Comparing Arizona Security to Airport Security

Open border advocates, amnesty promoters, and liberals of all sorts, including our America-slamming President are expressing outrage at Arizona’s new immigration law.  They are complaining that Arizona has decided to be effective in doing the job the Federal Government refuses to do: Enforcing immigration laws.  They charge that the law promotes “racial profiling”.  It doesn’t.  They charge that a state immigration law is not the purview of the states but is the responsibility of the federal government.  The federal government refuse to do its job.  They charge that the a state law that allows asking for evidence of citizenship such as showing a green card is somehow akin to Nazism.  Why are green cards issued if they are not required to be shown?  As an aside, check out how Mexico treats illegal aliens.

Oh, and it just happens that 99% of illegal immigrants in Arizona are Mexican, but we should not profile Mexicans.

Let’s now turn to our airport security screening.  Not only do the screeners ask for several forms of identification from EVERYONE passing through the gates, but they subject EVERYONE to wanding, body searches, shoe searches, and carry-on baggage searches.  They are screening EVERYONE.  And somehow that is OK, despite the fact that 99% of all terrorists, and the only ones who have threatened the safety of aircraft in the last 20 years are Muslim men from the middle east between the ages of 18 and 35.  But we shouldn’t profile Muslim men from the middle east between the ages of 18 and 35.

Holy crap!

I’m beginning to see some parallels here.  In both Arizona and in airports, there is a dire concern about the safety of people in both places due to specifically identified groups of people.  In both Arizona and in airports there is a clear profile identified of who is breaking the law and threatens lives.  In Arizona, it is Mexicans who have entered the country illegally.  In airports, it is Muslim men from the middle east between the ages of 18 to 35.  In neither instance is it acceptable to profile for the known characteristics of the people known to be a threat.

In Arizona, they merely want to identify individuals that do not have the legal right to be in their state.   So logically, they may focus on people who look Mexican, subject to demonstrable “probable cause.”   At airports, they are not even focusing on Muslim men from the middle east between the ages of 18 to 35.   They are screening ALL OF US.  Is this the same insanity the open borders and amnesty advocates want in Arizona:  Screen everyone, even though 80% are not Mexican while 99% of the illegals ARE Mexican?

We all carry identification that we have to show someone most every day.  I am asked to show ID when I charge something or if pulled over for an alleged traffic offense, whether I believe I committed an offense or not.  We don’t get offended and outraged when asked to show ID.  Why should we be offended when a state is trying to defend itself from a huge influx of illegal aliens and criminals?

None of this makes sense.  When something doesn’t make sense, there is usually a reason that we are not yet aware of.  Why doesn’t this make sense?  Does the federal government have a different agenda from most Americans?  Most Americans want safe communities.  Most Americans want to curb drug traffic and associated violence.  Most Americans want our laws to be enforced.  Most Americans don’t want to have to pay taxes for services (schools, welfare, hospitalization) for illegal aliens – tax evaders, law breakers and criminals.  Most Americans don’t want illegal aliens taking jobs of legal citizens, especially when we have a 10% unemployment rate.

What does the Federal government want?  What is their agenda? In both the Arizona illegal immigrant scenario and the airport security scenario, the Federal government seeks social justice as they define it.  They define social justice not merely in terms of  equal rights for all US citizens.  In fact, and this sounds bazaar but I believe the track record indicates this is true, they define “social justice” as giving preferential treatment to non-citizens, law breakers, and US haters at the expense of the rights of US citizens.  This sounds so bazaar that there has to be another motive behind it.  I’ve heard some suggest the motive is power – future votes - votes from a burgeoning Mexican population and potentially burgeoning Muslim population in the US.  Beyond this motive, there may be this Pollyannaesque ideal that the so-called “oppressed” and “downtrodden”, whether an illegal Mexican alien or a Sharia-inspired Muslim, should be given the welcome mat and special favors, similar to the civil rights-inspired “affirmative action” the federal government enforced since the 70’s.

The federal governments direction in all this is so out of control.  Affirmative action has outlived the demographics of race and inequality.  And now we see the federal government exercising a “stealth affirmative action” favoring illegal aliens and Muslims.  This federal behavior is promoting an exceedingly hostile “middle America.”  Things are likely to turn ugly.

To paraphrase Obama, who vowed to stand with the Muslim immigrants if the political winds shift in an ugly direction, “I will stand with them – the average middle class Americans should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.”

Mexicans and America’s Future

I had an enlightening experience this past month that verified a growing perception I have about America’s future.

We had some landscaping projects to do in our yard.  The first portion was done by a couple of guys employed by a reputable landscape company.  One was a 20-something white fellow, and the other appeared to be a 40ish white Barney Fife type.  The younger did 90% of the work, but needed a lot of coaching from yours truly, the property owner, to do the job correctly.  Even at that, the workmanship was sloppy.  The Barney Fife guy just stood around watching.  While the work was being done, I half jokingly asked the younger guy what his assistant was supposed to be doing, and he replied that he doesn’t do anything.

So I tried a second reputable firm to do the next set of landscaping tasks since the first one was unimpressive.  They sent over a team of Mexicans.  I must say, every one of them worked hard 100% of the time, they knew what they were doing without coaching, and they had a good time between themselves while they were doing it – they enjoyed their work.

Granted this is just one instance.  But it may be a representative microcosm of the difference between us “native” Americans who take their work for granted and those who are relative newcomers trying to make a go.

In fact, it may be this “new blood”, whether Mexican, or Honduran, or Guatemalan, or Vietnamese, that represents the future vitality of America.  There may be something to the perception that these newly Americans do the work that complacent Americans won’t do – and they do it better in some instances. These folks might very well represent a future hope and strength of our nation.

Note: There is no justification for praising the idea of “illegal aliens doing the work Americans won’t do.”  I was assured by the supervisor of the Mexican team that they have been “in country” for several years and the firm feels strongly about hiring only bona fide US citizens.

Geraldo Rivera In Fantasy Land

Geraldo Rivera displayed a fantasy understanding when he proclaimed the cause of the defeat of the Amnesty Legislation to be racial fear and prejudice. His claim exudes a gross ingorance of the real reasons for the justifiable concern and outrage of the American people toward the the defeated legislation. Geraldo is out of touch, just as the President and many legislators are.

Speaking for myself, and I believe millions share these views, my reasons for opposition include:

• Anger with the federal government for ignoring enforcement of our existing laws. This entire problem brings to light how little the feds care about the laws that are created to protect the economy, character, and stability of this nation.
• The feds pretending to take meaningful enforcment measures which end up being token gestures
• Righteous indignation that my grandparents had to obey the laws of the land to gain citizenship and the 12 to 18 million who are here ILLEGALLY don't - and many of our elected officials vehmently argued to reward them for their purposeful lawbreaking!
• Lack of desire on the part of many or most illegals to assimilate.
• Granting billions of dollars in government services to illegal, law-breaking non-citizens when many Americans are stuggling with taxes, health care, education.
• We don't buy the "no Americans will do the work" red herring. The clear motive of business is to reduce labor costs at the expense of American citizens.
• Increasing crime rates generated by the illegals out of proportion to that of the native population.
• A second language being forced upon virtually every business and institution in the nation.
• The lack of concern about national security at our borders.

A legitimate concern which is dwarfed by the concerns described above is the overrrunning of our population by one race and one language group which has never before occurred in this nation's history, and which will create disruption and change in the social fabric of this nation much more quickly than most people can tolerate without a sense of being invaded. But to suggest this is the major issue is ludicrous and demonstrates Geraldo's ignorance of all the other issues.

The capper was his statement on Brian and the Judge radio show on June 29 when he named Michelle Malkin among the racist Americans who want to keep the nation from getting darker. What kind of dumb remark was THAT! She's already darker than average!