Republicans "all in" against Hispanics

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-24-2010
Republicans "all in" against Hispanics
145
Wed, 04-28-2010 - 9:47pm

Palin and the radical Republicans are "all in" against hispanics in supporting the Arizona immigration law.

This is the same law that says Mexican looking people can be pulled over based on a new unconstitutional standard of "reasonable" suspicion. It goes even further and says that citizen activists can sue law enforcement officials for not pulling people over based on this unconstitutional standard.

There is a reason that at least one prominent Arizona sheriff say he will not enforce this law. There is a reason that former Republican Homeland Security Chief Tom Ridge is not comfortable with the law.

There is a reason even Republican svengali Karl Rove is having second thoughts. Karl knows hispanic voters he spent years pandering to are rightfully going to say thanks but no thanks to Republicans over this.

Karl also knows that independent voters will have serious doubts about Republicans over this, and that the measure will drive Democrats to the polls to enable reform.

This hateful unconstitutional law that Palin and the Republicans have gotten behind will have a just effect on their ability to convince people to vote for them this fall.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-07-2009
Wed, 04-28-2010 - 10:02pm
Again the libs sow the seeds for devision over racism.
iVillage Member
Registered: 01-24-2010
Wed, 04-28-2010 - 10:13pm

Now you say "libs hate white ranchers"?

You and Palin are peas in a pod:

"“There is no ability or opportunity in there for the racial profiling,” said. “Shame on the lame stream media again for turning this into something that it is not.”

Palin then blamed the president for allowing the “myth” that the law allows racial profiling to take hold.

“It's shameful, too, that the Obama administration has allowed...this to become more of a racial issue by perpetuating this myth that racial profiling is a part of this law,” she said."

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0410/36467.html#ixzz0mS24QD5K

Your position is clear. The voters will decide.

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-07-2009
Wed, 04-28-2010 - 10:20pm

Yes the voters will, you are on the wrong side of the issue, perhaps member of a special interest group?

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-30-2009
Wed, 04-28-2010 - 10:46pm

"This is the same law that says Mexican looking people can be pulled over based on a new unconstitutional standard of "reasonable" suspicion. It goes even further and says that citizen activists can sue law enforcement officials for not pulling people over based on this unconstitutional standard."


Posted the text of that law in another thread, here's the link again. Please point out in the actual text what backs up your hysterical claim.


TIA!

discussion title:AZ Illegal-Immigrant Law Draws Strong /m


emoticon:message #:

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-14-2010
Wed, 04-28-2010 - 10:51pm

For a party that's happy to abuse "Well Regulated" into meaning an all-out ban, I fail t see your concern over the use of the term "reasonable suspicion".

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-07-2009
Wed, 04-28-2010 - 10:56pm
I am going to say this forever
iVillage Member
Registered: 02-14-2010
Wed, 04-28-2010 - 11:04pm

Have you ever heard of the term "Driving while black?"


What is the solution to that problem? Do away with traffic laws claiming they were unconstitutional or do away with racial profiling?


Obviously liberals really don't care about fixing the illegal immigration problem, otherwise their focus would be on helpig the cops enforce the laws within the confines of the constitution. But as we can see they have no interest in making sure the law is applied constitutionally, they just want the law done away with.


Liberals want his law shot down because they want the illegals here.


iVillage Member
Registered: 09-07-2009
Wed, 04-28-2010 - 11:06pm
it is more votes it is not dealing with the problem
iVillage Member
Registered: 02-14-2010
Wed, 04-28-2010 - 11:28pm
You're entirely correct. They are also required to have a sponsor in the US to take care of them financially if they become incapable of doing it themselves. Liberals love to ingore that law too.
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-30-2009
Wed, 04-28-2010 - 11:51pm
Anecdote, but still....on one of my travels to the US, I landed/entered in St.Louis.

I went through customs.

"Welcome to the US ma'am, do you have anything to declare?"...

"Thank you kindly sir, and no nothing to declare." (thinking diamonds and stuff).

They checked my papers/passport (I passed), my travelplans (I passed), my sponsor (Ipassed).....and then they turned my hand-luggage inside-out.....

Pages