As an Australian I had no idea of the possible level of bickering between states let alone taking a state to court
discuss or ignore at your little hearts content
Pigheaded political suicide.
God forbid the existing law in Arizona is actually enforced.
Ah Trib and DB, I hoped you both might get in on this, always have thought provoking stuff. As a foreigner I had no clue this sort of thing happened. Is friction like this article mentions are big part in state vs federal politics?
In Oz we only have 6 states and 2 territories and there powers are steadily diminishing because to us it is simply another layer of administration costs. So I find it fascinating hearing this sort of thing in the US
[quote]Edward wrote:
In Oz we only have 6 states and 2 territories and there powers are steadily diminishing because to us it is simply another layer of administration costs. [/quote]
You can make that statement in reverse too.
[quote]Edward wrote:
Ah Trib and DB, I hoped you both might get in on this, always have thought provoking stuff. As a foreigner I had no clue this sort of thing happened. Is friction like this article mentions are big part in state vs federal politics?
In Oz we only have 6 states and 2 territories and there powers are steadily diminishing because to us it is simply another layer of administration costs. So I find it fascinating hearing this sort of thing in the US[/quote]
Friction like this is supposed to be built into the system, and when either the states or the feds step over their sphere of power the other side sues to keep them in check. Of course in the last hundred or so years this seems to be a one-sided battle.
Most interestingly, despite the ferocious demogoguery that accompanied criticism of Arizona’s law, the DOJ included exactly zero claims in their complaint that the state law was discriminatory. Instead, the DOJ opted to argue that the federal law pre-empts the state law and therefore the state law can’t be enforced (as it must yield under the Supremacy Clause).
There never was any legal merit to their tantrums about racial discrimination in the Arizona bill, but that didn’t stop them from trying to “poison the well” of public opinion with illegitmate claims so that enough popular discontent would force Arizona to reverse its stance (which failed, of course).
Who knew that pristine and uber-ethical Hope and Change included such unapologetic politicization of justice? I am shocked - shocked - to learn that this administration has simply adopted the Saul Alinsky method of governance and shaping of public opinion. Shocked. Seriously. Shocked.
This is Obama saving his mythical Hispanic vote, he knows he will lose them because he promised an amnesty he couldn’t deliver. If he appears to disagree and at least fight against “that racist, xenophobic, misguided and hateful law,” he might just win some of the Latino vote that came out for him in 2008. But wait, Obama, the Federal Law is the same evil hate-mongering law that Arizona just passed, does that mean you will sue yourself?
On a side note, interesting article about racism in Mexico towards Africa and the World Cup. Funny who is yelling racism this time…
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
http://www.breitbart.tv/az-cops-threatened-by-drug-cartel-snipers-at-border/
[/quote]
I don’t know how anybody can’t see that something has to be done down there, like now. Only a hopeless bureaucrat could tell Arizona to wait for them to hammer out some monstrous comprehensive immigration package. I also don’t how much more evidence anybody needs to convince them that this crew does not care about people. They are all about their leftist longings.
Totally off topic but considering the cost of illegal immigration, why don’t they just build a fucking massive wall. Hey it could even be a tourist draw, “The Great Wall of America.”
[quote]PAINTRAINDave wrote:
Totally off topic but considering the cost of illegal immigration, why don’t they just build a fucking massive wall. Hey it could even be a tourist draw, “The Great Wall of America.”
[/quote]
A wall won’t work and the expense, you have to fine people that hire illegals
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]PAINTRAINDave wrote:
Totally off topic but considering the cost of illegal immigration, why don’t they just build a fucking massive wall. Hey it could even be a tourist draw, “The Great Wall of America.”
[/quote]
A wall won’t work[/quote]
We aren’t thinking on the same scale.
[quote]PAINTRAINDave wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]PAINTRAINDave wrote:
Totally off topic but considering the cost of illegal immigration, why don’t they just build a fucking massive wall. Hey it could even be a tourist draw, “The Great Wall of America.”
[/quote]
A wall won’t work[/quote]
We aren’t thinking on the same scale.[/quote]
only built by Americans and without Belgium?
Why is it that the Federal Government can pick and choose what “Federal Laws” it wishes to enforce regarding the states. I was taught that federal law was the law of the country but each state was allowed to implement laws that were along the same guidelines, but stricter.
Here we have states going against federal narcotics laws (marijuana) and allowing for the production and distribution of illegal substances, and the federal government says “That’s not a priority of ours.” On the other hand you have states that are simply enforcing federal and state laws that are already on the books, and because that contradicts a political agenda it’s alright?
Am I missing something? I think we are slowly undermining ourselves as a country.
[quote]opie wrote:
Why is it that the Federal Government can pick and choose what “Federal Laws” it wishes to enforce regarding the states. I was taught that federal law was the law of the country but each state was allowed to implement laws that were along the same guidelines, but stricter. Here we have states going against federal narcotics laws (marijuana) and allowing for the production and distribution of illegal substances, and the federal government says “That’s not a priority of ours.” On the other hand you have states that are simply enforcing federal and state laws that are already on the books, and because that contradicts a political agenda it’s alright?
Am I missing something? I think we are slowly undermining ourselves as a country.[/quote]
The truth is that obama doesn’t want to secure the boarders, he doesn’t want illegals gone, He wants to give them tax dollars, because he cares more for them than tax paying American citizens.
^^I know, we’ve become a society of taking from those that need and giving to those that don’t deserve. Maybe one of our legal masterminds here knows something that I’m missing.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]opie wrote:
Why is it that the Federal Government can pick and choose what “Federal Laws” it wishes to enforce regarding the states. I was taught that federal law was the law of the country but each state was allowed to implement laws that were along the same guidelines, but stricter. Here we have states going against federal narcotics laws (marijuana) and allowing for the production and distribution of illegal substances, and the federal government says “That’s not a priority of ours.” On the other hand you have states that are simply enforcing federal and state laws that are already on the books, and because that contradicts a political agenda it’s alright?
Am I missing something? I think we are slowly undermining ourselves as a country.[/quote]
The truth is that obama doesn’t want to secure the boarders, he doesn’t want illegals gone, He wants to give them tax dollars, because he cares more for them than tax paying American citizens.[/quote]
I support the eradication of illegal immigration from this country, but the above statement is absolutely ridiculous. This is nothing more than another warped attempt to gain votes. It’s politics as usual for Obama, something he supposedly was the anti-thesis of. He doesn’t give a shit about illegal immigrants any more than anyone else does, but he certainly gives a shit about votes, and in his mind this attempt to usurp Arizona’s laws is a chance to gain some votes. Nothing more.
Regarding the Arizona law: while I believe that the existing law in Arizona should be enforced, I think there are better ways to go about ending massive illegal immigration. If you had a pile of shit in your house with a bunch of flies all over the place, would you swat at the flies or remove the pile of shit entirely? (And no Push I am not equating illegals with piles of shit or flies)
There is a huge incentive for illegals to risk life and limb to come here. Contrary to popular opinion on this forum, illegals don’t come here specifically to bilk the system and take advantage of the U.S. They come here because for them, there is no other option. No amount of arrests will deter them from continuing to sneak across the border because the incentive is so large compared to what is available to them in Mexico. The incentive is the piece of shit and it needs to be removed.
The Arizona law, while it makes sense in many ways, also serves to create divisiveness and it does not address the larger issue, which is why illegals come here in the first place despite all the inherent dangers. Along with enorcing current state laws, the govt should also enact some sort of legislature or something that fines into oblivion the American business owners who continually hire illegals despite the economic drain their presence in this country has become. It is them who provide the incentive for illegals to come here. As long as this country is in better shape than Mexico and there are people willing to risk a slap on the wrist in order to hire extremely cheap labor rather than hire their fellow Americans, the illegal immigrants will continue to come here. Obviously no one wants the country to slip below the status level of Mexico, so the only alternative is to remove the incentive. It makes more sense than simply jailing/deporting as many illegals as we can find (swatting at flies). Incarceration is expensive and we all know that deportation is not a significant deterrent.
[quote]opie wrote:
Why is it that the Federal Government can pick and choose what “Federal Laws” it wishes to enforce regarding the states. I was taught that federal law was the law of the country but each state was allowed to implement laws that were along the same guidelines, but stricter.
Here we have states going against federal narcotics laws (marijuana) and allowing for the production and distribution of illegal substances, and the federal government says “That’s not a priority of ours.” On the other hand you have states that are simply enforcing federal and state laws that are already on the books, and because that contradicts a political agenda it’s alright?
Am I missing something? I think we are slowly undermining ourselves as a country.[/quote]
I think your point will be an interesting point if in November Cali legalzes Maryjane . Arizona is a state full of old fucks and they will be clamoring about Cali selling drugs to Az’s residents and why do not the Feds do something. This issue is one reason why I do not want to vote for Brewer and the Dem’s choice (Goddard) is a drug NAZI
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]opie wrote:
Why is it that the Federal Government can pick and choose what “Federal Laws” it wishes to enforce regarding the states. I was taught that federal law was the law of the country but each state was allowed to implement laws that were along the same guidelines, but stricter. Here we have states going against federal narcotics laws (marijuana) and allowing for the production and distribution of illegal substances, and the federal government says “That’s not a priority of ours.” On the other hand you have states that are simply enforcing federal and state laws that are already on the books, and because that contradicts a political agenda it’s alright?
Am I missing something? I think we are slowly undermining ourselves as a country.[/quote]
The truth is that obama doesn’t want to secure the boarders, he doesn’t want illegals gone, He wants to give them tax dollars, because he cares more for them than tax paying American citizens.[/quote]
I think it is more like he is trying to mobilize a large group that is notoriously nonvoting being the Legal Mexican Vote