News Item: The Politburo Speaks
(Category: Immigration)
Posted by Toddy Littman
Tuesday 11 May 2010 - 12:58:36
From Answers.com (http://www.answers.com/topic/politburo):
"pol·it·bu·ro (pŏl'ĭt-byʊr'ō, pə-lĭt'-)
n., pl., -ros. The chief political and executive committee of a Communist party."
A little Drudge report tweet about Mr. Eric Holder today, the Attorney General of patronage, pardons, and office abuse by incompetence extraordinaire, here's the link to the article: http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/05/09/holder.arizona.immigration/index.html?hpt=T2
And here is the best part to me:
"The recently enacted Arizona law initially allowed police to ask anyone for proof of legal U.S. residency, based solely on a police officer's suspicion that the person might be in the country illegally. Arizona lawmakers soon amended the law so that officers could check a person's status only if the person had been stopped or arrested for another reason."
As usual the mainstream media must paint the picture of the initial protests as valid, as though the law actually allowed police to stop someone just for the sake of asking if they are legal or not, which the law did not. From the beginning the law only allowed people who were stopped, known as "legal contact" to be subject to an officer asking them if they are a legal resident.
And of course the obvious to this is true: "Driver's License and Registration" are well known expectations of every officer when you are pulled over at a traffic stop. "Do you have any identification please?" is another well-known question of them at your front door, usually after they flashed their badge and announced who they are. Thus, at what point is an illegal alien being oppressed if the American people, who are expected to produce the same indicia of legal existence, are not so oppressed? This is particularly true in those cases where you are a legal immigrant and the officer asks for any of this paperwork, you will naturally include your green card as you are required to have that on your person at all time.
But of course Mr. Holder, well, even after the law is amended, and the entire Progressive establishment, without ever addressing the oppressive nature of needing a driver's license or registration, (an oppression that must be true to be against requiring a person to produce a green card as well, even though federal law already requires the green card) decides to say this:
"Holder told ABC's 'This Week' program that one concern about the Arizona law is that 'you'll end up in a situation where people are racially profiled, and that could lead to a wedge drawn between certain communities and law enforcement, which leads to the problem of people in those communities not willing to interact with people in law enforcement, not willing to share information, not willing to be witnesses where law enforcement needs them.'"
Apparently Mr. Holder has never been to New York, New Jersey, and the most heinous of the places no one volunteers information, due to patronage concerns, is Chicago! In other words, the idea people don't volunteer information is perfectly acceptable where there is a political use for the information, but unacceptable if it results from a desperate desire to protect the border of the United States of America by protecting the border of the State of Arizona, where the United States Government has failed for decades, abdicating and giving at best lip service to the issue; where also the United States government is choosing the least financially costly means, more agents and enforcement of the current federal law (mirrored in the Arizona law) on employers who hire illegal aliens. They'd rather have the political cost of the endless reign of whatever party grants amnesty to 12+ million illegal aliens in the United States.
Of course this assumes the argument isn't specious in the first place, as 70% of the people of Arizona want this law, meaning 70% of the population will encourage and cooperate with law enforcement due to knowing their local police can finally do something about illegal immigration. That's 70% more people with respect for their State's government, a no-no in progressive "limit State's rights" circles, but nonetheless the truth of the matter. That's also 70% of the people of a State actually are contacting law enforcement to deal with suspected safe houses now, since before this development if they called the local police they were told "we can't really do anything about that since Obama's administration has revoked our authority under federal law."
Thank God the Progressives aren't counting on Arizona and already gave up on the 70% of the people the federal government has made angry over their handling of the border in Arizona.
Gotta love that Progressive Elitism Competence they claim is beyond the rest of us. We're just so stupid, uneducated, and haven't been told often enough what they are doing to the point we just nod yes after tiring of the constant blather from the Progressives telling us what they would like us to hear of what they are doing, and why, hoping that we tire of paying attention to the truth, the facts, the law and reality. If I remember, wasn't it Hitler who would tell a lie over and over until everyone believed it? Maybe it's President Obama or his Financier-In-Chief, George Soros, who are actually related to Hitler, and not the governor of Arizona as so many of these criminal by being illegal aliens are suggesting here in Arizona.
Thank you for reading this spontaneous fiasco of rant upon the reigning progressive advocatus diaboli in Washington, D.C.,
Toddy Littman
This news item is from ChangingWind.Org
( http://changingwind.org/rename/news.php?extend.81 )
(Category: Immigration)
Posted by Toddy Littman
Tuesday 11 May 2010 - 12:58:36
From Answers.com (http://www.answers.com/topic/politburo):
"pol·it·bu·ro (pŏl'ĭt-byʊr'ō, pə-lĭt'-)
n., pl., -ros. The chief political and executive committee of a Communist party."
A little Drudge report tweet about Mr. Eric Holder today, the Attorney General of patronage, pardons, and office abuse by incompetence extraordinaire, here's the link to the article: http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/05/09/holder.arizona.immigration/index.html?hpt=T2
And here is the best part to me:
"The recently enacted Arizona law initially allowed police to ask anyone for proof of legal U.S. residency, based solely on a police officer's suspicion that the person might be in the country illegally. Arizona lawmakers soon amended the law so that officers could check a person's status only if the person had been stopped or arrested for another reason."
As usual the mainstream media must paint the picture of the initial protests as valid, as though the law actually allowed police to stop someone just for the sake of asking if they are legal or not, which the law did not. From the beginning the law only allowed people who were stopped, known as "legal contact" to be subject to an officer asking them if they are a legal resident.
And of course the obvious to this is true: "Driver's License and Registration" are well known expectations of every officer when you are pulled over at a traffic stop. "Do you have any identification please?" is another well-known question of them at your front door, usually after they flashed their badge and announced who they are. Thus, at what point is an illegal alien being oppressed if the American people, who are expected to produce the same indicia of legal existence, are not so oppressed? This is particularly true in those cases where you are a legal immigrant and the officer asks for any of this paperwork, you will naturally include your green card as you are required to have that on your person at all time.
But of course Mr. Holder, well, even after the law is amended, and the entire Progressive establishment, without ever addressing the oppressive nature of needing a driver's license or registration, (an oppression that must be true to be against requiring a person to produce a green card as well, even though federal law already requires the green card) decides to say this:
"Holder told ABC's 'This Week' program that one concern about the Arizona law is that 'you'll end up in a situation where people are racially profiled, and that could lead to a wedge drawn between certain communities and law enforcement, which leads to the problem of people in those communities not willing to interact with people in law enforcement, not willing to share information, not willing to be witnesses where law enforcement needs them.'"
Apparently Mr. Holder has never been to New York, New Jersey, and the most heinous of the places no one volunteers information, due to patronage concerns, is Chicago! In other words, the idea people don't volunteer information is perfectly acceptable where there is a political use for the information, but unacceptable if it results from a desperate desire to protect the border of the United States of America by protecting the border of the State of Arizona, where the United States Government has failed for decades, abdicating and giving at best lip service to the issue; where also the United States government is choosing the least financially costly means, more agents and enforcement of the current federal law (mirrored in the Arizona law) on employers who hire illegal aliens. They'd rather have the political cost of the endless reign of whatever party grants amnesty to 12+ million illegal aliens in the United States.
Of course this assumes the argument isn't specious in the first place, as 70% of the people of Arizona want this law, meaning 70% of the population will encourage and cooperate with law enforcement due to knowing their local police can finally do something about illegal immigration. That's 70% more people with respect for their State's government, a no-no in progressive "limit State's rights" circles, but nonetheless the truth of the matter. That's also 70% of the people of a State actually are contacting law enforcement to deal with suspected safe houses now, since before this development if they called the local police they were told "we can't really do anything about that since Obama's administration has revoked our authority under federal law."
Thank God the Progressives aren't counting on Arizona and already gave up on the 70% of the people the federal government has made angry over their handling of the border in Arizona.
Gotta love that Progressive Elitism Competence they claim is beyond the rest of us. We're just so stupid, uneducated, and haven't been told often enough what they are doing to the point we just nod yes after tiring of the constant blather from the Progressives telling us what they would like us to hear of what they are doing, and why, hoping that we tire of paying attention to the truth, the facts, the law and reality. If I remember, wasn't it Hitler who would tell a lie over and over until everyone believed it? Maybe it's President Obama or his Financier-In-Chief, George Soros, who are actually related to Hitler, and not the governor of Arizona as so many of these criminal by being illegal aliens are suggesting here in Arizona.
Thank you for reading this spontaneous fiasco of rant upon the reigning progressive advocatus diaboli in Washington, D.C.,
Toddy Littman
This news item is from ChangingWind.Org
( http://changingwind.org/rename/news.php?extend.81 )