By Julie Percha

Apr 27, 2010 3:49pm

Obama Administration Officials, GOP Senator Graham Criticize Arizona Immigration Law

Jake Tapper and Jason Ryan report:

At a press conference this afternoon, Attorney General Eric Holder called controversial new anti-illegal immigration law an “unfortunate one” and confirmed that the Justice Department is reviewing the law to see if it is constitutional.

“I think that it is, I fear, subject to potential abuse,” Holder said. “I’m very concerned about the wedge that it could draw between communities that law enforcement is supposed to serve and those of us in law enforcement.”

Holder said that the officials at the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) are “looking at the law to decide exactly how we are going to react to it…we are considering all possibilities, including the possibility of a court challenge.”

For her part, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano – the former governor of Arizona — told the Senate Judiciary Committee that the law “could pull away resources from federal immigration enforcement efforts.”

The Chairman of the Committee Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said that the “law will be challenged on constitutional grounds. The President called the law misguided. He said it violates a basic of fairness that we cherish as Americans. When you were Governor of Arizona you twice vetoed bills of this type.”

Napolitano noted that the law does “not actually take effect until 90 days after the close of the Arizona legislative session, so it is not, in fact, in effect in Arizona which permits time, I think, for the Justice Department to really look at whether the law meets constitutional safeguards or not.”

The DHS Secretary said that from the standpoint of her department and the Immigration and Customs Enforcement division, “we have some deep concerns with the law from a law enforcement perspective because we believe it will detract from and siphon resources that we need to focus on those in the country illegally who are, those who are committing the most serious crimes in addition to violating our nation’s immigration laws. We have focused on felonies, on felons, on felony fugitives, on gang members…So we have concerns that at some point we’ll be responsible to enforce — or use our immigration resources against — anyone that would get picked up in AZ pursuant to this law.”

Significantly, the only Republican senator currently working with a Democratic counterpart on immigration reform, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, expressed concern about the Obama administration trying to move forward on comprehensive immigration reform given the current level of violence in Mexico.

“I bet you everything I own, if you bring it up in this environment, not having done anything that is going to reassure the American public that we wont have 20 million more, [illegal immigrants.] you’re going to crash and burn,” Graham told Napolitano. “The southern border is not only not secure there is a war going on in Mexico that’s bleeding over to America.”

Speaking of the Arizona law, Graham said, “good people are so afraid of an out of control border that they have to resort to a law that I think is unconstitutional.”

Graham said the law “doesn’t represent the best way forward,” but does represent the realpolitik of immigration right now. “It is impossible for me or any other serious Democrat to get this body to move forward until we can prove to the American people that we can secure our borders, and quite frankly Madame Secretary we have a long way to go. Once we get there comprehensive should come up.” Graham said it could be done “by 2012 but we need to address the elephant in the room”

Napolitano disagreed, saying “the passage of laws at the state levels like that illustrate the need for Congress to move ahead.”

- Jake Tapper and Jason Ryan

User Comments

NoBo better pray to whatever God he follows that Holder doesn’t take action against the Arizona Law.
Way way way too much concern for illegals and far too little concern for the citizens who have to deal with all the lawlessness caused by the illegals.

Posted by: Noz | April 27, 2010, 4:01 pm 4:01 pm

If they build the original fence as originally designed by Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) Any person trying to creep into America would be caught between the two fences–in the no mans-land–where they would be arrested by the undermanned Border agents. Before they could even scale the–SECOND–fence, they would already be exhausted from scaling the first fence and the flying patrolling drones would pick them up immediately. It’s one downright lie that the single line fence even covers half the distance, as its made up of vehicle barriers and ancient rusted barbed wire. Instead the so-called legislators paid millions of dollars for virtual equipment that is malfunctioning and probably received monetary kickbacks for the contracts..Politicians going back years have the deaths of Robert Kruntz, Rancher-US Border Patrol, Sheriff and deputies who have been murdered along the region. Those crummy idiots who we vote for a bunch of corrupt lawmakers are to blame for the carnage in Arizona and have blood on their hands. Kick out Sen. Reid as he tried to destroy the only immigration enforcement too–E-VERIFY.Get the facts–not lies and propaganda distributed by Liberals hiding under Democratic skirts. NUMBERSUSA

Posted by: Brittanicus | April 27, 2010, 4:10 pm 4:10 pm

Graham sounds like a reasonable man here.
It is tragic that the United States government, over all parties and administrations, has abdicated its authority of ensuring our borders for the last 25 years. It is tragic for those immigrants who are striving to make a new life find themselves in a shadow world of legitimacy because of that governmental abdication.
The tragedies are compounded now by the Obama administration, because they are willing to throw gas on any fire to create a mob-mind if they think it will serve their political interests.
May God bless every one of us caught in this ugliness, God bless every one in Arizona — the law-makers, the law-breakers and everyone in between. May our nation lean into calm reason and good will to resolve these difficult issues so that all may thrive.

Posted by: Carol | April 27, 2010, 4:20 pm 4:20 pm

Golly Gee Graham, maybe just maybe if elected politicians in Washington had been doing their job in regard to immigration, the Governor from Arizona would not have had to resort to this bill…The citizens of our Southern Border States have been crying for help for years only to be ignored…Now it is time to act….

Posted by: Parallex View | April 27, 2010, 4:21 pm 4:21 pm

Posted by: BigGuy | April 27, 2010, 4:25 pm 4:25 pm

It is amazing how ignorant some of these posts are. More than half the state is Latino, so who exactly is the police force going to protect and who are they going to serve. It’s a known fact among Latinos that undocumented immigrants usually have family who have documents and will be very vigilant in destroying any politican who backs this law. In fact, this has quickly become an inner conflict amongst Caucasions. Yes, Noz, Latinos and Whites are both Caucasions. And in this case, Latinos far, far, far outnumber the minority of white closet racists. Perhaps you should consider moving to New Hampshire?

Posted by: Chicano Power Unite | April 27, 2010, 4:43 pm 4:43 pm

Hey way to go…take the side of the
lawbreakers and those who choose to
ignore our law and ignore the good,
hardworking citizens of this country
( no matter if you were born here or
got citizenship the old fashioned way).
How Obama wins on this one is beyond me,
but there are lots of things that baffle
me on this clueless professor!

Posted by: wis134 | April 27, 2010, 4:44 pm 4:44 pm

Teaparty members, they’ve got a point. We don’t contribute to the community. In fact, we weren’t even upset until a black man took office now we blame him for any and everything we can. We need to start volunteering our time and trying to understand how to be a part of the solution, instead of just complaining all the time and preaching hate and segreation. All of you tea party member who constantly bombard our site with racist banter please be aware we are under investigation by the FBI.

Posted by: Tea Party | April 27, 2010, 4:47 pm 4:47 pm

I usually give Republicans and their echo chamber a hard time– but some on the right have acknowledged the real problems associated with Arizona’s new “show me your papers” b.s.
For example, besides Graham’s acknowledgement in his statement, “they have to resort to a law that I think is unconstitutional”, we have Jeb Bush:
“I think it creates unintended consequences. It’s difficult for me to imagine how you’re going to enforce this law. It places a significant burden on local law enforcement and you have civil liberties issues that are significant as well.”
And Joe Scarborough:
“”…It does offend me when one out of every three citizens in the state of Arizona are Hispanics, and you have now put a target on the back of one out of three citizens, who, if they’re walking their dog around a neighborhood, if they’re walking their child to school, and they’re an American citizen, or a legal, legal immigrant — to now put a target on their back, and make them think that every time they walk out of their door they may have to prove something. I will tell you, that is un-American. It is unacceptable and it is un-American.”
Good for them, though I would think more folks would be speaking out. As Eugene Robinson writes:
“Activists for Latino and immigrant rights — and supporters of sane governance — held weekend rallies denouncing the new law and vowing to do everything they can to overturn it. But where was the Tea Party crowd? Isn’t the whole premise of the Tea Party movement that overreaching government poses a grave threat to individual freedom? It seems to me that a law allowing individuals to be detained and interrogated on a whim — and requiring legal residents to carry identification documents, as in a police state — would send the Tea Partyers into apoplexy. Or is there some kind of exception if the people whose freedoms are being taken away happen to have brown skin and might speak Spanish?”
Good question.

Posted by: progressive mama | April 27, 2010, 4:47 pm 4:47 pm

Isn’t the whole premise of the Tea Party movement that overreaching government poses a grave threat to individual freedom?
Posted by: progressive mama | Apr 27, 2010 4:47:55 PM
Perhaps this law prohibits local governments from overreaching its authority and creating sanctuary cities, which is what Mayor Phil Gordon has done in Phoenix. The other side of the coin, so to speak.
IMO, activist groups concerned with this issue should be gathering in Washington to demand the borders be closed enforced by the federal government – whose responsibility it is to protect and defend our borders – so that the “shadow” groups cannot continue to grow and be a problem for law abiding citizens of any race or color.

Posted by: For the Record | April 27, 2010, 5:12 pm 5:12 pm

The President called the law misguided. He said it violates a basic of fairness that we cherish as Americans.
So, what does he mean? Is he saying that ILLEGAL doesn’t count anymore? If someone commits a crime, will the police not be able to do composite sketches and look for a particular person because they are a certain color? Is that profiling as well? Where does the line get drawn? How far will this go? Are we getting into gray area on ILLEGAL/LEGAL now?
Personally, I don’t give a rat’s butt what color somebody is, what sex they are, how thin or fat, tall or short, etc. The point is contained in one word: ILLEGAL. MOST illegal immigrants are of a certain origin, that’s just a fact. That isn’t our fault. But it IS our responsibility to do something about ILLEGAL activity in any form.
If these folks are here LEGALLY, let them stay, let them work, pay taxes, live out their ‘dreams’, whatever… but if they are NOT here legally, how can this president even justify saying that the ‘basic of fairness’ has been violated? My tax money paying to support an ILLEGAL immigrant? Now THAT is a ‘basic of fairness’ being violated.

Posted by: Shoe | April 27, 2010, 5:18 pm 5:18 pm

It appears the tea party’s principles when it comes to overreaching and oppressive government are skin deep.

Posted by: Ryan C | April 27, 2010, 5:36 pm 5:36 pm

As Eugene Robinson writes:
Posted by: progressive mama | Apr 27, 2010 4:47:55 PM
While Robinson speaks out against the law but of course offers no solution of his own other – but at least he provides some context as he writes:
“Arizona has become the preferred point of entry for undocumented workers, and an estimated 460,000 are in the state — settling down, or just passing through — at any given time. I have driven down to the border and watched as authorities tried to pick out trucks and vans that might be transporting people without papers. I’ve spent a morning at the Mexican consulate in Phoenix, which is usually crowded with recent immigrants; only the most naive observer would think that all of them, or even most of them, were in the country legally. The influx imposes an unfair burden on the state, and for years Arizonans have been imploring federal officials to do something about immigration reform and border control — to no avail.”
It’s a BIG problem. BIG. It drains many of Arizona’s already depleted resources. The Federal government is willing to kick this can down the road forever for political expediency and has done so since the amnesty of the 80′s. And whatever help Arizona gets from the Federal government is a drain on Federal taxes.
Many people want to close the borders but also not allow amnesty. My own opinion is to close the southern borders completely (even to daily legal crossing as a national emergency) but allow some type of path to citizenship after that for those who have been here – just because this travesty is the fault of the government – not the people even though they did break the law by coming here. Even that is a potential problem as you may get a flood of border crossings before the borders are closed if their is a hint of future amnesty.
Big problems require big solutions. Amnesty without border control is simply a repeat of the amnesty of ’86. We’ll be doing it all over again in another 20 years.

Posted by: For the Record | April 27, 2010, 5:37 pm 5:37 pm

So if the Hispanic turnout in Nov is up 10% from 2006, what does that do to the GOP?

Posted by: Ryan C | April 27, 2010, 5:38 pm 5:38 pm

“It’s not unprecedented having to carry around your papers.
It’s the same thing free black people had to do in 1863″
Jon Stewart

Posted by: Ryan C | April 27, 2010, 5:44 pm 5:44 pm

As a liberal, I find myself confused by my fellow liberals who can’t see the huge problems illegal immigration has caused for our legal immigrants and our poor. Wages for unskilled labor have fallen so much in the last twenty years for the simple reason that the illegals are competing for the same jobs as our poor and will work for a lot less. This has made a lot of business owners richer but has grown our poor class, as well as put a huge burden on the border states for police, education and health care for thousands of illegals who aren’t paying in taxes to those states.
The border needs to be controlled. Period. After it is closed, you can talk about a strict amnesty for those who are here, but close the border first.

Posted by: Lydia | April 27, 2010, 5:56 pm 5:56 pm

“As a liberal, I find myself confused by my fellow liberals who can’t see the huge problems”
Lydia,
As a liberal you should be aware that there is no uniform liberal opinion on this issue.
There is no real uniform for either left or right for that matter.
Many of the solutions mentioned may be supported all or in part depending on who you talk to.
I think we need a path to citizenship as well as tough laws on those who employ illegal immigrants.
I just think a law where suspicion equals skin color is fundamentally against our values.

Posted by: Ryan C | April 27, 2010, 6:05 pm 6:05 pm

Posted by: For the Record | Apr 27, 2010 5:37:12 PM
Oddly, I can’t find any big gaps here– meaning disagreements, though I’m unclear regarding whether or not you support the Arizona law as you mention overreaching and Phoenix. I don’t support the law, but we don’t disagree that illegal immigration is a huge issue that keeps being kicked down the road, or that big issues require big solutions– or, at the very least, big steps in the right direction with determined effort– or that “activist groups concerned with this issue should be gathering in Washington to demand the borders be enforced by the federal government – whose responsibility it is to protect and defend our borders – so that the “shadow” groups cannot continue to grow and be a problem for law abiding citizens of any race or color.”
In the area I live most immigrants, including illegal immigrants, are from Eastern Europe– Belarus, Poland, Ukraine, Czech Republic– and my sister is always mistaken for being Polish or The second biggest group of immigrants, including illegal immigrants, is from Mexico and Central America, but mostly Mexico– and I think about my niece, who is Greek and Italian, but is often mistaken for being Mexican, and her fiance and his family who is of Mexican descent but born here. I think about having to carry around papers and how crazy– and you know, fascist-seeming– that would be. And then I think about all the cops I know, who have more than enough responsibility, believe me.
I really don’t know the answer but I do think this is something the federal government should be pressed to handle, and not just kick down the road.
Also, you wrote, “While Robinson speaks out against the law but of course offers no solution of his own other – but at least he provides some context as he writes”– right. He doesn’t offer up a solution but he acknowledges the unfair burden on the state, and that for years Arizonans have been imploring federal officials to do something about immigration reform and border control — to no avail. Important points that I don’t dispute.

Posted by: progressive mama | April 27, 2010, 6:05 pm 6:05 pm

Lydia,
First of all border patrol and racially profiling are very differnt things, if you don’t get that then go back to school and perhaps not in Texas. Secondly, if you are claiming to support this because you are a ‘Liberal’ you are flat out effin lying. No party be they Dem, Rep, or any other would support this garbage. We do not live in a police state, no one should have to present ID unless they are involved in a crime, and driving to work whilst being brown skinned in AZ is not a crime.
Trying to claim that you are a lib/con etc. just to make a point against one or the other is stupid, please don’t do that. This is not about ‘sides’ this is about the constitution. Like him or not, it does comfort me that our POTUS is a constitutional professor, and can see that this, while a state law, may not be very legal.

Posted by: FixIt | April 27, 2010, 6:09 pm 6:09 pm

I think we need a path to citizenship as well as tough laws on those who employ illegal immigrants.
I just think a law where suspicion equals skin color is fundamentally against our values.
Posted by: Ryan C | Apr 27, 2010 6:05:02 PM
Absolutely. I agree completely. I do think we need some sort of dignified and humane border control too without just sealing it off completely.
no easy answers, imho.
And no uniform response or solutions from either the left or the right on this one. its a divisive issue– it divides parties, liberals,conservatives, and the country– and there are divisions within the divisions.
But anyway….

Posted by: progressive mama | April 27, 2010, 6:14 pm 6:14 pm

Posted by: progressive mama | April 27, 2010, 6:19 pm 6:19 pm

So if the Hispanic turnout in Nov is up 10% from 2006, what does that do to the GOP?
Posted by: Ryan C | Apr 27, 2010 5:38:21 PM
per Fox News, actually, pertaining to this point:
Napolitano: She’s gonna bankrupt the Republican Party and the state of Arizona. Look at what happened to the Republicans in California with the proposition –
Cavuto: What happens?
Napolitano: Ah, Hispanics — who have a natural home in the Republican Party because they are socially conservative — will flee in droves. She’s also gonna bankrupt her state, because no insurance company will provide coverage for this. And for all the lawsuits that will happen — for all the people that are wrongfully stopped — her budget will be paying for it. Her budget will be paying the legal bills of the lawyers who sue on behalf of those that were stopped.
This will be a disaster for Arizona — to say nothing of the fact that it’s so unconstitutional that I predict a federal judge will prevent Arizona from enforcing it as soon as they attempt to do so. That will probably be tomorrow.

Posted by: progressive mama | April 27, 2010, 6:24 pm 6:24 pm

I’m unclear regarding whether or not you support the Arizona law as you mention overreaching and Phoenix
Posted by: progressive mama | Apr 27, 2010 6:05:30 PM
I have not read the law – only a few opinions about the law. I think – with few exceptions – it will be much ado about nothing. Police forces who patrol the streets operate in a fish bowl and can “get away” with little.
I think that Robinson’s statement: “Brewer, who caved to xenophobic pressures that previous governors had the backbone to resist, should be ashamed of herself.” is completely inflammatory and unfounded – and it paints all Arizonans as xenophobes which in my experience is just not true.
And I am disappointed in Janet Napolitano who was the previous governor has now for what seems to be political expediency simply switched to the other side – and is ignoring the problem – waiting for amnesty to come along so we can hit the reset button (the easy way out). She may have just been playing the game while governor – waiting for her next promotion.

Posted by: For the Record | April 27, 2010, 6:39 pm 6:39 pm

Posted by: progressive mama | Apr 27, 2010 6:24:32 PM
I like Judge Napolitano. He’s a real no nonsense guy. I’ve been meaning to buy his latest book – but I have soooo many already I haven’t read yet.
Where would we be without opinions – and pundits!

Posted by: For the Record | April 27, 2010, 6:43 pm 6:43 pm

“It’s not unprecedented having to carry around your papers.
It’s the same thing free black people had to do in 1863″
Jon Stewart
Posted by: Ryan C | Apr 27, 2010 5:44:39 PM
Jon Steward, sharp and on point in his social commentary as he often is.
Posted by: progressive mama | Apr 27, 2010 6:19:59 PM
So crossing the border and hanging out as a day laborer with the possibility of being deported is the same as being hunted down, tied to a tree and whipped to death?
Well, it’s not the same thing and that “social commentary” demeans all the people who suffered so greatly and struggled so hard for freedom.
But I guess it’s a little different when your going for the punch line, right?

Posted by: For the Record | April 27, 2010, 6:49 pm 6:49 pm

the arizona law does nothing more than empower local police to enforce EXISTING FEDERAL LAW if 70% of the people want this then SHUT UP it is the will of the people. Not like the insurance scam pushed through by the obaminator and his cronies that is not supported by the majority.

Posted by: Duffey | April 27, 2010, 6:49 pm 6:49 pm

“It’s not unprecedented having to carry around your papers.”
Aren’t we all supposed to carry ID? I carry mine every day. What’s the problem?

Posted by: For the Record | April 27, 2010, 6:54 pm 6:54 pm

“Jon Steward, sharp and on point in his social commentary as he often is.”
BUT HE’S A COMEDIAN!
Comedians don’t do social commentary except throughout their acts.

Posted by: Ryan C | April 27, 2010, 6:55 pm 6:55 pm

Posted by: For the Record | Apr 27, 2010 6:49:10 PM
I think maybe you ought to reread it slowly and work on your comprehension skills. Maybe look up the words you don’t understand. Your analogy doesn’t work. To help you sort it out, it means you have to carry papers to prove you have a right to be where you are and doing what you’re doing, and the reason you have to do that is based on the color of your skin and a presumption of not having the right, more or less.

Posted by: progressive mama | April 27, 2010, 6:56 pm 6:56 pm

I understand the frustration of every immigrate when it comes to doing things legally because America has made things so hard to do the legal way. My husband and I’s situation is a perfect example of how doing things the legal way is harder than the illegal way. I’ve been trying to get my husband to the US for over a year now. I’m an American citizen and he is a Jamaica citizen. We have submitted all of our paper work and now are being given the runaround concerning our relationship. I’m a teacher but since I had to move back home where my mother lives due to her becoming ill and subsequently disabled from Gillian Barre’ Syndrome and I also had to switch jobs, they won’t accept my income as being sufficient even though I make way over the guidelines. They’re also giving me a hard time about the fact that I haven’t seen him in a year, but that’s because I’m the sole caretaker of my mother. I’m at the point there I’m looking into other means of getting my husband over here to the US because the legal process is ridiculous! I’ve paid the US over $2000.00 dollars directly through fees and indirectly through doing all of their requirements and I still can’t have my husband who I need and want with me. I’ve contacted the American Embassy over and Jamaica and tried to explain that fact that I do make more than enough! I’ve sent them my employment contracts for the pass two years and 7mths worth of paycheck subs showing my income and they still refuse to accept it. I completely understand the struggle immigrates go through and why they are so reluctant to do things the “legal” way.

Posted by: Mrs. LaChere Denton | April 27, 2010, 6:57 pm 6:57 pm

Posted by: For the Record | April 27, 2010, 6:57 pm 6:57 pm

BUT HE’S A COMEDIAN!
Comedians don’t do social commentary except throughout their acts.
Posted by: Ryan C | Apr 27, 2010 6:55:11 PM
Right. I shouldn’t confuse Bernie Goldberg any further. ;^)

Posted by: progressive mama | April 27, 2010, 7:00 pm 7:00 pm

BUT HE’S A COMEDIAN!
Comedians don’t do social commentary except throughout their acts.
Posted by: Ryan C | Apr 27, 2010 6:55:11 PM
Except the left wing nuts think he’s actually reporting the news!”
Sarcasm does not always translate thru posting.
But Stewart actually is reporting the news.
Mostly thru the lense of mocking cable news(as plump a target as has existed).
PewStudy of political knowledge (frokm 2007)
“There are substantial differences in the knowledge levels of the audiences for different news outlets. However, there is no clear connection between news formats and what audiences know. Well-informed audiences come from cable (Daily Show/Colbert Report, O’Reilly Factor), the internet (especially major newspaper websites), broadcast TV (NewsHour with Jim Lehrer) and radio (NPR, Rush Limbaugh’s program). The less informed audiences also frequent a mix of formats: broadcast television (network morning news shows, local news), cable (Fox News Channel), and the internet (online blogs where people discuss news events).”
Those who got their news from the Daily Show and/or Colbert Report had the highest score.

Posted by: Ryan C | April 27, 2010, 7:02 pm 7:02 pm

Posted by: For the Record | Apr 27, 2010 6:49:10 PM
I think maybe you ought to reread it slowly and work on your comprehension skills. Maybe look up the words you don’t understand.
Posted by: progressive mama | Apr 27, 2010 6:56:25 PM
Gosh. You’re soooo serious. I guess you don’t recognize lefty-style, over-the-top, emotional rhetoric when you read it. I admit, it was a stretch.
Carry on.

Posted by: For the Record | April 27, 2010, 7:04 pm 7:04 pm

But Stewart actually is reporting the news.
Posted by: Ryan C | Apr 27, 2010 7:02:54 PM
Yea, you got me there. Good point.
Carry on.

Posted by: For the Record | April 27, 2010, 7:06 pm 7:06 pm

“And Wolf Blitzer factchecks SNL!”
CNN has fallen so far from what it used to be 20 years ago.
Last night, flipping thru Larry King was on, he was doing a show on Bret Michaels (lead singer of 80′s Hair Metal Band Poison) who recently had a brain aneurysm.
Larry loves fluff so who am I to begrudge.
But half the show was a plug for the Celebrity Apprentice (which Michaels was on) which just made me ill.

Posted by: Ryan C | April 27, 2010, 7:09 pm 7:09 pm

I also completely disagree with this law. It’s to me the same thing as driving while Black! It’s a dangerous trap to say that it’s ok to allow law enforcement to pull someone over, demand proof of something, and detain them if they don’t have it. And for how long are they detained? how will they be treated? what if they decided to detain everyone who looks black, poor, a drug addict? It’s opening a Pandora’s box in so many ways! And what about those Hispanics that don’t “look” Hispanic? what about the millions of illegal immigrates that are white? why is it only an issue with people of color? there are plenty of illegal immigrates that come from countries European countries every year that are never sent back because they are white! example a few years back military officers got into trouble because they were getting paid to marry Russian women to aid them in coming over to the US! and what happened to the Russian women who committed the fraud, NOTHING! they got to stay here, hmmmmmmmmmmm I wonder why!

Posted by: Mrs. LaChere Denton | April 27, 2010, 7:09 pm 7:09 pm

I guess you don’t recognize lefty-style, over-the-top, emotional rhetoric when you read it. I admit, it was a stretch.
___________
I don’t recognize it as “lefty-style.” Most of the over-the-top, super-emotive, logically-inconsistent stuff I read strikes me as right-wing, and/or Fox News entertainment stuff and/or insane and/or all three (see Glenn Beck.)

Posted by: progressive mama | April 27, 2010, 7:14 pm 7:14 pm

Those who got their news from the Daily Show and/or Colbert Report had the highest score.
Posted by: Ryan C | Apr 27, 2010 7:02:54 PM
I watched Colbert once (didn’t like him) I think Stewart is funny – I watch him occasionally while channel surfing. I just took the poll and got 1 wrong (apparently the DOW was not closer to 11000 when the quiz was published).
I get my news from various sources but would rather be playing video games.
I think overall liberals are probably more well-read than conservatives – much the same as most professors are liberal. They prefer it. Conservatives are more business oriented in their thinking and interests. That’s obviously a very broad generality.

Posted by: For the Record | April 27, 2010, 7:21 pm 7:21 pm

I don’t recognize it as “lefty-style.” Most of the over-the-top, super-emotive, logically-inconsistent stuff I read strikes me as right-wing, and/or Fox News entertainment stuff and/or insane and/or all three (see Glenn Beck.)
Posted by: progressive mama | Apr 27, 2010 7:14:23 PM
Well, now I guess you would, wouldn’t you. No surprise there.
“all three” – see many liberal commentators from various sources
We could probably do this all day – it’s not likely to be productive.

Posted by: For the Record | April 27, 2010, 7:25 pm 7:25 pm

I am new Mexico citizen (american born) I have seen first hand the preferential treatment illegal immigrants get for medical care. For years illegal immigrants who needed dialysis were given the fast track thru the emergency room sent to the dialysis unit and received FREE dialysis. There is not one american citizen, veteran, or elderly person who could receive the same I am tired of paying taxes for people who come over here for health care (Signs are put up in EL Paso TX telling patients to go to UNM for health care.Until we can take care of our own we can’t and should’t take care of others. We also need to quit paying to educate illegal immigrants children again we need to take care of our own. Our forfathers are rolling in their graves. Our veterans are doing the same SHAME ON THOSE POLITICIANS WHO THINK IT IS OK TO BREAK THE LAW!!! WHY HAVE OR ENFORCE ANY LAW IF WE CHOOSE TO PICK AND CHOOSE THE LAWS TO ENFORCE

Posted by: C T | April 27, 2010, 8:16 pm 8:16 pm

It’s time for a National ID Card…
The de facto official identification card for adults in all states is the driver’s license, which must be carried at all times when operating a vehicle in most states, and in most states presented to law enforcement officers upon request (while one is driving the vehicle). Driver licensing authorities also make photo based identification cards available for those who do not have driver’s licenses.
48 states have a Department of Motor Vehicles (or an equivalent agency of the state government) which issues and manages driver’s licenses and identification cards. The states of Hawaii and Kentucky delegate driver licensing to county governments (along with vehicle registration).
Driver’s licenses issued in any state are recognized as valid identity documents in all other states under a variety of legal principles like comity and the Full Faith and Credit Clause. Many countries also recognize American licenses as valid identity documents.

Posted by: Boz Skaggs | April 27, 2010, 9:13 pm 9:13 pm

Lindsey Graham is not a man who can be trusted by Southern conservatives. He will saddle up with the likes of northern and S.F. liberals when it comes to cap and trade and immigration. South Carolina can find someone to challenge Graham in 2014 just as Arizina has a strong challenge to McCain(a man who almost legalized illegals before). Republicans you can do better. Look at Rubio in Florida, a man of the ordinary people and not liberal Washington.

Posted by: rockychance | April 27, 2010, 9:16 pm 9:16 pm

Great. Buncha do nothing guys in D. C. complain and moan and yak it up.
Get ridda all of em

Posted by: stan | April 27, 2010, 9:17 pm 9:17 pm

National ID Card#2
Besides border security, ending illegal immigration will also require an effective employment verification system that holds employers accountable for hiring illegal workers.
A tamper-proof ID system would dramatically decrease illegal immigration, experts have said, and would reduce the government revenue lost when employers and workers here illegally fail to pay taxes.
Require all U.S. citizens and legal immigrants who want jobs to obtain a high-tech, fraud-proof Social Security card. Each card’s unique biometric identifier would be stored only on the card; no government database would house everyone’s information.
The cards would not contain any private information, medical information or tracking devices. The card would be a high-tech version of the Social Security card that citizens already have.

Posted by: Boz Skaggs | April 27, 2010, 9:21 pm 9:21 pm

Obama is going to lose a lot of support from people like me who voted for him. No one is missing the fact that while Obama, Holter and Napolitano roundly condemn Arizon’s new law and foolishly and irresponsibly fan the flames of political partisanship and racial division, they are also doing absolutely nothing to stop illegal immigration across our souther border — which everyone agrees has reached crisis proportions. I don’t care whether the next candidate for federal or state office that I vote for is a Republican, a Democrat or something else — all I care about is that the candidate actually do something to clamp down on illegal immigration, which is now totally out of control and responsible for consuming a fair portion of my tax dollars. Obama has certainly lost my future vote with all of his recent moral grandstanding and complete lack of meaningful action on this issue.

Posted by: Douglas | April 27, 2010, 9:44 pm 9:44 pm

No one is missing the fact that while Obama, Holter and Napolitano roundly condemn Arizon’s new law and foolishly and irresponsibly fan the flames of political partisanship and racial division, they are also doing absolutely nothing to stop illegal immigration across our souther border — which everyone agrees has reached crisis proportions.
Posted by: Douglas | Apr 27, 2010 9:44:49 PM
______________________________________
President Obama increased the funding for immigration enforcement (deportation and defense of the border) by almost $2 billion last budget. He recently had quotas set for the minimum number of deportations each federal immigration officer must meet to increase enforcement (and took flak from the left for doing so). Based on the documented facts, this administration is doing more than any in a generation to secure the borders. But again, that’s just verifiable reality.

Posted by: tierra | April 28, 2010, 1:37 am 1:37 am

I always thought it was illegal to be an illegal and that is what the law has always been. So why is Obama and his croonies wanting the law to do, is it (do nothing). Could be that maybe Obama is also an illegal.

Posted by: Dale DuBois | April 28, 2010, 6:32 am 6:32 am

As a South Carolinian I look forward to sending Graham back to Seneca in 2014.

Posted by: Rasputin3.14 | April 28, 2010, 6:51 am 6:51 am

“President Obama increased the funding for immigration enforcement
blah blah blah
to increase enforcement
blah blah blah
this administration is doing more than any
blahditty blah blah
verifiable reality.” – tierra
Listen Honey, it’s all about focus and results not increasing a number or two in a budget. How’s that wall going? Has it been built yet? Is the kidnapping rate going down? Has anyone been beaten up or murdered lately?

Posted by: Noz | April 28, 2010, 8:53 am 8:53 am

To all of you who are against this AZ law, WHY its the same FEDERAL law thats on the books for years, so maybe that is wrong too, or you just jump on the bandwagon without reading it.

Posted by: Lizzie | April 28, 2010, 2:05 pm 2:05 pm

30% of the citizens of Arizona are of Hispanic heritage…. the composition of Arizona law enforcement reflects percentage. Citizens of Arizona are being run over, shot, kidnapped, and otherwise endangered by criminal illegal aliens. Law enforcement officers of all ethnicity are being shot at and killed!
This law does NOT allow an officer to demand anyone who “looks” illegal, to produce ID, BUT, if they are legally engaged with individuals, traffic stop, speeding, etc., they can. Just like they can legally ask to see a driver’s license. This racial crap is trumped up for political reasons. Arizona passed a law which mirrors federal law, which violates no ones “civil rights”.
Just try to hang out in Mexico, or any other sovereign nation in the world, without your passport ready to show who you are, and that you are a legal “guest”. If the United States borders are pointless, then why are paying taxes to the feckless “cartel” in Washington!?!?!?!

Posted by: oldtexgal | April 28, 2010, 6:21 pm 6:21 pm

what about the millions of illegal immigrates that are white?
—
What millions are you talking about?

Posted by: smartlillena | April 28, 2010, 8:01 pm 8:01 pm

The Arizona Law is pefectly legal. Investigate persons that are acting suscpiciously like illegals! Deport the SOB’s Now! The only reason far left lunes are against this and Obama is preaching its discrimantory and racist is the longer they don’t enforce the law and give more of these people amenesty, the bigger the Democratic voting block.
Deport all Illegals NOW!!!

Posted by: Chris | April 28, 2010, 11:04 pm 11:04 pm

I believe that the Law on Mexicans is wrong in so many ways! Mexicans are humans just as whites, blacks, arabs, all races! If a piece of paper allows someone to have to right to be here what makes the US any better then dirt? People come here to have a good life and be free. Why would you ever want to ruin a persons life better yet destroy families? If you think that what you are doing is right I prey for all those who are for this law! We were born Mexicans, we didnt ask to be. So why are we being punished for our race? IM 12 YEARS OLD AND IM A PROUD MEXICAN!! THANK YOU FOR BEING THE REASON WE CANT LIVE THE LIFE OF OTHERS.

Posted by: Angelica Talamantes | April 30, 2010, 1:15 am 1:15 am

Top

Obama Administration Officials, GOP Senator Graham Criticize Arizona Immigration Law

Related Videos

Leave a Reply