I feel much better. When Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer signed a vindictive, ill-conceived, and hypocritical law that is a recipe for profiling and unconstitutional on its face, I was a little worried. Unlike a lot of Americans — and from the sound of the debate over SB 1070, particularly a lot of white Americans — I take racial and ethnic profiling seriously.
And even before the New Jersey attorney general acknowledged, in a 1999 report, the use of racial profiling in stops and vehicle searches by state troopers, I’d already made peace with the fact that a practice the existence of which is often denied by police officers is alive and well behind the thin blue line.
But now that conservative commentators and Republican politicians assure me that the Arizona law is nowhere near as frightening as it appears, I realize that it was silly to have worried.
Just one thing: I might be more persuaded by the argument that critics of the law are just hysterical and concerned for no good reason if the people making those claims had a stake in the game. You see, it’s easy to tell critics to stand down when, by virtue of skin color, you’re not likely to wind up kneeling on a Phoenix street with your fingers interlocked behind your head.
I don’t think we’re likely to see Fox News contributor Bill Kristol in that position the next time he goes out to Phoenix for a speech to a Republican audience — the sort of thing where people pick at chicken Caesar salads (chicken brought to you by a poultry processing plant staffed by illegal immigrant workers, lettuce picked by illegal immigrant workers) while a nanny of questionable legal status is home watching the kids.
Yet during a recent installment of Fox News Sunday, Kristol — who is normally, by his own admission, somewhat liberal on immigration, even the illegal kind — suggested that, when all is said and done, maybe no more than a dozen U.S.-born Hispanics in the entire state of Arizona will be inconvenienced by having to prove they have the legal right to be in the United States. And besides, Kristol asked, what’s the worst that can happen? A few people suffer the minor inconvenience of having to show their birth certificate or some other proof of citizenship. Big deal.
Nor are we likely to see fellow syndicated columnist George Will in a “perp walk” in Tucson for not having his “papeles” with him the next time he’s at spring training. Will called it “passing strange for federal officials, including the president, to accuse Arizona of irresponsibility while the federal government is refusing to fulfill its responsibility to control the nation’s borders.”
Thus Will swallowed the ludicrous assertion advanced by crafters of the law that the reason that there are so many illegal immigrants in Arizona — nearly 500,000 according to some estimates — is because of Washington’s failure to control them. These folks refuse to accept that the real culprits are about half a million Arizonans who hired these people to cook their food, clean their homes, tend to their children and senior citizens, etc.
Ruben, you’ve added nothing substantive to the discussion of the new law and the enforcement process. You might have well have barked at the moon.
The best one was the MSNBC ‘headline’ that went something like this:
“Arizona Law Makes It Illegal To Be An ‘Illegal Immigrant’”
Rube here is just about THAT smart. Racist bugger too. Why does PJM allow his sick writing on an otherwise good web site?
Fascinating that you manage to insult whites within the first two sentences. As to racial profiling, why are we supposed to find it objectionable?
Allegations of profiling, allegations of prejudice, selective outrage, and the ever-present nanny card. Why am I not surprised?
The “profiling” movement is just that: an activist movement, complete with its own contingency of activist academics who do not even attempt to gild the illusion of objectivity into their lawsuit-driven studies. From little statistical misrepresentations, such giant controversies are grown. All of this distracts from the real problems being addressed by the law, which are so extreme that, of course, they must be countered with blanket accusations of prejudice.
From my experience of journalists and other purported intellectuals, I have little doubt that the people in Mr. Navarrette’s circles are far more likely to have household help (that they either pay under the table, or pay under the table) than the vast majority of readers here. So why does he feel so entitled to except himself, and others who oppose the law, from culpability for the very cynicism he condemns in people who are far less likely to actually practice it?
And on the subject of labor, what about the work we do to fund the vast network of social programs that feed, house, educate, heal and protect both legal and illegal immigrants? What about the work the police do to keep them safe, particularly as so many flee to America explicitly because of extreme lawlessness and the economic consequences of lawlessness in their home countries? Why do MSM columnists never talk about those things? Could it be that they are so biased against (in their eyes) “ordinary” Americans that they cannot see their contributions to society, in addition to not seeing so much more about them?
This article is the essence of prejudice. It is of a piece with the other hatreds being systematically fomented against certain classes of Americans — the ones who are lately presuming that they have the right to speak back to the people in charge as they foot the bill for the current madness. The real choice here isn’t racial profiling versus social justice. It’s El Paso versus Ciudad Juarez. And everyone knows what that means.
Yet again, Mr. Navarette Jr. proves he is an illiterate, and a legal dunce.
Gee, ya think you’re just a little biased, Mr. Navarrette? “vindictive, ill-conceived”…there’s just absolutely no chance of an unbiased article here, now, isn’t there?
You start with a link to an ACLU article (gee, what a shock, they found racial profiling in a study designed to look for, wait, you guessed it, racial profiling). Of course, their lead-off example, where most people would put their home-run hitter, they give the story of a black SFC who was stopped twice in Oklahoma. Of course, neither time does anyone say that he was stopped for being black, they just assume that every bad thing that happens happens to him because he’s black, just like you do. The sad part is that you know this to be a lie.
You can’t give one single example of racial profiling that’s not logical. A black man robs a store, how stupid is it to look for a white man? The article you linked to made claims that so many minorities are in jail for drug crimes because they are the ones sought, stopped, and searched, yet there’s not a shred of proof of this. And numbers don’t count. If you stop every car that appears to be driving drunk, and most of them turn out to be midgets from Upper Peninsula Michagan, this is not evidence that you are being biased against midgest from UP. Of course, when you argue dishonestly, like you have to do in order to claim racial discrimination, it doesn’t matter where you get your facts or what pretzel logic shape they take, does it, Mr. Navarette?
Why are you not likely to see Bill Kristol with his fingers interlocked? Mostly because you’re not likely to see ANYONE like that, that’s a position reserved for those who the police have reasonable suspicion to believe have broken the law and are being arrested. Why not Mr. Kristol, but more likely mexicans? Because Mexicans are by and large the perpetrators of the crimes in that area. Blacks in other areas, Asians in other areas, and Whites in other areas. To deny reality and not use this information is to make yourself willfully stupid.
As for being asked for their “papers”, I am asked for mine all the time, why are they so special they shouldn’t have to? When I’m stopped, it’s show me your license and registration, and if I don’t have insurance, they impound my car. Down here, we had an illegal who’s truck had no brakes, and he was driving it to work. He’d coast to a stop, slowly run the lights, and try to travel at four a.m. Worked until he hit someone at the light one day. The cops didn’t arrest him, didn’t file a report, and didn’t impound his car. No license, no registration, no insurance, and couldn’t pass inspection. Now that’s the kind of racial profiling that’s killing this country, but all of it’s because of whiny little babies who think we should give the poor mexican a break.
But here’s the real kicker. Racial profiling is a good thing. Everyone else in the world does it, especially Mexicans. You know, you’ve seen the signs…”You owe us everything yada yada yada”…there was actually one sign that said “Give us free homes, jobs with no taxes, health care, food, or we will shoot more police”.
I’m all in favor of taking someone who’s carrying that sign and moving them to a Mexican address overnight. But of course, you’d probably say the whole world DOES owe you everything.
Wrong.
Here’s the new message for you Mexicans:
Get the hell out of my country, or become an American and love it for what it is. Do it now, or self-deport, or when we come for you, you will spend time in jail first. Times are changing, and we aren’t putting up with your invasion anymore.
This is a little like the drug problem: Don’t blame the drug dealers for importing drugs, blame the US drug users who create a high demand for the product. There is plenty of blame to go around. Those who have entered the country illegally are not innocent just because those individuals and business who hire them may also be blameworthy.
If the law did what its opponents say – give police the right to stop anyone based on a “reasonable suspicion” that they are in the country illegally – I’d oppose it, too. But the law only allows officers to inquire about citizen ship when they have made an otherwise legal stop and also have a reasonable suspicion. That is neither extreme nor unconstitutional, and given the bankruptcy of Arizona and other southwest states, some action has to be taken to curb the cost of illegal immigration. Opponents fail to recognize that doing nothing is not a reasonable option.
What a racist you are, Mr. Navarrette. Your intense bias churns my stomach. Your dislike of America and Americans is disgusting and informs every article you write.
Yes, Navarrette is a racist. He is nothing more than a Brown Supremacist. I quite reading his writing long ago.
“These folks refuse to accept that the real culprits are about half a million Arizonans who hired these people to cook their food, clean their homes, tend to their children and senior citizens, etc.”
What hooey! More than half of Arizona’s illegals aren’t doing any work at all (unless you consider the narcotics business “work.”) And don’t even try to pretend that illegals aren’t living off welfare: they are. In Tucson a fake Social Security card costs fifteen bucks.
Just fess up, Ruben: you want open borders and no restrictions at all, and you’re going to piss and moan at ANY attempt to close the borders. Now, go back to yur MEChA meeting.
Navarrette wants to blame employers who hire people who show up looking for work. He doesn’t mention how they are supposed to determine the immigration status of the people they are hiring.
If they ask, wouldn’t that be racial profiling, which the author just spent way too many words condemning?
If you’re not making a stop for some legitimate reason (each of which will be examined with a microscope by all kinds of ACLU lawyers), you can’t ask for ID. And if you ARE making a stop, you already ask for ID. it’s Called “license and registration please”. If the driver of the vehicle is unable to produce a driver’s license or registration with his name on the car ownership, or if the car is not properly licensed, or if the car has other people in it who are also unable to produce ID, then–
further investigation is called for.
The arizona law does NOT permit profiling, or even pulling someone over without cause.
Navarette, you’re a dope.
Wow, Mr. Navarrette, Jr. It was very interesting to read how your father – and all police officers – racially profile our citizens. It needs to stop NOW. When you are mugged by a 6ft black male wearing an LA Dodgers cap, the only call that should go out is “on lookout for mugger – near Fifth Street.” Can’t say black – definitely racial profiling for any black within the vicinity. Can’t say 6 ft – that’s height profiling. Can’t say male – gender profiling. Can’t say LA Dodgers cap – that’s sports team profiling – how inconvenient to stop everyone wearing a Dodgers cap within the vicinity of Fifth Street. On second thought, I live on Fifth Street and it is known for its HUD housing, so is that lower income profiling? How would any criminal ever get caught? Yet, Phoenix is the kidnapping capital of the US and the kidnappers are Hispanic, and the police are not suppose to suspect anyone Hispanic????? Why don’t you answer this one, Mr. Navarette,Jr., just how would you (without racial profiling) go about investigating a NeoNazi/ white supremacist group involved in illegal drug trafficking???? For God’s sake, leave your father out of this one.
At the end of world war two my mother waited with her family in a refugee camp for four years, waiting her turn to legally emigrate to the United States. My grandfather, a minor politician in Latvia had resourcefully evaded the Soviet gulag, NAZI thugs, and shifting battle lines to bring his family safely to the British sector of occupied Germany. He could have cadged passage to the West. Instead he lawfully waited his turn. While waiting they drilled English from a relative who knew some.
Having lost everything they were working poor when they arrived, but they never took a penny of welfare – ever. Though English was her third language of necessity (having lived under Russian and German rule) my mother insisted her kids always speak English, because they were not hypenated Americans, they were Americans.
Imagine her stunned fury to discover that many people did not legally immigrate, did not wait their turn in line, did not love their adopted country and treat her with respect, did not hold her flag above all others. Imagine how appalled she was that some people treated this country as a job market or worse a welfare haven.
I pity the victims of Mexican crony-capitalist-socialism, but that victimhood does not excuse deliberate lawlessness. And to speak with such vitriol and contempt of those who merely ask the law be enforced is a new level of surrealism.
“These folks refuse to accept that the real culprits are about half a million Arizonans who hired these people to cook their food, clean their homes, tend to their children and senior citizens, etc.”
And they do so for far less then what native born or legal immigrants would accept. If you are able to remove these people from the workforce, and prior AZ laws do focus on employers, then wages will rise.
It would be interesting to see if one year after implementation if AZ’s low skilled workers like dishwashers, lawn cutters, etc, are making more money.
“Unlike a lot of Americans — and from the sound of the debate over SB 1070, particularly a lot of white Americans — I take racial and ethnic profiling seriously.” Rubin Navarrette
You just racially profiled, yourself. Apparently noticing the color similarity of those behind certain actions or viewpoints is a problem only when it fails to support the blatant hypocrisy of the liberal agenda. And don’t forget, the main liberal election platform of affirmative action is based on racial profiling; the racist presumption that color similarity coupled to a history lesson guarantees that those born the same colors as white slavers will forever continue to act like slavers and require government imposed discriminatory penalties to “protect” all other colors of people.
I’ve always found it fascinating how people who spend so much of their time telling us that nobody should notice race, spend so much of their time talking about the race of people who disagree with them.
Arizona is a soverign State and has an obligation to protect its citizens from physical threat or harm, as well as protect the taxpayers from forced charity. In my opinion the real reason for the outcry is democrats are concerned this law may actually work.
Sir; the reason I stopped you today is your headlight is out and you failed to signal at the last intersection. Your tags are also expired. May I see your license, registration, and insurance please?
Uh, no hablo ingles!
Whats that you don’t speak English?
How about these other 6 people in the car! Anybody hablo ingles, ingles!
Noooooooooo Senor!
O.K. then I’ll try in Spanish. Su licencia Senor !
No tengo!
Su seguransa?
No tengo
Su rejistro?
No tengo
O.K. then Su pasaporte o visa?
No tengo.
O.K. then partner I think you may be here illegally.
Baja te el choche por favor.
Yeah right! some racial profiling.
Well now that you have made your point, tell us what should be done.
There are drug smugglers, murders, and pimps in child sex crossing the boarder everyday.
Americans have been murdered in their homes in the middle of the night by some sick criminal crossing the boarder.
Tell us what should be done.
Mr. Navarrette skirts the real issue. If you are in the United States illegally, then you have already committed a crime. Mexican illegals are the problem in border states, so looking for someone who is Hispanic is only logical. I have friends who have waited 7 years and spent thousands of dollars to go through the legal immigration process. I am in favor of legal immigration. There is a reason for the lengthy vetting process. This process prevents criminals, people who have no skills to support themselves, terrorists and even those carrying TB or HIV from entering our country. We talk about immigration in the past and refer to Ellis Island, but even those going through Ellis Island eventually were screened for TB, a disease that killed thousands in crowded cities. People need to respect US laws because another thing they are bringing with them is lawlessness.
It’s always interesting to see a well-written, factual article posted on Pajamas Media – and then watch as the wingnuts refuse to accept any information that doesn’t feed into their preconceived paranoia.
Observations that match your personal biases are now being promoted to facts.
Interesting.
As silly as Ruben’s article. Hypocrisy at it’s best. If it walks like a duck; talks like a duck, guess what? It’s a duck. It has nothing to do with racial profiling just logical deduction. But that apparently isn’t a liberal’s forte. There’s nothing stopping them from moving if they don’t like America and that includes Obama.
Such as ….?
As Mr. Navarette’s article is completely absent of objective, logical discussion, I will assume that you are not referring to his writing, because that would just be silly!
On this topic, there is an antidote for the punditry who seem to be suffering perennial vapors over Arizona: move to one of the border communities.
I have been in a vehicle that was pulled over and licensce was checked even though I was not driving. The open borders crowd would have everyone in the car checked except for the illegals. If your a citizen then show your papers but if your not a citizen then you get a pass.
Does this make any sense whatsoever.
If Mexican nationals were half as passionate about marching and demonstrating to their government as they are to ours, perhaps they could reform their own country and not condemn future generations in Mexico to have to leave their homeland to seek greener pastures elsewhere. After all, there is nothing wrong with Mexico that can’t be fixed. There are no famines, pestilence, earthquakes, floods, volcanoes, despot dictators with torture and rape rooms or ethnic cleansing going on. What there is in Mexico includes abundant resources, tremendous coastlines, a general belief in the principles of capitalism and a favorable climate.
So what are the driving forces behind illegal immigration? Brace yourselves for the answers because they are not politically correct:
1. Mexico’s ruling elite know that the easiest solution to their poverty problem is to export it northward. In return, money pours into their country and into their pockets from Mexican nationals working in the U.S. All it costs the elites is some support for sympathetic politicians and lobby groups like La Raza. Meanwhile, they enforce their own draconian immigration laws on their Guatemalan border.
2. Mexican citizens know that it is easier to sneak into a willing U.S. than to foment change in their own country. But contrary to left wing dogma, the immigrants are not all nannies and gardeners just looking for a better life. Many are part of various criminal elements that are coming here to “trim some fat” from America. This is evidenced by the reluctance to learn English, the tendency not to assimilate and rising crime and incarceration rates in border states. Past demonstrators carried the Mexican flag instead of the American flag in front of the television cameras until they found out it wasn’t helping their cause.
3. Many Mexicans don’t recognize the border with Mexico because they believe that the southwestern United States belongs to Mexico and was taken wrongfully from them. Through the Reconquista movement, they hope to eventually reclaim the southwest by virtue of sheer numbers. The area will still be under United States sovereignty with the full benefit of all U.S. government perks, but the socio-economic control of the region will be from south of the border. At that point don’t look for La Raza to become as sympathetic to the plight of Guatemalans or El Salvadorians as Americans were to them.
4. In their lust for cheap labor, unscrupulous employers in the U.S. have created modern-day slaves out of illegal immigrants. They argue that if they had to pay American wages and benefits, they would have to pass the costs on to the consumer. Well the consumer is paying anyway in terms of all the government expense and social ills associated with massive uncontrolled illegal immigration.
5. Politicians have little regard for the welfare, safety or standard of living of American citizens if they can gain voting control over a huge new underclass. Besides, if they can get the newcomers to pay into the Social Security system it could perhaps postpone its inevitable collapse by another decade.
6. Most corporate business models assume perpetual growth. Without millions of prolific newcomers buying goods and services added to the equation, CEO’s might have to revise their profit projections downward.
Guilt-ridden liberals feel like it’s our fault that Mexico doesn’t have the same standard of living that is found in America and won’t hesitate to play the race card in the name of social justice. In reality they will only succeed in lowering America’s standard of living to third-world status and tax middle-class America, including legal immigrants, out of existence. Either we allow unlimited immigration from Guatemala, Haiti, Darfur and every other country, or we secure both our borders and control legal immigration. It’s not fair to play favorite with Mexico because just because their lobby has the most influence with our politicians. Finally, middle American taxpayers have no advocates for them in this battle over illegal immigration and have only themselves to rely on.
The ultimate reason for opposition to Arizona’s law is that the illegals are hoping for amnesty. That’s also Obama’s reason for opposing the law. Ultimately, the democrats hope to enlist the Hispanics as loyal supporters and be able to depend on their votes forever. The Hispanics ought to take a good look at the blacks in the USA. The blacks have been loyal supporters of the Democrats for decades, but have really got nothing to show for it. In spite of all the set asides and preferential treatment for blacks the average income level of black families is marginal. Is that really what is desired by the Hispanics? The blacks have been coddled and played up to by Democrats, but have done poorly in school. In the Indianapolis public schools, it’s impossible to give a failing grade to a black child, no matter how poorly he/she performs. Will the Dems do that same favor for Hispanics and thereby doom them to mediocre jobs? I have worked in Mexico and I think the Hispanics are smarter than the average Democrat, but they may be willing to give up opportunity for security.
“I feel much better. When Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer signed a vindictive, ill-conceived, and hypocritical law that is a recipe for profiling and unconstitutional on its face, I was a little worried. Unlike a lot of Americans — and from the sound of the debate over SB 1070, particularly a lot of white Americans — I take racial and ethnic profiling seriously.”
Stopped reading right there. What a smart guy you must be to immediately insult your supposed target audience like that. This article is an embarrassment to Pajamas Media and belongs on the Puffington Host.
Those damn ethnic profilers. There wouldnt be any profiling going on if 20 million Mexicans and other Latinos werent disrespecting US law. If their numbers were more in line with every other group on the planet as far as illegal immigration, then we wouldnt be having this conversation at all, because there wouldnt be an invasion going on.
Exit question:
I wonder what Ruben would say if 20 million Gringos moved to Mexico illegally, or how about to Kenya or Zimbabwe with no intention of assimilating to the local culture? Would Ruben castigate the locals for not giving the newcomers 40 acres and a mule and a big warm hug? Or would Ruben be talking about colonization and cultural imperialism?
As I understand it, the Arizona law merely provides for state enforcement of existing Federal stautes. It adds no requirements and simply acknowledges the Federal Govewrnment’s failure to perform in the area of border security.
If I had my way (and who knows, perhaps I will), US immigration laws with respect to citizens of the Republic of Mexico would exactly mirror the Mexican laws already on the books. Mexican law is draconian by comparison.
Hasta luego, Senor Rueben
Arizona has the balls to take an American stand to protect it’s borders against an invasion and the P. C. element in our society is so prevalent that the sheep demonstrate their cowardice and treason by condemning true patriotic citizens. This is the result of liberalism gone wild.
Please, Pajamas, find someone else to replace Ruben.
I don’t mind, and even welcome reasoned disagreement with my views. I always learn something worthwhile.
But Ruben is simply nasty, as well as being woefully uninformed.
I’m sure there are better contrarians out there – please find one to replace Ruben!
“I might be more persuaded by the argument that critics of the law are just hysterical and concerned for no good reason if the people making those claims had a stake in the game.”
Yeah, and since you do not live in Arizona, you yourself should shut the hell up according to your own argument. So, take your little California self and get a clue, it is not a racist thing in any other form than the fact that those committing the crime happen to be predominantly of one group of races. If we had a damned border with Africa, China, Europe, the middle east and they were over running our country do you think we would not be just as outraged? Do you think we would make laws and still chase down the poor Mexicans if Mexico was an ocean away? Of course it will affect Hispanics most, Hispanics make up the lions share of those who have entered the country illegally, the lions share of work visas that simply refuse to return home once the visa expires and is not renewed. When the law hits California the California Little Itallies, Little Chinas and other Little (ethnicity) groups will be included in the target sweeps. It will happen some day, so you better make sure you got your documentation, I am certain that your socialist self will be the first person the Terminator cops target.
What, exactly, does Mr. Navarette bring to the discourse here at Pajamas Media? As others have pointed out, his posts are *always* racist and anti-American. It seems to me that if he wants an online forum to spout is pro-Mexico, anti-American drivel he would fit in better at Charles Johnson’s Little Green Footballs site, since Charles lost his mind and became insane.
I really wish the editors and management of PM would re-consider allowing Navarette space to spew his ickiness.
There are no famines, pestilence, earthquakes, floods, volcanoes, despot dictators with torture and rape rooms or ethnic cleansing going on, WTF?
Earthquakes, check. Volcanoes, check.Floods, check. Pestilence,(TB)check. Despot dictators,check.Ethnic cleansing,(ASK THE INDIANS),check.
Close the borders,check.
Arrest employers knowingly hiring Illegals,check.
No more services,check.
No more anchor babies,check.
I think that about covers it miker5,
Good Day,
Bob in SoCal where no one does a thing about immigration
The Law is the Law, the Federal government nor anyone else gets to decide which laws they will abide by and which they will not.
The Arizona immigration law is basically the same as U.S. federal immigration, code it would not even be nesscessary if the federal government would enforce the Law!
It is not racial profiling, or is it “draconian”.
I just recently started a new job. In order to get paid for my new job I had to produce my passport, sign various forms to indicate that I was a legal US citizen. Should I be outraged? Here’s an idea. Carry your green card, then show it politely to the officer, and go about your merry way.
Are drunken driving checkpoints considered unlawful searches? When I’m stopped and have to present my drivers license and possibly my registration to the officer, have my civil rights been violated? The law states that non-naturalized citizens will have their immigration paperwork on them. What is so hard to understand? I’m sorry if the easiest common denominator of the offending persons is brown skin, its irrelevant to the legality of the argument, and race baiters like this columnist are all to ready to muddy it with insinuation.
As was said above, there is no more work for them. They stand around waiting to be employed for a day, and there are many leftovers, and plenty of them living in houses, collecting welfare. Do you really think we need more illegals. Now people are dying. DYING! Getting killed, raped, and kidnapped, and you have the audacity to start crying racism, shame on your logical fallacy.
Navarrette no doubt wants all of us evil white people evicted from “his” continent and deported to Ireland, Germany, and England. I’ll consent on one condition: he and all the Mexicans (except for the few Indian natives) must be deported to Spain.
Get over it, Ruben. The United States beat Mexico in a war. To the victor go the spoils. Too bad, so sad. Had the Mexican government not abused the people in the Southwest the territory might still belong to Mexico. But they did. Life isn’t fair.
Read The Obama Timeline and learn how we got into this predicament.
I was thinking of moving to Germany or Switzerland. If anyone wants to look up the citizenship and immigration requirements you’ll find it doesn’t involve crossing the border, refusing to assimilated, and getting on the welfare dole.
If I Germany was the last, best, economic opportunity for me, you’d better believe I would learn the language, and the culture, and I would work very hard to win their approval. Even in my many trips to Deutschland, I would strive as much as possible to communicate with Germans in German. It’s called respect.
Illegal or otherwise, many of our immigrants from across the southern border have NO respect. Rather, they have an over-inflated sense of entitlement, which has been fostered by liberal pundits who seek to take advantage of them, whether it be for work, for votes, or as a force for civil unrest.
Predictable and bland. This article is a communion wafer for the far left.
“Reasonable suspicion,” as Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio says, is “10 Mexicans in a trunk.” It is not, as the thug-in-chief implied, “taking your family out for ice cream cones.”
Don’t break the law and you won’t get hassled or arrested. Why is that so difficult to understand?
“Vindictive and Ill-conceived?” Not really. “Desperate” would have been a better way to describe the Arizona action. And Arizona is not the only U.S. entity to have taken “desperate” actions to try to do what the federal government and many (most) state governments won’t: respect and protect the sovereignty of the United States.
Why has that become such a hard concept for so many of the “political class” and their sycophants (like Mr. Navarette) to understand? Which part of the distinction between legal and illegal entrants to this country does the writer not get?
Also, which part of “Mexico lost a war to us 162 years ago” did Navarette and other historical ignoramuses not get? Mexicans are NOT entitled to simply move across the border willy-nilly if they are not legal U.S. residents. The American Southwest IS NOT part of Mexico any longer. After 162 years grown up countries learn to deal with such realities.
Loyalty to the country quite often means conflict with the government. The Founders knew the evils of government and to protect the governed from the evils of government they gave us the Constitution.
If La Raza wants to give the south western states back they should contact Spain and see if Spain wants them back. Mexico should also go back to Spain as well, or is that to much historical accuracy for La Raza to comprehend ?
This article was satire, right?
Why does Ruben support breaking of our immigration laws and the ceding of our national sovereignty?
1 against, 41 in favor; You are a real racist magnet R.N.
Three questions for you, sir:
Do the US, and the state of Arizona, have the right to expel illegal aliens ?
Is there any way humanly possible to write and enforce a _fair_ law to do this ?
Assuming there is, would you still oppose such a law on other grounds ?
Psychic phlash on your answer: No, No, No, there is no way to; Let everyone in.
I find your argument disingenuous, Mr. Navarette. If Asians or Ethiopians or Russians were pouring over the border by the millions, would you still object to Arizona’s attempt to enforce the sovereignty of our nation? Or would you suddenly agree that something needs to be done?
Geez, yet another load of biased garbage from Ruben. In Ruben’s world, everyone is guilty and complicit in crimes except for the criminals, as long as those criminals are from a certain part of the world. Here’s what happens when you don’t profile:
Last year I was driving from TX to AZ along I-10 when I encountered one of the Border Patrol’s checkpoints. I had been through these many times before without any fanfare since I’m just a white guy from Texas driving a big sedan that isn’t full of people or packages. Instead of being waved through as usual with the agent looking in my windows as I pass by since I roll them down to make their job easier, I get stopped. The BP agent asked me where I was driving from and where to, then she asked me if I was a U.S. citizen. She was hispanic with a thick accent so instead of answering, I asked her if she was a citizen. She didn’t like that question and told me that she would be asking the questions. I chuckled at her and informed her of my 1st Amendment right to speech, and that I didn’t have to answer any of her questions unless she was willing to place me into custody first. She looked at my backseat and asked what I had in my suitcase. I told her there were 3 small Mexicans in there, just waiting to pop out and scare her. She just stared at me with pursed lips so I told her we were done and I just drove away. Nobody chased me or pulled me over for leaving.
That woman was profiling, but not like she should have been doing. That was the only time I’ve ever been asked if I was a U.S. citizen, despite much international travel. She was obviously just like Ruben and didn’t like white folks so she tried to harass me. The fact that nobody came to get me after I just left the checkpoint tells me that she knows she was wrong, therefore she couldn’t report me or her attitude would have been exposed. I have no problem whatsoever with the AZ law. If law enforcement asks me for ID then I produce it, period.
Geez, CR. You’re kind of making Ruben’s point, in a way.
You resented the inconvenience of being stopped at a BP checkpoint, despite being “just a white guy from Texas driving a big sedan”. Illegal aliens don’t come just in Hispanic, and dark shades, and being white does not entitle you or me to special exemption from Border Patrol inspection.
That BP agent, even if “hispanic with a thick accent”, was undoubtedly a citizen, and was acting legally, when YOU PROFILED HER and mouthed off to her. She was also very patient and forbearing with you, and with your sarcasm — legally she could have searched you and your vehicle for several hours, and down to the last bolt and nut. Check the laws on legality of searches at BP checkpoints. You’ll be surprised at what they can legally do to you, and your car.
If we’re going to stop illegal immigration, we must all accept some inconvenience, carry our ID, and stop disrespecting our fellow Americans for trivial reasons, most especially the color of their skin, or the thickness of their accent.
Last time I looked, there were only three races in the world. Negro, Oriental, and Caucasian. Hispanics/Latinos are a sub-group of Caucasians. In other words. They’re WHITE! (Will they be stopping George Hamilton, do you think? He’s got dark skin.)
Since ruben won’t respond to correct your glaring error here I will channel him for his comment.
“You forgot Germans(1920s-40s) and Mexicans.”
I sent Ruben Navarette a copy of the actual text of the AZ law, together with a couple of knowledgeable explanations. I see from his first sentence that he failed to read the law.
I’m not reading further, and I am not reading his column ever again.
This has to be one of the mose ignorant articles ever posted here. I live in Arizona and we DO have a stake in the game. We have had our police officers and Arizona citizens killed by illegal aliens. Border agents have been ambushed and shot with AK47’s just 50 miles from Phoenix while helicopters came under fire rescuing them. Southern Arizona is rapidly becoming a war zone, yet people like Navarette seem oblivious to the exploding border crisis.
What Navarette doesn’t seem to understand is that Obama and his cronies in the leftwing media have been lying. Obama lied when he said he could be harassed by police when taking his kids out for ice cream. Unless Obama tried to rob the ice cream store no one can bother him about his resident status. Despite the hysterical cries of people like Navarette and the so-called “mainstream” media, this law does not authorize police to harass innocent citizens who have not already broken the law. If anything it will not do enough to protect the border, which Arizona has been forced to do because Barack Obama has done absolutely nothing about it.
Thank you! Everytime I despair that conservatives have sold out on the immigration issue I read someone that makes a little sense. Thanks! Limited government is limited government.
Apparently the concept of limited government is conveniently tossed by conservatives when it suits them. It’s OK to toss the 4th amendment. If you’re not guilty you won’t run. And so on.
You state: “My father is neither [dishonest or delusional], which is why he has no trouble acknowledging racial and ethnic profiling as a fact of life in police work.”
Yet when the legislature of Arizona attempts to assist the enforcement of federal law, you hysterically and fallaciously term their effort “vindictive, ill-conceived, and hypocritical” and “a recipe for profiling” as well as wildly asserting that it is “unconstitutional on its face”.
It’s not just cops for whom racial and ethnic profiling is a fact of life. Perception of racial characteristics and ethnicity are innate human traits, present since birth – child development research demonstrates that even small babies react to racial distinctions, almost from birth – they are ethnocentric long before they can even talk!
Incidentally, Hispanic is conspicuously not a race, nor is it an ethnicity. “Hispanic” spans genetic descent from Visigoths, Arabs, Moors, Romans, Carthaginians, Negroes, American Indians, and others. Castilians are ethnically very distant from the Negroid people of the Dominican Republic, yet both are deemed “Hispanic”. And illegal is not a race either.
Jesse Jackson once commented, “There is nothing more painful for me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps and start thinking about robbery—then look around and see somebody white and feel relieved.” He was acknowledging both a gut reaction and a statistical relationship. The incidence of crimes committed by ‘blacks’ is several times as high as for ‘whites’ (as is the race of the victims).
Everybody, including Hispanics, just naturally profiles, every day, and in nearly every interpersonal encounter, and in many instances– even a majority of instances – for respectful and desirable reasons. When I go to a Mexican restaurant, I am profiling, and I’m not expecting to find corned beef and cabbage. I buy my chopped chicken livers at DZ Akins Jewish delicatessen, not at El Pollo Loco. I visit an Irish pub for Guinness on tap, not Dos Equis, or Stolichnaya. And I always put salsa picante on my omelette, becauses I’m first and foremost an American, and it tastes good – not because it has a profile associated with it.
When, as a physician, I examine a patient, I profile a black person as much more likely to be hypertensive, to have sickle cell disease or prostatic cancer. When I profile a patient as Jewish (by physical appearance or last name), I associate that with the risk of several genetic diseases, and act accordingly. Does that make me a racist, or anti-semitic, or just ethical?
The conclusion implicit in your condemnation of profiling is that it is equivalent to dreaded racism. Yet the most flagrantly negative and disastrously consequential form of profiling is euphemistically termed “affirmative action”, where (as Jonah Goldberg has argued), the results are not a few minutes of traffic stop, but may be a major alteration of the course of one’s life.
Personally, I’ll be happy to carry my driver’s license and to suffer the inconvenience of proving my citizenship on demand, if it will help preserve the integrity of my country and of its laws.
http://article.nationalreview.com/433642/is-arizona-law-still-wrong-if-it-works/jonah-goldberg
Someone tell Navarrette that the profiling in New Jersey was funded by the DEA and was accurate in that young male black drivers both committed disproportionate numbers of speeding and other traffic violations but also engaged in drug transportation in disproportionate numbers as well. Just read “The Myth Of Racial Profiling” by Heather MacDonald at the City Journal. I do not hesitate to point out that Mexicans are disproportionately illegal aliens, drug smugglers, and common criminals in Arizona. But these facts disturb Navarrette.
“These folks refuse to accept that the real culprits are about half a million Arizonans who hired these people to cook their food, clean their homes, tend to their children and senior citizens, etc.”
Despite having to wade through his racist rants, one finds that even Peter Navarrette sometimes stumbles over the truth. If Americans refuse to hire illegal aliens, those aliens won’t come. Or at the very least, they won’t come in the millions that are currently pouring across our borders. Just as importantly, the 12 to 30 million (you pick the number) currently here will begin to self-deport. So one of things we should do — and it is only one of many things needing to be done to quelch this invasion– is to get really serious about penalizing those who hire these lawbreakers. I think a fine of $1,000 a head for each illegal working for a given company, household or individual who hires these lawbreakers, is a good first step. I would then goose it up to $2,000 a head for the next violation of federal/state immigration law. Then $3,000, etc., etc. Eventually those who hire these people are going to get the picture and employment for illegals will dry up. This, of course, is the last thing that pro-illegal immigrant industry lobbists, like Navarette, want to see. That in and of itself is reason to do it.
Because, you know, most of the illegal immigrants in the country are really Lithuanians who have smuggling themselves in in aircraft wheel wells.
The difficulty with making truth unmentionable is that then, only unmentionable people will speak truth, but it will be no less true.
“Yes, Navarrette is a racist. He is nothing more than a Brown Supremacist.”
Not only is Navarrete a Racist Brown Supremacist against black, white, asian, mid-eastern etc, etc he is a legal defender of Mexico’s SLAVE TRADE industry which sells human beings for dollars; because of Mr Navarrette’s inhuman Slave Trade he is deliberately driving down wages of all legal American citizens so that Navarette’s Mexican SLAVE TRADE industry can garner bigger profit off selling human beings:
http://www.numbersusa.com/content/issues/black-americans.html
Amnesty for illegal workers is not just a slap in the face to black Americans. It’s an economic disaster. I see illegal immigration and the adverse impact that it has on the political empowerment of African Americans, and the impact it has on the job market.”
– T. Willard Fair, president of the Urban League of Greater Miami, Fla.
Navarette, there is no legal justification in defedning Mexican SLAVE TRADE industry!
Why do you hate Life, Liberty and pursuit of Happiness?
Is your Racist Brown Supremacy so deep in your soul you cannot understand the evil you defend?
SLAVERY IS UN-AMERICAN!
While it is illegal to hire illegal aliens and those who do should be punished, it is ALSO illegal for the obamafeds to allow illegal access to the US. They have a sworn, constitutional responsibility to protect our borders.
But they (nor would Dubya) will not do it. Because illegals vote democrat, and they want the illegal vote and the vote of their sympathizers.
Police(me for 42 years) do not conduct stops based on race. We have much better things to do. Stops are based on behavior. Violate the law or act out unseemingly, and the Man wants to have a word with you. And he really doesn’t care what color you are.And, in many towns where illegals proliferate, the cop is also of mexican descent. Many policemen are married to ladies from ethnic minorities, and their children are of mixed races. Does one seriously suppose that such are likely to abuse minorities? My wife is chinese, and our adopted son is mexican. In Laredo, TX, for example, 95% of the police force is of mexican descent.Do you suppose they are prejudiced against La Raza?
In many areas most of La Migra and Customs are of mexican descent.
Lil’ Ruben is real short on the facts and long on his own ultraracism, imputing (projecting) his feelings onto others.You are not a mexican man, Ruben, you are just a man. Adam is both your ancestor and mine. “You ain’t no better…”; nor are you worse than I.Live with it.
PJM, thanks for letting Mr. Ruben prattle away on a subject he know little about. The court challenges comeing will be the fourth attemt by the “open borders” croud against Arizona laws, one previous enactment they challeged was immegrations verification by employers and fines for non-compliance, went to 9th circut court of appeals…Arizona prevailed, Second denial of welfare benefits to illegals….again upheld by 9th circut court. This law will be upheld as well. Those who haven’t lived here need to chill out, the law isn’t even in effect til July 29th yet we see reporters making up incidents trying to prove that we are racists out here. The most typical encounter with law-enforement is the traffic stop….hey in Arizona the sun shines daily, 98% of all vehicles have limo tint on the rear and passenger compartment windows, and as deep a tint as is legal(shops that apply tint will not put limo tint on windshields or driver compartment windows)so until some one fails to stop at a light, or speeds the officer has no clue what the ethnic origin of the driver is. As in all traffic stops the officer is going to ask for three things here in Arizona, drivers licence, registration and proof of insurance, In Arizona it is mandatory for an officer to impound the vehicle and arrest the driver if they do not have these items in their possession. If the car being driven cannot be assertained as the property of the driver and the driver cannot produce a licence to operate the vehicle the officer would be derelict in his duty not to pursue the case. Now they are obligated to assertain who the person is and if they are in Arizona legally.
Why is profiling, racial or otherwise wrong, when used to apprehend criminals?
Certainly I could see why it would be wrong to arrest someone based only on their race, but if the suspect for a crime is a certain color it is not racial profiling.
In this case, the law simply allows that police officer can ask for required documentation to support a persons identification and right to be in the US or such, if I understand correctly. The federal laws already require that those in the US with proper documentation have the papers available to show at all times. So it does follow that they could be asked for the papers, the law simply allows the officers to ask. Most of us do carry our id at all times as it is. The law is not the hardship that it is claimed to be, except on those that are here illegally anyhow.
So really, all the cries of racial profiling, are only meant to protect those that are here illegally from getting caught. It isn’t about protecting those legally here, no matter their race, it is about protecting the guilty.
What a hypocrite:You critize profiling, but only when it’s anglo males who get profiled.Of course, If it weren’t for anti white profiling,(AFFIRMATIVE ACTION)a” hypocritical and vindictive” policy aimed at driving better-qualified white males from the workforce, ,you’d be one of those illegals picking lettuce,and living in an “overcrowded” basement apartment.BTW Ruben: How does it feel to shill for rapacious landlords,imported peonage,and the mexican plutocracy?
“A few people suffer the minor inconvenience of having to show their birth certificate or some other proof of citizenship. Big deal.”
Sorta like when you apply for a job or fly on a commercial airplane. Can’t do much of anything nowadays without showing some i.d.
You’ve made your points and I hope for the best. Good Luck. Thanks.
We are a gaggle of volunteers and starting a brand new scheme in our community. Your web site provided us with useful info to paintings on. You have done an impressive job and our whole community can be thankful to you.