Thread: Hazing Arizona; an editorial in the NY Post

Hazing Arizona

Last Updated: 3:04 AM, May 17, 2010

Posted: May 17, 2010
Comments: 21
| More Print

It's easy for New York politicians to pronounce against Arizona's new illegal-alien law. They're 2,000 miles away from the socially corrosive consequences of a failed economy -- and a raging, narcotics-fueled border war that has already claimed some 23,000 lives.

But just imagine how sanguine they'd be if a half-million poverty-wracked economic refugees flooded the city from Canada -- or, maybe more to the point, from New Jersey.

And if the federal government refused to enforce existing immigration laws.

Not very, we imagine.

So they blithely call for anti-Arizona boycotts and divestment. And ugly allusions to South African apartheid roll from their lips.
John Liu
Bloomberg
John Liu

City Council members, for starters, introduced a resolution urging New Yorkers to shun Arizona and its businesses.

City Comptroller John Liu is exploring ways to cut the city's financial ties to the beleaguered state.

Sen. Chuck Schumer has asked Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer to delay the law until a federal cure-all bill, like one he's introduced, is passed. (Fat chance.)

Arizona's SB 1070 aims to "discourage and deter the unlawful entry and pres- ence of [illegal immigrants] and economic activity by persons unlawfully present in the United States."

It lays out a number of measures to that end, but among the most controversial: It lets cops ask for immigration documents from suspected aliens -- although only after they've been stopped for other reasons. Like traffic offenses.

In that respect, it mirrors federal laws long on the books -- especially Title 8, Section 1304 of US Code, which requires aliens to carry and produce proper papers "at all times." Draconian, huh?

Had Washington been enforcing its own laws and controlling the border, individual states like Arizona might not feel compelled to protect themselves.

Instead, Attorney General Eric Holder bashed Arizona, threatening a lawsuit. (Later, amazingly, he admitted he hadn't actually read SB 1070.)

Yet a Pew poll found that 59 percent of Americans back the law -- and some 73 percent are OK specifically with having cops ask for immigration documents.

They get it.

If New York's pols did, they'd push for a meaningful federal fix.

But don't expect that: After all, it might deprive them of their grandstand.

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/ed ... K#comments#ixzz0oCkuZUuj

Posted to the comment section:

Ratbstard

05/17/2010 12:21 PM

"But just imagine how sanguine they'd be if a half-million poverty-wracked economic refugees flooded the city from Canada -- or, maybe more to the point, from New Jersey."

This is a joke, right? NYC has IAs entering from every part of the globe. It is admitted that 500,000 already reside in NYC and that means the actual number is probably much, much higher.

As I see it ALL the AZ law does is make it ILLEGAL for any government agency in their state to practice any "Sanctuary Policies." This should have been done nationwide way back in 1988 when then Mayor Koch proudly declared NYC a "Sanctuary" from enforcement of the 1986 IRCA enforcement laws. Ask yourself why any city or state needed to declare sanctuary. The answer is they ALWAYS had the RIGHT to enforce the 86 IRCA laws. Sen Shmuck Schumer had a big part in the 86 IRCA laws and now he wants to sneak another Amnesty by us? SCREW HIM and all the IA hugging loudmouth groups out there!

I can only wish that every state in the union follows AZ's lead!

Sheesh! I wanted to thank this guy for putting a little sanity out there but after attempting registration and log-in multiple times the NYPost is having no business with me.

We need to support our journalists who are attempting to present fairness and accuracy non-biased.