that line - and if we give them benefits, we snub the law-abiding people waiting abroad to come here.

So, your points about bringing in labor - and treating them right.

We HAVE done that - its called the IMMIGRATION LAW - we have defined how much labor will come in.

The question is whether we will ENFORCE THAT LAW OR NOT.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 8:19 PM | Report abuse

Broadwayjoe


I thought they were not going to let you out of jail until tomorrow.


What happened ?

/.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 8:12 PM | Report abuse

I haven't seen you around for a day or two BroadwayJoe. We were afraid you'd gotten too near one of those violent Teabagger rallies and someone jacked your jaw.

Posted by: Brigade | May 13, 2010 8:05 PM | Report abuse

The price we have to pay...

American competitiveness is directly dependent on American productivity.

You could say, the competitive advantage or disadvantage of the American economy is all about productivity: the amount workers get paid for the value of what the market gets for "our" labor.

Illegal labor is now central to American
productivity. The availability of this work force is what allows people who get paid lots more to talk about growth and opportunity.

If you don't want illegal labor, you have to deal with legal labor and you call that...socialism.

I am not going to go on about slaves and the Chinese labor that built The West, I am sorry I brought it up.

But if we really don't want cheap labor, we really have to pay for what labor costs. If we do want cheap labor, lets take care of the people we use for that purpose.

Ok? Ok.

Posted by: shrink2 | May 13, 2010 8:04 PM | Report abuse

I've never been in a bar, 37th, I don't drink that swill. Alcohol is a disinfectant, not a beverage. I drink water, coffee, and tea, nothing else.

Posted by: Noacoler | May 13, 2010 7:59 PM | Report abuse

"Immigration as an emerging electoral issue?"

I think that started weeks ago when Arizona passed their racial profiling law, but thanks for stopping by...
_____________

Four (4) checks:

Cherry picked polls to suggest majority support for Arizona's racial profiling law. Check.

Free Rand Paul ad/mention. (Google "Ron Paul newsletter." Quite a "libertarian" Rand's Dad.) Check.

Free Marco Rubio ad/mention with free link to Rubio video. Check.

No positive mention of the 44th President of the United states. Check.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | May 13, 2010 7:57 PM | Report abuse

nothing --> noting

And the real problem with Arizona isn't the immigration law, it's the vile nativism behind it, a racist swell that has since erupted in a new pustule of intolerance, in suppressing ethnic studies. The legislature must be as ridden with bigots as a wild dog with fleas.

You can prance and preen about the rule of law but when states are actively passing stupid laws like that, it's racism, and no quotes around it.

Posted by: Noacoler | May 13, 2010 7:57 PM | Report abuse

Noacoler


When you walk into a bar, you have to show ID - because there are underage trying to get in.


It is the price of going in.


The uproar is not really over "what it does to the legals" - the uproar is that the immigration groups want the illegals to STAY - they want OPEN BORDERS

There is no way around that.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 7:49 PM | Report abuse

Brigade


There is one theory out there that in the past 4 years since the last big immigration issue came up - the fence was built in various areas - and enforcement was stepped up in California and Texas.


That left Arizona as the path of lease resistance for immigration -


New Mexico is there too, but it is distant and the rural roads are harder to navigate.

So there has been a funnel effect into Arizona.

I like your point about the "sustainability" of the underground economy.


We have to start thinking that way - these people come here, but they aim to stay - we cant think in terms of whether there is a job for them today, but in years to come -


Then they have kids - and in 18 years those kids are looking for jobs too - HERE.


The question is: at what point can our economy NOT handle this anymore?

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 7:44 PM | Report abuse

The problem with the AZ law isn't what it does to illegal immigrants, the problem is what it does to Latino Americans. Legitimate citizens.

After nothing that I would rather the law focused on the employers instead of on powerless poor people who're being exploited already, I will go on to say that I don't want illegal immigrants working here either ... I'd rather pay more for lettuce and asparagus. But then, I can afford to.

And Brigade, aside from your sneer-quote of the word racism, it's nice to see you getting a littler impulse-control. Keep it up.

Posted by: Noacoler | May 13, 2010 7:41 PM | Report abuse

@brigade,

I think you make some good points. Whether the AZ law is upheld or not, makes no difference. Illegals are/will spill over to the neighboring states.

The problem I have is one of understanding. At the highest level, I oppose illegal immigration. I'm as much a law-and-order person as anyone here.

But, I cannot help but notice that, as a nation, we have struggled with this problem for decades, and it only gets worse, not better. It seems to be those "unsolvable" problems like the War on Drugs. Good ideas, but they go nowhere. Neither political party does much when they're in power.

Now, I'm a lot more interested in understanding the issue, since it is obvious to me that we will continue to live with it for the rest of my life.

I have sympathy for Arizonans in the southern part of the state.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | May 13, 2010 7:29 PM | Report abuse

Some drawbacks of state-by-state solutions to illegal immigration are so obvious that you do have to wonder why more pressure isn't exerted on Washington.

Arizona's underground economy evidently can't support anywhere near the number of illegals currently in the state. So Arizona passes a law, which is basically a copy of federal immigration law. Arizona says it did so because the Feds will not enforce the immigration law.

Yet opponents of the Arizona law are not angry at the Feds, they're angry at Arizona. We're told that 60% or 70% of the electorate, depending on whose numbers you use, support the new law, but even they seem content to let Washington off the hook.

Assuming the law actually takes effect and passes constitutional muster (I'll grant this is a big "if"), do we have any reason to believe the Arizona illegals are going to pull stakes and return to Mexico? Why won't they simply relocate to California or New Mexico or some other state where pickings aren't as slim? Then Arizona's problem will become someone else's problem.

If all of Arizona's illegal immigrants flee to where "racism" is less of a problem, say boycott happy Los Angeles, will they be welcomed with open arms? Or will the residents there, in true "racist" fashion, demand that California DO SOMETHING about all these people?

And if the new law is ruled unconstitutional or the economic pressure brought to bear by the rest of the country becomes too great, what is Arizona supposed to do about its immigration problem? It's a little more complicated than recognizing Martin Luther King's birthday.

People as far apart as Karl Rove and Drindl are concerned about the effects this all will have on the midterms. It would be nice if the people in Washington would do what they're getting paid for and start solving some problems.

Posted by: Brigade | May 13, 2010 7:16 PM | Report abuse

@greatgran,

I admire your stand of not hiring illegals and not buying Chinese products. At least you walk the talk.

But there aren't many of you. If there were, and fewer big employers who hire illegals, we would have fewer illegals and fewer Chinese products. But, it doesn't come for free. We would pay higher labor costs and higher prices for products.

So far, it's patently obvious we are not willing to pay those prices. When we see Walmart empty, then I'll believe that we won't buy Chinese products. When I see everyone doing their own housekeeping, odd jobs, etc. then I'll believe we won't hire illegals. When the large employers start paying higher wages to attract other workers, then I'll believe they won't hire illegals.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | May 13, 2010 7:09 PM | Report abuse

greatgran, you dod 2/3 of a great post, but then you spoiled it with the silly invasion metaphor. We are not being invaded.

The real money from the Mexican drug imports isn't cocaine as one would think, it's *marijuana*, an entirely harmless affectation kept illegal to protect liquor profits. Make pot legal and it will cost less than beer. Anyone can grow it, and there is no justification for keeping it illegal.

Posted by: Noacoler | May 13, 2010 7:00 PM | Report abuse

The problem is not South of the border, we Americans just don't care enough about these issues to stop buying their drugs and stop hiring illegal labor. That is all it is. We create the demand, we create the market. Free market? Supply side? Sound familiar?

Posted by: shrink2 | May 13, 2010 6:19 PM
-------------------------------
You are so right. Illegal immigration is a result of pure market forces, who don't care about workers' legality, who don't care about products'(drugs) legality. It just efficiently matches up supply and demand.

If we want to end illegal immigration, we have to pay the price of interfering with the free market. We have to be willing to pay artificially higher labor costs and forego the sale of products, for which demand exists. We have to be willing to pay the costs of arming a border police or erect barriers to keep out low cost labor.

So far, we are NOT willing to pay those prices. We just keep trying to find a way to end illegal immigration in a costless way.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | May 13, 2010 6:52 PM | Report abuse

I care Shrink2 and you are so right. I do not buy drugs and do not hire illegal labor. I have a large home and could use the help but no one will work if I declare their income and pay social security, etc. I told them I will write checks and they want cash. We do our own yard and I clean my own house. I actually take this one step further My friend and I took a pact to not buy anything from China since I am outraged they send things over here to kill our pets and poison our children. Heck they even poisoned their own. I research every product, cleaning product, vitamins, etc. And there is not one decorative trinket I cannot live without. I look for American made products. We have been doing this for two years since we found the pet food we had just purchased was tainted with melamine from China.

Shrink2 is right. If we shut down on demand we do alot but we still need to seal the border. We have drug trains marching onto American soil guarded by Ak47's with our Sheriffs holding pistols. They are lying when they say we cannot seal. They just do not want to since someone is getting paid off. Is that not in itself an act of war on us?

Posted by: greatgran1 | May 13, 2010 6:46 PM | Report abuse

"I really think foreign countries must think we are either extremely naive or just plain stupid."

Granny, we are both. The whole war on drugs and the ridiculous Republican political poses struck on illegal labor migrants are naive and stupid.

If Americans want to exploit people in poverty from South and Central America, then stop yapping about walls and 'militarizing' the border.

If we don't want illegal laborers, then stop hiring them.

Same with drugs. You want to end the drug violence coming across the border? Americans must stop spending billions buying their drugs. Now don't even try to tell me we can't stop American demand for drugs coming across the borders, we just don't want to pay the price of stopping that demand.

The problem is not South of the border, we Americans just don't care enough about these issues to stop buying their drugs and stop hiring illegal labor. That is all it is. We create the demand, we create the market. Free market? Supply side? Sound familiar?

Posted by: shrink2 | May 13, 2010 6:19 PM | Report abuse

tlwinslow nailed it when he said the problem is Mexico. They have no middle class, a tiny super rich and a massive percentage of poor that they are very willing to send out way. They empty their prisons right at our back door. They are sucking us dry with drugs and crime.
Did you know you cannot protest in the streets of Mexico flying another country's flag or be deported? Only the national language must be used in government business. No welfare of any kind is offered to foreign residents. No foreign person can invest without restrictions. Schools do not accommodate foreign students in any manner. Can you believe this?
I really think foreign countries must think we are either extremely naive or just plain stupid.

Posted by: greatgran1 | May 13, 2010 5:52 PM | Report abuse

Statistically speaking probably true that the most employers are R when you consider most D's are in journalism, academia, or employed by or living off government.

==

I doubt that your nutty cartoonish view of reality does much to get you into any job that doesn't require a pair of bib overalls

Posted by: Noacoler | May 13, 2010 5:34 PM | Report abuse

Go after the ones who employ them by the thousands, the great majority of whom are Republicans.

This won't happen, of course.

"If anyone needs help connecting the dots, let me know."

Posted by: Noacoler
------------------------------------------
Statistically speaking probably true that the most employers are R when you consider most D's are in journalism, academia, or employed by or living off government.

Posted by: leapin | May 13, 2010 5:15 PM | Report abuse

It's sad that the U.S. is getting scared at all the little mice when the real problem is the elephant in the barn, the incurably corrupt Mexican govt. that rides the rich on the backs of the poor, crushing them until they cross the border despite all difficulties and obstacles, while making sweetheart deals with the U.S. establishment to silence exposure or criticism. Any real solution to the U.S.-Mexico problem must start with dissolving that govt. and putting something better in its place. Find out about the Megamerge Dissolution Solution at http://go.to/megamerge

Posted by: tlwinslow | May 13, 2010 5:14 PM | Report abuse

Noacoler


Thank you for giving us the gay angle on all of this - it all makes sense now.


YOU didn't pay employer taxes,

Unemployment taxes,


Social Security taxes


Worker's compensation taxes.


Amazing, how you LOVE TO SUPPORT TAXES - but when you actually have a chance to PAY THE TAXES YOU LOVE, you don't.

You belong in JAIL.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 4:52 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


So YOU are employing illegal aliens ????

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 4:48 PM | Report abuse

When my lover moved up here from SF to live with me we had some furniture to get into the truck. Took less than ten minutes to find three guys, brief conversation in Spanish, half a day of work, tipped them generously. They worked hard, didn't steal anything, and we were on the road before 2PM.

Too convenient to pass up.

Posted by: Noacoler | May 13, 2010 4:32 PM | Report abuse

The majority of people in this country are opposed to amnesty for illegal immigrants for two simple reasons:

(painfully obvious simplicity deleted out of mercy)

==

Yeah but it's so much easier to take it out on poor defenseless people.

AGAIN: people don't risk their lives crossing the border so they can starve, nor do they come here for that "free lunch" that leapin is always on about. They come here to work. They come here for jobs. Without the hope of getting a job, they wouldn't come.

YOU TRACKING SO FAR??

Who supplies the jobs? Suits.

Why don't we go after the suits? "That's crazy talk," right? Fine upstannin' pillars of the community, right? White people!

Sheesh. Grow one.

Posted by: Noacoler | May 13, 2010 4:27 PM | Report abuse

noacoler wrote: Better yet. Ask them if they want to see suit millionaires in prison for employing thousands of illegals.
------------------------
If this question was polled, I think most voters would support jailing wealthy employers. The lobbyists would go nuts, but I do think the average person would go for it.

What a lot of people who don't live in the border states, is how pervasive immigrants (and I suspect illegal) are. I never even heard of a SINGLE homeowner ever trying to determine a day laborer's status. It would be pointless, since none of us homeowners would know legal from illegal papers. If you want day labor, you'll take what is available.

Shrink is right--it's not just unskilled labor, it's skilled labor.

And I agree with shrink, that you get a good job done, for a reasonable price, with breathtaking speed, and no bellyaching.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | May 13, 2010 4:26 PM | Report abuse

"...Business interests* and partisan Democratic politicians..."

This just about covers the territory.
Any questions as to why things are not going to change?

*Republican politicians

Posted by: shrink2 | May 13, 2010 4:23 PM | Report abuse

@shrink: yeah. I didn't have Chrome but I maintain software that installs it. I just did.

Click the wrench button. Select Extensions. Enter AdBlock in the search box.

Seeing that stupid face week after week really gets old.

Posted by: Noacoler | May 13, 2010 4:22 PM | Report abuse

It really is too bad we don't have a system like in Great Britain - in which we can toss these characters out FAST.


If only this country could have called for NEW ELECTIONS THIS PAST WINTER - and been able to see Obama walking out - just like Gorden Brown just did in London.


WE NEED ELECTORIAL REFORM IN THIS COUNTRY WHICH WOULD ALLOW US TO GET RID OF OBAMA RIGHT AWAY.


INSTEAD OF OBAMA JAMMING HIS health care down everyone's throats, we could have tossed OBAMA OUT OF OFFICE.


Instead we have to listen to COMPLETE IDIOTS TRY TO DEFEND OBAMA FOR THE NEXT TWO YEARS - THE LIES, THE DISTRACTIONS, THE CRAP THAT IS ABOUT TO COME FROM THE DEMOCRATS IS GOING TO BE UNREAL.


Go ahead CALL THE WHOLE COUNTRY RACIST.


NO ONE CARES ANYMORE - AS LONG AS OBAMA AND THE LIBERALS ARE ALL THROWN OUT OF OFFICE.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 4:21 PM | Report abuse

shrink2


So who are the real criminals ????


the illegals or the democrats who hire them ???


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 4:19 PM | Report abuse

Noa, it worked!
Shane is...gone!
Thanks, I owe ya one.

Posted by: shrink2 | May 13, 2010 4:19 PM | Report abuse

The majority of people in this country are opposed to amnesty for illegal immigrants for two simple reasons:

1) they think the laws of this country generally should be obeyed and enforced. Business interests and partisan Democratic politicians disagree with this on the issue of illegal immigration.

2) in a recession with continuing high unemployment, most people object to persons who broke laws being allowed to compete for scarce jobs in most areas of country.

Posted by: Aprogressiveindependent | May 13, 2010 4:17 PM | Report abuse

Ask voters in border states whether they want to see housewives jailed for employing an illegal housecleaner, carpet cleaner, day laborer, babysitter, painter or handyman. If that was enforced, there would be NO housewives walking free.

==

Better yet. Ask them if they want to see suit millionaires in prison for employing thousands of illegals.

I don't think hanging around Home Depot looking for a few hours of hauling would be quite enough to attract 20 million.

Go after the ones who employ them by the thousands, the great majority of whom are Republicans.

This won't happen, of course.

"If anyone needs help connecting the dots, let me know."

Posted by: Noacoler | May 13, 2010 4:15 PM | Report abuse

noa, I'm willin'
but does it work with Chrome?

Perhaps as a result of where I live, Chrome is astonishingly fast, but a lot of stuff is glitchy on it.

Posted by: shrink2 | May 13, 2010 4:14 PM | Report abuse

37th is now addressing me.

No one will talk to him. Waaaaaaaaaaah.

No one will pay attention to him. Waaaaaaaaaaaah.

NO, wait-a-minute, not Waaaaaaaaaaaaaah.

Yip yip yip.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | May 13, 2010 4:10 PM | Report abuse

For those tired of seeing the Shane Evans ad:

In firefox, install AdBlock Plus.

Tools Menu | Add-ons | enter "Ad Block." Hit Enter. Select Ad Block Plus

Accept the default subscription.

If you still see the banner, hover and click "Block." Select the first entry beginning with http://

I don't see his stupid goatee anymore.

Posted by: Noacoler | May 13, 2010 4:08 PM | Report abuse

Where I live, in orchard country, the seasonal work creates very large numbers of people who will do anything you don't want to do for $7-10 an hour.

People here don't just get their windows washed, they get rock walls built, basements made into living space, 'park out' their wood lots, put in wine grapes...adding value to their property...all with no annoying taxes and fees, no permits, no workmans' comp, no problem with bad attitude either.

If you are a nice person they are very grateful and they work as hard, hard as sled dogs, a neighbor with a cherry orchard told me that once. None of that BS about a 20 minute break every three hours.

Posted by: shrink2 | May 13, 2010 4:06 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


Here is another plan for illegal immigration - and one that is likely to deter people from crossing the border.


This one is probably not that expensive compared to other methods.


We set up a series of PC laptops with cameras along the border - attached to each one is a machine gun. We allow computer users to log onto the computers and operate the machine guns.


This way - each position will have someone logged onto to each station all the time - and watching the border !

Come on we can use tranquilizer bullets -

As long as they wake up in ...... Africa.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 4:03 PM | Report abuse

Jail for Americans who pay illegal workers?
Ooops, look in the mirror America.
----------------------------------
This is the poll I'd like to see:

Ask voters in border states whether they want to see housewives jailed for employing an illegal housecleaner, carpet cleaner, day laborer, babysitter, painter or handyman. If that was enforced, there would be NO housewives walking free.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | May 13, 2010 3:54 PM | Report abuse

leapin writes
"I have a lawyer friend that can help you file for intellectual bankruptcy."


You're good for one of those about once a quarter. Well played.

.

Posted by: bsimon1 | May 13, 2010 3:54 PM | Report abuse

Anyone who would read any further than this needs to take a course in time management.
You, sir, are a fool.
Posted by: Noacoler
----------------------------------------
I have a lawyer friend that can help you file for intellectual bankruptcy.

Posted by: leapin | May 13, 2010 3:51 PM | Report abuse

37th writes:

yip yip yip YIP YIP YIP yap yap yap YAP YAP YAP

yap yap yap MACHINE GUNS!!!!!!!!!!!!

YIP YIP YIP...Vietnam...yap yap yap YAP YAP YAP
-------------------------------
What does it say about a guy who wants to impersonate a yapping dog? Not much of a self image, is it? Of course, puppies are kinda cute.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | May 13, 2010 3:49 PM | Report abuse

leapin, if the raids of industries who employ illegal labor sent the managers and the owners to jail instead of the workers...if the people who employ illegal workers to clean their toilets went to jail, the workers coming across both borders would...not find work.

The flow would stop. They are here for the money Americans pay them.

Jail for Americans who pay illegal workers?
Ooops, look in the mirror America.

You say there is a drug cartel problem too?
Americans are buying drugs from Mexico?

America's drug problem causes a crime wave to bite its sorry !Ass?


Posted by: shrink2 | May 13, 2010 3:45 PM | Report abuse

Have you noticed the deafening silence from Obama? In state after state across the country, Arizona-type immigration laws are being introduced and there is deep frustration over the lack of action on immigration by the federal government, but the leader of this nation is MIA. No initiatives, no speech to the nation, no summit, no solutions from Obama. WHERE IS OBAMA?

Posted by: mehuwss | May 13, 2010 3:42 PM | Report abuse

The D bagger free lunch party of the left

==

Anyone who would read any further than this needs to take a course in time management.

You, sir, are a fool.

Posted by: Noacoler | May 13, 2010 3:38 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


Here is another plan for illegal immigration - and one that is likely to deter people from crossing the border.

This one is probably not that expensive compared to other methods.

We set up a series of PC laptops with cameras along the border - attached to each one is a machine gun. We allow computer users to log onto the computers and operate the machine guns.

This way - each position will have someone logged onto to each station all the time - and watching the border !


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 3:35 PM | Report abuse

leapin, the only advocates of illegal immigration are Republican.

Illegal immigration happens because it is profitable. This country is entirely capable of stopping illegal immigration.
We don't.

Why? The answer is always the same: money.

No one in America thinks illegal immigration is good except for a few people who operate certain industries, very powerful industries, industries that are not controlled by liberals, nor statists (whatever that is).

Do you understand?

Posted by: shrink2 | May 13, 2010 3:32 PM | Report abuse

leapin


Legal immigrants left their old countries for a REASON


they don't want this country turning into their old country.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 3:28 PM | Report abuse

Hispanic GOP candidate Rubio talks out of both sides of his mouth!
He opposes the Arizona law that targets Hispanics until his Teabagger base finds out......now he supports the law.
lol


Posted by: angie12106
__________________________________________

The D bagger free lunch party of the left thinks that different skins pigments are monolithic in their behavior. Many legal immigrants, be they of brown, pink, yellow, whatever skin pigment, are not advocates of illegal immigration. They know that blatant disregard of our laws and borders is going to lead to unintended consequences that the neocom statists of the American left will find out in time to be self-destructive.

Posted by: leapin | May 13, 2010 3:22 PM | Report abuse

First of all this granny is a young one so don't knock the granny. The border needs to be secure first. Then provide a way Mexicans who can work and need to work can find employment and be given work permits. We can build a fence or monitor it with drones. I have great compassion for those needing work and those who need them but they are just letting anyone run through down here. This must stop.
And I am really sick of the misinformation by the President who obviously cannot find the time to read things he signs or makes comments on bills he obviously did not read. The bill in Arizona does not allow someone to be stopped while having ice cream with your kids unless you are robbing the store or breaking the law while driving.
Now who does not have a drivers license or some form of ID. If you do not drive, most states provide Personal ID cards with photo. This is so childish it is really almost embarrassing.
They stop citizens in Texas on highways running from the border to major cities all the time and ask for ID. And for the morons boycotting Arizona, these little thugs are moving your way. Oh are you going to have fun. The drug issue and allowing of any terrorist or felon to run across our borders is the same issue in the south.
Illegal immigration and its problems are still here because Obama is sitting on his fanny and letting you and I pick up the tab for the Feds doing absolutely nothing about the one right the Federal government has been given in our Constitution. And under Obama, the Feds have no problem sticking their nose in all the other areas of our life they have no business being involved in. And this administrations blaming it on everyone but themselves is just getting me riled. And nobody likes a riled granny.

Posted by: greatgran1 | May 13, 2010 3:21 PM | Report abuse

Here's a thought: maybe CC thinks 37th is a good representative of conservative thought.

==

You mean Republican thought. As in absence thereof.

Conservatism seems dead in America. The few actual conservatives are excoritated and purged by the whatever-we-call-thems who have taken over. Ronald Reagan would be savaged if he were in politics today, probably switch back to Democratic.

Based on the glaring favoritism here both in the blog and the comments, I believe you're right .. but that really doesn't say anything good about CC if he's cool with all this repetitive unhinged drivel and junk from this brain-charred mental case.

Posted by: Noacoler | May 13, 2010 3:20 PM | Report abuse

Uff da, I didn't know you were a squarehead, you learn something new every day.

Posted by: shrink2 | May 13, 2010 3:15 PM
---------------------------------
Uff da to you also. You don't know how much I'm chuckling.

Explains why the two of us are so into reading that technical blog about the BP oil gush.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | May 13, 2010 3:19 PM | Report abuse

I'm reading 37th posts:

yap yap yap YAP YAP YAP yip yip yip YIP YIP YIP

YIP YIP YIP YIP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Let's get back to yap yap yap YAP YAP YAP yip yip yip YIP YIP YIP

Posted by: 12BarBlues | May 13, 2010 3:16 PM | Report abuse

MethHead wrote:

"You have been banned 3 times"

==

Yes, for calling Jake a racist. There was considerable protest from other posters. There would be none if you were banned, quite the contrary.

==

"And how in the world can you call someone else unhinged ?"

==

By placing a finger on the u key, then the n key, then the h key ..

==

"When are you leaving for Vietnam ?"

==

Next visit: August

One-way: probably late 2012

==

Posted by: Noacoler | May 13, 2010 3:16 PM | Report abuse

Uff da, I didn't know you were a squarehead, you learn something new every day.

Posted by: shrink2 | May 13, 2010 3:15 PM | Report abuse

Why does CC let it go on?
----------------------------
Here's a thought: maybe CC thinks 37th is a good representative of conservative thought.

Bwahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: 12BarBlues | May 13, 2010 3:12 PM | Report abuse

This is not true and shows blatant Swedish bias! There were far more Germans and Norwegian immigrants in Minnesota than there were Swedes.

Posted by: shrink2 | May 13, 2010 3:05 PM
----------------------------------
Bwahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!

I wondered when the Norwegians would show up. I debated using Norwegians instead of Swedes, but the Swedes are meaner. (I'm descended from the Norwegians).

And we just won't talk about the Germans. LOL.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | May 13, 2010 3:10 PM | Report abuse

LET'S get back to immigration

Complaining about racial profiling AND LEAVING THE ILLEGAL ALIENS HERE IS NOT A SOLUTION - IT IS THE PROBLEM.

Dropping off the offenders in Africa would say to the Mexicans in Mexico - STAY THERE.


AND 12Bar, I rarely use exclamation points.

thanks !


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 3:07 PM | Report abuse

37th is like a yapping puppy running after the big dogs. He WANTS to be a part of the conversation, but he doesn't know how. He tries insults, silliness, repetition, demanding, capitalization and exclamation points. There is nothing he won't sink to to get attention directed at HIM.

==

Even Jake got banned for his vertical-space assault on the blog, and Jake not only seemed to have an exemption from the rules, he was outrightly coddled. 37th is even less substantive than Jake was, and that's saying a lot, but he's here month after month, 18 or mroe hours a day.

Nobody could get as little sleep as he does without stimulants, and sure enough he exhibits the derangement that comes of taking them.

Why does CC let it go on?

BB, you said you see CC in person, could you ask him about this? It's really mysterious.

Posted by: Noacoler | May 13, 2010 3:06 PM | Report abuse

"There wouldn't be a Minnesota without the Swedes."

This is not true and shows blatant Swedish bias! There were far more Germans and Norwegian immigrants in Minnesota than there were Swedes.

Posted by: shrink2 | May 13, 2010 3:05 PM | Report abuse

Noacoler


You have been banned 3 times - and you have the nerve to say someone else should go? Why don't you just leave?


And how in the world can you call someone else unhinged ?

When are you leaving for Vietnam ? Please pack and leave - and I hope you go on trial for being a spy

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 3:04 PM | Report abuse

Actually any of those documents would keep the police from questioning your legal status and that would only be after you were stopped for an infraction.

Posted by: bartling | May 13, 2010 2:55 PM
-------------------------------
You know this for a fact? Or are you assuming? I am planning a drive through, and actually I do have a little concern about the difference on my license from my birth certificate. However, I am clearly anglo, so that would be some protection.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | May 13, 2010 3:02 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


You are not offering any solutions to the illegal alien situation.

The democrats say : just let them break the law, and do nothing.

I suppose that the democrats WANT TO GIVE THE ILLEGAL ALIENS FREE HEALTH CARE AS WELL.

OH - sorry, the democrats want to give them a "path to citizenship" which is AMNESTY - and then GIVE THEM FREE HEALTH CARE TOO.

What is next - allowing their children to go to school in the US for free too ???


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 2:59 PM | Report abuse

@noa,

37th is like a yapping puppy running after the big dogs. He WANTS to be a part of the conversation, but he doesn't know how. He tries insults, silliness, repetition, demanding, capitalization and exclamation points. There is nothing he won't sink to to get attention directed at HIM.

What would the big dogs do to the puppy running around yapping? Of course, no puppy would be quite as dumb as 37th.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | May 13, 2010 2:59 PM | Report abuse

Does anyone know what constitutes proof of citizenship in Arizona?

If I drive through Arizona, and I am a resident of another state, what do I have to produce in Arizona?

I have a passport but prefer not to carry it in case it is lost or stolen.

I have a driver's license, but I know FOR A FACT that I have never proved my citizenship for that license. My first license was in Montana, and then through the years, in every state in which I resided.

I have a social security number, but I know FOR A FACT that I have never proved my citizenship for that number.

The reason I know this, is because when I applied for my passport (about 20 years ago)and had to produce a birth certificate, I was amazed that my first name is not what I've gone by, my whole life. And my drivers' license and social security records do not match that name, AND STILL DON'T.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | May 13, 2010 1:50 PM | Report abuse
==================================
Actually any of those documents would keep the police from questioning your legal status and that would only be after you were stopped for an infraction.

Posted by: bartling | May 13, 2010 2:55 PM | Report abuse

Is there any way we can drum up the pressure to get 37th out of here? He's just jamming the discussion and taking up excessive vertical space. He repeats his posts over and over and everything he writes is violently racist and unhinged.

Of course if he were liberal he'd've been banned long ago.

Posted by: Noacoler | May 13, 2010 2:51 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


There is WIDESPREAD breaking of the immigration laws - how do you propose that the law be ENFORCED?

Clearly, there is another problem - those caught and sent back to Mexico come back -


This problem has to be addressed. If we start sending the Mexicans to Africa - then it would be an ADDITIONAL REASON NOT TO COME HERE IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Right now, there is lax enforcement, and getting caught is not that bad - enough to deter them.

Maybe we should bill them for enforcement too.

Sending the illegal aliens would help the African economy too -

We need to address this problem.

THE DEMOCRATS JUST WANT TO DO NOTHING.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 2:49 PM | Report abuse

nuestros niños hablan Castellano muy bueno.

==

Wouldn't that be "muy bien?"

Not one of my 4-0 languages but I believe adjective and adverbs are much like English.

Good on you for raising your kids bilingual, unlike me and my generation your kids will have an easier time all their lives acquiring new languages. I struggle with Vietnamese, but then I'm 56 and it's tonal.

I **love** watching America go bilingual. I love the enrichment and I delight in the discomfiture of bigots. Around here if you go to a mall you hear Spanish, two or three Chinese dialects, Vietnamese, and, oddly enough, even Portugese.

Posted by: Noacoler | May 13, 2010 2:47 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


It is my understanding that the new drivers' licenses - which one has to give your birth certificate again - are good enough to prove who you are.

However, some states have resisted implementation of the new license requirements.

However, if your papers are not in order, I recommend that you leave the country immediately - don't even go to Arizona to try to get caught. Just leave.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 2:43 PM | Report abuse

perhaps we should drop them off in Africa - so it is more difficult for them to run back to the US.
---------------------------------
I get down on my knees and PLEAD with everyone here not to respond to this. 37th has been trying for weeks now to get SOMEONE to argue with him about his send-em-to-Africa. So far, I don't anyone has tumbled for his taunt.

He's just a troll, don't feed him. He is silliness at the highest level.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | May 13, 2010 2:36 PM | Report abuse

The penalties have to INCREASE for illegal aliens - perhaps we should drop them off in Africa - so it is more difficult for them to run back to the US.

Employer penalties shoudl be INCREASED too.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 2:32 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


Sounds like you should be deported immediately. I'm sure that many people on this blog would agree.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010
-----------------------------------
You never disappoint me. I don't expect anything from you but silliness and you ALWAYS come through.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | May 13, 2010 2:28 PM | Report abuse

For most Americans, immigration is a plus.

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | May 13, 2010 2:16 PM

how did you figure that? did you divide by zero.

Posted by: doof | May 13, 2010 2:25 PM | Report abuse

Chris probably does not remember that ALL THE ILLEGAL ALIENS WERE GIVEN AMNESTY IN THE 80S - and the country was promised NO MORE


The Amnesty only encouraged more illegal aliens to come here.


That plan does not work.

La Raza - if they do not like this country, they should go back to Mexico. This is one of the biggest jokes ever.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 2:25 PM | Report abuse

We haven't had a Consuelo or José. We have employed an Inora and a María as sitters. As a side benefit, nuestros niños hablan Castellano muy bueno.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | May 13, 2010 2:23 PM | Report abuse

Or do you think liberals make money running industries that depend upon illegal labor?

Posted by: shrink2 | May 13, 2010 12:17 PM


liberals are too stupid to run anything. look at obama.

Posted by: doof | May 13, 2010 2:18 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


Sounds like you should be deported immediately. I'm sure that many people on this blog would agree.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 2:18 PM | Report abuse

There was an interesting guest on C-SPAN this morning. I caught a bit of her discussion on the radio. The question came up about the effect of immigration--legal and illegal. For most Americans, immigration is a plus.

For those without high school diplomas, there is wage suppression of several percent. The effects were weaker than I expected, though the person wasn't coming to the discussion with an agenda.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | May 13, 2010 2:16 PM | Report abuse

There was an interesting guest on C-SPAN this morning. I caught a bit of her discussion on the radio. The question came up about the effect of immigration--legal and illegal. For most Americans, immigration is a plus.

For those without high school diplomas, there is wage suppression of several percent. The effects were weaker than I expected, though the person wasn't coming to the discussion with an agenda.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | May 13, 2010 2:13 PM | Report abuse

the rich Republican who employs them.

Posted by: JEP07 | May 13, 2010 1:44 PM
---------------------------------
With due respect, Jep, liberals also employ Consuelo and Jose and others. In fact, Consuelo and Jose employ anglos.

Now, I'm talking as a Californian, where I can't even imagine life without hispanics who are very much integrated into California life.

It would be like talking about Minnesota without the Swedes. There wouldn't be a Minnesota without the Swedes.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | May 13, 2010 1:56 PM | Report abuse

We knew that having a nonwhite president would torque up the right wing but nobody expected the raw insanity we've gotten. Now with fewer illegals than anytime in memory we have wingnuts screaming that it "gets worse every day."

idiots. Idiots. Idiots.

Posted by: Noacoler | May 13, 2010 1:55 PM | Report abuse

Does anyone know what constitutes proof of citizenship in Arizona?

If I drive through Arizona, and I am a resident of another state, what do I have to produce in Arizona?

I have a passport but prefer not to carry it in case it is lost or stolen.

I have a driver's license, but I know FOR A FACT that I have never proved my citizenship for that license. My first license was in Montana, and then through the years, in every state in which I resided.

I have a social security number, but I know FOR A FACT that I have never proved my citizenship for that number.

The reason I know this, is because when I applied for my passport (about 20 years ago)and had to produce a birth certificate, I was amazed that my first name is not what I've gone by, my whole life. And my drivers' license and social security records do not match that name, AND STILL DON'T.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | May 13, 2010 1:50 PM | Report abuse

"grifting border criminals"

Oh, you mean Maria and Consuela, the house-maid and the nanny?

Real grifters, that pair...

The only grifters involved are the coyotes who brought them here and the rich Republican who employs them.

Posted by: JEP07 | May 13, 2010 1:44 PM | Report abuse

Drindl, I recall we had this very conversation in another version back in September or October of 2006. Zouk was touting a permanent Republican majority.

And as I recall, he was even suggesting George Allen would be the next President.

Zouk was ALWAYS wrong then, too. But he always represented real people I met daily, there are so many who are desperate for the fictional "Leave it to Beaver" world that never existed, they want to believe the lies and are afraid of considering the truth.

Posted by: JEP07 | May 13, 2010 1:40 PM | Report abuse

If any politician mentions anything about amnesty and more services for these grifting border criminals, then that politician needs to be sent to the unemployment line, with the rest of Americans there due to illegal immigration.

Posted by: hared | May 13, 2010 1:35 PM | Report abuse

It's zouk, JEP. He has been kicked off here a number of times, but like the undead, he keeps coming back because he hasn't got anything else.

If anything, his life has gotten emptier, because now he's on here every few mintues for like 18 hours a day, posting the exact same stuff under usually 3 names a day -- sometimes even talks to himself!

It's hilarious, but pathetic too -- such a wasted life.

Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 1:25 PM | Report abuse

math whiz still calls gaining 290,000 jobs a job less recovery but losing 525,000 p/month
a booming economy and proof of how well
the GOP ran the economy (into the ditch).
count on math whiz to always cheer AGAINST America and pray for economic failure
using logic he learned at his community college.
Again whiz tell us how -525,000 jobs is greater than gaining +290,000 and brag to us about that wonderful 8 years of -.01% DOW growth. Maybe if you repeat that nonsense
enough times you will persuade yourself that you know anything at all about economics.

Posted by: leichtman1 | May 13, 2010 1:22 PM | Report abuse

Utahreb wrote: I am a long-time registered Indpendent and have found myself on the side of liberals in most matters, like the health care reform bill.
-------------------------------------
You're the one! You were the single, registered Utah Independent, and now you've gone to Arizona.

LOL.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | May 13, 2010 1:13 PM | Report abuse

PS Drindl it is good to see you are still here beating up on the wingnut ideologue ignoramusses(sp?), I see the King of Zouk has either changed his name (again, or you've got a new bumpkin to embarrass.

At least Bumbler is well named...

Posted by: JEP07 | May 13, 2010 12:58 PM | Report abuse

The Labor Department said Thursday that initial unemployment claims were a seasonally adjusted 444,000 this week.

Finance whiz was bragging about the new jobs figure of 290,000. that was for the MONTH of april.

do the math finance whiz.

they used to call this a "jobless recovery". that was when a Repub was in power. Now, since it is a Lib, they call it a potential for good news sometime in the future.

when Bush said that intelligence reports indicated there were WMDs , he was called a liar for years.

When berry said that unemployment would not go above 8%, he was "mistaken" and blamed the crisis for being worse than he thought, except at the time it was called the worst crisis in history.

Posted by: bumblingberry | May 13, 2010 12:58 PM | Report abuse

hmmm...historical examples of when walls have successfully kept people in or out of a territory. Thinking, thinking...

Interesting strategy by Crist. I wonder what the motivation was of donors who wwant Crist the Republican to have the money rather than Crist the independent. The guy is looking a lot better now than he did against Rubio. I'd probably be happy if I were a Crist donor.

Posted by: DDAWD | May 13, 2010 12:52 PM | Report abuse

"emerging electoral issue?"

Chris, where you been for the last 40 years?

This issue has been with us since FOREVER, true it may be seeing a resurgence in the media, but it has never been off the public stovetop, if not on the front burners.

Actually, I think one of those front burners actually is labeled "immigration reforrm."

Posted by: JEP07 | May 13, 2010 12:52 PM | Report abuse

The fence is estimated to cost $5 billion to complete. That is just a payback to a corrupt Chicago donor in this administration - a rounding error.

Posted by: bumblingberry | May 13, 2010 12:51 PM | Report abuse

greatgran1 writes
"We are being lied to that fences do not work. They would if you build them."

I'm sure a fence could be built that would work. The question is whether that's the most cost-effective way to solve the problem.

re: the rest of your post, you're conflating the drug war with the illegal immigration problem. They're both problems & certainly overlap, but are not the same thing & likely require different solutions.

Posted by: bsimon1 | May 13, 2010 12:47 PM | Report abuse

Regardless of the rhetoric Dear Leader has been spouting in order to fan the flames against Arizona's "misguided" immigration law, the American public isn't buying it. A recent Pew Research Center poll shows overwhelming public support -- 73% agree that people should be required to produce documents verifying their legal status if police ask.


While Americans are 59% in support of the Arizona law per se, they are even more in support of individual items for which the law provides. The issue isn't completely partisan, either. While the nation is split along party lines on some areas, a significant majority of Democrats at least support the key provisions of the law: 65% of Dems support requiring folks to produce documents verifying their legal status and 55% support allowing the authorities to detain them if they can't somehow verify their status as legal residents.

With polling like this, will it be any surprise if the White House soft-sells the issue, diverting its resources instead toward another winner with the people, Cap and Trade? If only we had been so lucky with ObamaCare. Just how many more unpopular issues can Chairman Zero try to force on the American people and still expect to be re-elected?

Posted by: bumblingberry | May 13, 2010 12:43 PM | Report abuse

WASHINGTON — A strong majority of Americans support Arizona's controversial new immigration law and would back similar laws in their own states, according to three new polls released Wednesday.


Sixty-one percent of Americans — and 64 percent of registered voters — said they favored the law in a survey of 1,016 adults conducted May 6-9 by the McClatchy-Ipsos poll.
Some 73 percent of those surveyed by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press said they approved of the provision that requires people to provide proof of their legal status, compared with 23 percent who disapproved. A further 67 percent were in favor of allowing police to detain anyone unable to verify their legal status, while 62 percent supported police having the power to question anyone they believed may in the country illegally.
A NBC/WSJ poll found sixty-four percent favor this law, while 34 percent oppose it. But that poll also found those numbers are essentially reversed among Latinos -- with 70 percent of them opposing the law, and only 27 percent supporting it.
Despite what can only be described as overwhelming support throughout the country, local and state governments controlled by Democrats continued to pass resolutions condemning the law or calling for boycotts. The Obama administration, moreover, has suggested it will launch a federal investigation of the law and perhaps a court challenge.

Los Angeles on Wednesday became the latest major city to approve an economic boycott of Arizona in protest at the immigration law. San Francisco passed a similar measure late Tuesday, according Agence France-Presse.

The Los Angeles City Council voted 13-1 in favor of the boycott, which bars all travel to Arizona for city-related business and forbids department chiefs from doing business with companies headquartered in the state.

Posted by: nychap44 | May 13, 2010 12:38 PM | Report abuse

I am neither a Republican nor a Democrat. I am a GDI - an independent, just like when I attended college. For the past year, I have been researching the immigration issue from the other side of the border in south-central Mexico.

What most people in the USA don't realize, is that the border fence makes it nearly impossible for Mexicans to return home, once they cross. Many Mexicans have been deprived from ever seeing family members again. This also motivates younger family members to cross to visit their parents, etc.

The border is a deadly region to cross due to our uncivilized drug laws and the resulting violence of the mob engaged in trafficking. For unskilled workers, we only issue a handful of visas every year.

We have a human rights nightmare at the border. As Pogo once said, "we have met the enemy and he is us."

Posted by: alance | May 13, 2010 12:37 PM | Report abuse

Amazing how people get all caught up in these idiotic party affiliations. Here is an analogy for ALL of you. Compare the Democrats to the fox - slick, sly...will sneak up on you if you aren't careful. And the Republicans, like the wolf, breaking through the door all full of hot air and bluster. Now, imagine that ALL of the people in this country are the chickens in the coop that the wolf or fox is hunting for. Does it matter to the chicken which one is going to eat him? if you don't know, ask a chicken. Point is people that we don't need to align ourselves with the politricks of EITHER party. Can any of you name something significant that has changed in your own life whether it was the Republicans or Democrats in charge? NO...you can't and you know it. The reason that the banks got "too big to fail" was the public; health care getting outrageous? the public. clowns and jokers in office for year after year? the public who votes them in and then apathetically leaves them there to rot in office, doing little to nothing to even justify ever being there in the first place. illegal immigration? the public, who can't seem to realize that first and foremost anyone who comes into this country UNLAWFULLY is breaking what? how about the law? W.C. Fields said it best "I would never join a club that would have me as a member"...and that means both of the political clubs. think, folks...it ain't illegal...YET.....

Posted by: drum7591 | May 13, 2010 12:36 PM | Report abuse

You mentioned the rapid growth of the Hispanic population. Illegal immigration, past and present, is reason our Hispanic population is burgeoning. Reagan legalized one generation of illegals. Now Democrats want to legalize all the illegals who have poured into the country since the Reagan amnesty. It's insane. The Democrats are insane. Who is going to pay for this vast population of unskilled workers who speak little or no English? Who's going to pay for the vast array of social benefits legitimacy conveys? Not the illegal aliens who no doubt fall into the 50% of Americans who pay no federal tax.

Posted by: ndriscoll1 | May 13, 2010 12:30 PM | Report abuse

drivl has elected to apply the "I know you are but what am I" defense today.

fitting for her level of intellect, isn't it?

she must be having trouble finding a matching retort on all her ugly hate sites.

you could try the "I'm rubber you're glue" tactic. I hear that one works great.

Posted by: bumblingberry | May 13, 2010 12:28 PM | Report abuse

I see the liberal twits would punish a corporation by simply killing them. all fine if you subscribe to liberal facsism.

But consider that since it is a private organization at fault, there is recourse including monetary damages and punishment.

Now if big government liberals had thier way, and every industry was nationalized, there would be no recourse. the only money available would be tax money. the only punishment, a congressional hearing and lots of finger pointing, the same way it is with every big government f up ever.

Have you ever tried to point out to the DMV or the IRS that they are mistaken? Ever wondered when the zoning board would get back to you on your plans?

Berry doesn't like Apple ipods (except the one he has and the one he gave to the queen (not Neo), the other one) but consider how many peopple flock to the apple store. when my kids ipod went bad, they replaced it that day. Just try to get the government to respond to anything in less than a year or two. Berry is still trying to figure out what happened when the Army Doc shot up the fort. Of course it is no ones fault and there will be no punishment, no correction, no money changing hands. It is the government so it is simply tough sheet.

What we need is more of that, according to a few liberal moonbats, a very few by the looks of the upcoming election.

Posted by: bumblingberry | May 13, 2010 12:23 PM | Report abuse

It is time to start deporting the illegal aliens


The problem is they run back over the border to the United States.


Maybe we should drop them off in Africa - to make it harder for them to get back.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 12:20 PM | Report abuse

"Someone is making money off the Feds not doing their part to secure the border."

That is correct grandma, they are called Republicans. Or do you think liberals make money running industries that depend upon illegal labor?

Posted by: shrink2 | May 13, 2010 12:17 PM | Report abuse

alance thank you.

Here we have an honest Republican, aware of the money being made and declaring no harm no foul on illegal migration. Why do "social conservatives" think voting for a Republican will "close the border"? There is money being made people, illegals generate wealth for business owners and guess what the party of business owners happens to be?

Oh, is there something wrong with that?
Then talk to the people who run the food industries about your desire to put them out of business. Imports are readily available after all.

Posted by: shrink2 | May 13, 2010 12:12 PM | Report abuse

Hard to ignore the elephant in the room. We are all furious about the huge deficit and the healthcare takeover but adding to all this expense is the problem with illegal immigration. We in the south are carrying this massive burden which is getting worse by the day. Our hospitals are overrun as well as our schools. And crime is beyond belief. We have a virtual blood bath on the border with
22,000 poor souls who have been beheaded, knifed or gunned down. They have killed a number of Chief of police, police, editors, journalists, mayors or citizens just brave enough to stand up for what is right. Drug cartel march drug trains into American soil guarded by AK47's and our sheriffs have pistols. Hello? And do you think these little thugs are not coming your way or that the crime stays at the border? A Mexican man beheaded his wife in Lewisville, Texas and threw her in his neighbor's driveway while the neighbor's kids viewed from the living room window. This crime was just two weeks ago and an example of what we read in our papers every week. This is more than serious and yes illegal immigration is a real issue. Running people over the border endangers us and it endangers those poor people who are being taken advantage of by cartels who have figured out that this is quite the money making business.
Something is fishy is Washington and I will be brave enough to say what no one is saying. We are being lied to that fences do not work. They would if you build them. Someone is making money off the Feds not doing their part to secure the border. Our security and our future is on the line with this issue.

Posted by: greatgran1 | May 13, 2010 12:11 PM | Report abuse

Besides the outrageous deficits, the biggest problem we have over immigration is that the strategists in both parties (are) trying to game out how the immigration issue will affect turnout. The political elites of both parties still see this issue as a game to exploit.

It is a myth that America's population is too large. Well meaning people are still being suckered by the old discredited book - The Population Bomb.

While immigrants often work for less money than native born North Americans, they are not slave-labor. That is a liberal myth. What they make here is better than what they made in Mexico.

The Central Valley of California, for example, is the most productive agricultural region in the entire world, due to immigrant labor and irrigation.

Posted by: alance | May 13, 2010 11:58 AM | Report abuse

doof you may philosophically disagree
with Rove about immigration but since he was responsible for Bush's 2 elections you might
want to consider his appreciation of the
issue politically especially in states like
Ca and Texas. Interesting CC made no
mention of the Rove quote and how conservatives
now want to diss Rove when he tells them something they obviously don't want to hear.

Posted by: leichtman1 | May 13, 2010 11:54 AM | Report abuse

criminal. we ought to do what they do in China and execute who ever is responsible for this.

==

cosign

force feed them petroleum

Posted by: Noacoler | May 13, 2010 11:54 AM | Report abuse

"the stooges spread their message of hate here every day. be sure to tune in anytime. there is always at least one or two here at all times.

Posted by: bumblingberry"


.

Indeed. You are always here.

Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 11:52 AM | Report abuse

AMviennaVA


So you have no problem with deporting ALL the illegal aliens in the country ???


How do you propose those laws get enforced?


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 11:50 AM | Report abuse

execute who ever is responsible for this.

Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 11:38 AM


can't you just feel the love?

the stooges spread their message of hate here every day. be sure to tune in anytime. there is always at least one or two here at all times.

Posted by: bumblingberry | May 13, 2010 11:47 AM | Report abuse

Mr. Cillizza. There is a big difference between illegal aliens and legal immigrants. Journalists like you confuse two totally different subjects. Does the law, according to you, means anything?
You embolden organizations like LaRaza, and other open border entitlement ridden organizations, who disregard our laws, disregard our flag, disregard our language.
It is sad. I have very little respect for journalists like you.

Posted by: wggodek | May 13, 2010 11:45 AM | Report abuse


Yea, make it an emergency so hasty laws that CHANGE nothing can be passed and we will be stuck with our problem forever.

Arizona adopted federal immigration laws and made them state laws so the problem can be addressed and laws enforced and problems corrected.

This problem has been ignored for decades and hasty new laws to preserve the problem is not REFORM!

Posted by: maphound | May 13, 2010 11:44 AM | Report abuse

I like this line,

"...refused to become aware of what has been said."

Posted by: shrink2 | May 13, 2010 11:44 AM | Report abuse

60 to 65% of Americans support the AZ law which mirrors exactly the Federal Law which is not being enforced. The press and Obama are misrepresenting the AZ law and the downside for Donkeycrats will be long term just as with the healthcare fraud. What part of illegal do you not understand? There are LEGAL ways to come into this Country, but that is not good enough for La Raza and the rest of them..

Posted by: 2010Rout | May 13, 2010 11:44 AM | Report abuse

"A House energy panel investigation has found that the blowout preventer that failed to stop a huge oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico had a dead battery in its control pod, leaks in its hydraulic system, a "useless" test version of a key component and a cutting tool that wasn't strong enough to shear through steel joints in the well pipe and stop the flow of oil. "

criminal. we ought to do what they do in China and execute who ever is responsible for this.

Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 11:38 AM | Report abuse

curious why Karl Rove's recent criticism of GOP support for the Az law has not been
measured here since he is pretty savy
when it comes to winning elections and GOP political strategies?

Posted by: leichtman1 | May 13, 2010 11:25 AM

he was the one who pushed bush on comprehensive immigration. rove is an idiot when it comes to immigration.

Posted by: doof | May 13, 2010 11:38 AM | Report abuse

37thand0street @ May 13, 2010 9:05 AM wrote " ... The people who oppose the law in Arizona really want OPEN BORDERS - they don't want any immigration laws and they want the people here to get AMNESTY."

That is WRONG. You have obviously refused to become aware of what has been said. What we need is respect for the 4th ammendment of the Constitution. No more, and no less.

Posted by: AMviennaVA | May 13, 2010 11:37 AM | Report abuse


"this has to be a new low in idiocy.
Posted by: bumblingberry | "

jesus, you just can't stop yourself, can you?


.

get a freaking grip -- seek help! try to think about something else!

Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 11:34 AM | Report abuse

Drivl's brain, being mostly empty, is now poaching other people's posts from other blogs.

this has to be a new low in idiocy.

Posted by: bumblingberry | May 13, 2010 11:30 AM | Report abuse

"I think it's time to bring back the old expression, "Get a life." I know it's 90's, but some people really need to.


Start with Ped and drivl. It's all downhill from there.

Posted by: bumblingberry"

.

You should really follow your own advice and stop thinking about me all day long.

Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 11:30 AM | Report abuse

conservatives at this site have obsessively
blogged about Kagan being gay. Since Souter
is single why didn't they make that sentiment known when he was chosen by Sununu and since
folks here think raising the spector is so
horrible(its a turnoff to gen Y voters) why
GOP Congresmen have not raised that?

Posted by: leichtman1 | May 13, 2010 11:30 AM | Report abuse


"The most astonishing and surprising thing I find about Washington DC today is the contrast in mood between DC today and what DC was thinking a generation ago, in 1983, the last time the unemployment rate was kissing 10%. Back then it was a genuine national emergency that unemployment was so high--real policies like massive monetary ease and the eruption of the Reagan deficits were put in place to reduce unemployment quickly, and everybody whose policies wouldn't have much of an effect on jobs was nevertheless claiming that their projects were the magic unemployment-reducing bullet.

Today.... nobody much in DC seems to care. A decade of widening wealth inequality that has created a chattering class of reporters, pundits, and lobbyists who have no connection with mainstream America? The collapse of the union movement and thus of the political voice of America's sellers of labor power? I don't know what the cause is. But it does astonish me.

Brad DeLong on May 12, 2010 at 09:11 AM in

nilso said...

'I think that there is an evil synergy between all the things you cited, and more. As wealth inequality grows, the wealthy have more to spend on (let's call it what it is) propaganda against unions and for Thatcherite policies. They have also funded tax-exempt foundations and "scholarly" institutions like the Hoover Institute, which give an academic flavor to the propaganda.

Unions have been eroded partly as a result of this constant flow of propaganda, both directly as workers have been educated to distrust unions, and indirectly as politicians have been more comfortable outsourcing jobs overseas.

Those pundits in the chattering class are given time on media outlets that are controlled by.... billionaires with an axe to grind. The public discourse has been profoundly polluted by such well-funded memes as "class warfare" (to describe any feeble attempt to defend workers).

One side is incredibly well-organized, well-funded, and ruthless; the other is scattered, underfunded, and tries to adhere to the good. You are astonished? I am not."

http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2010/05/the-most-astonishing-and-surprising-thing-i-find-about-washington-dc-today-is-the-contrast-in-mood-between-dc-today-and-what.html

Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 11:28 AM | Report abuse

Beware, liberal outrage ahead:

Continuing our theme of real life imitating cultural stereotypes, Teh gheys are all upset because the Wall Street Journal published a picture of Elena Kagan playing softball.


'It clearly is an allusion to her being gay. It's just too easy a punch line,' Cathy Renna, a former spokesperson for the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation who is now a consultant, [whined to] the Washington-based blog.

I think it's time to bring back the old expression, "Get a life." I know it's 90's, but some people really need to.


Start with Ped and drivl. It's all downhill from there.

Posted by: bumblingberry | May 13, 2010 11:25 AM | Report abuse

curious why Karl Rove's recent criticism of GOP support for the Az law has not been
measured here since he is pretty savy
when it comes to winning elections and GOP political strategies?

Posted by: leichtman1 | May 13, 2010 11:25 AM | Report abuse

It will take decades to recover from the havoc Democrats have created since they acquired all the keys to the liquor cabinet in 2008. ObamaCare alone will probably bankrupt the nation within a generation. But the worst hasn't hit us yet. In addition to an amnesty program that will open the floodgates to tens of millions of Third World public dependents, Tax & Charade still lurks in the background. The House has already passed a version. If made into law, it will plunge the nation into depression, easily double the already atrocious unemployment rate, and grant the federal government totalitarian power over all areas of human endeavor — all in the name of making a futile gesture toward relieving a "crisis" that an increasing number of Americans are aware does not exist.

All the Dems need is a Senate bill to coordinate with the House bill; Comrade Obama is chomping at the bit to sign the result. Two of the most pernicious kleptocrats in the Senate, Hanoi John Kerry and the allegedly moderate Joe Lieberman, have taken the lead with the American Power Act. The bill summary and section-by-section analysis are already online. Prominently featured are draconian restrictions on "global warming pollution" — i.e., the utterly harmless CO2 that is generated by literally all human activity.

If Dems are able to ram this through like ObamaCare, plant a garden. The economy is likely to collapse, as probably intended. Another option is to move to China, India, or Mexico — where the last American manufacturing jobs will be headed.

Not even the left-wing maniacs in Washington think driving American industry overseas will have any impact on the weather. Cap & Trade is a naked power grab. For the gang of thugs that calls itself our government to have the unprecedented level of totalitarian control it's after, not only our economic freedom but the wealth it created must be destroyed.

Posted by: bumblingberry | May 13, 2010 11:23 AM | Report abuse

In a typical Liberal response to a threat, today after carefully considering the times Square bomber incident, Obambi slashed defense funds for New York.

no doubt some campaign contributor needs the money more for his pet project.

Posted by: bumblingberry | May 13, 2010 11:22 AM | Report abuse

Portrait of an out of work, loony loser with no where to go:

Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 9:34 AM
Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 9:37 AM
Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 9:44 AM
Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 9:50 AM
Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 9:53 AM
Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 10:08 AM
Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 10:14 AM
Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 10:18 AM
Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 10:35 AM
Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 10:45 AM
Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 10:48 AM
Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 10:51 AM
Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 10:54 AM

==

this from the unemployed mental who posts here from dawn to the wee hours under a dozen monikers

go stalk some models, loser

Posted by: Noacoler | May 13, 2010 11:22 AM | Report abuse

"Shrink, I have argued for rational enforcement of employment laws and modernization of information sharing for years as the 80-20 solution. That is, for 20% or less of the cost of militarizing the borders and ports, 80% or more of the undocs would voluntarily go home - or try to get work in Canada, if they were Ukrainians in Portland, I guess."

We could have solved this problem years ago this way. But big business doesn't want it 'solved.'

"Instead of blaming Obama for going after the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and HCR we should acknowledge that last year he had an unusual amount of political currency and he spent it on some complex, unpopular but important pieces of legislation. He could have just prudently sat on his popularity and let things slide, but instead he used it to stabilize our economy and rethink the mess health care and health insurance is."

Exactly, Margaret.

Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 11:22 AM | Report abuse

Although I live on the border in Texas, I am not in a position to judge the people of Arizona. I no longer go across to Matamoros because the cartels are targeting Americans in trucks- they want our trucks - BUT

The mood in Arizona does not change the mood around the country. This mornings decision by Arizona to regulate Ethnic Studies will not help their case.

Gov. Perry (TX) has already stated he disagrees with Arizona on he issue of immigration. The Latino vote will decide the Texas election. The Tea Party people while very effective in Republican politics may just be the end of the Republican Party.

Latinos and other minorities are going to see this as an attack on them and vote Democrat. fair minded Independents are going to vote Democrat or not vote at all.

I say we need to encourage the Tea Party as a way to defeat the Republicans in November

Posted by: bobbywc | May 13, 2010 11:19 AM | Report abuse

Rusty actually 74% of hispanic voters oppose the bill. But the split among them is generational in that more of the older
hispanics 50+ support minimally support it and overwhelmingly the younger hispanics
oppose it. That is why Rubio, Wittman and even Perry have said they oppose b/c it is toxic to that voting block in the states with the largest hispanic populations. On the flip side older voters tend to vote in far higher numbers then gen y

mark I have to disagree with you about Perry.

He likely listens to Rove who pleads with
Rs to back away from this long term political suicide by the GOP. Secondly I distinctly remember how Perry first came to office against Sharp. He spent over $1 million running nasty ads in the valley the last 2 weeks of that campaign. Perry is savy and knows he will still need 40% of the hispanic vote in what may turn out to be a 2-3 point race. yes the business and farming community thrive on the backs of illegal labor, but I submit its more a cynical
crass belief to curry their vote ands keep him in power rather than some well thought out business rationale, imho.

Posted by: leichtman1 | May 13, 2010 11:18 AM | Report abuse

I'll never understand why people can't figure out who benefits from illegal labor.
Has it ever occurred to you "social conservatives" why illegal labor is allowed to work in this country?

Who do you think makes money from illegal labor, liberals? No. Find an industry that depends on illegal labor and I'll show you its Republican owners. Republicans exploit illegal labor.

==

(crickets)

Posted by: Noacoler | May 13, 2010 11:17 AM | Report abuse

But how to overcome holdbacks and MSRP, without paying for little Bradley's braces?

girls want to know!

Posted by: bumblingberry | May 13, 2010 11:16 AM | Report abuse

.

"Portrait of an out of work, loony loser with no where to go:
Posted by: bumblingberry" |


.

yes, you are.

Now, why don't you try to find something else to obssess about besides me while you're here the whole day?

Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 11:15 AM | Report abuse

@shrink re: Shane Evans

Run adblock. The web is intolerable without it. You won't see that hair-ring hardhat goofball and you won't see rotating people sticking out their tongues and crossing their eyes.

Posted by: Noacoler | May 13, 2010 11:09 AM | Report abuse

President Obama has been happy to beat up on Wall Street "fat cats," but tonight he'll be even happier to take their money. The President is slated to headline a superswank, $50,000-per-couple fund-raiser for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee at Manhattan's gilded St. Regis hotel on Fifth Ave. The high-dollar affair will feature fine French food, a bevy of Wall Street titans and 23 Congress members - including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).

Posted by: bumblingberry | May 13, 2010 11:09 AM | Report abuse

The problem with this article is it fails to mention that 72 % of Arizonians including 53% of hispanic voters were in favor of this law.
Politicians across the land might be stampeded into jumping on board without thinking this through - because it doesn't offer a solution to getting hispanics that can't make it here back to Mexico or central america - it will just succeed in moving them around the country.

Posted by: agapn9 | May 13, 2010 11:07 AM | Report abuse

Public disaffection over TARP could be mitigated cheaply if a bunch of banking executives went to prison. Not ad though there aren't good reasons.

Posted by: Noacoler | May 13, 2010 11:05 AM | Report abuse

I've been interested in immigration and overpopulation since the 1970s--a long time to be on the losing side of a political issue. It isn't fun to be an academic and be called a racist.

I'll add three points to the discussion. First, it has been obvious for many years that the reason nothing can be done is that the Republicans want the cheap (semi-slave) labor and that the Democrats want the (supposed) vote and the issue. Second, for all these many years most academic surveys of legal Hispanics reveal that they are (often 60-40) opposed to illegal immigrants. It is the organizations, La Raza and the like, that support illegals because they see political power via numbers in the future.
Third, legal Hispanics are quite culturally conservative. They are not worried about overpopulation, environmental issues and female rights.

Posted by: rusty3 | May 13, 2010 11:04 AM | Report abuse

Portrait of an out of work, loony loser with no where to go:

Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 9:34 AM
Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 9:37 AM
Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 9:44 AM
Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 9:50 AM
Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 9:53 AM
Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 10:08 AM
Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 10:14 AM
Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 10:18 AM
Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 10:35 AM
Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 10:45 AM
Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 10:48 AM
Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 10:51 AM
Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 10:54 AM

Posted by: bumblingberry | May 13, 2010 11:03 AM | Report abuse

Immigration reform is desperately needed! To become a legal immigrant to the U.S., even for foreign multi-millionaires who have invested millions of dollars in the U.S. and employed dozens of U.S. citizens, it usually takes 14 years or so to get a Green Card (Permanent Resident Card) with lots of rejections along the way. Then add another 5 1/2 years for citizenship. So, the legal way to become an immigrant to the U.S. and finally a U.S. citizen is a very long, tedious road which also costs a small fortune.

Here we need urgent reform to make the process more immigrant friendly. After all, this is a country of immigrants and alone for the sake of our economy we need immigrants. Especially considering the vast size of our precious USA, where all the world population would fit into Texas and Oklahoma, each family with a nice home and a white-picket fence. There's plenty of space and room for everyone who want to to immigrate to the U.S. as only a very small percentage if that many at all, are eager to immigrate to the U.S.

Certain standards "Yes", but a more streamlined approach to let work-hungry and investment-interested folks into the U.S. within a 6-12 months process and not putting them through a two decade-long ordeal.

Posted by: scherf_com | May 13, 2010 11:02 AM | Report abuse

Note to coal company:
I am sick of "Shane Evans". Put up a new spokesflak please.

But one benefit of the Hydrocarbon "leak" is the disappearance of the smirking oil lady selling us the beauty of offshore drilling.

Posted by: shrink2 | May 13, 2010 11:02 AM | Report abuse

If you truly want to know what is going on; Then you will have to accept these things as the TRUTH. Once you understand the following things; All things will be understood. So I tell you Obama is the Anti-Christ, Devil on Earth, or what ever else you want to call this Demonic Figure. His words describe him, He is a False Hope, If you listen to him you will love him. He carries a Bow without an Arrow. He will conquer all through his speech, his false hoods will capture all who sit and listen to him.

Posted by: makom | May 13, 2010 11:02 AM | Report abuse

"As ThinkProgress has reported, many far-right members of the Oklahoma legislature have made denying women rights a full-time mission. What the legislature has done in recent weeks:

– Both the House and the Senate passed a law mandating the collection of personal details about every single abortion performed in the state, which will then be posted on a public website.

– The legislature overrode the governor’s veto of an ultrasound mandate, which requires that doctor’s show women seeking an abortion ultrasounds of their babies and “describe the size of the fetus and any viewable organs and limbs. There are no exceptions for rape or incest.” The law also “limits who can do the ultrasound and which technology can be used — issues lawmakers are ill-equipped to decide.”

– The legislature also overrode the governor’s veto of a measure to prevent women from filing “wrongful life” lawsuits against “doctors who withhold information about a fetus or pregnancy that could cause a woman to seek an abortion.”

Yesterday, the Oklahoma House was at it again, this time passing a bill (HB 3290) by a 70-21 vote to bar private insurance companies from covering abortion."

Gee, isn't that government interference in the all mighty 'free market'? Oh well, hypocritical Rs don't care, do they?

Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 10:54 AM | Report abuse

Agreed and yes, the Canadian border is even more porous than the Mexican. Hiking around the Okanogan, it is easy to go back and forth across the border and not even know it.

Posted by: shrink2 | May 13, 2010 10:52 AM | Report abuse

7 puffy paragraphs for Sean Duffy -- whynot just give him the front page of the Post?

Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 10:51 AM | Report abuse

The conventional view is often wrong. Therefore, if one wants to think outside the box, on the issue of immigration we may well be witnessing the Balkanization of the United States. On the one hand, according to Pew Hispanic, Hispanic Americans are opposed to immigration enforcement in every category polled including punishing employers for hiring illegal immigrants. On the other hand, the rest of this country wants immigration law enforcement. For example, sixty percent support Arizona's immigration laws. Therefore, we may well see the Hispanics forming one voting block and the rest of America another voting block. From this perspective, the growing numbers of Hispanics will be irrelevant. Something for people to think about.

Posted by: jeffreed | May 13, 2010 10:50 AM | Report abuse

Shrink, I have argued for rational enforcement of employment laws and modernization of information sharing for years as the 80-20 solution. That is, for 20% or less of the cost of militarizing the borders and ports, 80% or more of the undocs would voluntarily go home - or try to get work in Canada, if they were Ukrainians in Portland, I guess.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | May 13, 2010 10:48 AM | Report abuse


'
Rome is using the illegal aliens to take control of our economy and reduce our freedom. Their intent is to get the homosexuals (priests) a tax free ride at our expense while at the same time diminishing our Protestant capitalism. Why are we continuing to allow them to dictate domestic policy at our expense?"

whew. Earth to 'virgin' -- seek help.

Posted by: virgin12"

Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 10:48 AM | Report abuse

Probable Cause/Reasonable Suspicion according to Congressman Bilbray of San
Diego is to look at the kind of shoes and
clothes the defendant is wearing. How do
ou if a driver is illegal Matthews asked Bilbray on Hardball. Oh I can tell an
illegal by looking at the type of their shoes they are wearing. If that is not profiling wonder what is?
And Steele wonders why the GOP has such
a hard time attracting hispanic voters.
Even Karl Rove (politically not ethically or legally) deplores the Az law and
predicts political disaster for the GOP's future efforts to attract young hispanic
voters to the GOP. The first time for me to agree with Rove.

Posted by: leichtman1 | May 13, 2010 10:47 AM | Report abuse

Probable Cause/Reasonable Suspicion according to Congressman Bilbray of San
Diego is to look at the kind of shoes and
clothes the defendant is wearing. How do
ou if a driver is illegal Matthews asked Bilbray on Hardball. Oh I can tell an
illegal by looking at the type of their shoes they are wearing. If that is not profiling wonder what is?
And Steele wonders why the GOP has such
a hard time attracting hispanic voters.
Even Karl Rove (politically not ethically or legally) deplores the Az law and
predicts political disaster for the GOP's future efforts to attract young hispanic
voters to the GOP. The first time for me to agree with Rove.

Posted by: leichtman1 | May 13, 2010 10:46 AM | Report abuse

Probable Cause/Reasonable Suspicion according to Congressman Bilbray of San
Diego is to look at the kind of shoes and
clothes the defendant is wearing. How do
ou if a driver is illegal Matthews asked Bilbray on Hardball. Oh I can tell an
illegal by looking at the type of their shoes they are wearing. If that is not profiling wonder what is?
And Steele wonders why the GOP has such
a hard time attracting hispanic voters.
Even Karl Rove (politically not ethically or legally) deplores the Az law and
predicts political disaster for the GOP's future efforts to attract young hispanic
voters to the GOP. The first time for me to agree with Rove.

Posted by: leichtman1 | May 13, 2010 10:45 AM | Report abuse

"...the focus should be on employers that are circumventing labor laws & hiring undocumented workers."

Too easy, besides, it would work. Better to race bait the downwardly mobile white middle class and win elections all the while keeping Republican business owners "competitive".


Indeed, shrink. Solving the problem by targetting employers wouldn't give the Rs an issue to get their voting base outraged about.

The problem is complex -- taking illegals out of the work force would drive up the cost of goods, particularly food -- tremendously. Chicken and beef processing plants are staffed pretty much 100% by illegals who work for almost nothing. Take them aways and suddenly your Big Mac costs $15.

Better instead to make it a simple race issue that the simple-minded can glom onto -- a simple narrative for the largely simple press in this country to tout.

Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 10:45 AM | Report abuse

Rome is using the illegal aliens to take control of our economy and reduce our freedom. Their intent is to get the homosexuals (priests) a tax free ride at our expense while at the same time diminishing our Protestant capitalism. Why are we continuing to allow them to dictate domestic policy at our expense?

Posted by: virgin12 | May 13, 2010 10:42 AM | Report abuse


well, i guess a passport would help Moonbat. They are now required to go across the Mexican border into AZ and vice versa. I remember a time when we just walked through a tunnel in Nogales.

I look at it more as:
getting pulled over for "anything" and then asking for "travelling papers".

If the person has a Mexican driver's license or plates that say SONORA (and we have that here). They are from Sonora, Mexico and are in AZ. So there would be probable cause to "pull over".

I am worried about the "pulling over" for something, and then the cop having "reasonable suspicion".
All cops have "reasonable suspicion".

Another problem is the "group of people".
Say that a group of Sonorans are sitting in a park. Cop does a drive through the park. Sees them and has "reasonable suspicion". That bothers me with this new law. To stop on the street, so to speak.

Part of the law has "no picking up undocumenteds for work" (for the day or so). AZ has that because of their big industry of landscaping.

I see, far away, reasonable suspicion, but I don't believe the application of reasonable suspicion will be constitutional.

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | May 13, 2010 10:42 AM | Report abuse

Rome is using the illegal aliens to take control of our economy and reduce our freedom. Their intent is to get the homosexuals a tax free ride at our expense while at the same time diminishing our Protestant capitalism. Why are we continuing to allow them to dictate domestic policy at our expense?

Posted by: virgin12 | May 13, 2010 10:41 AM | Report abuse

I know a green carded Polish immigrant who vends illegal Slavic workers (mostly Ukrainian and Russian) to the construction and remodeling industry in the Portland suburbs.

He is, in a way, a pimp, but during the housing boom at least, he made more money than I did, lot more. It was odd seeing him in his big black BMW. It was hard not to feel angry.

America just can not figure out why all these illegals are here, but it has nothing to do with the borders.

Posted by: shrink2 | May 13, 2010 10:36 AM | Report abuse

"Actually, I DO hate illegal aliens.

What are you gonna do about that?

Posted by: pmendez"

Laugh and then laugh some more when you start getting asked constantly for your birth certificate because of your name.

Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 10:35 AM | Report abuse

zouk asks
"Like having a Mexican drivers license?"

What does that prove? People can cross the border legally, you know.

Posted by: bsimon1 | May 13, 2010 10:34 AM | Report abuse

joelwisch writes
"adding over three thousand Border Patrol Officers to the Border Line doesn't do a bit of good in dealing with the rapists, robbers, killers and thugs that are already in place in Arizona, Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, Utah and a dozen other states, at least."

So Joel, do you think local cops in all those states should be focusing on the rapists, robbers, killers & thugs, or on the guy that's trying to put food on the table and maybe send some dollars home to madre & padre? In a pefect world, all the laws can be properly enforced; but in the world we live in there are limited resources and someone has to decide where they need to be applied. Put differently, how much of a tax increase are you willing to pay in order to better enforce immigration law?


Posted by: bsimon1 | May 13, 2010 10:31 AM | Report abuse

just think how expensive all the deportations are going to take.

i wonder if it will be big trucks just dumping the undocumenteds at the border.
Make it Mexico's problem after that, eh?

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | May 13, 2010 10:30 AM | Report abuse

it's not probable cause...

in the AZ law, it is called
"reasonable suspicion"...

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | May 13, 2010 10:22 AM | Report abuse


Like having a Mexican drivers license? Seems like libs prefer don't ask don't tell again. Yet also don't want the Feds to lift a finger. Liberal solutions. Unless you can tax it, they have no idea.

Posted by: Moonbat | May 13, 2010 10:30 AM | Report abuse

Leichtman, because the TX business and Ag forces are so open about their need for illegals - really, they make it public, shrink - Perry has said he believes we need aliens for our work force. So both of them would say they would veto an AZ type bill, is my guess.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | May 13, 2010 10:28 AM | Report abuse

Speaking of Hayward, it is also home to the freshwater fishing hall of fame:

http://www.freshwater-fishing.org/

immediately adjacent to the lumberjack bowl

http://www.lumberjackworldchampionships.com/


Posted by: bsimon1 | May 13, 2010 10:25 AM | Report abuse

Given the rapid population growth of Hispanics -- and their expected development into a major political force in coming elections -- voicing support for the Arizona law could cause politicians some long term pains. But, if the NBC/WSJ and Gallup numbers are right, it may be in the service of some short term political gains.
=============================
Mexican Americans represent some 9% of the population. Illegal aliens are up to 7% at this point, and until the Birthright Citizenship problems are finally straightened out by Congress, that number will rise, and the illegal aliens will get a foot in the door, have a child, and collect WIC's. Nice Job Congress.... and typical.

Law Enforcement leadership tells us they cannot deport the 11 million illegal aliens in this country. I doubt there are many idiots who believe there are only 11 million illegal aliens in this country, but it is a fact of life that they sure can't do the job. And in fact, they need help, and perhaps a lot of help.

The Mirror-Copy of the Federal Immigration Law Arizona has can do a very good job of providing the Interior Immigration Law Enforcement that is desperately needed. Eric Holder said clearly.. the law does not racially profile. ICE has made it clear.. they cannot do anything but the worst cases beyond the border, and adding over three thousand Border Patrol Officers to the Border Line doesn't do a bit of good in dealing with the rapists, robbers, killers and thugs that are already in place in Arizona, Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, Utah and a dozen other states, at least.

Lets keep the American Citizens in Arizona from getting killed. Lets support their use of the Immigration Law to do what the Federal Government cannot do. I don't think that fits into the plans of the Democratic Party and the illegal aliens voting, but it will save American Lives. It is a good law. It is good for the people of the country. It is good for Arizona. Support us, please.

Posted by: joelwisch | May 13, 2010 10:23 AM | Report abuse

"...the focus should be on employers that are circumventing labor laws & hiring undocumented workers."

Too easy, besides, it would work. Better to race bait the downwardly mobile white middle class and win elections all the while keeping Republican business owners "competitive".

Posted by: shrink2 | May 13, 2010 10:23 AM | Report abuse

Unless I missed it while reading the article, Mr. Cillizza left out the results of a poll by The New York Times/CBS, published a little over a week ago.

Here are some of the results :

How serious a problem is illegal immigration ?
65% says very serious and 24% says somewhat so.


Do you think illegal immigration strengthens or weakens the U.S. Economy ?
74% says weakens.


On Arizona's new law on immigration :
60% says just right or does not go far enough
36% says goes too far

Posted by: observer31 | May 13, 2010 10:22 AM | Report abuse

it's not probable cause...

in the AZ law, it is called
"reasonable suspicion"...

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | May 13, 2010 10:22 AM | Report abuse

I actually feel a certain sympathy for this guy:


" Gov. Mark Sanford spent the weekend with his one-time and perhaps future lover Maria Belen Chapur. This time it was in Florida, not Argentina, and Sanford made sure his staff and state authorities knew where he was.

I must say I've always found this the most endearing and humanizing part of the Sanford story. There was a lot of irresponsibility, juvenile conduct and 'man waking up at 50 and realizing he wasn't living his own life' to Sanford's high-profile self-immolation. (You can grow up before you're nearly grown up at all and realize when you're well into the second half of life that you're still a kid living someone else's life entirely.) But most pols who get caught with a mistress quickly retreat to saying the whole thing was shameful and a terrible lapse of judgment or perhaps that they need therapy for sex addiction (who doesn't?) or whatever else. Sanford could never really bring himself to say that, though, because I just don't think he thought it was true. Sometimes comically but almost always to his political detriment, he simply couldn't resist saying that he loved Chapur very deeply, even memorably and repeatedly (and perhaps bizarrely) calling her his 'soulmate' while, rather incongruously, trying to salvage his own marriage.

Sanford said the purpose of the weekend together was "obviously to see if something could be restarted on that front given the rather enormous geographic gulf between us. And time will tell. I don't know if it will or won't."

Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 10:18 AM | Report abuse

Utahreb writes
"Sooooo - what to do? Feeling so strongly regarding having our laws enforced, I guess I will have to vote for conservative candidates (with whom I have little in common on most matters) in order to promote enforcement of our immigration laws."


utahreb- its not quite as simple as the 'conservative' argument would put it. For instance, there is a significant cost associated with enforcing immigration law. If you're going to require state & local cops to enforce immigration law, that takes time & energy away from their other duties. Many police organizations (though there is not 100% agreement) say that requiring local cops to enforce immigration law negatively impacts their ability to investigate non-immigration laws; i.e. witnesses don't step forward if they're worried about being reported to INS.

Obviously the flip side is that the liberals/Dems haven't done a very good job of building a case for an alternative. Personally I think the focus should be on employers that are circumventing labor laws & hiring undocumented workers. If undocs can't find jobs, they'll stop coming here. I've seen stories that the economic downturn has actually caused some reverse migration, where people have left the US as jobs became more scarce. Where I think conservatives are unrealistic is in arguing for building a 2000 mile long wall or fence that will magically stop people from crossing the border. It takes a hell of a wall to stop every guy with a ladder. And how much does it cost? How much do the patrols cost? I can't believe that manning the border from the Pacific to the Gulf is the most cost-effective way to stop illegal migrants. And if it is, who's going to pay for it? We're already in a deep hole; where does the money come from to seal off the border?

Posted by: bsimon1 | May 13, 2010 10:17 AM | Report abuse

pmendez


I have another concern which you may share - the illegals come here, and then they have children who become US citizens - in 20 years are we going to have enough jobs here for all of them ???

It is an important question.

There may be jobs available now - but how many jobs will there be later?

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 10:16 AM | Report abuse

Please don't challange welfare in tandem with posts about drivl. She feels it is her RIGHT to be supported by others so she can surf the Internet all day and spread her brand of hate and envy from site to site.

Can you imagine where she'd be if she had to fend for herself?

Posted by: Moonbat | May 13, 2010 10:15 AM | Report abuse

"Actually, I DO hate illegal aliens.

What are you gonna do about that?

Posted by: pmendez"

Laugh at you because you are a peabrained impotent bigot.

Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 10:14 AM | Report abuse

margaretmeyers


I have to disagree


Obama's health care is a massive give-away to special interests - and will lead to a massive increase in percentage of GDP to health care.

It is still an open question as to whether health care will be repealed - or declared an unconstitutional encroachment on the traditional powers of the States.


Anyway, you can dream on about the health care system you want - I really do not believe you have much basis AT ALL to say that this plan will result in what you are saying.


You are clinging to a dream - which is not in the bill - AND by the way - the CBO said it is $150 Billion more expensive - AND COUNTING.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 10:13 AM | Report abuse

@37thandOStreet

Just try "MASSIVE DEPORTATIONS" in LA, or Chicago, or NYC or even Langley Park and you'll see exactly what I'm talking about.

I can remember the DC riots in 1968. Rioters didn't have AK-47s back then.

The US has already lost control of many major urban areas to people who have no love for or connection to the our culture. They are here not to become Americans, but to colonize and make money. Kinda like we did to the Indians. And since we seem to be just as stupid & selfish as the Indians, happy to take the wampum (cheap labor) and oblivious to the long-term consequences, violence is probable. The only question is will things turn out like Custer's Last Stand or Wounded Knee?

Posted by: pmendez | May 13, 2010 10:13 AM | Report abuse

and will be replaced by new issues like the disatrous oil leak. The Energy industry is crucial to Houston's economy and White was Sec of Energy for Clinton. As
to immigration Perry will play the hispanic vote taking stands on both side of the Az law and show faux outrage against
the Az law then if re elected would sign in into law in a heartbeat.
Crucial question mark: how would each candidate answer the question in their debates would you Veto a Texas law R state reps have already promised to initiate? My guess is that neither candidate would give an honest straight forward answer to that critical question in our debates b/c the issue is so toxic from both sides. I still think the crucial polling number not addressed is precisely how it impacts the votes of unaffiliated independents since their votes usually are decisive in most elections. The only poll I have read measuring Independent's view on the bill showed their opposition by 16% but that factor seems unreported. And Your thoughts?

Posted by: leichtman1 | May 13, 2010 10:12 AM | Report abuse

and will be replaced by new issues like the disatrous oil leak. The Energy industry is crucial to Houston's economy and White was Sec of Energy for Clinton. As
to immigration Perry will play the hispanic vote taking stands on both side of the Az law and show faux outrage against
the Az law then if re elected would sign in into law in a heartbeat.
Crucial question mark: how would each candidate answer the question in their debates would you Veto a Texas law R state reps have already promised to initiate? My guess is that neither candidate would give an honest straight forward answer to that critical question in our debates b/c the issue is so toxic from both sides. I still think the crucial polling number not addressed is precisely how it impacts the votes of unaffiliated independents since their votes usually are decisive in most elections. The only poll I have read measuring Independent's view on the bill showed their opposition by 16% but that factor seems unreported. And Your thoughts?

Posted by: leichtman1 | May 13, 2010 10:12 AM | Report abuse

Yesterday afternoon, on our way to the kids' ball game in Odell OR, my wife, who is quite brown (born in Borneo*, now called Kalimantan), delivered an item from a charity auction for a supervisor at a large produce and fruit packing house. The white receptionist spoke to her in Spanish and directed her to the area where people apply for day labor in the warehouse and on the farms and orchards.

When she explained what she was there for, the receptionist couldn't believe it. She repeated twice, "You are not here to work?"

As a matter of fact, the owner of this business has a big Constitutional Tea Party sign on the highway next to his fields.

I'll never understand why people can't figure out who benefits from illegal labor.
Has it ever occurred to you "social conservatives" why illegal labor is allowed to work in this country?

Who do you think makes money from illegal labor, liberals? No. Find an industry that depends on illegal labor and I'll show you its Republican owners. Republicans exploit illegal labor.

*The Little Rascals "Wild Man from Borneo" episode is so unabashedly racist it is actually hilarious. Stymie looks at the bone-in-the-nose Ugga Bugga type cast quizzically, up and down and says, "How-dju get to be so black?"

Posted by: shrink2 | May 13, 2010 10:11 AM | Report abuse

and will be replaced by new issues like the disatrous oil leak. The Energy industry is crucial to Houston's economy and White was Sec of Energy for Clinton. As
to immigration Perry will play the hispanic vote taking stands on both side of the Az law and show faux outrage against
the Az law then if re elected would sign in into law in a heartbeat.
Crucial question mark: how would each candidate answer the question in their debates would you Veto a Texas law R state reps have already promised to initiate? My guess is that neither candidate would give an honest straight forward answer to that critical question in our debates b/c the issue is so toxic from both sides. I still think the crucial polling number not addressed is precisely how it impacts the votes of unaffiliated independents since their votes usually are decisive in most elections. The only poll I have read measuring Independent's view on the bill showed their opposition by 16% but that factor seems unreported. And Your thoughts?

Posted by: leichtman1 | May 13, 2010 10:09 AM | Report abuse

Whitman flailing in CA -- worst gubernatorial candidate ever.

'In March, Whitman attracted attention for inviting the press to a meeting with Oakland railroad workers -- and then refusing to answer any questions. According to the Chronicle, however, after shunning the press corps, Whitman did sit down with conservative columnist Debra J. Saunders for a 30-minute, one-on-one interview.

In another instance cameras caught Whitman stopping to answer a question, only to hurry away when pressed by reporters.

And, while taping a 30-minute town hall-style infomercial, someone leaked footage showing Whitman urging a staged audience to applaud for her: "You are an integral part of this. Lots of cheering would be good."

Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 10:08 AM | Report abuse

The Los Angelos CITY COUNCIL JUST AGREED - THIS ISSUE IS MORE ABOUT OPEN BORDERS THAN ABOUT DISCRIMINATION.

If the LA city council was so concerned about discrimination, they would not be passing a boycott which discriminates against people from Arizona, who are US Citizens and deserve all the economic opportunities on equal footing with all other US citizens.

So the MEXICANS REALLY WANT OPEN BORDERS.

SEND FEDERAL TROOPS TO LA AND DEPORT ALL THE ILLEGALS

LET'S GET THIS ISSUE TAKEN CARE OF.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 10:05 AM | Report abuse

Tell us, Chris, why is it that you focus so much on the what the loony fringe cares about?

Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 9:34 AM | Report abuse


Uuuummmmm. Because you fundies are his base.

Drivl. Try this. Surf over to Kos. Hit F5. Reload brain. Cut and paste. Repeat.

But you already know that.

Posted by: Moonbat | May 13, 2010 10:04 AM | Report abuse

@DRINDL

So, 64% of the population is a "small group of haters"?

I guess your personal experience trumps polls done by NBC News, CBS News, WSJ and Pew Research Center for the People and the Press.

Actually, I DO hate illegal aliens. I also hate the traitors who put their welfare ahead of the welfare of US citizens.

What are you gonna do about that?

Posted by: pmendez | May 13, 2010 10:04 AM | Report abuse

The Fix writes
"Duffy plays up his profile as a ... lumberjack sports athlete(!)"

The lumberjack world championships are held in Hayward, WI every year, which is in WI-7. Going as a spectator is a pretty fun afternoon - logrolling, boom-running, pole-climbing, jack&jill sawing, spring-board chopping & more. The axe, hand-sawing & climbing events are impressive displays of athleticism.

Posted by: bsimon1 | May 13, 2010 10:01 AM | Report abuse

pmendez


I am curious to a discussion as to where all this is going.

First, I think that much of this immigration is about jobs - so wouldn't they be careful not to take steps to hurt their employment ?

I don't know if the Mexicans are reluctant to "assimilate" - and I believe their values are the same as ours - after all they are Christians.


(So the only thought I will entertain is if one takes the position that the democrats are pulling American away from Christianity - and the Mexicans are religious and Christian and thus out-of-step with the democrats in the United States.)


Having said that on ONE SIDE, I agree there are way too many illegal immigrants and that something HAS TO BE DONE.


FEW REMEMBER IN THE 1980S there was Amnesty given to the illegals - with the pleadge of NO MORE - AND THE BORDERS WILL BE ENFORCED.

That AMNESTY ONLY ENCOURAGED MORE ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION.

We REALLY need to take some BOLD MOVES - LIKE MASSIVE ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS - MASSIVE DEPORTATIONS - AND STRICT BORDER IMPROVEMENTS.

I am not sure whether that will do no more than to buy time - however it will be worthwhile.


.


Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 10:01 AM | Report abuse

Want to send a message to LA?? Simple boycott going to the movies for ONE WEEKEND. Just one weekend and the movie industry will be on the phone to the mayor to change his stance.. LA depends on the movie industry.. with that clout he'll have no choice but to end the boycott of Arizona.

Posted by: sovine08 | May 13, 2010 10:00 AM | Report abuse

well, bum fr*&^ egypt down here made national news again regarding "ethnic classes".

on immigration - coppers need probable cause, but the USA Patriot Act knocked out probable cause. Arizona follows the USA Patriot Act. In more ways and in more state agencies than is suspected.

Figures.
You should see the new ad for John McCain.
"and build the dang fence"

///
And BTW, who the heck is "flooding" Chris' column here. Knock it off.

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | May 13, 2010 9:56 AM | Report abuse

37th, as a mother I am always thinking about the future. HCR had to happen and I do firmly believe that after several years of adjustment (for all parties involved) we will have better health care for more people at a lower % of the GDP, like most of the developed world.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | May 13, 2010 9:55 AM | Report abuse

being in America illegally bis against the law
ergo that in itself is probable cause under the law.

mark Perry will ant to make HC a major election issue but I think the general anger
against HC has/will by Nov and
replaced by a new unknown crisis de jour
like

Posted by: leichtman1 | May 13, 2010 9:55 AM | Report abuse

Immigration will only be an issue among a small group of haters -- the same bedwetters who are always whining about something.

Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 9:53 AM | Report abuse

Republicans at work:

"Last Sunday, Attorney General Eric Holder and White House homeland security adviser John Brennan publicly stated that the Times Square bomber, Faisal Shahzad, was facilitated by the Pakistani Taliban. Yesterday, administration officials conducted a closed-door intelligence briefing for members of Congress to present its evidence of the connection. Sen. Kit Bond (R-MO) emerged from the briefing unconvinced, telling reporters that “the information I’ve seen so far” does not confirm a link between Shahzad and the Pakistani Taliban. Bond, however, may have missed portions of the briefing because he fell asleep."

Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 9:50 AM | Report abuse


"particularly culturally conservative House districts" -- what a way with words...love it.

Racistville, Arizona, Texas, Alabama, Mississippi, et al...the usual suspects...

Posted by: bgreen2224 | May 13, 2010 9:50 AM | Report abuse

The LA boycott is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. The "privileges and immunities" clause prohibits discrimination between citizens of different states.

IT IS NOT IRONIC THAT LA WANTS TO DISCRIMINATE AGAINST US CITIZEN AS A REMEDY TO THE ARIZONA LAW ???

LA IS IN REVOLT - SEND FEDERAL TROOPS TO LA TO PUT DOWN THE INSURRECTION AND TO ENFORCE FEDERAL IMMIGRATION LAWS.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 9:47 AM | Report abuse

Immigration is indeed going to be a pivotal issue -- illegal immigration, that is. The American people have spoken, and they have had enough of footing the bill for illegals and listening to their demands. Politicians would be wise to listen to legitimate voters -- not illegals who commit identity theft to vote.

Posted by: wmpowellfan | May 13, 2010 9:45 AM | Report abuse

@37thandOStreet

"WAR! What is it good for? Absolutely nuthin! Hunh! Say it again!..."

(couldn't resist...)

I don't WANT a civil war. It is the American-hating, One-World, Global Elites who have created the tinderbox that is now the US. Tens of millions of people living here who do not share our culture, our language or our values, and don't want to assimilate.

Remember the riots of the 1960's? We fought a "war on poverty" after that, only to turn around and import a new, permanent underclass with even less connection to the country. The result will be a new wave of urban riots that will make the 60's look like they were organized by Ghandi.

Ted Kennedy (may he burn in Hell) and the Liberals sowed the wind in 1965 when they opened up the US to 3rd World immigration. Now, we shall all reap the whirlwind.

Posted by: pmendez | May 13, 2010 9:45 AM | Report abuse

LOL-- the monster the Rs created is coming to get them....


"MONTICELLO, KY. -- When Senate candidate Rand Paul told a lunchtime crowd at Shearer's Buffet that "we have to do things differently" in Washington and "bring 'em home and send some different Republicans," it wasn't hard to make the jump from this rural area near the Tennessee border to the top Republican in the state, if not the country: Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.

"We're sick of McConnell," said Winna Ramsey, 50, a radiology technician from Monticello who came to hear Paul speak at Shearer's. "Rand Paul is not a career politician. He's got the people's interests in mind, not the special interests. He's a breath of fresh air from what I can see."

what he is is a breath of hot air, a complete loon. Catch this pic of in suit and tie -- and shorts.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/12/AR2010051205204.html?hpid=topnews

Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 9:44 AM | Report abuse

MM, I think we are in basic accord on substance. But I am closer to CC on appearances.

I singled out the PRIORITY MISPLACED on HCR, b/c most people understood ARRA and FinReg as attempts to deal with the disaster, but not HCR [except for shrink].

My suggestion is that absent a faster upturn, the timing of HCR will be the cause of the heavier-than-normal D losses, b/c few would see it as a direct fix to the economy or job loss.

Elizabeth Warren again pointed out yesterday that TARP bailed out big banks and did nothing much for Main Street lending or smallbiz. That was an opportunity missed during the HCR debate.

The financial and employment crisis was and remains the great domestic problem and should be on the front burner. Moving the pot labeled "HCR" to the front burner may turn out to have made history in a good sense, but it also may "turn out" many Ds from office in 2010.

IF there is an upturn for Ds - say the D wins PA 12 as you think will happen, I expect CC to take more than passing notice.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | May 13, 2010 9:44 AM | Report abuse

God riddance lawless Los Angeles.

(1) Good riddance Lawless Los Angeles, land of my birth and upbringing, posted here since direct posts are not being allowed on that article; (2) Many news reports said that immigration had become the main issue in the UK election, leading to media post-election analysis to pretty much not mention it; (3) On angering Hispanics, it is amazing that if a nation can be invaded long enough, with the complicity of political and media elites, enough political power is created so that no one dares to stop that invasion in the future; (4) Americans died fighting for freedom and independence for over 200 years for this?
- - - -
Border Enforcement + Immigration Moratorium + Job, Crime and Eco Sanity.

Posted by: tma_sierrahills | May 13, 2010 9:41 AM | Report abuse

The Republicans have a challenge ahead of them - because they have to EXPLAIN - THEY HAVE TO ASK DO YOU WANT OPEN BORDERS???

Only after one has thought out, that open borders lend themselves to no enforcement, do people get it.

Once people start to ground their thinking that the borders must not be open, and there must be some immigration laws - THEN THEY COME AROUND TO ENFORCEMENT.

This issue does not really help the democrats -


The democrats are misreading the polls again - taking out pieces and ignoring the whole.

AND I CHALLENGE THE DEMOCRATS - WHO IS TRYING TO WEDGE ISSUE WHO?


BY IMPLYING THAT THEY SUPPORT ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS, IS IT NOT THE DEMOCRATS WHO ARE DRIVING A WEDGE ISSUE???

TRAITORS.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 9:41 AM | Report abuse

People, 2/3's of 1,234 poll respondents does not a majority of the 130,000,000 voters make. Poll results are not written in stone, and you are all falling into the crazy cycle of reading and attatching WAY too much importance to the results.
A wapo poll showed that of the 1,009 respondents, 93% were white, and 74% were conservative. Not exactly a TRUE slice of the voting public. The Tea Party maybe, but not of the voting public. CC's columns have become laughable because he's always sourcing some poll or another to support his GOP cheerleading. How about a poll to see how hypocritical all those LA,Miss, and Alabama GOPers who scream for "limitted federal government" look with their assurances that the Federal Government will make sure the damage is fixed?

Posted by: katem1 | May 13, 2010 9:40 AM | Report abuse

Oh come on WAPO's Silly Sissy Chrissy your
stupid always inaccurate WAPO/ABC Mickey
Mouse Network News is lowballing the numbers like WAPO/ABC Polls always do...So
for those of us that no long trust this poll the new Pew Research/AP poll ask a number of questions about AA New SB 1070
Immigration Law and found 59% Approve of it
Nationally and Silly Chrissy & WAPO donot want you to know that Ten More States are
working on enacting a copy of the new AZ
Anti Illegal Immigration Law already so now
WAPO/ABC News Poll,you Obama Shill explain
that and why you still incorrectly report
such a low priority on the importance of
Dealing With Illegal Aliens and Illegal
Immigration and why for months now has the
famous Rasmussen Poll being showing Barack
Obama Having Double Digit Disapproval Ratings and the there also is new polling data showing only 25% of people favor your
Comrade Leader Barack Obama's Illegal Alien Amnesty Plan? And tell us Silly Chrissy you Obama PR Agent,how do you also
explain why up to over 60 to 70% Nationally
Support the tough new Arizona Immigration
Law SB 1070 as well? So tell me again how
come WAPO and you Chrissy why NBC New Poll
shows 64% Support the New Arizona Law as well and that all told clearly proves you
Silly Sissy Chrissy have been drinking too
much toxic Obama Kool Aid and need to go
become White House Press Secretary Baghdad
Bob Gibbs assistant. See how pathethic WAPO
has become nowdays folks to report such
inaccurate nonsense? Gov Jan Brewer for
President in 2012!

Posted by: KarenKay2009 | May 13, 2010 9:38 AM | Report abuse

I moved to AZ two years ago from UY. Before I moved, I saw the increasing numbers of illegals in UT and the problems caused by them.

I am a long-time registered Indpendent and have found myself on the side of liberals in most matters, like the health care reform bill. However, on the matter of illegal immigration I find myself on the conservative side.

Sooooo - what to do? Feeling so strongly regarding having our laws enforced, I guess I will have to vote for conservative candidates (with whom I have little in common on most matters) in order to promote enforcement of our immigration laws.

I think there are more like me who are facing this dilemma in November.

Posted by: Utahreb | May 13, 2010 9:37 AM | Report abuse

"Worth noting: Survey USA conducts automated phone call interviews, a methodology that remains somewhat controversial in the polling community.)"

Somewhat? It's completely discredited. No reputable organization takes it seriously.

Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 9:37 AM | Report abuse

@Angie12106:

Arizona has not lost "billions" in tourism. Try a few million dollars. The most hysterical claims are $90 million over 5 years.

Since many of the conventions "lost" by Arizona are from groups that were only CONSIDERING Arizona (like GOP) the true, net losses are much less.

(The same goes for the many commenters on WaPo who CLAIM they are canceling their travel plans to Arizona! I never knew Arizona was the #1 travel destination for East Coast, Jewish liberals, LOL!)

However, Arizona might actually save "Billions" by getting rid of their illegal aliens.

Maryland, a similar size state with half as many illegal aliens, pays $1.4 on the public education, incarceration and emergency healthcare for illegal aliens.

SOURCE: http://www.fairus.org/site/DocServer/md_costsw.pdf?docID=4001

Posted by: pmendez | May 13, 2010 9:36 AM | Report abuse

pmendez


What do you mean by that??? What can be gained by a war???


Please tell us what you are talking about

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 9:35 AM | Report abuse

Immigration is the new wedge being used by Republicans, cynically to gin up the useful hate, fear and outrage that is forever linking just beneath the surface of the modern prototypical 'conservative.'

These folks are continuously either frothing or wetting their pants, they just need the right prompt from their masters like Rush or Glen to get them all wound up and hysterical.

The puppeteers weren't getting enough leverage to carry them through the next election from hating gays or healthcare reform, so they settled on hating on brown and black people -- always a sure fire winner among these folks.

And so we have the issue du jour -- which you will note only 12% even of Republicans think is a 'major' issue -- but it will be flogged relentlessly now in this reliably rightwing space as wellas among all the MSM, because for some reason they are so disportately concerned about what the unhinged wingers are p*ssing about today.

Tell us, Chris, why is it that you focus so much on the what the loony fringe cares about?

Posted by: drindl | May 13, 2010 9:34 AM | Report abuse

"LA OKs Arizona boycott"

And the rest of America approves BOYCOTT of LA.

Mexican flags now fly over the American flag. The Sapanish language is now triumphed by LaRaza as the language of the land, at tax payer expense. Illegals and drug runners come and go as they please over an open border and, in their wake, lay dead Americans. LaRaza activists and LaRaza US Congressmen openly call for a Reconquista Revolution.

Meanwhile Democrats hail these new separatist supremacist "undocumented immigrants" as a credit to the fabric of a united America?

Enough is enough - get rid of the PC BS politicians and then pass the AZ law nationwide after we militarize the border.

The invasion has been going on long enough. Time to get tough!

Posted by: Patriot12 | May 13, 2010 9:32 AM | Report abuse

"LA OKs Arizona boycott"

And the rest of America approves BOYCOTT of LA.

Mexican flags now fly over the American flag. The Sapanish language is now triumphed by LaRaza as the language of the land, at tax payer expense. Illegals and drug runners come and go as they please over an open border and, in their wake, lay dead Americans. LaRaza activists and LaRaza US Congressmen openly call for a Reconquista Revolution.

Meanwhile Democrats hail these new separatist supremacist "undocumented immigrants" as a credit to the fabric of a united America?

Enough is enough - get rid of the PC BS politicians and then pass the AZ law nationwide after we militarize the border.

The invasion has been going on long enough. Time to get tough!

Posted by: Patriot12 | May 13, 2010 9:29 AM | Report abuse

Cillizza distorted the poll results by citing only the "strongly favor"
respondents.

Posted by: infuse | May 13, 2010 8:02 AM

pew poll is much better. no doubt that america supports the arizona law.

http://people-press.org/report/613/arizona-immigration-law

here in california, whitman has a nonstop radio commercial on immigration. she doesn't mention the arizona law, but comes down hard on illegals in commercial. she stayed away from it before. must be reading the polls.

Posted by: doof | May 13, 2010 9:26 AM | Report abuse

The cluelessness of those who see everything through the prism of D vs R, Us vs Them, Inside-the-Beltway politics is simply stunning!

Illegal immigration is not an "emerging electoral issue."

It is going to be the cause of Civil War 2.

I'll bet that when LA and Chicago are in flames and the US military is trying to retake the Southwest, The Fix readers will still be arguing how this will impact DNC fundraising during an off-year election...

Posted by: pmendez | May 13, 2010 9:26 AM | Report abuse

Margaret


You wonder why after the comments you make about me.

The democrats want the immigration issue for the elections - to try to get the hispanic vote.


HOWEVER - THE DEMOCRATS ARE BETRAYING OUR COUNTRY AGAIN - SUPPORTING OPEN BORDERS JUST SO THEY CAN GET SOME EXTRA VOTES IN THE ELECTION.


This is just another reason why the democrats are just no good and rotten : they CAN NOT BE TRUSTED TO GOVERN FOR THE GOOD OF THE COUNTRY.

What do you say - Do you care about the future of the country or do you just want to care about the elections for the democrats.


CAN YOU BE TRUSTED TO PLACE THE GOOD OF THE COUNTRY FIRST ???


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 9:25 AM | Report abuse

Given the rapid population growth of Hispanics -- and their expected development into a major political force in coming elections -- voicing support for the Arizona law could cause politicians some long term pains
______
So Republicans want the law which was already on the books enforced and since the Federal government refuses Arizona says it will enforce the law itself and that makes Repubs the bad guys??? Meanwhile Democrats don't want the law enforced because it hurts them POLITICALLY!!! Who's the cynical ones here???

Posted by: sovine08 | May 13, 2010 9:17 AM | Report abuse

dagner49, this is America. Speak English.

Posted by: Blarg | May 13, 2010 9:14 AM | Report abuse

The immigration issue is not clear - it is really a proxy issue for the question: what should our immigration laws be?


The people who oppose the law in Arizona really want OPEN BORDERS - they don't want any immigration laws and they want the people here to get AMNESTY.

So, it is about time that the CRIMINALS WHO BREAK THE IMMIGRATION LAWS STOP HIDING BEHIND THE CONSTITUTION.

This is a unique situation - instead of the classic case, in which a defendent accused of a crime tries to invoke protections at a trial.

Instead we have PEOPLE FROM OTHER COUNTRIES - INTENTIONALLY BREAKING THE LAW AND SEEKING TO PRE-SETUP A CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION.

HARDLY THE INTENTION OF THE WRITERS.

I don't like racial profiling - and the original cases involved blacks driving down the highway being stopped for no reason.


However, those cases bare little in common to a situation in which there are 500,000 illegals in Arizona - the law is being broken all over the place - THERE IS REASON TO BELIEVE THE LAW MAY BE BROKEN.

Everyone should have to give their papers - that is the REMEDY if people are complaining about racial profiling in this situation.


THE SOLUTION IS NOT TO STOP ENFORCEMENT OF THE LAW.

And that is the KEY- the immigration groups REALLY WANT TO STOP THE ENFORCEMENT OF THE LAW.


The racial profiling is really a secondary concern.

DO YOU WANT OPEN BORDERS?


Because that is what the MEXICANS WANT - A FREE FLOW OF PEOPLE BETWEEN THE TWO COUNTRIES.


The democrats want the immigration issue for the elections - to try to get the hispanic vote.

HOWEVER - THE DEMOCRATS ARE BETRAYING OUR COUNTRY AGAIN - SUPPORTING OPEN BORDERS JUST SO THEY CAN GET SOME EXTRA VOTES IN THE ELECTION.

This is just another reason why the democrats are just no good and rotten : they CAN NOT BE TRUSTED TO GOVERN FOR THE GOOD OF THE COUNTRY.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 9:05 AM | Report abuse

I was asked if I would support Hillary in 2912 IF she were to run. I will not weasal
my answer. While I continue to support her policies and firmly believe she would have been
a superior POTUS I would not support her if she would choose to do so. To do so would destoy her integrity, break a solomn pledge she made when she became SOS,create hostility towards her and the positive influence she has been for or nation, bring her political Jug, completely splinter the D padment into question and guarantee a R POTUS.Therefore I would not support her and have no doubt she
would not make that suicidal decision.

Your question 37th was completely fair and
my answer honest.

Posted by: leichtman1 | May 13, 2010 9:02 AM | Report abuse

the working class dems and gop support arizonia .the waco libs is proble.saw the wicked witch nancy pelosi on tv begging the catholic church to get involed politically with her version of immigration reform.then our crazy racist president saying how legal latinio childern going to get a ice cream would be arrested.he seems to have a real problem enforcing the laws.pot-queer militarty-illegal aliens.istead of trying to legally change the law he has holder and thre reast of his obamist quit enforcing the laws.

Posted by: dagner49 | May 13, 2010 8:54 AM | Report abuse

"Hispanic GOP candidate Rubio talks out of both sides of his mouth!
He opposes the Arizona law that targets Hispanics until his Teabagger base finds out......now he supports the law.
lol"
Posted by: angie12106 | May 13, 2010 8:40 AM

=====
Teabaggers? Now angie has come to believe that two-thirds of ALL AMERICANS are teabaggers. LOL! (As the NBC/WSJ poll results show, 2/3 favor the AZ law.) Rubio is little more than another politician who blows with the wind. That should surprise no one.

Posted by: infuse | May 13, 2010 8:52 AM | Report abuse

AMERICANS VOTE THEIR POCKETBOOKS FIRST, NOT THEIR BORDERS

Rather than rely on a push poll, perhaps readers should reference the comments of Pima County, Arizona sheriff Clarence Dupnik, who told PBS' Tavis Smiley this week that the immigration issue has been overblown. He refuses to enforce the new Arizona law, calling it "stupid" and "racist." And he says the southern border is much less porous than it was a decade ago.

http://www.pbs.org/kcet/tavissmiley/archive/201005/20100511_dupnik.html?vid=1491319532

***


DELAWARE A.G. BEAU BIDEN'S 'MILD STROKE'... A SILENT MICROWAVE WEAPON ATTACK BY POLITICAL ENEMIES?


URGENT TO THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE U.S. (staff, please save and forward):

Our prayers are with Beau and the family, and I wish him a speedy recovery. But it also would be prudent to heed the words of TV's N.C.I.S. Special Agent LeRoy Jethro Gibbs: "I don't believe in coincidences."

So-called "targeted individuals" -- perhaps including some of the nation's political leaders -- may be unwitting victims of an awesome, silent, invisible and little known microwave/laser radio frequency weapon system that has been installed on cell towers in every neighborhood in America -- a precision-targeted weapon that apparently has been franchised out to various authorities, commands and operatives, and, a preponderance of evidence shows, is being used for nefarious purposes.

Please read these articles by a veteran journalist -- and question key security and intel officials under oath about the deployment of Homeland Security's "torture towers."

http://nowpublic.com/world/u-s-silently-tortures-americans-cell-tower-microwaves
http://nowpublic.com/world/gestapo-usa-govt-funded-vigilante-network-terrorizes-america OR NowPublic.com/scrivener re: "Gestapo USA."

Posted by: scrivener50 | May 13, 2010 8:45 AM | Report abuse

Hispanic GOP candidate Rubio talks out of both sides of his mouth!
He opposes the Arizona law that targets Hispanics until his Teabagger base finds out......now he supports the law.
lol

Posted by: angie12106 | May 13, 2010 8:40 AM | Report abuse

Republicans "support" the new Arizona law that has resulted in BILLIONS in lost revenue for the state as conventions pull out and businesses and tourists AVOID the state.
So - how do Republicans respond to Arizona losing revenue for supporting a Republican position? By AVOIDING Arizona for their 2012 national convention.

Message from Republicans - STAY OUT of Arizona!

Posted by: angie12106 | May 13, 2010 8:32 AM | Report abuse

Republicans "support" the new Arizona law that has resulted in BILLIONS in lost revenue for the state as conventions pull out and businesses and tourists AVOID the state.
So - how do Republicans respond to Arizona losing revenue for supporting a Republican position? By AVOIDING Arizona for their 2012 national convention.

Message from Republicans - STAY OUT of Arizona!

Posted by: angie12106 | May 13, 2010 8:32 AM | Report abuse

And what's 37th doing out of bed at this hour? Is his mom doing the laundry early today?

Posted by: margaretmeyers | May 13, 2010 8:19 AM | Report abuse

Mark, You know that I rail at CC because he always sees the cup so very half full when it comes to the Republicans, and so fatally half empty when it comes to the Democrats. That was my point.

Facts: mid-terms are always correctional; the Democrats are holding some Senate and Congressional seats that are not reasonably theirs to keep; the party out of power is always a more interesting story than the party in power.

Instead of blaming Obama for going after the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and HCR we should acknowledge that last year he had an unusual amount of political currency and he spent it on some complex, unpopular but important pieces of legislation. He could have just prudently sat on his popularity and let things slide, but instead he used it to stabilize our economy and rethink the mess health care and health insurance is.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | May 13, 2010 8:10 AM | Report abuse

Cillizza distorted the poll results by citing only the "strongly favor" respondents. According to the actual poll, nearly two-thirds of all Americans favor the Arizona law! What is it about MSM that can't handle the idea that the vast majority of Americans want our immigration laws enforced! What should be "striking" about that?

--from MSNBC.com about the NBC/WSJ poll--
"Those aren’t the only striking results from this survey, which was conducted after several significant and newsworthy events:

-- Nearly two-thirds of Americans back Arizona’s new controversial immigration law;"
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2010/05/12/2312511.aspx

Posted by: infuse | May 13, 2010 8:02 AM | Report abuse

Here again the media shows it has taken sides on the issue. Cillizza even WARNS politicians to ignore the current polls and think of the future voter.

Woe be to an elected official who spurns this issue in the here and now for some future voter. As they like to say, "How can I stay in office if I'm not reelected?"

Posted by: infuse | May 13, 2010 7:49 AM | Report abuse

(Worth noting: The NBC/WSJ poll question on the Arizona law explained it thusly: "The Arizona law makes it a state crime to be in the U.S. illegally. It requires local and state law enforcement officers to question people about their immigration status if they have reason to suspect a person is in the country illegally, making it a crime for them to lack registration documents.)

AND INCORRECTLY.

The law doesn't allow a person's status to be checked unless first stopped for something else that is illegal. Nor is the Arizona law more likely to cause racial profiling than current federal law which allows federal officers to detain and question on reasonable suspicion. And U.S. law makes it a criminal misdemeanor to enter the country illegally, a felony for a second offense.

But we will never know these things from the way main stream media took sides and distorted and lied about the law.

Posted by: infuse | May 13, 2010 7:41 AM | Report abuse

Spector shot himself in the foot attacking the military service of a 31 year vet and his vote against Kagan, I doubt he will survive. Rubio also has shot himself in the foot with his ad with the ethics investigation having him return double dipped funds to the GOP instead of the government. Much of Rubio's support won't be there on election day with N. Floridians turned off by his immigration stance, and older Cuban voters not accepting his cuts to medicare and social security. The GOP embraced the dixiecrat racism after civil rights winning the south for decades but losing the black vote at the same time. The same will happen with the anti-immigrant policy alienating hispanics. The birth rates of minorities if continued for decades will have them as the majority.

Posted by: jameschirico | May 13, 2010 7:37 AM | Report abuse

MM, let me back up my speculation with stats.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/

Nate Silver maintains a running scorecard on the Senate polling and he shows 7 R pickups and no D pickups. He shows 8 R pickups as the next most likely scenario to seven. It is actually likely that Rs will have a pretty good midterm, according to a statistician who is himself a D. A Senate where JB will have to show up to break a tie vote is now in play.

So I would argue that it is not CC's job to find pearls of good news for Ds in the unusually grim national environment. 538 does not even think OH and MO are likely D takeovers. Rand Paul looks like Bunning's replacement in KY. Grim.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | May 13, 2010 7:31 AM | Report abuse

margaretmeyers


This is not a Republican column - it just feels that way to you because Obama has turned the country against the democratic party......... forever.

I think it was the hypocrisy.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 13, 2010 7:22 AM | Report abuse

MM, it is possible that there is little good news for Ds, right now. If the public mood in '07-'08 was that the nation was in a hole or on the edge of a canyon, the Ds would have satisfied that mood by pulling back or climbing out. The timing of HCR was unfortunate b/c it gave rise to a sense that the Ds were interested in digging their own hole, or jumping off the cliff; take your pick. FinReg should have been the second order of biz, not HCR. Put that disappointment on top of normal midterm backsliding and you have some brew.
As exciting as HCR was for lifelong loyal Ds, it was a big show over something other than jobs and the economy for everyone else. BHO probably decided his best shot at HCR was while he had an enthusiastic majority. The price he paid was losing that enthusiastic majority - because of the timing and the ugliness of the fight both appearing to be distractions from the business of jobs and the economy. Few people understand shrink's argument that HCR was a jobs bill.
==========

Still, show us a million new jobs by 9-30 and CC may report more D optimism among the political groupies.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | May 13, 2010 7:12 AM | Report abuse

#5: Crist is following BHO's model. As nominee, you will revall that BHO went back on his offer to take public financing if McC did the same. I was disappointed by his lame justification for doing so, but it seemed not to matter to voters. Crist surely has polling that says there is no significant down side to keeping the money.

I would guess that Specter had information that led him to believe that Ds would be more immediately accepting of him if he returned CFG cash.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | May 13, 2010 6:50 AM | Report abuse

This wall-to-wall GOP column needs a new title:

"REPUBLICANS ON THE MARCH, BY GOLLY!"

Posted by: margaretmeyers | May 13, 2010 6:45 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company