Have you ever been at a game with a buddy when, all of a sudden, he just goes nuts and starts screaming at a ballplayer or a referee or maybe even another fan?
I’m not talking Julia Roberts doing the Arsenio Hall “whoop, whoop” at a polo match in Pretty Woman, but rather somebody you know (and wish you didn’t at that particular moment) screaming at the top of his lungs, veins popping in his neck, profanity flying.
Multiply that mortification several times over, and that’s the feeling I get when people who are on the same side of a political argument as I am start engaging in hyperbole-on-steroids when trying to make a point.
If I’m on the right side of an issue, I should be able to state and defend my position through rational public discourse. But that’s probably unrealistic these days. Many in my generation grew up screaming at the top of their lungs.
Add to that the fact that SB 1070 is not a disagreement over a temporary sales-tax increase, but rather a matter that could have a devastating impact on some people’s lives. Then there’s the fact that the range of opinions on this issue run the gamut from those who think there should be no national borders whatsoever to those who believe that the definition and defense of said borders is vital to the very identity and survival of a nation.
I am not a fan of SB 1070. On a personal level, I would rather that my (Hispanic) wife and kids not be subjected to any harassment. My wife looks quite Hispanic, and my daughter has relatively dark skin. (For some reason—darn those genetics!—my son, who is equally Hispanic and bilingual, is whiter than those sheets that Robert Byrd used to wear back when he was in that Southern social klub.)
As a citizen, I think SB 1070 is mean-spirited and counterproductive. If I could sincerely believe that the state Legislature passed it in an effort to spur the foot-dragging federal government into action regarding illegal immigration, that would be one thing. But, in actuality, Arizona’s “lawmakers” have been too busy—doing things like conducting a vendetta against public-school teachers and seeing to it that terrorists can buy weapons at gun shows without getting bogged down in paperwork—to ever put in any heavy thinking.
At the same time, some of the people who are protesting the law are driving me nuts. First off, what’s with the use of “racist”? Mexicans, let alone Mexican Americans, are not a separate race. Say it with me: They’re not. Claiming that they are is scientifically incorrect and intellectually dishonest. To be sure, using the term “racist” is a powerful weapon; it can immediately knock the person at whom it’s leveled back on his heels. But it’s also wrong, and its use in this case dilutes its effectiveness when it is being used correctly.
Furthermore, does anyone truly believe that the two-thirds of all Arizonans who express support for the law are all bigots? How is that even possible? We’re supposed to believe that 30 percent of Arizona is Hispanic, and everybody else is a non-Hispanic bigot? That doesn’t make a lot of sense. Polls also show that half of all Americans support the law. Instead of shouting “Racist!” at 150 million people, perhaps we opponents of SB 1070 should take a step back and try to understand why that number is so high.
Professional blowhard Rush Limbaugh has always said that a great way to win a political argument before it even gets started is to establish the terminology that is going to be used. Such is the case here, but the attempts seem ham-fisted and largely embarrassing.
For example, if a cop pulls you over and asks for your driver’s license and registration, you’re not going to give it a second thought. But if he were to ask for “your papers,” all of a sudden, he might as well be wearing a black leather trench coat and a monocle. Here in America, people get asked for their ID, not their papers. That “papers” thing is a stroke of genius.
Then, all of these news outlets keep referring to SB 1070 as an “anti-immigrant law.” Is it really? My parents and grandparents all came through Ellis Island. Were they alive, would they be threatened by SB 1070? In the interest of common sense and fairness, isn’t it more correctly an anti-illegal-immigrant law? I don’t like the law, but when my fellow protesters start lying about things, it weakens their arguments (and mine, by association).
Which brings me to MSNBC, the cable network that is now as equally unwatchable as Fox News (although I still watch both of them with shocking regularity). MSNBC recently had this headline: “Law Makes It a Crime to be Illegal Immigrant.”
It’s as though it had been written in crayon.
This article appears in May 20-26, 2010.
First of all you are wrong about the term racist. It is white people who created the term Hispanic, and it is white people that have treated chicanos/latinos/mexicans as a seperate race from the inception of this country. I do not identify as white nor do I identify as native american, I identify myself as chicano or mestizo. I would never be mistaken for white therefore I could never be called a part of the white race. If you really want to be scientific about this then you would say there are no races, not just not a Mexican race, however racism does exist just the same. The Census is a perfect example of this as there were Guamanian, Samoan and Hawaiian races, and several other small islands races, however Mexicans were not included, thus I chose other and wrote in mestizo. The fact that islands with less than 1 million people could somehow be there own “race” but Mexicans with hundreds of millions of people throughout the Americas could not is, in fact, racist.
The people that support this law are not all racist. However the people that wrote the law ARE! Russell Pearce has ties to neo-nazi and other hate groups all over this state and country. He even let that slip in 2006 when he forwarded a hate group email to his supporters then tried to cover up. Kris Kobach, the Immigration Reform Law Institute (IRLI) affiliated attorney who wrote the law and is running for Sec. of State in Kansas is a racist. IRLI is the legal arm of Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), which was labeled as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center a few years ago. FAIR’s founder John Tanton has many ties to hate groups and has written many articles for hate publications over the past 25 years. If that does not make someone a racist I don’t know what does. And white people, like Beck, O’Reilly, Dobbs, and Horne use the term racist far more than any minorities do nowadays. According to Beck Obama is racist. Remember that a majority of people in this country supported the Jim Crow laws, and were against the Civil Rights Acts of 1964, 1965, and 1968.
I ask you if Mexicans are a part of the white race, how were 1 million U.S. citizens deported during the 1920s and 1930s in reaction to the Mexican Revolution and the Great Depression? If Mexicans were white how was Operation Wetback allowed to go into affect in the 1950s to deport the immigrant workers that were brought in during the Bracero Program? The fact is we call it racism because we have always been considered a different race by white people.
You’re also wrong about the use of “anti-immigrant” terminology, because this all is anti-immigrant. The majority of the 10 million undocumented immigrants living in this country came through legal channels and simply overstayed their visas. The very fact that we call immigrants aliens or illegals is incorrect and offensive terminology. Alien is used to make it seem like these people are from out of this world. Illegal is also mis-used, a person cannot be illegal, their actions are illegal, but they themselves are not illegal.
This law was not foisted on us by this state, it is part of a national effort by the repuglican party to demonize all immigrants for all of our society’s ills. They won’t even allow for it to come up for a vote in the Senate, what kind of a democracy is this?
I’m also tired of white people calling out minorities for using the word racist. When something is racist, as sb 1070 and hb 2281 are, it deserves to be called out. You will never be mistaken for an immigrant and therefore you cannot even be empathetic with the situation chicanos/latinos/mexicanos are facing in this state. Have you ever been pulled over for being brown? Ever been the first one questioned at a gathering of people? Ever been pulled out of your car, handcuffed, or followed for no reason? Ever been asked if you have contraband in your car at a routine traffic stop? My guess is no.
Open your eyes and realize that we’re calling out racism. If the people coming across the border were pale-skinned, blond-haired, and blue-eyed, there would be none of these laws, we wouldn’t be having this discussion. This is not about safety or security, it is about blatant racism and the white people in this state and country fearing their loss of political power. This is the last power grab of a dying system. We will turn Arizona into what California has become since the passage of prop 187 there in 1994.
And MSNBC is not a liberal faux news. They have Pat Buchanon and Joe Scaraborough and several other conservatives on their network. Where are their equivalents at faux news? They do not call themselves fair and balanced at every turn when they are being blatantly partisan. They do not fail to tell their audience that a commentator has a personal or monetary stake in an issue and try to play them off as being an objective observer. They also call out Obama on several issues and decision he makes, whereas faux never did so against George Bush. You have much homework to do. Just read the signs or hear out the obscene chants of the counter-protestors at all of these rallies, they are clearly ignorant, bigoted, xenophobic, and racist!
Tom
Perhaps “racist” isn’t precisely the right word, but contextually, the bigotry of SB 1070 can be described as racist. Are native peoples racially distinct from anglos? Well, ultimately no, in that all “races” can be traced back to African ancestry, and if you were saying that so-called race is a social construct, I would agree with you to a certain extent.
But I think it is well understood that “racism” and “bigotry” can be sometimes used interchangeably, and I suggest this is one of those instances. Hatred doesn’t have to be directed at a distinctly different “race” as it’s commonly understood to be bigoted. And your anecdote about your son notwithstanding, you can’t deny that people with certain characteristics of skin color, face, and hair will be subjected to scrutiny under this law in a way that utter honkies like you and I will not be. So what is your point about whether it’s racist?
Furthermore, if you doubt that there was a racist agenda on the minds of the people behind the bill, I’ll let Rachel Maddow set you straight. If that’s not stone cold racism, I’m not really sure what is.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ilKUxWbGQj4…
To Romero1984:
All I have to say to you sir is “Wow,” “Bravo,” and %$^&@ Yes!” Your facts, figures, and contextual understanding of SB1070 are matched only by your authentic, articulate ability at presenting them.
To Mr. Danehy:
I only hope that your severe drubbing by Mr. Romero doesn’t leave your over inflated ego so badly damaged that you’ll find yourself unable to say the words: “I’m sorry,” “I’m an idiot,” and “I don’t know what in hell I’m talking about.”
What is more than apparent sir is that you know even less about the mortifying ramifications of this “racist” bill than you do the history of Pancho Villa.
B.Eliot Minor,
Harlem, NY
Don Romero1984,
Perfecto! Your response is excellent. While Mr. Danehy writes very readable English, sadly in this case, he is so far off base, the ball went outside the park behind home plate. Foul ball!
On Wednesday, March 12th, I walked with between 200 and 300 people on the Oregon State University campus in protest of SB1070 and SB2281. We started at the César Chavez Center and marched to a mall, where students acted out a traffic stop involving enforcement of SB1070 and two professors spoke about the two new Anglozona laws. One of the profs has only been in Oregon for nine months. He taught high school in Tucson before moving up here.
The Anglozona politicians running the show in what was my home state until Dec 2009, took away every shred of homesickness. I lived in Tucson for just over 50 years and went through several months of wishing I still did. No more! Oregon is my new home state, where I think there are enough caring people to prevent an SB1070 and an SB2281 from becoming law.
Since Tucson and Flagstaff apparently are suing the State of Anglozona, maybe there should be a geographic division into three parts? The area around Flagstaff could become Alta Arizona; Southern Arizona around Tucson might be called Baja Arizona; and the surrounding of the state legislature in Phoenix should be named Caca Arizona.
Maybe I should have written that last paragraph in crayon?
Boycott Arizona!
Ooppps! The date in my comment should have been May 12th. Sorry.
Gee folks, how many of you know that California has a law on its books that essentially says the same thing as SB 1070? The statute is ‘California Penal Code 834b’ and has been a law for years. Shouldn’t the people protesting SB 1070 be protesting the fact that California law enforcement personnel can ask for the very same identification as SB 1070 covers under CPC 834b?
Do you now boycott California?
Seriously? You guys didn’t really read Romero’s rambling, did you?
Danehy made a simple point: “Mexican” is not a race, it’s a nationality. “Hispanic” or “latino” may well be races. (Many) Mexicans are one flavor of hispanic/latino, just as a white frenchman is one flavor of “white”; under Romero1984’s paradigm, hating on the French is racism against whites. It’s as silly as saying “the Canadian race”.
Yes, scientifically races don’t exist, blah blah – but just like Jesus, actual existence does not preclude social construction, and so for all intents and purposes, races do exist, and are based on simple observations. Right or wrong, that’s how it is. The human brain loves to create simple categories based on appearance. An “us”/”not us” test that was probably pretty useful at some point in our evolutionary history, even if it provides the framework for the present silliness.
Romero1984: “You’re also wrong about the use of “anti-immigrant” terminology…The majority of the 10 million undocumented immigrants…came through legal channels and simply overstayed their visas.”
So? It’s illegal to overstay your visa, and thus their presence in the country is an illegal activity. If they have to intent to leave, they are immigrants: this makes them people who have immigrated via an illegal act (overstaying), also known as an “illegal immigrant”. Shortening it to “illegal” is only a matter of convenience, though I concede that “alien” is and ugly, dehumanizing word.
ALSO: Ricardo: Do you do PR work the state of Oregon? By my count, you have only once posted a comment that did not mention the superiority of your new home (and the fact that you live in said new home). Don’t get me wrong, I agree with your assessment of Oregon’s badassedness. Just curious.
Illegal is ILLEGAL! If you overstayed your visa, ILLEGAL! If you came to shop but decided to stay, ILLEGAL. If you crossed the desert via foot, car, train, plane, bus, horse, camel, dog-sled and did so without documentation, ILLEGAL. Spin it all you want, ILLEGAL is ILLEGAL! Romero1984, what a racist remark.
Read the bill Tom. It just enforces a law already on the Federal books. California already has a law just like it.
I would like to hear a better idea from all the critics of SB1070. I think the real problem is the hidden agenda they have.
I agree not all who support 1070 are bigots but it would be difficult to convince me that Russell Pierce and company in Phoenix are NOT running a campaign against people of brown skin. How else can you explain the passage of the ethnic studies law. Tom, don’t go Webster’s on me with the term “racist.” The current connotation of the term includes discrimination of cultures and ethnic groups. When a majority enacts laws and policy against a specific segment of the population, identified in this case by the color of their skin, it’s can be and should be called racism. I’m not worried about being stopped and asked for papers as I am an educated and fairly affluent, native born Mexican-American. I slip effortlessly back and forth between both cultures but what about my parents and grandparents, who were also born in this country. Their English is not that great, they dress a little different, and my grandmother doesn’t drive. According to the law she’s going to have to carry a birth certificate or get a state ID to ensure that she’s not harassed or arrested. Look at your wife’s family. Some of them will not pass the eye test regardless of where they were born. Brown people, legal and illegal, are scared and I’m disappointed that you and other non-bigot supporters of 1070 can’t see the big picture. Immigration is an important and pressing issue but this law subjects all brown people to a very subjective eye test, possibly from some yahoo with an agenda.
Although you are largely correct, Mr. Danehy, it is your intent that puzzles me. Exactly where did you intend to position yourself vis a vis a law that you admit was written and passed to make life miserable for people with brown skin? I find it hard to believe that you think the authors of the bill had intentions that were fair and unbiased by bigotry. And if you admit that the bill was intended to make life difficult for people who have darker skin, the question again arises about why you positioned yourself the way you have in your comments? And I’m not shouting, just asking what you hoped to accomplish?
The “Arizona Capitol Times” recently published an investigation looking into possible effects of SB1070. What it found was interesting and certainly useful for those that argue against the law but wish to avoid the racism angle against proponents of the law (which only stifles debate).
With SB1070 becoming law in August, it stands to reason that the number of arrested immigrants will increase. The investigative piece points out that overlooked by SB1070 supporters is the “catch-and-release” policy of current federal immigration law, where ICE releases immigrants back into the population to await deportation hearings, while being allowed to work. Many of these individuals are granted permanent residency and can apply for a “cancellation of removal”.
Essentially, Republicans in this state have inadvertently created a guest-worker program that allows immigrants they wish to see deported remain in the country legally much longer with full legal protection under US law. Russell Pearce acknowledges that this will result in legal residency for a greater number of immigrants. He points out, however, that the law will cause most immigrants to leave the state willfully (which, truth be told, will simply not happen as long as the economic incentives that make illegal immigration to Arizona viable remain).
http://azcapitoltimes.com/blog/2010/05/17/…
The “papers” thing isn’t a stroke of genius– that’s what immigration documents are called among people who have to worry about such things. You don’t know that because no one has ever asked you if you have ‘papers.’ Because you’re white. Get it?
What is so controversial about SB 1070? In Texas we enforce that law, despite what our Republican governor, Ricky “Good Hair” Perry babbles. (Texas does a lot of business with Mexico so he $uck$ up to Mexico.) Being in this country illegally is a crime. We all have identification and we have to show that identification, that is what it is for. If you are a criminal, if you are here illegally, if you are a drug dealer or coyote, you will be arrested. The anti SB 1070 folks are pro crime.
It looks as though it is up to the states to secure our borders. Do you think Step and Fetch It Obama, busily doing the bidding of his corporate masters, is going to do anything to secure the borders to stop crime? Crime sweeping Mexico will spread more and more into US. Obama promised a lot, change we could believe it. His lies were all rhetoric, just theatre. And to quote the annoying Sarah Palin, “How is that working out for you folks?” She would not do any better.
I wish Governor Brewer and Arizona success enforcing the law. It appears to be all up to the states and the task looks formidable.
Stand your ground on SB 1070.
Your forebears came through Ellis Island because there was an Ellis Island. Pro-immigrant immigration policies allowed people from all over the world to become American legally.
Those days are gone, it is easier to become a UK or EU resident legal resident, and in time citizen, than a US resident and citizen. I should know, I am a legal resident of the UK, can become an EU resident if I so chose. I’ve been in the US for 12 years now, legally. Working hard, paying taxes. The avenues open for me to become a resident (citizenship would have to wait 10-15 years after that) are: marry an American citizen, or prove that I am the most outstanding person in my field. Thankfully, I can do the latter.
Ask yourself, could your ancestors have come to America legally? Would they still have fled the guetto/pogrom/grinding poverty etc. for America even if those two options were the only way to legally migrate?
TX, W Corvi, Bob, No Guey, Unbug, and Bilbur, did you read what I wrote? I didn’t make any racist remarks, I pointed out facts to you. Apparently you do not know how to comprehend facts, especially those that disagree with your point of view. The fact that the majority of undocumented immigrants came through legal channels and overstayed their visas means this law will do NOTHING to stop all of them from coming in the first place. Overstaying your visa or crossing the border through the desert is a violation of CIVIL law, not CRIMINAL law! Do you understand the difference? Thus someone is not a criminal when they violate civil law. I ask how many of your ancestors came here legally?
You do not understand the history of this country, this region, or our government’s historically racist policies towards all chicanos/latino/mexicanos. Like I said before, if the people coming across were white, none of these laws would be passed, and none of you would be hiding behind your computers supporting these racist policies. In the late 1800s and early 1900s this country even had racist policies towards Europeans. The quota immigration system was slanted to except more northern and western European immigrants (because they are “whiter”) then southern and eastern European immigrants. In the 1880s this country passed its first racially biased laws, the Chinese Exclusionary Acts.
But none of this will mean anything to you because you do not understand facts anyway. Here’s one thing you can count on from me, I am going to counteract and call out every anti-latino/chicano law, policy, statement, and politician from now on. I will not be silent any longer and I will not see my state and my country where my family has lived for five generations turn into a fascist regime. SB 1070 is based on the presumption of guilt rather than the presumption of innoncence which turns the entire base of our legal system on its head. We are fast becoming a nation of despots and tyranny rather than a nation of laws. We torture our enemies, we deny rights to our own citizens, we create kangaroo courts and do not charge people with crimes and hold them indefinitely. We spy on our own citizens. The repuglican party wants to rule the world and keep all “minorities” in their place. They are on a runaway train towards fascism. Every single policy they create they try to justify by using or saying 9/11.
SB 1070 is a racist law, plain and simple. HB 2281 is a further example of this state legislature targeting latinos. Fascism starts by targeting a group of people and blaming them for all of our society’s ills. You cry about drugs, who demands and uses the drugs? You cry about violence, who manufactures, sells, and does not properly regulate the automatic weapons that are used to commit the violence? You cry about immigrants being a drain on our economy, they contribute $4.4 billion to the AZ economy every year, they pay $2.4 billion in taxes to AZ every year, they provide the labor for thousands of low wage jobs that Americans don’t do every year.
This is a country of immigrants and it always will be. “Send me your tired, your weak, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, those homeless, the tempest tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door.”
You guys don’t get it! SB1070 just mirrors federal law, so if you have a beef with it contact Obama! A country without laws that are enforced is called anarchy. Check out Mexico’s immigration laws and you’ll feel lucky to have SB1070!
For those of you who want anarchy, move to Mexico!
Answer this question, what will you do if our laws are not enforced and 5 million illegals come to AZ. looking a hand out? Don’t tell me it can’t happen, history says they’ll keep coming until we stop them!
Romero, Illegal aliens cost AZ. taxpayers 3 billion a year, that’s a fact. Who pays for their health care, food stamps, crime, etc? You made my point by saying, “send me your weak (those needing free health care), send these, your homeless (those needing free housing/welfare), etc! Look at California, illegals cost taxpayers an estimated 8-9 billion dollars a year in welfare, etc! Americans can’t afford other countries over population, poverty, and illiteracy!
First, to romero 1984, that was an excellent letter! What else would you call a mixture of Idigenous people, Native Indians, and European Invaders but a seperate race. This similar to the problem I have with a fellow co-worker. He can’t see that the Mexican people are dsitinct and sperate from all other Latinos.
My Tata was working in mines in Bisbee during the Copper Strike during the early part of the last century. He and his fellow miners only wanted to be paid an honest day’s wage. Along with the “Wobblies” he was put in a cattle car and deported to Mexico. That left my Nana to fend for herself and my future Father and his three sisters, one wich went on to serve as a WAVE in World War II . Luckily, he made it back and rejoined them. Why is is that no one ever speaks of that?
Unfortunatley, these two pieces of legislation will be a lasting legacy and black eye for Arizona.
To Ricardo Small, I liked your idea of splitting up the state into three different parts. The idea of a Baja Arizona has been around for awhile and I think its time for it to take place. Besides, what will the people of Anglozona do when the weeds begin to get out of hand in the traffic medians?
Xochi1
To Romero1984:
I don’t know who you are pal but this is a country that needs your voice more than ever. It has reached me here in New York and watered my spirit. Keep it up.
Cheers.
By Danehy’s logic, racism is *impossible,* as “scientifically” there is no basis whatsoever to classify any person as belonging to a different race.
But people place themselves and others within artificial categories, “races,” and thus people see “Mexican” as a “race.”
And let me get this straight: SB 1070 is “mean spirited,” and Tom thinks that it could lead to harassment of of his wife, based on her being “Hispanic” and with darker skin no less, but, no, no, nothing could “racist” about that!
Is this just some deal where Danehy needs to make sure no one thinks he’s a hippie?
I agree with SB1070 because all it does in reflect federal law. It is not a racist law but a well designed law. Mexico, on the other hand, has immigration laws that are racists and punitive. Perhaps, it would be better if we instituted the same laws here they have in Mexico.
When I lived in Mexico I knew I had better have my papers or I would find myself in jail quickly. As a güero Hispanic from north of the border I had to be very careful of the anti-American sentiment that existed. Mexicans are racist in and of themselves.
The law is about borders, security, and cross border crime. The law is about enforcement of existing law and not about choosing which law is to be enforced and which is not. I laugh when I am out and about as Hispanics talk about the whites and how racist they are while they don’t know that I understand them perfectly. La Raza is definitely a racist organization that, in my mind, is as much a terror organization as CAIR with their Marxist approach to cutting the opposition off at the knees.
Romero, I am a proud Hispanic who loves the EEUU as a naturalized citizen and who despises the Mexican government for their corruption and treatment of the people. The Mexican government encourages it’s citizens to break the law here because the EEUU is the safety valve for their corrupt society. I don’t want that corruption here!!!
Yet here you are yelling and sputtering about this racist country. BASTA YA!
The Tucson Weekly can now be counted as no better than much of the school system out there. By censoring (removing) my concise response to PATRiOTS, but allowing the vigilante talk of many of your readers to remain you have shown where you stand on the issue of censorship. Congratulations. You should be quite proud of yourselves!
If your comment was removed, I encourage you to peruse our comments policy, and consider civility when re-commenting. Take the high road, folks. And thanks for visiting TucsonWeekly.com!
While there was NOTHING in my response to PATRIOTS that could be construed as any more uncivil than that seen both in his hostile replies as well as others in agreement with SB1020, readers won’t be able to judge for themselves because you have made the decision for them in what constitutes an appropriate response to what I believe is an inappropriate bill. In your haste to exercise your authority over content you have sacrificed one point of view for the benefit of another. My response had no profanity, name calling, bigotry, racial slurs, or slander–and reflected only one perspective in response to another. As editors, you have written guidelines that allow for a wide flexibility in their application. As personalities however, you have demonstrated a gross bias in this flexibility–reflecting an incredibly shallow interpretation of what constitutes “appropriate.”
I was not responding to a movie or restaurant review I found disagreeable–but instead was taking an individual to task on an incredibly emotional and complicated issue involving people’s lives. Interpreting what constitutes a “high road” in this case has been given very narrow parameters by your staff and demonstrated more about you than it did about me.
Thanks for visiting TucsonWeekly.censorship!
jpriest: For the record, 1) We’ve removed comments both pro and con that violate our comment policy–including a comment from the very person you’re debating. 2) The Tucson Weekly and me, personally, are very against SB 1070 and have said so. 3) If you don’t like the rules–and name-calling is one of the things against the rules–feel free to comment elsewhere. If you were truly being “censored,” we’d have removed all of your comments and suspended your account. Thanks for reading!
JBoegle: For the record, it seems to me that you are “very against” SB1020 in much the same way Danehy is. That is to say, by limiting the breadth of this very important debate on your pages, you (and Danehy) have in essence narrowed the meaning of the debate itself to what YOU believe your readership to be comfortable with. And if that ain’t censorship–then the Tucson Weekly deserves a Pulitzer.
My apologies, SB1070.
A Pulitzer? Aw, shucks! We’ve won many hundreds of awards over the years, but we haven’t yet won a Pulitzer. I appreciate the motivation! That’s very sweet, jpriest.
Great and warm article and well written….BUT…..anyone reading who also doesn’t like this word “racist” being thrown around in this national discourse ….will finally know how the working immigrant undocumented mothers and fathers feel being mislabeled as criminal and illegal when 100% of their time is spent working and going about the business of taking care of their families and daily needs. As if getting them out would fix the state of Arizonas’ and our nations social and economic problems.
When all the latinos and hispanics are cut out of their race by the national census we just all participated in, cut away from the same by the kkk and aryans and supremists and hated and slandered by these bonefied racists along with with blacks and jews etc.
Cut out and targeted by SB 1070 and added and subtracted by Arizona Dept of Public Safetys’ crime report for the state ( see page 64, 2008) from the “whites”(their word not mine). Why did they cut this demographic out?
Then it is the slipperiest of slopes to get to this word racist from the discrimination shown.
When Joe Arpaio sites increases in violent crimes of murder,rape, robbery and drug dealings and then arrests working immigrant mothers at MacDonalds. Wasting his resources.
When Arizona ignores a greater issue of Az citizens driving drunk from sports bars,happy hours,dance clubs,sporting events,TV sports gatherings with friends, etc., not setting up every street with with roadchecks (lawful contact) which would net criminal citizens in far greater numbers than immigrant famlilies.And since the majority of citizens in Arizona are european descendants it would be an fitting endeavor to target them.
When Az citizens force the removal of traffic cam’s that expose ALL of them as other than the law abiding citizens they self righteously claim. What hypocrisy to focus the new laws on immigrants. What a enormous number these drivers are.
Show us the data that tells of ANY crime in Arizona that has this same time, effort and thinking put to it, as there is for SB 1070.
When we all don’t hear a peep from Arizona, ( compared to the 60 + % clamoring and supporting SB 1070) or anyone begging ( as is the need) of the state or nation to right the harm the mortgage derivitive schemers did to the nation,state, business owners,pensions, jobs, condo owners and homeowners by the thousands and (across the country) millions. Of all these there will be no recompense and the trillions of dollars lost DWARF the immigrant issue.
Same happened in 1994 to immigrants (prop 187 Calif )and stock derivitives. Before that, Lincoln Savings and Loan and immigrants..over and over again across the decades.
When the prejudiced european descendants use the hatefilled word “nigger” that harms ALL black people and use the equally hatefilled word ” beaner” to harm all brown, but there is no a such word in our english language that harms all the white race.
The majority of whites are not prejudiced but tell us of the 60 + % of SB 1070 supporters, how many are not.
Then with all this there might be some light shed. on the misuse of the word racist..
D J Sosa
Long Beach,Ca
Great article. I friend of mine just sent it to me (a year later) because the same hyperbole-on-steroids is now going on regarding the NO COMPROMISE stance on the Mexican American Studies issue. A reasoned discussion– amongst supporters– is not possible when their stance is based on hard-line hype. “You’re either with us or agin us” is the message; no other opinion, except full support, is valid. Everyone who has a different opinion– even if they basically agree the anti-MAS bill was disciminatory and that MAS content should be taught– is shouted down and labeled a racist. So much for free speech or civil discourse. 🙁