• 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!

Hispanics flee Arizona ahead of immigration law

Zyphlin said:
[*]It is illegal for any member of the Nevada Legislature to conduct official business wearing a penis costume while the legislature is in session
Click to expand...

We need to start enforcing this law. This epidemic of penis-clad legislators is getting out of control.
 
Zyphlin said:
So while I think the cries of "unconstitutional" are bull**** if you're going to scream that at the states when its clear federal law allows it, but I do think its not too unreasonable to be more worried about Arizona then the rest of the country because for the rest of the country illegal immigration is essentially a blue law.
Click to expand...

I'm the exact opposite: The Arizona laws are absolutely, postively, 100% constitutional.

It is the federal laws that are unconstitutional. ;)
 
Gill said:
Give me a list of these supposed companies or industries that promote the use of illegal immigrants and I'll be glad to avoid them.
Click to expand...

Why should I do your work for you? If you're so bothered by it, do it yourself. Quit being lazy, that's how we got to this point now. People wanting others to do their work for them so they don't have to get off the couch or think about a problem. Illegal immigrants work all sorts of jobs from agriculture to construction to slaughter houses. If you don't like illegal immigration, you should look at what you're supporting. But don't sit there and demand that others do your work. It's your damned duty, and you need to do it.

No wonder things are seemingly falling apart in this country. We've gotten far too lazy.
 
Tucker Case said:
Proof?
Click to expand...

Coorection: it is unlikely. There is nothing to indicate that it is happening.


But not every state has the same attitude about illegals as Arizona does. Those who leave are simply moving to one of those states that have a different attitude.
Click to expand...

OK, this is what zyphlin said and I concede it.





Then whyon Earth did he come to the US, which was founded because of personal decisions made using ideology and politcs as their basis? :confused:

The whole revolution was about not wanting to pay taxes. It wasn't all that oppresive of a stituation for the founders. But most definitely they made their personal decisions based on ideology and politics.
Click to expand...

So, you are saying they should have made the personal decision of not moving to the US because of a political/ideological stance, which is that politics/ideology shouldn't interfere with personal decisions? That makes no sense at all.

What you are describing is basically politicians in general, which are a different case (and usually choose their carreer for the personal reason that it is the type of career they want and a subect they are interested in; the same reasons any career is chosen).
 
Dav said:
So, you are saying they should have made the personal decision of not moving to the US because of a political/ideological stance, which is that politics/ideology shouldn't interfere with personal decisions? That makes no sense at all.
Click to expand...

His comment wasn't political. It was that "Cuba went wrong when people became unable to separate politics from their personal lives." This is a belief that intermingling politics and perosnal lives is dangerous and will always lead to problems.

Thus, it would be a stupid decision to go to a country that has had this same exact problem since it's very inception.

He should isntead have gone to a country that was founded by people who do not allow politics and ideology to enter into their personal lives, as this would prevent the same thing form occuring in his new homeland.

It's not his ideology that should have guided his decision, his practical application of a belief he had should have guided his decision.

What you are describing is basically politicians in general, which are a different case (and usually choose their carreer for the personal reason that it is the type of career they want and a subect they are interested in; the same reasons any career is chosen).
Click to expand...

I'm describing reality. Your position is in defiance of reality. You formulate your political positions and ideology based on personal preferences. They are intertwined from the very start. Your father would be searching for a very, very long time for the mythical land where politics and perosnal lives are not intertwined. There is no other possibility.
 
Zyphlin said:
To be fair, and this goes to me too, towards the federal government...

Sadly there's not been an administration in some time that actually took border enforcement seriously. We all got hoodwinkinked into thinking it was going to happen with the promises of it occuring after amnesty in the 80's and it didn't, and its not going to this time either if we give amnesty first. But because the Federal Government is so derelict in enforcing their own laws that are on the books and so wantonly ignoring criminals, what we have are federal immigration laws that are essentially on par with "Blue Laws" that you see in states and cities now.

You know the type:
  • its illegal for a couple to hold hands on a sunday
  • its forbidden for a man with a moustache to kiss a woman
  • Its prohibited to eat onions between the hours of 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. while out riding a horse
  • its forbidden from buying drinks for more than three people other than himself at any one period during the day
  • It is illegal for any member of the Nevada Legislature to conduct official business wearing a penis costume while the legislature is in session.

Those are all from the books of towns in Nevada, or its actual state law.

That's essentially what most Federal immigration laws have became; they've become the equivilent of buying too many women drinks in a day or having a moustache while making out. They're laws that are ignored and found silly and devoid of any real use in either enforcing nor taking the time to remove them. They've become jokes, not just to us that want them enforced but to the people that are enforcing them.

I doubt any citizens going to be bad that there's a law banning kissing if you have a mustache, however if they started enforcing it then that probably changes the situation.

So while I think the cries of "unconstitutional" are bull**** if you're going to scream that at the states when its clear federal law allows it, but I do think its not too unreasonable to be more worried about Arizona then the rest of the country because for the rest of the country illegal immigration is essentially a blue law.
Click to expand...

The cries of unconstitutionality are hollow, because I see no clause whatsoever that precludes a state from doing this. Washington can say that it's their job, but the fact remains that it's not a mutually exclusive situation. It's not Arizona or the Fed can take action, it's Arizona and the Fed can take action.
 
American said:
The cries of unconstitutionality are hollow, because I see no clause whatsoever that precludes a state from doing this. Washington can say that it's their job, but the fact remains that it's not a mutually exclusive situation. It's not Arizona or the Fed can take action, it's Arizona and the Fed can take action.
Click to expand...

It should be that Arizona can take action and the Feds cannot. Just as there is no clause that limits State authority, there is no clause that grants federal authority.

According to the 10th, that means it is reserved to the States.
 
I guess it's all part of the free market system. If the consumer doesn't like it, they can go somewhere else. And in this case, if Arizona is concerned about losing its Hispanic population, they'll try something different.
 
OmniRocky said:
I guess it's all part of the free market system. If the consumer doesn't like it, they can go somewhere else. And in this case, if Arizona is concerned about losing its Hispanic population, they'll try something different.
Click to expand...

Agreed. And if they feel that they aren't losing much, they won't change anything. It's ultimately the decision of the people of Arizona.
 
Zyphlin said:
To be fair, and this goes to me too, towards the federal government...

Sadly there's not been an administration in some time that actually took border enforcement seriously. We all got hoodwinkinked into thinking it was going to happen with the promises of it occuring after amnesty in the 80's and it didn't, and its not going to this time either if we give amnesty first. But because the Federal Government is so derelict in enforcing their own laws that are on the books and so wantonly ignoring criminals, what we have are federal immigration laws that are essentially on par with "Blue Laws" that you see in states and cities now.

You know the type:
  • its illegal for a couple to hold hands on a sunday
  • its forbidden for a man with a moustache to kiss a woman
  • Its prohibited to eat onions between the hours of 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. while out riding a horse
  • its forbidden from buying drinks for more than three people other than himself at any one period during the day
  • It is illegal for any member of the Nevada Legislature to conduct official business wearing a penis costume while the legislature is in session.

Those are all from the books of towns in Nevada, or its actual state law.

That's essentially what most Federal immigration laws have became; they've become the equivilent of buying too many women drinks in a day or having a moustache while making out. They're laws that are ignored and found silly and devoid of any real use in either enforcing nor taking the time to remove them. They've become jokes, not just to us that want them enforced but to the people that are enforcing them.

I doubt any citizens going to be bad that there's a law banning kissing if you have a mustache, however if they started enforcing it then that probably changes the situation.

So while I think the cries of "unconstitutional" are bull**** if you're going to scream that at the states when its clear federal law allows it, but I do think its not too unreasonable to be more worried about Arizona then the rest of the country because for the rest of the country illegal immigration is essentially a blue law.
Click to expand...

Zyphlin, I agree that the federal government has not done well on it's job to stop immigration, but I do not think the border is the solution, at least not all of it. It is simply not possible or feasible to really stop people sneaking into this country. The resources it would take are insane. A wall won't do it. Increased border patrols won't do it. Our military is stretched thins as is, so having them patrol is not a solution. What needs to be done is reduce the reason why people sneak to this country, and that means going after those who employ illegals.

Any one who knows me knows I am staunchly anti-illegal. To me, it's a clear cut issue. If you are here illegally, you are a criminal. End of story. But focusing on the people coming into the country seems to me to be akin to going after drug users in the war on drugs. The better solution is to go after the ability of illegals to succeed here. If they cannot get jobs, cannot get benefits, then they have no reason to come here.
 
Tucker Case said:
It should be that Arizona can take action and the Feds cannot. Just as there is no clause that limits State authority, there is no clause that grants federal authority.

According to the 10th, that means it is reserved to the States.
Click to expand...
I agree for the most part, however the Arizona governor has been requesting action from the Fed which does then give them authority to act.
 
Redress said:
Zyphlin, I agree that the federal government has not done well on it's job to stop immigration, but I do not think the border is the solution, at least not all of it. It is simply not possible or feasible to really stop people sneaking into this country. The resources it would take are insane. A wall won't do it. Increased border patrols won't do it. Our military is stretched thins as is, so having them patrol is not a solution. What needs to be done is reduce the reason why people sneak to this country, and that means going after those who employ illegals.
Click to expand...

First, I disagree with you in regards to the resources taking too much to properly protect the border. I think its definitely do able, both logistically, financially, and man power wise. A workable border protection set up could likely be set up for a fraction of what we just threw out in TARP 1, TARP 2, or what we paid off multiple various businesses like GM and the banks. I'm not willing to say no to something that in part aids in one of the primary purposes of the federal government, protection of our sovereign land, because of "cost" when we just had TRILLIONS spent on things that were in many ways questionable at best in regards to being legitimate originally intended federal government endevours. The long term cost for it, even with upkeep of employement, would likely be largely less burdensome then the vast amount of entitlement programs we have and are adding.

Second, I also disagree with the notion that it would not be affective. Decentivizing why people come here only can go so far without fundamentally shifting the incentive for ANYONE to come or remain here. No matter how much we hammer that angle down there's still likely going to be reasons why it's still more advantageous to come rather than not to come. Either method, alone, will fail to address the issue efficiently and fully. However, thankfully, despite how its presented by many people it is NOT an "either or" type of situation where we either protect our most breached border OR deal with the reasons why they come. Indeed, the government can and SHOULD do both to provide the largest chance of success.
 
Ikari said:
Why should I do your work for you? If you're so bothered by it, do it yourself. Quit being lazy, that's how we got to this point now. People wanting others to do their work for them so they don't have to get off the couch or think about a problem. Illegal immigrants work all sorts of jobs from agriculture to construction to slaughter houses. If you don't like illegal immigration, you should look at what you're supporting. But don't sit there and demand that others do your work. It's your damned duty, and you need to do it.

No wonder things are seemingly falling apart in this country. We've gotten far too lazy.
Click to expand...

I'll take your post as your admission that "I threw that out there hoping no one would call me on it".

You're dismissed.
 
Zyphlin said:
First, I disagree with you in regards to the resources taking too much to properly protect the border. I think its definitely do able, both logistically, financially, and man power wise. A workable border protection set up could likely be set up for a fraction of what we just threw out in TARP 1, TARP 2, or what we paid off multiple various businesses like GM and the banks. I'm not willing to say no to something that in part aids in one of the primary purposes of the federal government, protection of our sovereign land, because of "cost" when we just had TRILLIONS spent on things that were in many ways questionable at best in regards to being legitimate originally intended federal government endevours. The long term cost for it, even with upkeep of employement, would likely be largely less burdensome then the vast amount of entitlement programs we have and are adding.

Second, I also disagree with the notion that it would not be affective. Decentivizing why people come here only can go so far without fundamentally shifting the incentive for ANYONE to come or remain here. No matter how much we hammer that angle down there's still likely going to be reasons why it's still more advantageous to come rather than not to come. Either method, alone, will fail to address the issue efficiently and fully. However, thankfully, despite how its presented by many people it is NOT an "either or" type of situation where we either protect our most breached border OR deal with the reasons why they come. Indeed, the government can and SHOULD do both to provide the largest chance of success.
Click to expand...

To be clear, I am not calling for neglecting border security, I just firmly believe that we can never really stop the flow of terrorists. They will adapt and find a way. We can however do better than we have.

I think the bigger solution is to reduce the success of those who come here illegally by going after people who employ or shelter illegals.
 
Redress said:
To be clear, I am not calling for neglecting border security, I just firmly believe that we can never really stop the flow of terrorists. They will adapt and find a way. We can however do better than we have.

I think the bigger solution is to reduce the success of those who come here illegally by going after people who employ or shelter illegals.
Click to expand...

I agree completely; however, neither Republicans or Democrats would dare make any meaningful effort to go after businesses that hire illegal aliens. Sure, they will make a few measely laws and give big speeches claiming they have done all they can to correct the problem, but in the end will do all they can to protect businesses.

Both know where the butter on their bread comes from.
 
Gill said:
I'll take your post as your admission that "I threw that out there hoping no one would call me on it".

You're dismissed.
Click to expand...

No, not at all. There have been raids on factories and industries for using illegal immigrants. Greely had a huge raid on the meat packing plant there. Many seasonal agricultural products such as strawberries are harvested with illegal alien labor. Lawn care services the country over hire many illegal immigrants because they can pay them poorly. A lot of construction is done with illegal immigrant labor. I mean, I figured this stuff was common knowledge at this point. But instead we have you trying to deflect away not only the fact that this takes place regularly, but your duty to understand and know about it. It's piss poor. People want to bitch about the illegal immigrant problem, but it's a problem through our consumerism. If we changed that, we could affect the system. But it takes getting up off your fat, lazy ass to do something about it. An act not many seem to want to do. In fact, you yourself are a prime example. You wanted the answer handed to you and when you didn't get it, you just ignored the problem. So thanks for contributing to the problem and working hard to be intellectually dishonest and lazy about it. But it's not doing anything to help out where we are at or to drive us to better circumstances. For that, you need educated consumerism. And no, the answer will not be given to you. You're going to actually have to do some work. Sorry, but the system doesn't stay controlled and regulated through no effort. You have to expend energy to keep the Republic going. So do it, or shut up. Because if you're just going to be part of the problem, no one wants to hear you bitching about the problem.
 
Gill said:
I agree completely; however, neither Republicans or Democrats would dare make any meaningful effort to go after businesses that hire illegal aliens. Sure, they will make a few measely laws and give big speeches claiming they have done all they can to correct the problem, but in the end will do all they can to protect businesses.

Both know where the butter on their bread comes from.
Click to expand...

Which is sad. I have come to the conclusion that we never will do anything serious about illegal immigration simply because politicians are too cowardly to attempt it.
 
Gill said:
I agree completely; however, neither Republicans or Democrats would dare make any meaningful effort to go after businesses that hire illegal aliens. Sure, they will make a few measely laws and give big speeches claiming they have done all they can to correct the problem, but in the end will do all they can to protect businesses.

Both know where the butter on their bread comes from.
Click to expand...

Weren't you saying there are no businesses which hire illegal aliens? I mean, you were so quick to dismiss the point when I didn't hand you the answer on a silver platter. So how can you fault the Republicans and Democrats for not going after businesses which hire illegal aliens if no such business exists? Hmmm, interesting.
 
Redress said:
Which is sad. I have come to the conclusion that we never will do anything serious about illegal immigration simply because politicians are too cowardly to attempt it.
Click to expand...

You could stop buying from those companies. You can put pressure on the politicians. You can vote for people more willing to crack down. We're not yet completely out of the loop; we still have some influence on the system. Both politically and economically. You don't need to wait for the government to do something.
 
Ikari said:
Weren't you saying there are no businesses which hire illegal aliens? I mean, you were so quick to dismiss the point when I didn't hand you the answer on a silver platter. So how can you fault the Republicans and Democrats for not going after businesses which hire illegal aliens if no such business exists? Hmmm, interesting.
Click to expand...

No, actually I didn't say any such thing. You said:

If you have such a problem with illegal immigration, then you have to avoid buying things from companies or industries which promote the use of illegal immigrants.
Click to expand...

And I replied that I would gladly stop doing business with any company that "PROMOTES" the use of illegal immigrants if you supplied me a list. Big difference between companies that HIRE illegal immigrants and those that PROMOTE hiring illegal immigrants.

By the way, I'm still waiting on that list of companies that promote illegal aliens.
 
Gill said:
No, actually I didn't say any such thing. You said:
Click to expand...

In fact you did. For we had a post which talked about cracking down on the companies which hire illegal immigrants to which you responded that you wish the government would. Yet when I mentioned that there were such companies and if you were really worried about it you'd look into and stop buying from them; you claimed that you needed a list as if no such company exists. So which is it? Should we come down hard on the government for allowing companies to hire illegal aliens, or are there no companies which hire illegal aliens.

Gill said:
And I replied that I would gladly stop doing business with any company that "PROMOTES" the use of illegal immigrants if you supplied me a list. Big difference between companies that HIRE illegal immigrants and those that PROMOTE hiring illegal immigrants.
Click to expand...

They are in fact equivalent. Companies which hire illegal aliens promote the practice of hiring illegal aliens. More will come because they know there are places where they can be employed. Is it a tough concept to understand? I don't really think so.

Gill said:
By the way, I'm still waiting on that list of companies that promote illegal aliens.
Click to expand...

And I'm still waiting for you to do your own research. I can't sit here and hold your hand and hope you'll do what's necessary to help control the problem. That has to be done by you. I cannot deliver everything to you. I don't know when we've started to lose the ideal of the rugged individual, wherein we can help ourselves and take care of ourselves; but it's been hurting us ever since we've abandoned it. It's time for you to learn how to take care of yourself. If this is a topic you feel deeply concerned about; then it is your responsibility to educate yourself and make the proper choices to influence the system in the direction you'd like to take it. It's not something which can be given.
 
earthworm said:
"Conservative" says it all.
Overused....yes
As an American citizen, I feel that its a compliment that the Mexicans have choosen our nation.
Now that "we" are chasing them out, I feel embarrassed.
Click to expand...

You support people breaking our laws? Nice to know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom