• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

AZ puts Los Angeles on notice

Ockham

Ockham

Noblesse oblige
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
23,909
Reaction score
11,003
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Haven't seen this play out in the MSM - probably because the MSM is too enthralled with the Arizona racist narrative. According to the Los Angeles Mayor - Boycotts work. However, since Los Angeles made a bit of a splash last week passing a boycott of Arizona and the Los Angeles mayor signing said boycott - and interesting thing occurred. Arizona decided not to roll over and play dead. This little memo from the Arizona Corporation Commission - specifically Gary Pierce, outlined exactly some down side to the approved boycott --- not to Arizona, but to Los Angeles.

Gary Pierce said:
I received your message; please receive mine. As a state-wide elected member of the Arizona Corporation Commission overseeing Arizona's electric and water utilities, I too am keenly aware of the "resources and ties" we share with the City of Los Angeles. In fact, approximately twenty-five percent of the electricity consumed in Los Angeles is generated by power plants in Arizona.

If an economic boycott is truly what you desire, I will be happy to encourage Arizona utilities to renegotiate your power agreements so Los Angeles no longer receives any power from Arizona-based generation. I am confident that Arizona's utilities would be happy to take those electrons off your hands. If, however, you find that the City Council lacks the strength of its convictions to turn off the lights in Los Angeles and boycott Arizona power, please reconsider the wisdom of attempting to harm Arizona's economy.
Click to expand...


:shock: Whoa. Them's fightin' words right there. If I know one thing about Los Angeles - it's that they have no spine. Shut off their lights, they'll whine and moan. Let's hope Los Angeles calls the bluff - I'd love to watch the drama unfold.


[ame="http://www.scribd.com/doc/31587415/Response-to-the-LA-Boycott-by-AZ-Corp-Commissioner"]Response to the LA Boycott by AZ Corp Commissioner[/ame]
 
I sent a letter to the Gov and the CorpCommission supporting this. If LA want to play sanctions, then let the games begin. If SRP/APS can break the contract with LA for electricity, IMO there is enough demand elsewhere that the utility company would see no loss.

I also called LA city council and SD mayor office to inform them our two week vaction plans to LA/SD has been canceled. We will not be setting foot in the state of CA this year or in the future. I realize one person is not much of an impact, but I believe others in AZ will do the same.
 
bluff and bravado. big dick contest. the issue is, who can better afford the loss. who really has the bigger dick?

Arizona produces an amount of power for L.A. roughly equivalent to what they produce for themselves as a state. they are gonna lose a contract, roughly equivalent to 2% of the STATE's GDP. That on top of an estimated 8 million in contracts L.A. holds with Arizona. Add to that another 6 million loss from canceled conventions/conferences and the problem takes on a little scope. Moody's suggest that, taken together, these boycotts "could have a negative impact on the state’s credit, as it could lead to further weakening of state finances that have already been negatively affected by the recession".

AZ is trying to head off threatened boycotts from San Francisco, Oakland.... Washington D.C., St Paul, Minn, and N.Y. City. Will it work? Or will it backfire and convince these cities to go ahead. St Paul has already restricted city travel to Az. Berkely has approved a Boycott.

can L.A. survive the cut in electricity? Ca. is already the largest producer of renewable power in the world. Can it increase its own power generation, increase supplies from Nev and/or Utah to compensate?

as an angeleno, i am not worried.

Az has a right to enforce its own laws, but requiring anyone with brown skin to be prepared to prove that they are not here illegally IS discriminatory. And good people are right in protesting it. Nowhere in the United States is a requirement to prove citizenship considered probable cause for interfering with the movement or activities of private persons. Nowhere is not holding such a document in your possession at all times considered probable cause for arrest. In Nazi Germany, in the Soviet Union it was common. Not here.

The state of AZ has positioned itself for scorn from the entire nation and they are getting it. And they are gonna lose to the Lakers, too.

geo.
 
Last edited:
Geo Patric said:
bluff and bravado. big dick contest. the issue is, who can better afford the loss. who really has the bigger dick?

Arizona produces an amount of power for L.A. roughly equivalent to what they produce for themselves as a state. they are gonna lose a contract, roughly equivalent to 2% of the STATE's GDP. That on top of an estimated 8 million in contracts L.A. holds with Arizona. Add to that another 6 million loss from canceled conventions/conferences and the problem takes on a little scope. Moody's suggest that, taken together, these boycotts "could have a negative impact on the state’s credit, as it could lead to further weakening of state finances that have already been negatively affected by the recession".

AZ is trying to head off threatened boycotts from San Francisco, Oakland.... Washington D.C., St Paul, Minn, and N.Y. City. Will it work? Or will it backfire and convince these cities to go ahead. St Paul has already restricted city travel to Az. Berkely has approved a Boycott.

can L.A. survive the cut in electricity? Ca. is already the largest producer of renewable power in the world. Can it increase its own power generation, increase supplies from Nev and/or Utah to compensate?

as an angeleno, i am not worried.

Az has a right to enforce its own laws, but requiring anyone with brown skin to be prepared to prove that they are not here illegally IS discriminatory. And good people are right in protesting it. Nowhere in the United States is a requirement to prove citizenship considered probable cause for interfering with the movement or activities of private persons. Nowhere is not holding such a document in your possession at all times considered probable cause for arrest. In Nazi Germany, in the Soviet Union it was common. Not here.

The state of AZ has positioned itself for scorn from the entire nation and they are getting it. And they are gonna lose to the Lakers, too.

geo.
Click to expand...

Pfft. If anything, it's gonna cost LA far more than it has to spend. In case you hadn't noticed, Los Angeles is already all but bankrupt and we're already fighting with the utilities on a weekly basis. Renegotiating this contract will send your electricity costs (which are already absurd) through the roof. If Arizona does this, it's gonna be more than a small inconvenience to the council and to the mayor and will probably cost them elections. All these lofty ideals about how hard it is for the poor mexican illegal migrating through Arizona because now they actually have to follow the laws (for shame!!) will evaporate when people open that power bill and see it raised another 8-15%.

LA shouldn't have been getting involved in Arizona's business to start with...and now it's gonna walk away from that scrap with its tail between its legs.
 
Typical California. Dish it out, and can't take it. Maybe they shouldn't start a fight they can't finish.

I just hope that the illegal exodus happening in Arizona ALL go up to California and bankrupt them even more. I'd love a day when California implodes upon itself and martial law breaks out.

I hope they start with Hollywood.
 
Ockham said:
Haven't seen this play out in the MSM - probably because the MSM is too enthralled with the Arizona racist narrative. According to the Los Angeles Mayor - Boycotts work. However, since Los Angeles made a bit of a splash last week passing a boycott of Arizona and the Los Angeles mayor signing said boycott - and interesting thing occurred. Arizona decided not to roll over and play dead. This little memo from the Arizona Corporation Commission - specifically Gary Pierce, outlined exactly some down side to the approved boycott --- not to Arizona, but to Los Angeles.




:shock: Whoa. Them's fightin' words right there. If I know one thing about Los Angeles - it's that they have no spine. Shut off their lights, they'll whine and moan. Let's hope Los Angeles calls the bluff - I'd love to watch the drama unfold.


Response to the LA Boycott by AZ Corp Commissioner
Click to expand...


There is NOTHING racist about it. The illegals need to get the hell out.... PERIOD.
 
jallman said:
Pfft. If anything, it's gonna cost LA far more than it has to spend.
Click to expand...
a tootsie pop would cost us more than we have to spend.
In case you hadn't noticed, Los Angeles is already all but bankrupt and we're already fighting with the utilities on a weekly basis.
Click to expand...
but... we are not fighting for availability. The Mayor v. DWP is attempting to hold up the city for approval on a rate hike. They will lose and win. They will be forced to pay the 7.4m AND they will get the rate hike.
Renegotiating this contract will send your electricity costs (which are already absurd) through the roof.
Click to expand...
not mine. i am 100% solar.
All these lofty ideals about how hard it is for the poor mexican illegal migrating through Arizona because now they actually have to follow the laws (for shame!!) will evaporate when people open that power bill and see it raised another 8-15%.
Click to expand...
it is not the illegal immigrant that is causing the stink. it is the latino AMERICAN CITIZEN who has to carry proof of citizenship. It is the targeting of anyone who looks to someone like she might be from latin america who becomes subject to being stopped and interrogated simply BECAUSE she looks like she might be latina.

no one is arguing that everyone has to follow the laws, as long as laws are not targeted at groups arbitrarily. I have no problem with Az increasing its enforcement of law. That is not the point. I am not obliged to carry proof of citizenship. Nor is my nephew. in Az he would but i still would not. I am white, he is Mexican American. THAT is the problem.
[/quote]
LA shouldn't have been getting involved in Arizona's business to start with...and now it's gonna walk away from that scrap with its tail between its legs.[/QUOTE]

well... we shall just have to wait and see. I predict AZ will make modifications to the law qualifying when and under what conditions a law enforcement officer may and/or must require proof of citizenship. The simplest and most just would be to require it of everyone.

i would LOVE to see the response to that.

geo.
 
Gipper said:
Typical California. Dish it out, and can't take it. Maybe they shouldn't start a fight they can't finish.

I just hope that the illegal exodus happening in Arizona ALL go up to California and bankrupt them even more. I'd love a day when California implodes upon itself and martial law breaks out.

I hope they start with Hollywood.
Click to expand...

well, your hopes are destined to being dashed.

the influx of immigrants moved FROM california TO arizona (and elsewhere) because of increased border enforcement. heck.. WE have seen a sizable decrease.

geo.
 
Geo Patric said:
a tootsie pop would cost us more than we have to spend.

but... we are not fighting for availability. The Mayor v. DWP is attempting to hold up the city for approval on a rate hike. They will lose and win. They will be forced to pay the 7.4m AND they will get the rate hike.

not mine. i am 100% solar.

it is not the illegal immigrant that is causing the stink. it is the latino AMERICAN CITIZEN who has to carry proof of citizenship. It is the targeting of anyone who looks to someone like she might be from latin america who becomes subject to being stopped and interrogated simply BECAUSE she looks like she might be latina.

no one is arguing that everyone has to follow the laws, as long as laws are not targeted at groups arbitrarily. I have no problem with Az increasing its enforcement of law. That is not the point. I am not obliged to carry proof of citizenship. Nor is my nephew. in Az he would but i still would not. I am white, he is Mexican American. THAT is the problem.

LA shouldn't have been getting involved in Arizona's business to start with...and now it's gonna walk away from that scrap with its tail between its legs.

well... we shall just have to wait and see. I predict AZ will make modifications to the law qualifying when and under what conditions a law enforcement officer may and/or must require proof of citizenship. The simplest and most just would be to require it of everyone.

i would LOVE to see the response to that.

geo.
Click to expand...

Let's back this up and take it to a more honest platform...first of all, the law doesn't require poor little brown people to carry papers just because they're poor little brown people. However, it does require everyone at all times to provide proof of identification if they are detained during the commission of another crime or traffic violation. That's already the case as it is...except now, the officers of Arizona can do what the Feds have so far refused to do...check immigration status. Now, if you're a legal alien, you are already required to carry papers with you so...no problem there. If you have a green card, you're already required to have it with you or be able to present it so...no problem there. If you're a citizen, you have to have some form of ID in a driver's license or a social security card or state ID so...no issue there either. If you are in any of those three situations, you brought it on yourself by first committing a crime and secondly not having proper ID at the time you committed the crime so....yeah, no sympathy for anyone in the unfortunate situation of having to be detained for an extra hour or two to have their immigration status confirmed...not poor little brown people, poor little white people, black people, yellow people....no one.

This isn't about race except for the fact that the current immigration issue happens to be weighted around brown people at the moment.
 
It's called Long Beach. Kind of makes a lot more sense that way.

And good for AZ. Shut this city council up, please.
 
Well, this story just went from interesting to simply delicious! :popcorn2:
 
first of all, the law doesn't require poor little brown people to carry papers just because they're poor little brown people.
Click to expand...
your paternalist rhetorical flourishes belie your own pretense of fairness. yes, it does. it requires anyone a law enforcement officer 'suspects' of being an immigrant to provide documentation proving that they are either citizens or foreign nationals legally in the country.
However, it does require everyone at all times to provide proof of identification if they are detained during the commission of another crime or traffic violation. That's already the case as it is...
Click to expand...
so, the law was unnecessary EXCEPT in allowing law enforcement officers to stop and interrogate people they have no reason to suspect of having committed a crime aside from from her presumed place of origin derived the color of her skin. Thanks for the clarification.
so....yeah, no sympathy for anyone in the unfortunate situation of having to be detained ...
Click to expand...
keep your sympathy. no self respecting man or woman obliges it of you.
This isn't about race except for the fact that the current immigration issue happens to be weighted around brown people at the moment.
Click to expand...
A self refuting statement. That it is 'at the moment' does not change that it is about "brown people". That it is not about a hatred of brown people per se does not make it not racist. you are questioning the legitimacy of people based on their skin color.

It IS about race, but that it is about race is secondary. it is MORE about the sovereignty of the individual. It is about limiting the role of armed authority in interfering in the free movement of you and me AND all those brown skinned persons.

'they came first for the immigrants, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a immigrant. Then they came for.... and then they came for... Then they came for me and by that time no one was left to speak up.'

geo.
 
Last edited:
Geo Patric said:
your paternalist rhetorical flourishes belie your own pretense of fairness.
Click to expand...

I am fair. I want the law to apply to everyone equally. Even poor little brown people.

yes, it does. it requires anyone a law enforcement officer 'suspects' of being an immigrant to provide documentation proving that they are either citizens or foreign nationals legally in the country.
Click to expand...

OK, I see nothing wrong with that.

so, the law was unnecessary EXCEPT in allowing law enforcement officers to stop and interrogate people they have no reason to suspect of having committed a crime aside from from her presumed place of origin derived the color of her skin. Thanks for the clarification.
Click to expand...

Except you aren't clear about it. It doesn't allow law enforcement to just stop and interrogate anyone they have no reason to suspect committed a crime. This is where your argument breaks down because the foundation of it is built on a lie.

Tell you what...read the law and then get back to me. When you correct your half-truths and misinformation, we can continue. I've no interest in debating the issue unless it is done from a factual perspective.
 
Geo Patric said:
you are questioning the legitimacy of people based on their skin color.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. Because statistically they are more likely to be illegal aliens. Why wouldn't we profile?
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
:lol: If only AZ had the cajohnes to turn out LA's lights.
Click to expand...

25% of LA's lights. And they really can't do that so abruptly...they kind of have to renegotiate contracts like LA is trying to do to them.

Unless they make the case that the city measure to boycott AZ businesses is now law and cut the power based on that...OMG, I would love to see the chaos that ensues while Mayor Vato tries to keep all these primadonnas and divas under control when they realize their hair dryers aren't going to work without power. :lol:
 
jallman said:
25% of LA's lights. And they really can't do that so abruptly...they kind of have to renegotiate contracts like LA is trying to do to them.

Unless they make the case that the city measure to boycott AZ businesses is now law and cut the power based on that...OMG, I would love to see the chaos that ensues while Mayor Vato tries to keep all these primadonnas and divas under control when they realize their hair dryers aren't going to work without power. :lol:
Click to expand...




Just be armed brother..... You live amongst savages..... :mrgreen:
 
reefedjib said:
Absolutely. Because statistically they are more likely to be illegal aliens. Why wouldn't we profile?
Click to expand...

They are the most likely in Arizona, yes. In somewhere like New York, I think it's a pretty even mix of illegals.

But that's not the point. The point is that this law isn't requiring or permitting anything more than was already law except one thing: now local law enforcement can check immigration status in the course of an arrest or other, previously lawful, detainment.
 
And I mean savages... Who the hell puts sprouts and capers on a bagel with LOX?!?!?!?!??!
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
And I mean savages... Who the hell puts sprouts and capers on a bagel with LOX?!?!?!?!??!
Click to expand...

I can't deal with capers anyway. And I hate sprouts.

Here's another good one that I can't figure out: we live in one of the sunniest places on earth yet these plastic bitches use tanning beds...
 
It doesn't allow law enforcement to just stop and interrogate anyone they have no reason to suspect committed a crime.
Click to expand...

except that YOU are not being clear. illegal immigration is a violation of the law. if you believe that someone has illegally immigrated, you have 'reason' to suspect that he is in violation of the law.
[/quote]

you say it yourself. it targets brown people, it is likely to incur invalid detentions and interrogations. and it obliges no more evidence that a law has been broken than the 'suspicions' of a law enforcement officer. gee... imagine my surprise... you don't wanna talk to me anymore.
I've no interest in debating the issue unless it is done from a factual perspective.
Click to expand...
an empiricist... my favorite kind...here are some fact to digest:

Joanna Lydgate, a civil rights fellow with the Warren Institute at Berkeley School of Law conducted a survey and wrote a report on Operation Streamline, a federal Program (sponsored, not surprisingly, by John mcCain of Arizona) which attempts to prosecute as a crime each and every illegal entry.

the result, a clogging of federal courts, to be expected. 'Group trials' a violation of federal procedure and a violation of civil rights. Small matters to some, i suppose. but:
As petty immigration prosecutions more than tripled nationwide from 2003 to 2008, researchers at Syracuse University found that organized-crime prosecutions and drug prosecutions declined by 20%, and weapons prosecutions fell by 19%.
Click to expand...
well, except in the one state where Operation Streamline is NOT in effect. HERE, "The Southern District of California ranks first nationwide in per capita prosecutions for drug importing and human smuggling."
but it is working, right? i mean, in those states where OS in in effect, illegal immigration is down over the last few months some 24% , yes, but it fluctuates all the time, usually due to economic fluctuations. Notice that in the ONE state where OS is NOT in effect, illegal immigration is down 27%.

draconian measures are USUALLY counter productive. Az has taken a bold leap. There are repercussions to such bold actions. Az is suffering them now.

geo.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom