Five Federal Lands in Arizona Have Travel Warnings in Place

[denaliguide]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/06/18/federal-lands-arizona-travel-warnings-place/

[Spooky]

Faux News....:lol8:. Arizona has a problem, but hey, hugely exaggerate and play up the issue to get voters on your side. "Americans can't access their own lands"?! Holy hell, the world is ending, let's shoot Mexicans on sight. :2thumbs:

ClusterFox is nothing but the GOP's talking points. And the GOP would have us all living in eternal fear. Gack.

[denaliguide]

an arizona rancher on the border gets shot and killed by a suspected illegal, a border patrol agent in arizona gets shot and wounded in southern arizona by a suspected illegal. hmmm............ no problem there, is there?

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/64910

and it's just not mexicans crossing illegally.

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=156441

let's just throw the doors open and let them all in.

so, what you are saying is that just because its from foxnews it can't be believed? i suppose that pmsnbc is the true arbiter of the real news?

[Spooky]

That's not what I'm saying at all about Arizona. My post said, "Arizona has a problem."

Look at the big picture: Arizona is in an extremely defensive position because the law they passed is clearly racist and ineffective. As a result they've lost millions because of boycotts from around the country, including cities like L.A. and Denver. Like any business that's losing income, they're trying to mitigate the damage. Arizona is in a position of creating good publicity for themselves to stop the bleeding. You don't believe politicians would put spin on stories, or take advantage of a negative thing, blow it out of proportion in order to get their agenda through?

The law they passed to fix this problem makes no sense. How is the police asking random people for papers (remember, they're not supposed to profile) going to help the problem of hundreds of people a day illegally crossing the border? How does that law address the crime at the border? The drugs, the people smuggling?

The law doesn't work to solve the problem they really have, which is border security. All the law does is address, possibly, at its best, a few of the people who already made it over.

I'm also saying that faux news is used by politicians to further an agenda. FOX news is licensed as "entertainment" instead of "news." This is because they lie. They've admitted under oath that they lie. They've been sued for lying. But they won, because their licensing agreement doesn't require them to tell the truth.

Nor did I say that MSNBC is the true arbiter of news. I commented about FOX, not MSNBC.

Nor did I say they should throw the doors open and let them all in. Like a lot of people who are whipped up into a frenzied anger, you're throwing a lot of words in others' mouths and attaching a lot of suppositions about others' positions in order to defend your own. But that's the point, right? That's the purpose of articles like this. To make you afraid and pissed so politicians who are spinning stories will have an agreeable audience to back their position.

I was reacting sarcastically to the politicization of truly horrible crimes in order to further an agenda. You don't think people have lost their lives in other border areas? Why hasn't Texas passed a similar law? Border agents, smugglers, illegal crossers and home owners lose their lives there, too. So, why? Why do we hear about it in Arizona and not Texas? It's because AZ is trying to rehab their image. And like any good GOP child, the politicians involved are using fear in order to do so.

Arizona needs border security! They need effective, strong, capable and numerous border security agents. They need better equipment, people and training. Why America doesn't secure its borders is beyond me. It's said that we don't want "militarized" borders but I disagree...it's looking like we NEED militarized borders.

Wouldn't you agree that the best answer would be rationally solving the problem at its source, instead of reacting out of fear and anger?

[mattandersao]

#1- Arizona's law is rather effective, it will not stop illegal migrants from crossing the border but will cause them leave Arizona, they will find a more friendly state (Utah for now until Utah legislature passes a similar racist law).
#2- The only problem I have with Fox is the attempt to pass themselves of as "fair and balanced" true some of them are fair and balanced, but many of their commentators and even reporters are far from that.
#3-It is fairly obvious that the Federal Government needs to fulfill its constitution obligation and deal with border security and immigration, this will probably not happen this year. President Bush tried during his second term and failed so I doubt the current administration is willing to push through comprehensive immigration reform.

[Wasatch Rebel]

The law they passed to fix this problem makes no sense. How is the police asking random people for papers (remember, they're not supposed to profile) going to help the problem of hundreds of people a day illegally crossing the border? How does that law address the crime at the border? The drugs, the people smuggling?



It isn't random people. It's people who are being investigated for breaking the law. Now, that can be anyone who breaks the law--not a particular race. Which brings up another thing--Mexican isn't a race, it's a nationality. There are white Mexicans, part-white Mexicans, Mexican Indians, etc. Also, I don't really believe that it's being blown out of proportion. Unless my friends from AZ are lying.

[Spooky]

#1- Arizona's law is rather effective, it will not stop illegal migrants from crossing the border but will cause them leave Arizona,

How is that effective? The law is a band-aid. The border is the hemorrhaging wound.

Just because George Bush failed doesn't mean the Obama administration isn't willing to try. Hell, every administration since the 1930's has failed to pass any kind of healthcare reform but that didn't scare Obama off.

Otherwise, it sounds like we're in agreement. The federal government needs to do something and Fox News isn't fair and balanced.

[Spooky]

It isn't random people. It's people who are being investigated for breaking the law. Now, that can be anyone who breaks the law--not a particular race. Which brings up another thing--Mexican isn't a race, it's a nationality. There are white Mexicans, part-white Mexicans, Mexican Indians, etc. Also, I don't really believe that it's being blown out of proportion. Unless my friends from AZ are lying.

I shouldn't have said "random" but otherwise you're making my point. What percentage of illegal residents are committing crimes that will be investigated by the police, resulting in them having to prove they're here illegally? Whatever that percentage is, it's far less than the 100% of those crossing the border illegally. We need to catch them there.

[mattandersao]

As I said the law does not stop illegals from entering but will stop them from staying in Arizona imo.

[Wasatch Rebel]

I shouldn't have said "random" but otherwise you're making my point. What percentage of illegal residents are committing crimes that will be investigated by the police, resulting in them having to prove they're here illegally? Whatever that percentage is, it's far less than the 100% of those crossing the border illegally. We need to catch them there.

If your point is that we need to enforce the border first, I wholeheartedly agree. But since the feds are not doing what they are supposed to be doing, states like Arizona with a lot of crime caused by illegals really have no recourse except to take care of the situation themselves. Since border enforcement is a national responsibility, the only thing Arizona can do to mitigate the problem is to remove those who are already here illegally. To say it's profiling is really oversimplifying it. For example, if you or I were to be pulled over for running a stop light in Arizona, or probably any other state, we'd be asked for our I.D. That's what's happening in AZ--people who break the law are being asked for their I.D. The same as anyone anywhere else. I guess the problem as you see it is that these people who don't have I.D. are being unduly challenged--or what? I don't see the problem when anyone who is a suspect in a crime, or even traffic law violations, would be asked for their I.D. as well. Maybe it aggravates you that asking for I.D. identifies some as illegals because they have no I.D..

[denaliguide]

i do not feel that the law in arizona is racist. it simply mirrors the federal laws already on the books that are being unenforced by the federal government. but then again i am also not against profiling. profiling works.

the police in arizona can not just come up to you hanging out in front of home depot and ask for your papers. they have to have contacted you in the course of another investigation or incidenct. if i am pulled over for speeding, or arrested i must provide proof of identification, so why can't they ask someone else?

[QUOTE=Spooky;405849]Arizona needs border security! They need effective, strong, capable and numerous border security agents. They need better equipment, people and training. Why America doesn't secure its borders is beyond me. It's said that we don't want "militarized" borders but I disagree...it's looking like we NEED militarized borders.QUOTE]

i couldn't agree more. but it's not just arizona. let's not forget california and texas. the federal government has to pull it's head out of the sand. so, why aren't they taking on this topic? simple, it's an election year. you know that controversial issues are never brought up in an election year. the obama administration is more concerned with whether or not a state is usurping it's authority than actually securing the border. hence the federal lawsuit attemptiing to stop the law.

texas is discussing a passing a law similiar to arizona's. wouldn't surprise me if they actually do it.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_state_surveys/texas/57_in_texas_support_immigration_law_like_arizona_s


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OXs8gRI70oo

then there's the boycott's. what a bunch of shit. i will never spend another dime in los angeles, california, or boulder, or anywhere else that doesn't recognize a states soverign right to pass laws for the benefit of their residents. i will boycott the boycotters. if i was arizona i would send all california felons, in arizona prisons, back to california. let california deal with them

and you are right i just threw out pmsnbc out there. i should have included abc, cbs, cnn, tbs, bbc, time, newsweek, and the wall street journal. of course they are all bias and agenda free. :roflol:hell, i even throw in al-jazerra.

[Wasatch Rebel]

i do not feel that the law in arizona is racist. it simply mirrors the federal laws already on the books that are being unenforced by the federal government. but then again i am also not against profiling. profiling works.

Agree. It wasn't old ladies from Holland who blew up the Twin Towers.






texas is discussing a passing a law similiar to arizona's.

I wish Utah had the nads to do something similar.


then there's the boycott's. what a bunch of shit. i will never spend another dime in los angeles, california, or boulder, or anywhere else that doesn't recognize a states soverign right to pass laws for the benefit of their residents. i will boycott the boycotters. if i was arizona i would send all california felons, in arizona prisons, back to california. let california deal with them

That's almost an exact duplicate of what I've been posting on forums all over that have to do with this. In fact my exact comment on one thread where people were complaining about it was, "If Arizona doesn't pass it, I'll boycott them."


and you are right i just threw out pmsnbc out there. i should have included abc, cbs, cnn, tbs, bbc, time, newsweek, and the wall street journal. of course they are all bias and agenda free. :roflol:hell, i even throw in al-jazerra.

It never ceases to amaze me how many people believe that Fox is the only news source that isn't fair and balanced. It's because Fox doesn't support their views and nearly every other major news source toes the left line--so of course they're not biased.:lol8:

[mattandersao]

The difference is if I am pulled over and don't have my drivers license, which happens often, I do not face the chance of deportation, nor does the officer ask me to prove my citizenship. If a latino in Arizona is pulled over for whatever reason and does not have any form of ID, even if they are a legal resident, I assume the will be detained until proof of citizenship is brought to where they are being detained. This amounts to what I consider profiling unless all other nationalities are treated the same...

[denaliguide]

The difference is if I am pulled over and don't have my drivers license, which happens often, I do not face the chance of deportation, nor does the officer ask me to prove my citizenship. If a latino in Arizona is pulled over for whatever reason and does not have any form of ID, even if they are a legal resident, I assume the will be detained until proof of citizenship is brought to where they are being detained. This amounts to what I consider profiling unless all other nationalities are treated the same...

to avoid the accusation of profiling they will have to treat other nationalities the same. there is also a significant number of OTM's (other than mexicans) illegally crossing the border.
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=156441 (http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=156441)

if terrorists want to attempt to smuggle in a dirty bomb, the mexican border is where it will happen. imo

[Spooky]

if i am pulled over for speeding, or arrested i must provide proof of identification, so why can't they ask someone else?

That's not how it's working. You must provide proof of citizenship. Not just identification. I know I don't carry my birth certificate around, for security purposes. But I agree 100% that we should all have to carry id that shows citizenship status.


and you are right i just threw out pmsnbc out there. i should have included abc, cbs, cnn, tbs, bbc, time, newsweek, and the wall street journal. of course they are all bias and agenda free. :roflol:hell, i even throw in al-jazerra.

I didn't say that any of those organizations do or do not give us the truth...all I said was that FOX isn't required to give you the truth because they're licensed as entertainment.


I wish Utah had the nads to do something similar.

They were going to, remember? Nearly every police agency in Utah revolted. They did not want to be put in the position of being INS officials instead of police officers.


It never ceases to amaze me how many people believe that Fox is the only news source that isn't fair and balanced. It's because Fox doesn't support their views and nearly every other major news source toes the left line--so of course they're not biased.:lol8:

Did I say anything that's not true to deserve that? Did I say other news sources are accurate and only FOX isn't? Are you lumping me into that group?

If so, then I've got to say: It never ceases to amaze ME how right wing government hating tea party activists who hate everybody who is not white jump to such generalized conclusions about those who do not agree with them. :nono: :wink:


The difference is if I am pulled over and don't have my drivers license, which happens often, I do not face the chance of deportation, nor does the officer ask me to prove my citizenship. If a latino in Arizona is pulled over for whatever reason and does not have any form of ID, even if they are a legal resident, I assume the will be detained until proof of citizenship is brought to where they are being detained. This amounts to what I consider profiling unless all other nationalities are treated the same...

Agreed.

[Spooky]

Back to the original point, which is that Faux "News" is misleading readers and watchers, as evidenced in this thread.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201006180012

If you want to know the truth about what is going on in that strip of AZ, you'll read the link. Media Matters is an organization that holds all media outlets' feet to the fire, believing it important that factual news be given to the people of the U.S.

Like I said, FOX news is a GOP controlled media outlet specializing in entertainment. That entertainment has a purpose. It's to scare you into voting for the GOP or tea party agenda. It's to scare you shitless. And man oh man is it working!

The truth? That area of AZ is improving.


On the evening of June 16, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service put out a statement attempting to clear up confusion surrounding the closure, which is in the Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge. Part of the statement said that while the closure had been implemented "due to human safety concerns," "since 2006 the Refuge has experienced a significant decline in violent activity in the area thanks to ongoing cooperation between the US Fish and Wildlife Service and US Customs and Border Protection."

[Wasatch Rebel]

Did I say anything that's not true to deserve that? Did I say other news sources are accurate and only FOX isn't? Are you lumping me into that group?

Come on, you brought up "Faux News". But no, I didn't specify you in particular. It's just that you're okay with what other news sources say, but no okay with what Fox says. I've got no problem with that, but maybe it's because one supports your opinion, and one doesn't.

As for Mediamatters it was in part begun by Hillary Clinton. Here's an actually Clinton quote regarding it. On some things, it may be unbiased, but hardly could it be considered a middle of the road source with no biases. Unless you'd also believe that a media watchdog started by Sean Hannity would be objective. Well, here's the Clinton quote.

"I only wish that we had this active and fighting blogosphere about 15 years ago because we have certainly suffered over the last years from a real imbalance in the political world in our country. But we are righting that balance -- or lefting that balance -- not sure which, and we are certainly better prepared and more focused on taking our arguments and making them effective and disseminating them widely and really putting together a network in the blogosphere in a lot of the new progressive infrastructure -- institutions that I helped to start and support like Media Matters and Center for American Progress. We're beginning to match what I had said for years was the advantage of the other side."

For more on this you can see her touting her involvement with the group here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbzC6-N9mwM

[Spooky]

Come on, you brought up "Faux News". But no, I didn't specify you in particular. It's just that you're okay with what other news sources say, but no okay with what Fox says. I've got no problem with that, but maybe it's because one supports your opinion, and one doesn't.

Actually, I'm okay with what the U.S. Fish & Wildlife said. I didn't say I was okay with other news sources...I tend to triple check all sources before believing a story. Also, believe it or not, I strive to not form an opinion until I've gotten as many facts as possible. I don't look for opinions that merely back up what I believe in. That's not growth, it's mental stagnation.

I brought up faux news because the original post in this thread was a story presented as fact here that faux news posted in total error. It's difficult to see people become angry and afraid over stories that are largely made up. :wink:

P.S. I've never heard "PMSNBC" before. Kinda cute. :haha:

[Wasatch Rebel]

Okay. I think you're very responsible for doing things that way. And I appreciate your honesty. Actually, I think a lot of what Fox does is opinion pieces that they label as such, but I don't like stuff that's supposed to be straight news that is instead fabricated any more than you do. And I don't like it when opinion is passed off as reporting, as some of the networks do all the time.

[Jaxx]

On the evening of June 16, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service put out a statement attempting to clear up confusion surrounding the closure, which is in the Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge. Part of the statement said that while the closure had been implemented "due to human safety concerns," "since 2006 the Refuge has experienced a significant decline in violent activity in the area thanks to ongoing cooperation between the US Fish and Wildlife Service and US Customs and Border Protection."

Sounds like there was a bigger problem and now there is not as big of a problem, but still a problem, with violence and that is why the area has closed. I still have to say that even though the news was late to the party it is still an incredibly ridiculous situation when we have to close parts of OUR COUNTRY due to violent activity from another country spilling into our country.

I think everyone in the discussion is pretty much on the same boat on this though.

[nelsonccc]

The difference is if I am pulled over and don't have my drivers license, which happens often, I do not face the chance of deportation, nor does the officer ask me to prove my citizenship. If a latino in Arizona is pulled over for whatever reason and does not have any form of ID, even if they are a legal resident, I assume the will be detained until proof of citizenship is brought to where they are being detained. This amounts to what I consider profiling unless all other nationalities are treated the same...

Good. We should be profiling. Period. Detain them until they provide proof. I think we should Berlin wall that shit. Two tall walls with a mine field inbetween. Let the news show a couple of blown up illegal aliens. That'll slow it down. No more detaining and shipping them back, if you get caught you die. Until we show that we are serious about protecting our borders it won't stop.

We should take the money our goverment is spending to bail out the auto and banking industries (wow, we've become a socialist nation) and put it into securing our borders. Think of all the jobs that'll be created by building two big long walls!

[bbennett]

We should take the money our goverment is spending to bail out the auto and banking industries (wow, we've become a socialist nation) and put it into securing our borders. Think of all the jobs that'll be created by building two big long walls!

I know where we can save a bunch of money on labor costs for that wall. It's not exactly legal but it's not likely that we'd have to worry about anyone enforcing the law on that one.:wink:

[nelsonccc]

I know where we can save a bunch of money on labor costs for that wall. It's not exactly legal but it's not likely that we'd have to worry about anyone enforcing the law on that one.:wink:

yep we should catch them, then tell them we'll give them citzenship if they help build the wall for 12 months @ minimum wage. The thing would have thousands of workers lining upt o keep out the other illegals!:naughty:

[denaliguide]

and if they only worked from the south side of the wall they wouldn't be technically illegals. :roflol::roflol::roflol:

[Wasatch Rebel]

I still have to say that even though the news was late to the party it is still an incredibly ridiculous situation when we have to close parts of OUR COUNTRY due to violent activity from another country spilling into our country.



Amen to that.

Here's Arizona Senator Kyl telling a group that Obama said, no securing of border until the Republicans agree to comprehensive immigration reform. http://www.billoreilly.com/video?chartID=554&vid=-859276675205381646

[Jaxx]

Amen to that.

Here's Arizona Senator Kyl telling a group that Obama said, no securing of border until the Republicans agree to comprehensive immigration reform. http://www.billoreilly.com/video?chartID=554&vid=-859276675205381646

wow :eek2:

[Spooky]

Amen to that.

Here's Arizona Senator Kyl telling a group that Obama said, no securing of border until the Republicans agree to comprehensive immigration reform. http://www.billoreilly.com/video?chartID=554&vid=-859276675205381646

What are the Dem's to do when the Repubs refuse to allow any legislation through, period? They've shut down the government. They've made the entire democratic process a joke by forcing the Dem's to have a majority vote on every issue.

You can be as angry as you want, but to be honest about what the problem is, you need to look at where it's started.

[denaliguide]

let me see if i understand this. we have a dem pres., a dem controlled senate, and a dem controlled house. and they can't pass anything because of the republicans? no, they can't pass anything because of a few dems that think that the party might be just overdoing it a bit and crossed over to vote with the repub's. good for them. if all the dems were in line with pelosi and crew they could have a majority each and every time with no problem. it's not a joke. it's called checks and balances. obama promised bi-partisanship during the campaign, but i have yet to see him deliver on it. he also promised transparency, and i haven't seen much of that either.

the fact that obama said that if he secured the border first there would be no incentive for bi-partisan co-operation on immigration reform says it all. it's basically a childish "do it my way or i don't want to play". nothing new here. i wish he would just take his ball and go home.

tell me. where are the 1200 nat. guard troops that were promised a month ago? no one has seen them along the border yet. just more foot dragging by obama.

[mattandersao]

Good. I think we should Holocaust that shit. Torture, experiment on, and mass execute a couple CEO's (including Utah hero Mitt Romney) who employ illegals (including us common folk who hire them in the parking lot of our home depots to do odd jobs). That will slow it down, no not slow it down in fact stop illegal immigration. No jobs, no better life, no migration. No more need for a wall that will never work, no more deportations, if you hire an illegal you die! Until we are serious about the cause of why so many people abandon their cultures, lives, etc it will not stop.

On a serious note I have a couple questions, or thoughts to add to this thread
1. We have no problem destroying our planet by using the most polluting energy sources rather than alternative ones. We(Americans) have the same mindset when it comes to fruits and vegetables, our housing, hotels, etc. All of these products require a cheap source of labor, without migrant workers, often illegal, prices of those same products will drastically increase. If we deport everyone, which seems to be the desire of many on this thread, are you willing to pay for it? Its obvious we wont pay for a better planet, will we for an illegal immigrant free country?

Ill add some more later!

[denaliguide]

All of these products require a cheap source of labor, without migrant workers, often illegal, prices of those same products will drastically increase. If we deport everyone, which seems to be the desire of many on this thread, are you willing to pay for it?

i am willing hire a bunch of high school kids and legal immigrants as entry level technicians for crap jobs. or how about a welfare to work program.

in todays news the labor department wants to guarantee illegal worker the same wages as legal workers. supposedly it's to encourage employers to hire legal workers. catch 22 is that it's illegal to hire illegal workers.

[mattandersao]

Welfare is an interesting idea, a CCC type program. As for hiring teenagers and legal immigrants there obviously arent enough workers in the farm regions to pick our produce, etc or else business would hire them rather than the illegal it is basic supply/demand. Where there is a demand for cheap labor there will supply of illegal immigration. President Bush idea of a guest worker program would have solved this whole dilemma imo. Hopefully any immigration reform will include such a program. It was used during WW II why not now? Also why do so many choose to single out the person just trying to make a better life for themselves and their families rather than the fat cats hiring them?

P.S. I am in no way sticking up for drug runners, felony crime breaking illegal immigrant.

[mattandersao]

Also it is illegal to hire illegal workers but the fine is a slap on the wrist for the employer. Business is in business to make profit. An easy way to profit is to underpay workers, and the cheapest and easiest to underpay are those here illegally. Until there are serious consequences for hiring illegal immigrants the problem of illegal immigration will continue because as ACDC sang "Come on, come on, listen to the money talk"

[denaliguide]

guest worker program is a good idea. that's where new zealand gets a lot of its fruit pickers. travelers come over and get a working visa which allows them to have a working vacation.

i am all for stiffer penalties for employers who hire illegals. makes sense to me.

as i said in a previous post the dept. of labor is offering assistance to illegals who think they are getting shortchanged for their work. if this happens all employees will be getting equal pay. that would remove the incentive for employers to hire illegals, since you would have to pay them the same.

follow the money. how true is that. from both sides. what is unarguable is the impact that illegals have on a states resources. heallth care being the most glaring one imo. additionally mexico would prefer that nothing is done to prevent the flow of illegals. especially since the illegals are what is keeping mexico afloat by sending wages back to their families. i have read somewhere that in many mexican villages the only men there are either very old or very young.

on another money note. i find it hilarious that los angeles has decided to boycott arizona. except for their speed cameras. the contract for the speed cameras is with an arizona company. now, since these cameras generate 6 million in revenue, apparently l.a. doesn't want to lose out on that revenue stream. hypocritical to say the least. i'll never spend another dime in l.a.

but back to the original topic of this thread. is it really alright for americans to be told that they can't travel in certain parts of the south due to fears of their safety from illegal traffic coming across the border. everyday you hear more stories. i don't think things are getting better when cartels are telling law enforcement in nogales to just look the other way when they see drug smugglers or fear for their lives. or when you read reports of heavily armed coyotes having lookouts posted throughout the desert watching for law enforcement.

every other country in the world takes border security seriously. but not the u.s. i'm not saying we have to have the same penalties for crossing illegally that some countries have, but i am saying that we cannot allow our borders to be unsecured. and it's not just the illegal mexicans crossing the border that i am concerned with. plenty of OTM's (other than mexicans) are crossing the border too.

[nelsonccc]

On a serious note I have a couple questions, or thoughts to add to this thread
1. We have no problem destroying our planet by using the most polluting energy sources rather than alternative ones. We(Americans) have the same mindset when it comes to fruits and vegetables, our housing, hotels, etc. All of these products require a cheap source of labor, without migrant workers, often illegal, prices of those same products will drastically increase. If we deport everyone, which seems to be the desire of many on this thread, are you willing to pay for it? Its obvious we wont pay for a better planet, will we for an illegal immigrant free country?

Ill add some more later!


There are a lot of misbeliefs when it comes to the cost of cheap labor. I recently read a book that says that the cost increse from $3 an hour labor to $8 an hour labor would reslut in a 6% increase in produce. This equates to about $16 a year for the average american family grocery bill. The same book shows that 70% of the restaraunt labor in LA is suspected to be illegal. IF they were all gone and replaced with minimum wage labor than the average $100 dinner bill would be $106. The fact is its all bullshit. There would not be an economic explosion. America would adapt. The illegals aren't taking jobs americans won't do, they're taking jobs that americans used to do!

In any case, the cost to consumers is far greater to support illegal aliens than it would be to pay higher labor costs. One hospital in southern california (which is now closed) showed a 19 million dollar expense to treat undocumented persons in one year.

[ratagonia]

That's not what I'm saying at all about Arizona. My post said, "Arizona has a problem."

Look at the big picture: Arizona is in an extremely defensive position because the law they passed is clearly racist and ineffective. As a result they've lost millions because of boycotts from around the country, including cities like L.A. and Denver. Like any business that's losing income, they're trying to mitigate the damage. Arizona is in a position of creating good publicity for themselves to stop the bleeding. You don't believe politicians would put spin on stories, or take advantage of a negative thing, blow it out of proportion in order to get their agenda through?

The law they passed to fix this problem makes no sense. How is the police asking random people for papers (remember, they're not supposed to profile) going to help the problem of hundreds of people a day illegally crossing the border? How does that law address the crime at the border? The drugs, the people smuggling?

The law doesn't work to solve the problem they really have, which is border security. All the law does is address, possibly, at its best, a few of the people who already made it over.

I'm also saying that faux news is used by politicians to further an agenda. FOX news is licensed as "entertainment" instead of "news." This is because they lie. They've admitted under oath that they lie. They've been sued for lying. But they won, because their licensing agreement doesn't require them to tell the truth.

Nor did I say that MSNBC is the true arbiter of news. I commented about FOX, not MSNBC.

Nor did I say they should throw the doors open and let them all in. Like a lot of people who are whipped up into a frenzied anger, you're throwing a lot of words in others' mouths and attaching a lot of suppositions about others' positions in order to defend your own. But that's the point, right? That's the purpose of articles like this. To make you afraid and pissed so politicians who are spinning stories will have an agreeable audience to back their position.

I was reacting sarcastically to the politicization of truly horrible crimes in order to further an agenda. You don't think people have lost their lives in other border areas? Why hasn't Texas passed a similar law? Border agents, smugglers, illegal crossers and home owners lose their lives there, too. So, why? Why do we hear about it in Arizona and not Texas? It's because AZ is trying to rehab their image. And like any good GOP child, the politicians involved are using fear in order to do so.

Arizona needs border security! They need effective, strong, capable and numerous border security agents. They need better equipment, people and training. Why America doesn't secure its borders is beyond me. It's said that we don't want "militarized" borders but I disagree...it's looking like we NEED militarized borders.

Wouldn't you agree that the best answer would be rationally solving the problem at its source, instead of reacting out of fear and anger?

:2thumbs:

Tom