And on it goes, rolling, rolling, rolling to borrow from the Rawhide theme song of years gone by. What is it ? For our purposes, it is the continuing controversy or fight or debate ( although there seems to be precious little in the way of real debate) or any such word of your choosing about immigration of the illegal variety and the state of Arizona.
There have been untold thousands of words written and opinions expressed. There have been boycotts , threatened boycotts, angry demonstrations, considerable name calling and now federal intervention in the form of a lawsuit filed by the Justice Department. And now we have a ruling by federal judge Susan Bolton halting the implementation of significant parts of the law. A big deal, yep! A comment by Yale immigration law professor Peter Schuck to the New York Times called her decision a ” rush to judgment. ” Wonder why? Without knowing any better I would have guessed that perhaps there was some pressure exerted from somewhere to get a quick stay from what was perceived as a favorable source. But I doubt I would have thought that was the case since federal judges should be somewhat immune to such pressures, right? Judge Bolton, nominated by Bill Clinton, but recommended by Senator Jon Kyl. has served on the U S District Court for the District of Arizona since 2000. Bet she never expected to be smack dab in the middle of such controversy. Sorry for the digression. One more statement from Professor Shuck. His opinion is that her quick decision reflects pressure from the feds ( Justice Department or higher?) to get this done quickly.
So, where do we stand now and what happens next? Governor Brewer is condidering an appeal and pondering some revisions to the law. Whether the boycotts continue or not or how successful they have been I don’t know. I don’t have the answer to this but I wonder if an individual state has been boycotted before? Thankfully, Commissioner Bud Selig has had the good sense not to move the 2011 All-Star game.
But my real question is what are people protesting against or boycotting? Do they know or have many/most just been agitated or encouraged to yell and scream angry things in front of cameras and photographers without a clear of understanding of what or why? And not for one minute do I buy the opinion that Arizona’s actions go against the truths expressed so eloquently on the Statue Of Liberty or violate the great American tradition of immigration.
I have two acquaintances, one whose father immigrated from Italy, legally, making him 1st generation American and another who immigrated from Mexico legally and earned citizenship. I applaud them and many like them. Those who are illegally and remain here illegally, with no thought towards becoming citizens are not the historical norm of immigration.
One closing thought which may be a repeat from another post. Find out how the country of Mexico deals with illegal immigrants. ( This is not an issue that will go away nor is it one easily solved. I fervently hope that ther can be a solution, not only for Arizona but for the country as well.)
The lawsuit that is. And word of it comes from a somewhat unlikely source. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton said just over a week ago that the Administration would be suing the state of Arizona. Her phrase was that the Justice Department “will be bringing a lawsuit against the act.”
Her comment has finally been confirmed by an unnamed U. S. official speaking on condition of anonymity. An Administration official commenting on the evil Arizona law does not want his/her name used. You would think it would be an honor to be against this travesty of a law. I’m surprised that Obama spokespersons were not standing in line to confirm this announcement.
It is amusing to me that word first came from someone other than Attorney General Eric Holder or even Homeland Security Director Janet Napolitano, the previous governor of Arizona. But especially puzzling that Holder was not involved since he is over the Justice Department. Perhaps he is finally getting around to reading the law.
Got a feeling that Governor Brewer is not all that upset with the announcement of a forthcoming lawsuit. The suit would perhaps be the opportunity for a long needed discussion on immigration reform which is after all under the purview of the federal government. But since this administration has failed to act on said issue as did the Bush administration, Arizona has made the issue a priority. Obama had made such reform a major campaign promise which has obviously not been the case until now.
An article that I read just yesterday made that very claim, using the phrase “highest prioities” when referring to the overhauling of immigration law. Yeah, right.
Oh, one last tidbit. Governor Brewer has met with the President just about 2 weeks ago, in a session labeled as cordial. Wonder what that means in Washington words. There was no yelling and screaming and the meeting closed with a don’t call us, we’ll call you? Brewer actually did invite the President to come to Arizona and see what the situation is like on the front lines of immigration reform. Answer, no commitment for a visit at this time.
And so it continues. The pros and the cons, the demonstrations ( including uncomprehending children) the boycotts, the threats, the cancelled contracts ( an illegal act in itself) and on it goes.
There has been so much written and said about Arizona’s new law that it is nearly impossible to get a decent perspective on all of it. For now, just a few observations and comments will have to do. But, for a change, I’ll offer what I hope will be the outcome of all the sound and fury. And that is meaningful immigration reform, which is a purview of the federal government, not Arizona or the growing number of states that are considering similar legislation. The President promised immigration reform his first year in office. It did not happen. I hope for the country as a whole and for border states such as Arizona, Texas, New Mexico and California in particular that it occurs. Reform does not mean amnesty or wholesale deportation of 10-12 million people. It means a path to citizenship; tax-paying American citizenship or some in between legal status. The poem by Emma Lazarus on the Statue of Liberty ” give me your tired, your poor,” etc was not aimed at people who come illegally with no intentions of changing that status.
Just a few observations about things I have read. Governor Jan Brewer of Arizona, no matter what one thinks of her or the law, is not a Nazi. Accusation and signs proclaiming such are stupid, uninformed, or incendiary. Take your pick. The cities of Los Angeles and Austin, Tx have voted to cancel legal contracts with the state of Arizona. Are these actions not illegal in and of themselves? Lawsuit anyone? The city of Los Angeles obtains much of its electricity from Arizona. What if Arizona wanted to cancel those contracts? Why, of course not. That would be petulant and childish and worse. Just like the Los Angeles city councilman, Ed Reyes, who said a few days ago, “As an American, I cannot go to Arizona without a passport.” The only thing I can is I sincerely hope he doesn’t believe that or he would never make on Are You Smarter than a Fifth Grader?
Finally, for a piece de resistance. we have Attorney General Eric Holder being questioned by Texas Congressman Ted Poe. The AG was asked if he had read the Arizona law which he has publicly criticized. After attempting to evade the question and being reminded by Poe that it’s only 10 pages long, Mr Holder had to attempt that he had not read the law. Not to worry though. He will get around to it soon.
Our president has made much of the phrase,”the audacity of hope” and he is correct in that hope is an audacious thing. But, there ae other things associated with our ruling class that are perhaps equally as audacious.
We may be witnessing a phenomenon that is unprecedented in recent political history or not, but it is quite fun to take note of it. Have you observed how many Democrats servings as either senators or governors were not elected to their current positions.
- New York Governor David Paterson and Senator Kirsten( guns hidden under the bed) Gilliland
- Illinois Governor Pat Quinn and Senator( for now ) Roland Burris
- Delaware Senator Ted( temporary until it’s time for Beau) Kaufman
- Arizona Governor Jan Brewer
- Colorado senator Michael Bennett
- Kansas Governor Mark ( wait until Kathleen Sebelius is confirmed to HHS ) Parkinson
Any common ground up there, at least one caretaker and one whose shelf life as a senator is limited. We could have had yet another until New Hampshire’s Jud Gregg went, oops, what was I thinking, and withdrew. Shucks, there could even be more. The Administration is still young.
Ok, now for part two which is sort of related. Have you noticed ow many of the nominees or their their spouses etc have had tax problems. Well, not that I am a conspiracy theorist or anything , but I think that was all done for a purpose. Pick people with tax problems, have them do a mea culpa, fess up, pay the taxes, get sympathy, because they are the best person for the job, etc. Beside, look how they are doing double duty by helping the budget deficit. So, if you know a politician with IRS trouble, preferably a Democrat, contact the White House at once. Oh yes, bonus news, the state of Kansas has big time budget problems and cannot at present send out tax refunds. For your further consideration, hope you are not rich whatever the Democrats define that as today because the tax man cometh.
- Bible study
- Christian living
- Foreign Policy
- International politics
- Legal system
- Life and Death
- Local Politics
- State Politics