This Is Beautiful

A beautiful offer made to Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa by Arizona Corporation Commissioner Gary Pierce:

SNIP

a boycott war is bad for both sides, and said he would "be happy to encourage Arizona utilities to renegotiate your power agreements" to end the electricity flowing to Los Angeles.

"I am confident that Arizona's utilities would be happy to take those electrons off your hands," Mr. Pierce said. "If, however, you find that the City Council lacks the strength of its convictions to turn off the lights in Los Angeles and boycott Arizona power, please reconsider the wisdom of attempting to harm Arizona's economy."

GO ARIZONA!

Arizona Fights Back

Interesting reading on the Fox News site.

Here are some interesting points made in the article "Arizona in Boycott Battle With Immigration Law Opponents"

SNIP

The backlash against the backlash may be getting some support. According to the San Diego Union-Tribune, would-be tourists have started notifying the San Diego Convention and Visitors Bureau and some hotels that they are canceling their vacation plans to the Pacific Coast city -- after San Diego's city council decided to launch a boycott against Arizona.

Sucks when we use their tactics against them, doesn't it?

SNIP

As California officials threaten to deprive Arizona of their state's financial support, Arizona has some leverage of its own.

The Golden State gets almost a third of its electricity from Arizona -- most of it coming from a nuclear power plant outside Phoenix, as well as coal-fired power plants in northern Arizona and two giant hydroelectric power generators along the Colorado River.

Maybe Kalifornia will build some more nuke plants for their own use, of course that would violate another one of their "principles".


SNIP

California also contracts to house 4,000 inmates in Arizona prisons, not to mention a $22 million contract at city-owned Los Angeles International Airport for Phoenix-based U.S. Airways and millions more in trucking contracts at the port of Los Angeles.

Over crowded prisons and airports, oh my!

SNIP

In California, some officials are likewise worried about the counter-boycott on San Diego.

"We're in a very tough environment already because of everything else going on, and we don't need another negative impact to our industry," Convention and Visitors Bureau President Joe Terzi told the Union-Tribune. "This affects all the hardworking men and women who count on tourism for their livelihoods, so we're saying, don't do something that hurts their livelihoods."

"I've been approached by a number of hotels who are very concerned because they've received cancelations from Arizona guests," Namara Mercer, executive director of the county Hotel-Motel Association, told the newspaper.

Then let Arizona voters, not Kalifornians run their own state!

SNIP

Bruce St. James, radio talk show host at KTAR, said the law looks a lot different to those who actually live in Arizona.

"I think it's easy to throw stones when you're sitting so far away," he said. "When you're in the middle of it, I think if you believe any of the polls ... close to 70 percent of the people who have to live here think this is a step in the right direction."

AMEN!!

For those of you who would like to help Arizona out, try paying a visit to BUYcottArizona.com. I am do for a vacation soon...

Royal Douche 05.13.10

The Winner: Dr. George V. Fornero

Reason: His decision to cancel a girls' basketball team's trip to Arizona over his tantrum over Arizona's lawful immigration law. Of course, sending kids to trips in the People's Republic Of China is ok to him, since they are so humane over there, right? If Illinois does not want an anti illegal immigration law, that is up to them. Arizona is not his territory. The children of his school district already put up with the indoctrination of a liberal school system. Why screw up their games as well? These girls earn the right to go to places like Arizona, through fair competition, and hard work. I doubt this douche ever heard of this idea.

The funny thing about this situation is that he officially states that all school functions belong in the school district in Illinois all of a sudden. Too bad he already allowed kids to go to China, a Liberal icon of human rights.

He also demonstrates his faith in his students by stressing that the team has not qualified for the championships. And if they do, then what? He is running out of legitimate excuses. This is plainly political, and school taxes are paying for this kind of liberal crap.

BTW: You may tell him your opinion if you would like:

Dr. George V. Fornero

Superintendent


Administrative Center
1040 Park Ave West
Highland Park, IL 60035
Phone: (224) 765-1000

email: gfornero@dist113.org

Runner Up: Assistant Superintendent Suzan Hebson.

Reason:

Same as the winner, except she is a loser.

Girls Hoops Team May Need to 'Go Rogue'

Sarah Palin

Editor's note: The outrage over an Illinois school administrator's decision to cancel a girls' basketball team's trip to Arizona has attracted nationwide attention. George Fornero, superintendent of District 113 in Illinois, which oversees Highland Park High School, defended the decision by Assistant Superintendent Suzan Hebson and said it was not a political statement in response to Arizona's new law. The following is from a discussion about the school's decision to cancel the trip to Arizona as discussed on Fox News Channel on May 13.

"AMERICA LIVE" HOST, MEGYN KELLY:

You have advice for these girls, what is it?

FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR/FORMER ALASKA GOV. SARAH PALIN:

[The Illinois school district's decision is] probably the most outrageous school district decision I've heard in quite some time.

I want these girls to feel empowered and "go rogue" if they must. Figure out a way to protest a decision like this and figure out a way to get there on their own. If it can be done, not being sanctioned by the school, [they should still go to] this tournament. Look at the lady hoopsters, they're told no ball in Arizona, because, Arizona isn't, as they said "aligned with the beliefs and values" of, I guess, their school district. Yet, their school district blessed the student trips to China!

So that what they're saying there is, that our sister state Arizona, it doesn't share our beliefs and values. But China, known for its human rights violations, and it's anti-girl policies, does share their values? This is absolutely unbelievable. I say let the girls play ball. Keeping the girls off the basketball court for purely political reasons, it's not right. and you know, for me, hearing the words, those are fighting words.

We are going to do all that we can to shed more light on what this political issue is, this Arizona boycott. It's going to hurt everybody in Arizona, including the Hispanic community. And it's not a solution to the problem. The problem is how are we going to secure our borders. Keeping girls off the basketball court has nothing to do with the solution that we need to find!

What these girls are going to find as they grow up and enter sort of real life and family and career they are going to find that everything they ever needed to know they will have learned on the basketball court. They will have learned teamwork, and leadership skills, they will have learned goal setting and self-discipline and personal responsibility, and they will have learned how to plow through the opponent, a full-court press, perhaps, that is adversarial and picking at you and trying to make decisions for you to get you off your game. They are going to learn how to plow through that and those lessons will be able to be applied in their future lives.

At a time like this, for these girls who are already honing those skills and learning those things, to have something stripped away from them that's based on nonsense -- because the school district's ruling is nonsense -- it makes no sense that Arizona, the people of Arizona, essentially are being boycotted, because they don't share their "values and beliefs," it does strip away much from these girls. But I think that they will find within themselves that empowerment, that ability to stand up for what they believe in. and as we've heard from so many of these girls and their parents, even though some of them may agree or disagree with the law that Governor Brewer signed into law, [is that] they still have that right to speak up and to stand for what they believe in. And I think that those girls are going to feel empowered here in these coming days and do exactly that.

Let the girls play ball!

The Shattered Template In Arizona

American Spectator

By Jeffrey Lord on 5.4.10 @ 6:10AM

"You know, I tried to talk about good roads and good schools and all these things that have been part of my career, and nobody listened. And then I began talking about n….s, and they stomped the floor." -- Democrat George Wallace on his first, failed, race for Governor of Alabama

That sound you hear is a rare thing.

A liberal template is being shattered in Arizona. The template of race.

It's an important liberal template too. Central to the success of one of the biggest of liberal myths. The myth? That the electoral successes of the Left throughout American history have had nothing to do with race, much less racism. That in fact all those angelic lefties out there just want truth, justice and the American way for white and black and brown and yellow and red and any other combination of hues on the color scale. Kumbaya. Divide by race? How insulting!

The truth, however -- and that truth is reappearing vividly once again in Arizona -- is that the American Left could not have made it to the 21st century without tying itself tightly to abject racism. It has secured political success in the past by playing every possible race card from supporting, in order, slavery, segregation, lynching, the Ku Klux Klan and racial quotas, while fiercely opposing the legal immigration of Asians. The latter were labeled by Democrats as "a servile race" whose presence was objectionable because "they had not sprung from the great parent stock." Now, in the piece de resistance, the Left is using the race card with illegal immigration. And it is no accident that what began with racial appeals to whites (in opposing rights for blacks and legal immigration for Asians) moved on to racial appeals to blacks and now to brown-skinned Americans. The more the race changes, the more the approach stays the same.

The liberal media, but of course, is complicit. And, it is most import to understand, it has always been so. If liberals were the (literal) slave masters and segregationist bullies of America's past (and they were), the left-leaning press was the plantation PR agent. They approached progressives and their use of race in such a starkly deceptive fashion as to be a pluperfect example of what this magazine's editor in chief R. Emmett Tyrrell calls "the Kultursmog." Tyrrell defines the term (in his new book After the Hangover) as a liberal "pollutant" which "contaminates such vast areas of American culture with Liberal prejudices and bugaboos." There is no need to rehash here the details of all those Democratic Party platforms (26) that directly supported either slavery itself or segregation when they weren't whacking away at Asians. Suffice to say the American Left has danced, tangoed, waltzed, and fox- trotted when not sleeping with every incarnation of racism in America from the beginning to this moment. Somehow, this just never made it into the news of the day as reported by all those Lefty journos, the cultural smokestacks never getting around to pumping this particularly cleansing truth into the political atmosphere.

Case in point (there are an endless number) is the New York Times' handling of the death in 1924 of former President Woodrow Wilson, a hero then and now of the American Left.

The day after Wilson's death, befitting the importance of a powerful president, the Times published a three page review of Wilson's career. Three pages in fine print, beneath the headline Career of Woodrow Wilson as College Executive, Governor and President. There was not a single, solitary word that Wilson was not only a thorough-going racist, had avidly courted like-minded segregationists to get elected (carrying the 13 states of the "Solid South") but had used his presidential power to both segregate the federal government and appoint rabid progressive-racists to powerful posts, such as Secretary of the Navy Josephus Daniels. Daniels, on cue, promptly segregated the US Navy.

And of these decidedly important events which vividly illustrated the historic tie between the American Left and racists the Times reported: Nothing. Zero. Not one solitary word in a three-page, fine print career review.

The Times did have space for other headlines though during the so-called "Progressive Era." They are unintentionally revealing of the American Left's view of race.

"Woman Rescued from Negro"
"Woman Stabbed by a Negro"
"Negro Attacks a Teacher"
"Negro Kills a Sheriff"
"Negro Saves $30,000"

Got that? Not "Woman Rescued" or "Woman Stabbed" or "Man Attacks a Teacher" or "Man Saves $30,000." Noooooooooo. It's a Negro. Yet when a white man was caught sending bombs to three people, the headline ran: "Three Bombs His, Janitor Admits." Race never made the story, the man's ethnic surname identifying him as an Irish American. A white man.

This was -- and is -- the way the liberal media deals with race. It is a necessary base line for the success of the American Left. The Times was relentless in reporting blacks as perpetrators of all manner of bad deeds -- because this supported the need for progressive-racists to appeal successfully for white votes. It worked. And when Woodrow Wilson died, the historical record of what he had actually done -- the true nature of the relationship between the left and racism during the Wilson presidency -- vanished. Right in front of the eyes of 1924 Times readers. Then again, how can something vanish if it's never reported in the first place?

As time moved on, a strange similarity began to emerge as the Left finally engaged with American blacks.

Progressives presented big government to blacks in precisely the same way they presented it to white Southerners: tied tightly together to the idea of racial identity. Thus emerged a whole generation of progressive black politicians who were the mirror image of their white supremacist counterparts: each exploiting the combustible mix of racism and big government.

Nowhere has this approach been more prominently displayed then on Capitol Hill, where the Congressional Black Caucus has emerged blessed by the liberal media, with the progressive-racism formula burnished to a finely polished glow.

When liberal white Congressman Steve Cohen, elected from a Tennessee district that is 60% black, requested membership to what he assumed was the politically simpatico Black Caucus, he was refused. In stark terms worthy of a Klan member (underneath those hoods were big government leftists) denying membership to an eager -- but black -- leftist, Black Caucus member Congressman William Lacy Clay, Jr. bluntly delivered the response: "Mr. Cohen asked for admission, and he got his answer. He's white and the Caucus is black. It's time to move on. We have racial policies to pursue and we are pursuing them, as Mr. Cohen has learned. It's an unwritten rule. It's understood."

Yet this starkly racial rejoinder never made the liberal press so much as blink. Why might that be?

The original verbal attack by Southern progressives on supporters of equal rights in the Solid (which is to say Democratic) South was that so-and-so was a "n…lover." The term radiated hatred, as it was designed to do. The message was that race X -- African Americans in this case -- were inferior. And that if you deigned in word or deed to suggest otherwise, you were to be stigmatized by this description.

Today, "racist" is the new "n-word" for the Left.

It is used precisely by white, black, and Latino progressives in exactly the same way the "n-word" phrase was used in the Solid South by white progressives; to stigmatize, to render illegitimate for social -- and most importantly -- political reasons. It is not possible to have a "Solid South" or a "black vote" or "Hispanic vote" turning out for progressive causes en masse unless the race button is pushed.

And so, it's pushed.

The newest crop of those pushing the old progressive-race theme -- this time with Latinos -- include the well-schooled members of the Congressional Black Caucus. This being the group that proudly excludes non-blacks -- that would be Latinos as well as whites -- per Congressman Clay. So a group of Democrats that deliberately discriminates against Latinos and whites in the fine style of their party's tradition is out there using the r-word with all the skill of George Wallace if not the subtlety of Woodrow Wilson or the New York Times.

The "racist" label is quickly affixed to any and all who believe in a color-blind America, just as the "n-word" once was employed in the quest for progressive electoral victories based on appeals to white supremacy. This in turn fills American leftist politics with those who use only a marginally updated version of that George Wallace quote to succeed, simply substituting the "r word" for the "n word." As in:

"You know, I tried to talk about good roads and good schools and all these things that have been part of my career, and nobody listened. And then I began talking about racists, and they stomped the floor."

They are stomping the floor in Arizona, as seen here.

Not slow to cheer on the floor stompers was President Obama.

"It will be up to each of you to make sure that the young people, African Americans, Latinos, and women, who powered our victory in 2008 stand together once again."

And right there, the liberal template on race -- in use for the better part of two centuries -- has now begun to shatter.

Why?

The conservative media exists -- and from the Wall Street Journal to the Washington Times to the New York Post to Rush Limbaugh and the rest of talk radio -- the entire progressive-race axis is not only being exposed it is being mocked.

• Peggy Noonan in the Wall Street Journal even brought in some establishment Republicans:

The establishments of the American political parties, and the media, are full of people who think concern about illegal immigration is a mark of racism. If you were Freud you might say, "How odd that's where their minds so quickly go, how strange they're so eager to point an accusing finger. Could they be projecting onto others their own, heavily defended-against inner emotions?"

Good question Peggy. Very good question with a lot of sad history that already gives the rest of us an answer.

• Jeffrey Kuhner in the Washington Times: "Mr. Obama is fracturing America. He is calling on the primacy of race and gender in order to perpetuate his national socialist revolution"

• Rush Limbaugh threw the "r-word" right back at Obama: "This is the regime at its racist best."

• Mark Steyn mocked the "r-word" as only a legal immigrant can:

As I write, I have my papers on me -- and not just because I'm in Arizona. I'm an immigrant, and it is a condition of my admission to this great land that I carry documentary proof of my residency status with me at all times and be prepared to produce it to law enforcement officials, whether on a business trip to Tucson or taking a 20-minute stroll in the woods back at my pad in New Hampshire.

Who would impose such an outrageous Nazi fascist discriminatory law?

Er, well, that would be Franklin Roosevelt.

• Bob Gorrell: The cartoonist featured in The New York Post perhaps scored as only a cartoonist can, with this gem showing a baffled Arizonan saying he only wants the law obeyed and those with proper documentation allowed in his state -- only to be fingered by an angry Democrat as a racist.

The problem for progressives is that in today's world millions of Americans of all colors -- those who really do believe in a color-blind society and live it everyday with family, friends, neighbors, employers, employees, colleagues and so on -- simply refuse to be played. A Rasmussen poll shows that 70% of Arizonans -- not just white Arizonans but all Arizonans be they white, black, brown, red or yellow -- want their border secured. Like people everywhere else in America they have locks on their door for a reason, and cannot fathom the idea that if their house were suddenly invaded by hundreds of uninvited and increasingly violent people of any race they would be deemed "racists" for calling the police.

But the push is on to make Hispanics the new white supremacists, to make the people in that Phoenix rally into the kind of people in this rally. To tie people together politically by the fact of skin color as opposed to the idea of America, of liberty, of freedom and economic opportunity for all.

Make no mistake: the reason progressives use race so desperately to win elections -- and have done so forever -- is that they are desperate. For control. Control over you, your health care, your taxes, your checkbook, your kid's schools, your view of religion -- everything and anything right down to the latest ploy to remove salt from your diet and plastic toys from McDonald's. And they can't get it unless they place the race card.

But time has moved on. It isn't 1924 anymore.

The liberal template on race is shattering. Seventy-percent of Arizonans know the game -- and so does the conservative media.

And we refuse to play.

A Legal Immigrant's Take on Arizona's Immigration Law

Fox News

As a legal immigrant, I neither empathize with nor support those who break the law in order to gain admission into the United States of America.

I am a legal immigrant. My family and I emigrated from Russia to New York in 1993. We applied for permission to do so in 1990. Throughout those three years we went through numerous background checks and interviews and we waited patiently to be granted the right to move to America.

My status as a legal immigrant shapes my perspective on the illegal immigration issue in general, and Arizona Immigration Law SB 1070 recently adopted by the state of Arizona in particular. When confronted by critics of this legislation, who have urged me to empathize with illegal immigrants, I draw the following comparison: when a person goes into a bank with a check and receives cash for it, that person follows the legal and proper procedure for obtaining money; however, when a person robs a bank with a gun, that person, too, has received cash, but by way of committing an illegal act. Both individuals leave the bank with money, however, one is a law abiding citizen while the other is a criminal.

As a legal immigrant, I neither empathize with nor support those who break the law in order to gain admission into the United States of America. The background checks and interviews that we experienced as a part of the legal immigration process proved to the American authorities that my family did not harbor a criminal past, communicable diseases or extreme views. Those who skirt the procedures are not only breaking the law by entering the country illegally, they are robbing the United States of the chance to vet them. These illegal aliens disrespect the American rule of law. They disrespect legal immigrants like me who stood in line to come here. And they disrespect all American citizens at large who are kept safe by the immigration rules and processes.

It is counterproductive to denounce the Arizona bill as the left has at every turn. It would be much more constructive to offer Arizona and its citizens an alternative -- something the federal government has failed to do. Arizona's illegal immigration problem manifests itself in overcrowded schools and hospitals, rampant violence and has left Phoenix with the second highest kidnapping rate in the world, right behind Mexico City.

Arizona has exercised its constitutional right to deal with the problem that has bankrupted the state. Polls show that 70 percent of Arizonans and a majority of Americans support the measure.
President Obama has led the charge against Arizona’s new immigration law. He is capitalizing on this divisive issue for political gain by wrongfully painting supporters of the bill as racist.

As president of the United States, it is Mr. Obama's job to protect its citizens. He should not frivolously interfere with states as they deal with the problems that they face, especially those, such as illegal immigration, that federal institutions do not deal with adequately. Speaking both as a legal immigrant and an American citizen, I urge President Obama to put away his political interests. If his opposition to the legislation is truly genuine, then he needs to step up offer real alternatives to SB 1070.

Boris Epshteyn is a political strategist, attorney and business consultant in New York City. He served as a communications aide on the McCain – Palin 2008 presidential campaign. He is a frequent guest on Foxnews.com's "The Strategy Room" and appears occasionally on other Fox News Channel programs. Contact him at boris@strategy-llc.com.

Robocop's Comment:

Funny thing, my parents agree to this. Remember Libtards, this is not a race issue. It is an issue of law.

How Mexico treats illegal aliens

By Michelle Malkin



My syndicated column today responds to Mexican President Felipe Calderon’s demagoguery on Arizona’s immigration enforcement law. Calderon has a long history of bashing the U.S. — and then getting rewarded for it with billions of dollars in foreign aid (see here, here, and here).

I reported on Calderon’s aggressive meddling on behalf of illegal aliens through his government consulate offices in America here. Heather Mac Donald published a thorough investigation of the Mexican government meddle-crats here. Allan Wall has reported on it for years. Mike Sweeney, an Arizona Republic letter-writer underscores my column theme today:

“Having traveled into Mexico last year to various cities on the Baja Peninsula, a distance of more than 1,000 miles round-trip, we were stopped more than 20 times at various checkpoints. At most of those stops, we were told to exit the vehicle and we were subjected to rigorous inspections. Where does Mexican President Felipe Calderón get off with his hypocritical outrage at our Senate Bill 1070?”

Where indeed?

***

How Mexico treats illegal aliens
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2010

Mexican President Felipe Calderon has accused Arizona of opening the door “to intolerance, hate, discrimination and abuse in law enforcement.” But Arizona has nothing on Mexico when it comes to cracking down on illegal aliens. While open-borders activists decry new enforcement measures signed into law in “Nazi-zona” last week, they remain deaf, dumb or willfully blind to the unapologetically restrictionist policies of our neighbors to the south.

The Arizona law bans sanctuary cities that refuse to enforce immigration laws, stiffens penalties against illegal alien day laborers and their employers, makes it a misdemeanor for immigrants to fail to complete and carry an alien registration document, and allows the police to arrest immigrants unable to show documents proving they are in the U.S. legally. If those rules constitute the racist, fascist, xenophobic, inhumane regime that the National Council of La Raza, Al Sharpton, Catholic bishops and their grievance-mongering followers claim, then what about these regulations and restrictions imposed on foreigners?

– The Mexican government will bar foreigners if they upset “the equilibrium of the national demographics.” How’s that for racial and ethnic profiling?

– If outsiders do not enhance the country’s “economic or national interests” or are “not found to be physically or mentally healthy,” they are not welcome. Neither are those who show “contempt against national sovereignty or security.” They must not be economic burdens on society and must have clean criminal histories. Those seeking to obtain Mexican citizenship must show a birth certificate, provide a bank statement proving economic independence, pass an exam and prove they can provide their own health care.

– Illegal entry into the country is equivalent to a felony punishable by two years’ imprisonment. Document fraud is subject to fine and imprisonment; so is alien marriage fraud. Evading deportation is a serious crime; illegal re-entry after deportation is punishable by ten years’ imprisonment. Foreigners may be kicked out of the country without due process and the endless bites at the litigation apple that illegal aliens are afforded in our country (see, for example, President Obama’s illegal alien aunt — a fugitive from deportation for eight years who is awaiting a second decision on her previously rejected asylum claim).

– Law enforcement officials at all levels — by national mandate — must cooperate to enforce immigration laws, including illegal alien arrests and deportations. The Mexican military is also required to assist in immigration enforcement operations. Native-born Mexicans are empowered to make citizens’ arrests of illegal aliens and turn them in to authorities.

– Ready to show your papers? Mexico’s National Catalog of Foreigners tracks all outside tourists and foreign nationals. A National Population Registry tracks and verifies the identity of every member of the population, who must carry a citizens’ identity card. Visitors who do not possess proper documents and identification are subject to arrest as illegal aliens.

All of these provisions are enshrined in Mexico’s Ley General de Población (General Law of the Population) and were spotlighted in a 2006 research paper published by the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Security Policy. There’s been no public clamor for “comprehensive immigration reform” in Mexico, however, because pro-illegal alien speech by outsiders is prohibited.

Consider: Open-borders protesters marched freely at the Capitol building in Arizona, comparing GOP Gov. Jan Brewer to Hitler, waving Mexican flags, advocating that demonstrators “Smash the State,” and holding signs that proclaimed “No human is illegal” and “We have rights.”

But under the Mexican constitution, such political speech by foreigners is banned. Noncitizens cannot “in any way participate in the political affairs of the country.” In fact, a plethora of Mexican statutes enacted by its congress limit the participation of foreign nationals and companies in everything from investment, education, mining and civil aviation to electric energy and firearms. Foreigners have severely limited private property and employment rights (if any).

As for abuse, the Mexican government is notorious for its abuse of Central American illegal aliens who attempt to violate Mexico’s southern border. The Red Cross has protested rampant Mexican police corruption, intimidation and bribery schemes targeting illegal aliens there for years. Mexico didn’t respond by granting mass amnesty to illegal aliens, as it is demanding that we do. It clamped down on its borders even further. In late 2008, the Mexican government launched an aggressive deportation plan to curtain illegal Cuban immigration and human trafficking through Cancun.

Meanwhile, Mexican consular offices in the United States have coordinated with left-wing social justice groups and the Catholic Church leadership to demand a moratorium on all deportations and a freeze on all employment raids across America.

Mexico is doing the job Arizona is now doing — a job the U.S. government has failed miserably to do: putting its people first. Here’s the proper rejoinder to all the hysterical demagogues in Mexico (and their sympathizers here on American soil) now calling for boycotts and invoking Jim Crow laws, apartheid and the Holocaust because Arizona has taken its sovereignty into its own hands:

Hipócritas.

Arizona Governor Signs Controversial Immigration Enforcement Bill

Fox News

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer on Friday signed into law a controversial bill that seeks to crack down on illegal immigration.

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer on Friday signed into law a controversial bill that seeks to crack down on illegal immigration.

The sweeping measure will make it a crime under state law to be in the country illegally. It will also require local police officers to question people about their immigration status if there is reason to suspect they are in the country illegally.

It takes effect 90 days after the current legislative sessions end in the next several weeks.

Before signing the bill, Brewer called the measure "another step forward in protecting the state of Arizona."

She said the bill "represents another tool for our state to use as we work to solve a crisis that we did not create and the federal government has refused to fix -- the crisis caused by illegal immigration."

Earlier, President Obama called the bill "misguided" and said it could violate people's civil rights. He said he's instructed the Justice Department to see if it is legal.

The bill's Republican sponsor, state Rep. Russell Pearce of Mesa, said Obama and other critics of the bill were "against law enforcement, our citizens and the rule of law."

Civil rights activists have said the bill would lead to racial profiling and deter Hispanics from reporting crimes.

Brewer said she wouldn't tolerate racial profiling.

Hundreds of protesters gathered at the State Capitol complex Friday calling on Brewer to veto the legislation.

Demonstrators have been camped outside the Capitol since the measure passed out of the Legislature on Monday. Their numbers have grown steadily throughout the week, with buses bringing protesters from as far away as Los Angeles.

About a dozen supporters of the measure also gathered.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Robocop's Comment:

I am starting to like Arizona. First they pass Constitutional Carry, and now this. As a son of LEGAL immigrants who had to jump through hoops to have the right to be here, I applaud this measure. As a Jailer who sees plenty of bed space wasted on illegals who crossed the border to earn a dishonest living, I applaud this measure. As a taxpayer who has to pay to house, feed, educate, and medically treat these illegals, I applaud this measure. Now if only Texas, and the rest of this country could follow this example...

Now the Libtards are taking this law to court. It will be an interesting irony to see the courts strike down a law that merely enforces existing immigration laws. Nothing surprises me anymore when it comes to judicial activists.