• 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

Tucker Case said:
I don't think those numbers will be fully known for a while.

What I'm interested in seeing is if this ends up benefiting Arizona economically or damaging them economically.

Legal businesses will surely suffer from fewer patrons, and if legal Hispanic residents are leaving in large numbers as well, I anticipate that the effect wil be greatly magnified.

I'd laugh my ass off if this ends up doing major harm to Arizona's economy.
Click to expand...

I'll be laughing right along with you. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot!

Who is boycotting Arizona?

Cities/counties that have approved boycotts of Arizona:
• Austin, Tex. to cut business and travel ties with Arizona.
• Berkeley, Calif.
• Boston
• Boulder, Colo.
• Chicago, IL
• Columbus, Ohio
• Cook County, IL
• El Paso, Texas (city and county)
• Gallup, N.M.
• Hartford, Conn.
• Los Angeles
• Oakland
• Richmond, Calif.
• San Pablo, Calif.
• St. Paul, Minn.
• Santa Monica, Calif.
• San Francisco (non-binding resolution)
• Seattle
• West Hollywood, Calif.

Groups that announced travel boycotts of Arizona:
• Service Employees International Union
• United Food and Commercial Workers International Union
• National Council of La Raza
• Asian American Justice Center
• Center for Community Change
• League of United Latin American Citizens
• National Puerto Rican Coalition
• Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights
• American Educational Research Assn.
• World Boxing Council
• Sociologists Without Borders
• L.A. Gay & Lesbian Center

Known cancellations of meetings or events planned in Arizona:
• National Minority Suppliers Development Council Inc. is moving its fall Phoenix convention to Florida. 7,000 were expected to attend.

• Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity Inc., the oldest African American Greek-lettered fraternity, cancelled a July meeting at the Sheraton Phoenix Downtown Hotel. (with an estimated 5,000 attendees) Convention moved to Las Vegas

• American Immigration Lawyers Association cancelled its fall conference at the Camelback Inn in Paradise Valley.

• National Urban League. The group issued a rebuke of the city and suspended consideration of Phoenix's bid to host its 2012 annual conference.

• National Autonomous University of Mexico has canceled its exchange program with the University of Arizona.

• Autonomous University of San Luis Potosí has canceled its exchange program with the University of Arizona.

• Club América, one of Mexico's biggest soccer teams, cancelled its exhibition match against Club de Fútbol Pachuca scheduled for July 7 at University of Phoenix Stadium. Gilbert-based event promoters will likely move the match to California.

• Representatives of the Mexican state of Sonora announced they would not attend the annual meeting of the Sonora-Arizona Commission, scheduled to take place June 3-4 in Phoenix.

• Mexico's six border governors announced they would boycott the 28th annual U.S.-Mexico Border Governors Conference if it is held as scheduled in Phoenix in September.

• In the Chicago area, the Highland Park High School girls varsity basketball team cancelled a trip to play in a basketball tournament, citing "safety concerns" related to the new law. According to a story on chicagobreakingnews.com, the trip also "would not be aligned with our beliefs and values," said District 113 Assistant Superintendent Suzan Hebson.

• Glass Art Society, of Seattle, cancels 2011 conference in Tucson.

• National Association of Black Accountants cancels 2012 conference in Phoenix.

• National Urban League cancels 2012 conference in Phoenix.

Public bodies that announced Arizona boycotts:
• Denver Public Schools, banned work-related travel to the state.

Other actions against:
• San Diego City Council on May 3 urges Arizona to repeal the law.
• City of Pasadena on May 18 approves resolution condemning Arizona's immigration law.
• League of United Latin American Citizens urges companies such as Frito-Lay not to sponsor Arizona sporting events, such as the Tostitos Fiesta Bowl in Glendale.
• Fulton County (Georgia) Board of Commissioners vote May 19 to oppose Arizona's law.
• Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak on April 30 urged city employees not to travel to Arizona.
• American Anthropological Association condemns SB 1070 and refuses to have meetings in Arizona until law is repealed or struck down.
• Sound Strike is a movement launched online to organize artists to boycott Arizona. It is being led by Zack de la Rocha, of the band Rage Against the Machine. More than a dozen musical groups have signed on, as well as movie-maker Michael Moore (see list below)
• Tacoma City Council on May 25th approved resolution condemning Arizona's law as encouraging racial profiling and dropped earlier language that called for a city boycott on business and travel to Arizona.
• Milwaukee Area Technical College Board directed staff May 25th to refrain from buying goods from any Arizona-based company and from sending employees to meetings or conferences.
• Mexico's Foreign Ministry in late April warned Mexicans traveling to Arizona to be aware that they could be "bothered and questioned for no other reason at any moment."
• The AFL-CIO has condemned the law, claiming it could lead to racial profiling and could undermine worker rights by discouraging Latinos from filing complaints.
Click to expand...

Other groups not mentioned in the above article:

• The Society for Advancement of Chicanos and Native Americans in Science (SACNAS) announced that Phoenix was no longer being considered as a site for its 2012 conference.

• In a unanimous vote, the San Diego Unified School District Board condemned Arizona's controversial immigration law.

• City councils in Washington, D.C. , San Jose, Sacramento, and New York City are also considering economic boycotts of Arizona, Hall & Oates just canceled concerts there, and immigrant players in Major League Baseball are considering boycotting the 2011 All-Star game in Phoenix.

• Interestingly enough, the city councils of Tucson and Flagstaff are considering suing the state over the matter.

• Entertainers who have taken a stand to boycott Arizona:

Cypress Hill
Juanes
Conor Oberst
Los Tigres del Norte
Rage Against the Machine
Cafe Tacvba
Micheal Moore
Kanye West
Calle 13
Joe Satriani
Serj Tankian
Rise Against
Ozomatli
Sabertooth Tiger
Massive Attack
One Day as a Lion
Street Sweeper Social Club
Spank Rock
Sonic Youth
Tenacious D

At least 23 major meetings/conventions have been canceled in Arizona, representing a loss of $6 to $10 million in revenue. In Phoenix, city officials estimate that $90 million in hotel and convention business over the next five years could be lost due to boycotts.

Ouch.


Edit: Aw, HELL. Sorry for the crap formatting... I HATE this friggin' super-skinny first post of every page BS. WTF? Why?
 
Last edited:
MrVicchio said:
It's factcheck, they have a bias to siding with Obama. He worked for and helped the Annennburg Foundation, he is against the law, so they are. Remember your argument about the IDF Tape? Yeah, your logic, is being applied here. Factcheck.org is the IDF, their article is the tape. And I'm you, doubting the veracity and integrity.

/win
Click to expand...

Several problems. The article is not against the law, it is simply reporting on certain aspects of the law. If anything, it is more positive towards the law than negative. of course if you had actually read the article instead of not liking what you saw and dismissing it, you would know that. Second, Showing a very indirect connection between Obama and factcheck is not proof of bias. Lastly, the article I linked showed the sourcing for all it's information.

/win
 
the makeout hobo said:
I really don't see who else the law requiring proof of citizenship is going to target. Are they going to ask white people for proof they're not illegal immigrants from Sweden? They have every reason to be afraid the law will be used against the hispanic populace.
Click to expand...

From the way the law reads, if let's say, a person from Sweden didn't speak English, didn't have a drivers license, didn't have a green card, didn't have a Visa..... then I would imagine the law would be applied the same way as for a person from Russia. (that by the way, is the really big population in Oregon that is here ILLEGALLY.
Assuming these are ALL illegal immigrants, and not legals or natives that are afraid of discrimination.
Click to expand...

Strawman....... you can cry "discrimination" all you want, there is nothing in the law that allows discrimination.
 
Ikari said:
Why don't you save your racism as well? The law was clearly made to force out hispanic people. People want to bitch about the government this and illegal immigrants that; but never acknowledge their own role in the problem. Y'all ****ed up and now you're just looking for places to point the finger. Lame. Deal with the consequences of our actions.
Click to expand...

Save your personal attacks..... they only detract from your already weak arguments.
 
Crunch said:
Looks like the new law is having the desired effect.
Click to expand...

Looks like you're in agreement with the wrong crowd, too: Hispanics Fleeing Arizona - Stormfront

If you assume each Latino child costs $11,000 per year for public schools, a family with 8 children will cost the state:

8 X 12years X $11,000 = $1.056 million

When you hear liberals claim that their boycott will cost Arizona $10 million, it would only take ten large Mexican families to leave Arizona to break even.

Arizona is going to come out way ahead even if liberals all over America boycott them. (And many conservatives are pledging to take vacations or hold their company meetings in Arizona.)
Click to expand...

$10 million doesn't even scratch the surface of taxpayer liability for illegals. There are social costs far beyond mere educational expenses. If we consider only the bottom line, any Leftist boycott amounts to chump change in comparison to ridding the taxpayers of the consequences of illegal incursion.

Ten million. Don't make me laugh.
Click to expand...

Exactly!!

Self-righteous liberals in San Francisco and Seattle are screaming about a boycott while their actual business with Arizona is chump change.

Meanwhile FAIR estimates the net cost of illegals to California to be $13.1 billion per year. (Add another billion to that yearly cost as Arizona's illegals mostly flee to California.)
Click to expand...

This is outrageous that they let Illegal parents volunteer in the classroom. I'm glad they're leaving AZ. Hopefully they're going back to Mexico, but I doubt it. More than likely they're heading for CA and neighboring states.
Click to expand...

Hispanic activists say illegal aliens are "exploited".
Illegals are NOT exploited!! First, illegals earn about 4 - 6 times what they earn in Mexico (or whichever Hellhole they are from). Also, illegals get:
- free health care
- free K-12 education for their anchor babies
- free food stamps for their anchor babies
- free federal welfare checks for their anchor babies
- WIC (nutrional program for babies)
- EIC (Earned Income Tax credits up to $4,200/year)
- Low income housing subsidies (Sec. 8)

Exploited?? Give me a break!!
Click to expand...

I'm sure some of them will be moving to Maine because its mostly White libtards who can't wait for more diversheety and will roll out the red carpet of free benefits for any non-white illegals.Pass the barf bag, please.
Click to expand...

I think Caine and Zyphlin were wrong, because it's not a matter of the occasional match-up. It's literally harder to find a social issue where the social conservatives here separate from the white nationalists then not, and I think it's because they have the same starting point, even if the supremacists let it become explicitly racist. Your starting point is a shared conceptualization of illegal/undocumented immigrants. Lakoff says:

Within Strict Father morality, illegal immigrants are seen as lawbreakers ("illegals") who should be punished...From the perspective of the Nation as Family metaphor, illegal immigrants are not citizens, hence they are not children in our family. To be expected to provide food, housing, and health care for illegal immigrants is like being expected to feed, house, and care for other children in the neighborhood who are coming into our house without permission. They weren’t invited, they have no business being there, and we have no responsibility to take care of them.
Click to expand...

The white supremacists go from the subconscious generalization of associating such people with a certain non-white ethnic group to an explicit association. And they still want to uphold the same principle of preventing those conceptualized as parasites from stealing from the wealthy hard-working to subsidize their laziness.
 
Crunch said:
Save your personal attacks..... they only detract from your already weak arguments.
Click to expand...

Claiming something is a personal attack to avoid addressing the issues hardly makes for a valid counter-argument.
 
MrVicchio said:
No, your STATEMENT was . The discussion is people fleeing Arizona, you assume that innocent people are "getting caught up".

As if they had no choice, that this was forced on them. It's not, they CHOOSE to run in fear of something they have nothing to fear.
Click to expand...

And if you read, the original comment said they didn't care how many people fled so long as they were getting some illegals. That means not all that flee are illegal, i.e. innocent and legal immigrants. The original statement conveyed the idea that of these innocent people who flee for whatever reason, that number is inconsequential so long as some illegals are forced out too. Thus, one doesn't care how many innocent people get caught up so long as it catches some criminal. It's called reading, try it.
 
Tucker Case said:
Speculation ain't worth dick if it ain't sourced. Just sayin'.
Click to expand...

Indeed.

Take the linked-to article for example:

Arizona's tough new immigration enforcement law is fueling an exodus of Hispanics from the state seven weeks before it goes into effect, according to officials and residents in the state.
Though no one has precise figures, reports from school officials, businesses and individuals indicate worried Hispanics — both legal and illegal — are leaving the state in anticipation of the law, which will go into effect July 29.

Schools in Hispanic areas report unusual drops in enrollment. The Balsz Elementary School District is 75% Hispanic, and within a month of the law's passage, the parents of 70 students pulled them out of school, said District Superintendent Jeffrey Smith. The district lost seven students over the same one-month period last year, and parents tell Smith the Arizona law is the reason for leaving.
Click to expand...

I read the whole article, there is nothing in the article that would lead anyone to believe that ANY of the immigrants who left the state were legally there. In fact, the rest of the article doesn't even mention legal immigrants leaving; all of the rest of it is about illegal immigrants leaving, and that's all they give any actual evidence - or even anecdotes - for.

It's shoddy reporting at its worst. Nothing "indicates" that legal immigrants are leaving; it's worse than shoddy reporting, actually. It's an outright lie.
 
Last edited:
Glinda said:
• Entertainers who have taken a stand to boycott Arizona:

Cypress Hill
Juanes
Conor Oberst
Los Tigres del Norte
Rage Against the Machine
Cafe Tacvba
Micheal Moore
Kanye West
Calle 13
Joe Satriani
Serj Tankian
Rise Against
Ozomatli
Sabertooth Tiger
Massive Attack
One Day as a Lion
Street Sweeper Social Club
Spank Rock
Sonic Youth
Tenacious D
Click to expand...


Oh good lord. Virginia legistlature, please please enact Arizona's law right now.
 
Frankly, every entity which has decided to boycott Arizona ought to boycott the United States as well, since it has federal laws that aren't really any different from the one Arizona passed on a state level.
 
Many have said that "illegals" provide much of the hotel / host industry workforce by providing housekeeping and landscaping to resorts/hotels. For those who are boycotting AZ. Thank you. Do you realize you are penalizing many of the ones who you want to assist? You are helping AZ by having illegals leave before the law is enacted.
It is pure speculation on the "profiling" that has been said "will" occur under the new law. The new law doesn't come on till the end of July. While I am just one person, and their are many others, who will boycott the towns, States that object to what Az has done. I always like smaller towns anyway. If Phoenix is hurt financial, that just means that Mayor Phil has less money to give away to the illegals who he supports.
 
Dav said:
Oh good lord. Virginia legistlature, please please enact Arizona's law right now.
Click to expand...


LOL...... that's what I've been saying about Oregon, maybe we could get rid of our Russian Mafia.
 
Redress said:
Did you read the article? It specifically did mention that both legal, and illegal Hispanics where leaving.
Click to expand...

It specifically mentioned it without citing any reason to believe it, not even anecdotal. Or even mentioning anything about legal immigrants beyond the first line.
 
Tucker Case said:
The desired effect is to chase away hispanics? :confused:

I thought it was about illegal immigrants. According to the story, the exodus is not limited to illegals.
Click to expand...

That is their own stupidity then.
 
the makeout hobo said:
If this is illegal immigrants leaving the state, then that's good. If this is legal immigrants or natives that are leaving the state because they're afraid of being discriminated against, then that's bad for everyone involved
Click to expand...

Its their own stupidity, Discrimination is not written into the law.

If the dumbass liberal media wants to have them convinced that this is going to cause discrimination, and they move because of a misrepresentation in the media, so be it.
 
The law is obviously working. Good on Arizona!
 
Caine said:
Its their own stupidity, Discrimination is not written into the law.

If the dumbass liberal media wants to have them convinced that this is going to cause discrimination, and they move because of a misrepresentation in the media, so be it.
Click to expand...

And may they all go to LA.
 
Ikari said:
I know you do. You seem to favor draconian, large, and intrusive government while taking no personal responsibility for any of your actions. In sort...a neo-con.

Man, I remember when conservatives stood for small, responsible government and people owning up to their actions and the consequences there of. Ahhh the good ol' days.
Click to expand...

Open Mouth, Insert Foot.

People taking responsibility for their actions = taking responsibility for being here illegally.
People taking responsibility for their actions = taking responsibility for employing illegal immigrants.
People taking responsibility for their actions = taking responsibility for aiding and abetting illegal immigrants.
 
kaya'08 said:
The law is obviously working. Good on Arizona!
Click to expand...

And 6 weeks before it goes into effect!!!!!!!!!! Just think how well it will work once it does.
 
the makeout hobo said:
I really don't see who else the law requiring proof of citizenship is going to target. Are they going to ask white people for proof they're not illegal immigrants from Sweden? They have every reason to be afraid the law will be used against the hispanic populace.
Click to expand...
You lack understanding of basic english reading skills if you have read the law and fail to understand where those of us who have read it don't see the discrimination.
I don't see anywhere in the law that says you must "target" someone.
 
I love how I'm apparently the only one who read the article, which does not mention anything about legal immigrants beyond the dishonest claim in the quote in the OP.

Also:

Juan Carlos Cruz, an illegal immigrant who has worked in plant nurseries for 20 years, huddled with dozens of relatives over the Memorial Day Weekend in the backyard of his brother's Phoenix-area home to plot out the family's next move to avoid what they say will be harassment by police. Virginia and California are the front-runners.
Click to expand...

I hope Arizona police read this article, so that they now have the name of an admitted criminal and can catch him before he moves to my state. Also: how were they interviewing (harboring) a fugitive criminal and getting away with it?
 
Caine said:
Open Mouth, Insert Foot.

People taking responsibility for their actions = taking responsibility for being here illegally.
People taking responsibility for their actions = taking responsibility for employing illegal immigrants.
People taking responsibility for their actions = taking responsibility for aiding and abetting illegal immigrants.
Click to expand...

People taking responsibility for their actions = taking responsibility for the things we buy and the attitudes and practices we endorse by doing so. 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. Of course, those products tend to be cheaper than other means, and people buy those things regardless.

This illegal immigration thing isn't new, and many of us have indeed reaped the benefits one way or the other through the exploitation of the illegal immigrant. We have all contributed to the problem through our consumer habits and our lax attitude in controlling the government.

You can take your foot out of your mouth whenever you want.
 
Ikari said:
Or it's the fault of the legislature for making a discriminatory law. But I don't suppose that's an avenue you wish to look into even though the measured effect already is the displacement of...hispanics. Not of some generalized representation of the populace, but of hispanics. And no, it's not their fault. If the law is not discriminatory at all, yet there is this mass exodus; it is the fault of those who passed the laws and who supported the laws for not explaining the dynamics of the law.



Illegal immigration has been around for a long time. The economic collapses is not the fault of that. They were predominately taking jobs that Americans were not, so no real problem there. We exploited the fudge out of them to get really cheap crap. Well there could be a problem there if you believe in human rights; but we still got the benefit.
Click to expand...

Oh Jesus H. Christ.

Show me in the law where the discrimination is Or knock it off with the discrimination claims.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom