by Justin La Grange
In an epic political month, Gov. Jan Brewer has surpassed Gov. Sarah Palin and Rep. Bachmann as the premier female superstar of the Republican Party with her courageous -- or should I say "con cajones" -- passing of Arizona's anti-illegal immigration law SB1070, and HB2281, another bill that restricts certain outrageous "anti-American" vile ethnic studies courses in taxpayer funded institutions of learning. These bills, which the idiotic left has blantantly distorted and mischaracterized for their own political gain, are really actually quite tepid and boringly commonsense. However, the left's panties (which both men and women on the left wear) are in a flaming twist because they loathe three key ideas: 1. the constitutional requirement of the federal enforcement of our sovereign borders 2. the rightful deportation of unauthorized illegal aliens and 3. when decisions do not come from Supreme Leader Barack Obama (centralized federal authority, which ironically was not to their liking during the Bush administration).
Fortunately, there are a few reasonable outlets including this blogpost to tell you what the mainstream media and your idiot friends refuse to tell you, chiefly being: 1. SB1070 is not a racial profiling law and 2. the "ethnic studies" bill does not ban ethnic studies classes. But if you're a La Raza nutcase, let's not let facts get in the way of your histrionics. In fact, if you're the attorney general, let's also not let facts get in the way of radical amnesty propaganda fit for the Daily Kos and Keith Olbermann. I'm of course referring to Eric Holder's beyond ridiculous admission yesterday that he had made a public judgment denouncing SB1070 before he had actually read the bill, which up to this point in time he has not. Yes, you have that right, Obama's chief federal attorney has not read the bill that he and his entire administration have vowed to assault. Wow.
SB1070: Illegal Immigration Crackdown Law
However, I have read SB1070 and would like to tell you a little about it.
Let's start out with why this immigration bill was even brought to the table. At the turn of this decade Phoenix is the kidnapping capital of the US, crimes committed by illegal immigrants are pervasive, gangs and drug activity involving illegal aliens are terrorizing Arizona's citizens, and illegal aliens are a net-net drain on public resources (usurping far more state/federal costs than they bring in in terms of per capita revenue production/utility). Many cities are de-facto sanctuary cities that prohibit the easy deportation of illegal aliens who were found to be without the appropriate documentation. And most importantly, Arizona is acting to protect itself as the federal government is neglecting its duties in article 4 of the constitution, which stipulates that it is the responsibility of the federal government to protect the states from invasion and violence. Make no mistake, Arizona has been invaded, and there is violence -- in fact, one citizen dead at the hands of an illegal immigrant is one citizen too much and the only evidence required to showcase that the federal government has neglected its constitutional duties.
In response, we have SB1070 which in essence puts into motion the ability of any state authorities to question the immigration status and request documention of anybody they come into contact with -- for a regular enforcement or other general administrative reason -- that they would suspect to be in the country illegally, and then contact the appropriate authorities (ICE/INS, whatnot) to arrange for deportation. Now, if you read that over carefully, you'll see two myths being debunked:
1. Police can just question anybody they find on the street -- patently false. SB1070 clearly specifies that the only time an individual can be interrogated about their immigration status is when they come into contact with state government or state authorities and the reason for the contact is completely unrelated to immigration status/race, for example a traffic violation, applying for state benefits, unlawful criminal behavior including unlawful labor, etc. Again, the only way someone can be question or detained is if they have reason to come in contact with state authorities for unlawful behavior unrelated to their immigration status.
2. The law is racial -- it's clearly not because anybody having to come into contact with the authorities at any point for any reason (that would be an acceptable detainment point) is generally required to furnish some kind of documentation anyway (ala for a traffic violation, to receive state benefits, if you commit a crime, etc), so no matter who you are (white, brown, yellow, black) you will need to furnish your papers/documents anyway. If you're without documents and happen to be Hispanic, then whoops. If you're a Chinese national smuggled in through a cargo box from Shanghai, then whoops. In addition, an amendment that doesn't change the legal mechanics of SB1070 but was put in for show specifies that race cannot be a factor in any detainment or law enforcement stop. Fundamentally, SB1070 is a very sound bill in terms of civil rights, despite the histrionics of the bedwetting far-left and race baiting Raza groups who make such outrageous civil rights violation claims when most -- including our US Attorney General -- have not read the bill.
To be clear, the following scenario between law enforcement officers is not applicable: "Hey Bob, look at that Mexican over there, kinda tiny and kinda brown and doesn't look like he speaks English. He's probably an illegal. Let's take him away." This kind of nonsense is not anywhere remotely close to any kind of reality in this law but you wouldn't know it from the histrionics of self-serving anti-American Hispanic segregationist groups, self-righteous white liberals who enjoy marinating in their superiority, and the mainstream media who intentionally cloud the mechanics of the law, give airtime to histrionic groups, and have not read the law themselves.
And the public has spoken -- in every nationwide poll they approve of SB1070 by a considerable to vast margin, even with the media's gross mischaracterizations.
HB2281: Ban of Extremist Ethnic Studies Courses
HB2281 -- another grand example of a reasonable law subject to mainstream media histrionics! They would have you believe that this law bans "ethnic studies" courses when it does not do anything of the sort. HB2281 prohibits courses that: "promote the overthrow of the United States government," "promote resentment toward a race or class of people," "are designed primarily for pupils of a particular ethnic group," or "advocate ethnic solidarity instead of treatment of pupils as individuals" (In other words, "the history of Mexican immigration throughout the 20th century" is still an acceptable course, whereas "Chicano Empowerment Against an Imperialist US Power" is not). All of these criteria are not suitable for an impartial taxpayer funded public institution that is supposed to be a steward of everybody's viewpoints...and being a steward of everybody's viewpoints include making sure classes don't come in with authoritative viewpoints, delivering a revised opinion of history as fact via a professor/authority figure who is supposed to be a factual authority. It is the responsibility of professors to bring facts and non-biased data to the table and let students develop their own worldview and opinion on the issues as they see fit -- the ethnic studies courses that are being banned bring a forced exclusionary worldview (which necessarily exclude and intimidate students who don't share that worldview) to an academic setting which is not only anti-academic, but grossly inappropriate for a requisitely non-biased institution funded by the taxpayer.
But fundamentally, why must studies be "ethnic" anyway? It's ridiculous. It's divisive. The existence of classes like these and fringe groups like La Raza, Mecha, and Black Power groups in public institutions just serve to drive ethnicities apart rather than bring them together.
To end then, with a primary focus on SB1070, these laws are not about racism or the lack of understanding of why many law-abiding hard working illegals come to America. Fundamentally, these laws are about just this very word: the law. It's about people desperately seeking the tangibility of their laws meaning something. It's about people saying two cheers for a law on the books that is actually able to be enforced. It's about people needing to know that the law that makes their state a sovereign state free of illegal intruders of any origin is actually a law they can trust and believe in. It's about people agreeing that fairness dictates whomever breaks any law in America is necessarily punished, and people who violate the laws of our sovereign borders are no exception.
There are many situations in life where the balance of what would be common sense or practicality is thrown out in favor of the law and what is fundamentally right. If we live in a state where the law is not our government's word, we have nothing.
