home

Monday Afternoon Open Thread: Boycott Arizona!

Via Digby, the conservative Arizona Republic editorializes:

[Arizona Gov.] Brewer's televised signing ceremony for this harsh, unnecessary legislation constitutes the low point of an administration we have come to admire for its often surprising grit in the face of hard times. We held out hope for more.

Whether Arizona pays a price for indulging the whims of state Sen. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, is no longer the issue. We are paying a price. Not since the dismal days of our nationally infamous fight over a holiday to honor the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., has the profile of Arizona descended this low.

(Emphasis supplied.) Meanwhile, Lindsey Graham is upset that Democrats want to take up immigration reform. If there was ever a doubt that Republicans loathe Latinos, this removes it.

Open Thread.

< Misreading The Polling On FinReg | Tancredo: Arizona Went Too Far >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    As far as loathing Latinos (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 05:45:26 PM EST
    Enterprise AL is a study in what I do not know.  They don't know what to do with "these people".  They have figured out where to segregate blacks to in this town, but we have no "Latino town".....just lots of Latino work.  Their idea of "America" and mine couldn't ever be farther apart.  Born and raised in Colorado, I've always shared America with "Latinos"...and a family last name, and bad sandwiches in my lunch, and birthday parties, and PTA meetings, and apartments, and ideas, and recipes, and babysitting, and books, and best friendships.

    Having grown up (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by Jen M on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 05:52:39 PM EST
    In Brazil and Costa Rica, I hear you. Except you have to add family on my list.

    If you ever go to Costa Rica don't say you are American, they will say "me too"  

    We are, after all, in the same hemisphere.

    Parent

    My Aunt is Latino (5.00 / 3) (#18)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 06:33:16 PM EST
    therefore my cousins I suppose are half if we are attempting to talk "purebreds" in human terms :)  I didn't consciously grasp that she was Latino though and that some people considered her "different" from me until I was in my teens.  I came to understand though that her worries can be and are different from mine about ten years ago.  We were all sitting around discussing hate crimes.  Someone at the table asked if burning a cross in someone's yard should be a hate crime.  Me in my Buddhism said No, it is a symbol....nothing but a burning symbol, it should mean nothing to anyone other than the jerk lighting it.  My so beautiful Aunt though said so softly, "No, it is a hate crime."  Something in her eyes that night I will never forget. She was always so strong for me, suddenly I realized that she had been twice as strong in this life than I being her neice had ever really suspected.  She loved my mom so very much and even though my mom has been gone 30 years now she still does,  she keeps trying to tell me my mom was a good cook, but she didn't have to eat at the womans table though seven days a week :)  She tried to be a second mom to me when she could, sent me all the latest best children's books, bought and sent me my first "professional" art set with drawing journal, many different papers, charcoal pencils and gum erasers.  And she has known fear, different fears than I have ever known in this life living in this country.

    Parent
    What a wonderful Aunt! (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by Jen M on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 07:40:28 PM EST
    I hope I can be one tenth as good

    Parent
    oh, and my lil brother (5.00 / 3) (#36)
    by Jen M on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 07:45:49 PM EST
    is adopted as I am.  He, however, was born in Brazil, from a Brazilian mother who gave him up.

    I was born in Chicago to lord only knows who. I am generic short European that could pass for native from Scandinavia to Italy.  

    My brother is 6'5" blonde and blue eyed.

    If we both went to Arizona would he, the actual Latino be stopped?

    Parent

    I think about that too (none / 0) (#53)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 03:34:24 AM EST
    when considering this issue.  What would it be like to get pulled over and have half my family shaken down because of something like melanin genes?  It would violate the whole family too.  What would the rest of us do?  Would there be a fist fight and then jail time for some of my family members?  I can think of two right off the bat that that would be likely for in such a scenario.

    Parent
    Well, to be accurate (5.00 / 4) (#4)
    by Cream City on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 06:06:06 PM EST
    Latinos and Latinas have shared Colorado with you -- and us.  And they have shared New Mexico, Nevada, much of California and more, even Arizona! for about a fourth of this country, which was about a third of their country before we stole it from Mexico.

    I would like to see nationwide teach-ins of the history of the Mexican-American War of 1848, not only the infamous actions of President Polk but also the words of Ulysses S. Grant, a future president then who served in that war -- and regretted it ever afterward.  He said that our Civil War was our penance for the Mexican-American War -- owing to our national shame of slavery and the "doctrine of manifest destiny," as both factors led us into both wars.

    I wonder if Grant could imagine that we still would be fighting the Mexican-American War today.

    Parent

    my county is a minimum of 10 percent Latino (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by jeffinalabama on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 06:17:23 PM EST
    and probably more. Currently 40 percent of school aged children are Latino. Within 10 years, 60 percent of the children in this county's schools will be latino.

    But the mayor of Albertville is concerned about "illegal immigrants." He signed on with the 287 G program with ICE.

    It's a difficult situation, and it's surprisingly complex, intergenerationally.

    Boycotting Arizona-- count me in. Let's not see this nonsense spread.

    Parent

    the history of texas alone (5.00 / 3) (#13)
    by CST on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 06:28:16 PM EST
    is enough to make you sit back and think - just who took over which country.

    Not to mention the damage done to the Rio Grande (and therefore the economy in Mexico) due to the dams put in on this side of the border essentially taking all the water from mexico and keeping it up north.

    Parent

    Yes, it's mind-boggling for students (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by Cream City on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 07:18:23 PM EST
    when taught that the lead-up to the Mexican-American War was due to Mexico trying to keep out illegal immigrant Americans -- the ones who invaded Texas and brought slaves, and since slavery already was illegal in Mexico, it attempted to keep out  more Americans!

    Parent
    Probably even more mind-boggling (none / 0) (#95)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 05:39:03 PM EST
    for them to learn the truth, that for for most of the 1820's Mexico invited Americans and others to legally immigrate to the Mexican territory of Texas because these legal immigrants would pay Mexico to buy the land and then also pay the Mexican gvt taxes.

    Mexico allowed slavery in the territory because w/o it there would be no profits to be made in Texas and therefore no Americans nor anyone else would have any reason to pay Mexico for Texas territory land and there would be no tax money to collect.

    Then, after the Mexicans took the legal immigrants' land-purchase money and their tax money for some time, they realized that it might be too much of a good thing, that there were a lot more legal immigrants in Texas than Mexicans (ie., the only Mexicans with enough money to buy land were not of the class that would consider dirtying themselves with farming or ranching) and that the Americans and other legal immigrants wanted to have more say in how the territory was run.

    At some point the Mexican gvt realized that they were in real danger of losing control of the territory so they then increased taxes and abolished slavery in 1929 in its territories in an effort to drive the legal immigrants and legal land-holders out of the territory.

    And the rest, as they say, is history.

    Parent

    Sorry, slight mistake on my part: (none / 0) (#98)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 05:48:25 PM EST
    On September 15, 1829, President Vicente Guerrero declared emancipation for slaves, although he later exempted Texas.


    Parent
    The fact is, people throughout (none / 0) (#99)
    by MyLeftMind on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 05:56:43 PM EST
    history have always taken land and resources from other people. It's human nature. Tribalism and racism stem from very human characteristics that are biologically innate and have insured our survival. The whole anti-white sentiment that pervades politically correct thinking nowadays is pretty silly when you look at the overall pattern of violence between people of with the same origins.

    Parent
    Yup. (none / 0) (#104)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 06:23:13 PM EST
    Huh? And who did Mexico "steal" (none / 0) (#22)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 06:40:01 PM EST
    those parts of the country from? And who "stole"/displaced who on that land before that? And before that?

    Hell, why not give all the land back to it's rightful original owners, you know, the deer and the buffalo?

    Parent

    You really are not going to try (5.00 / 3) (#31)
    by Cream City on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 07:15:18 PM EST
    that illogical, grade-school argument on a blog full of lawyers, are you?:-)  

    Even if you do, it may help to know that a huge part of the population of Mexico is mestizo, so they are descendants of the First Nations -- and so, even by your argument, they have a prior claim.

    Parent

    LMAO (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by mexboy on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 10:09:26 PM EST
    You are too funny Cream City!
    Thanks for that.

    Parent
    Sad. Really. (none / 0) (#63)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 12:19:55 PM EST
    The English speaking Europeans and their descendants "stole" the land from the Spanish speaking Europeans and their descendants who "stole" the land from the then existing populations of native peoples who were not the "first peoples."

    Did you ever wonder why the illegal immigrants you see are mostly mestizo? And not of European or other wealthy bloodlines like, say, Salma Hayek or Benicio Del Toro or Felipe Calderón or Carlos Slim? Have you ever seen the living conditions of Mexico's native peoples, ie., no European blood? Why do you think "cholo" is a relatively degrading word?

    I can understand that know little about the Mexico and it's history and culture, but one would think you could at least use google. :-)

    Parent

    Never Wondered (none / 0) (#65)
    by squeaky on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 12:34:23 PM EST
    Did you ever wonder why the illegal immigrants you see are mostly mestizo? And not of European or other wealthy bloodlines like, say, Salma Hayek or Benicio Del Toro or Felipe Calderón or Carlos Slim?

    Because the rich are called émigrées while the poor are called immigrants. Also the rich are fewer in numbers than the poor, so the poor stand out because of their numbers.

    Parent

    Maybe you should wonder. (none / 0) (#66)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 12:40:28 PM EST
    It might help you understand Mexico better.

    Parent
    Really, now, you must not have read (none / 0) (#73)
    by Cream City on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 01:53:43 PM EST
    much about the Mayans and Aztecs -- as I have, and rather extensively.  And they (and others) consider themselves quite the natives there.

    Go away with your ignorance and attitude.

    Parent

    I think the ignorance and attitude (none / 0) (#74)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 02:00:35 PM EST
    is summed up quite clearly in this one phrase:
    a fourth of this country, which was about a third of their country before we stole it from Mexico.


    Parent
    Good lord, just look at maps (none / 0) (#107)
    by Cream City on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 06:52:24 PM EST
    of how much of this country was how much of Mexico before the Mexican-American War -- and read about what Polk did.

    Then come on back to be able to engage in a conversation about that most misguided war.

    Parent

    "Stole" is the word at issue, (none / 0) (#110)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 11:01:16 PM EST
    you'd think a poster on a blog full of lawyers would have figured that out by now.

    Parent
    Reminds me of Wallace Stevens (none / 0) (#84)
    by jondee on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 03:15:21 PM EST
    (of all people) saying in a letter in reference to the Ethiopian invasion, "Let the fascists take it from the n*ggers, the way the n*ggers took it from the boa constrictors.."

    Stevens felt that way right up until the moment when his mother was knocked over in the street by a mugger (asserting his own right of dominion)

    Parent

    So the upshot is what? (none / 0) (#80)
    by jondee on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 03:07:39 PM EST
    There's nothing wrong with stealing? And might makes right?

    Parent
    The upshot (none / 0) (#86)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 03:31:37 PM EST
    is that the self-loathing, or whatever, displayed in such comments is misplaced.

    Parent
    self loathing? (5.00 / 1) (#88)
    by CST on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 03:46:10 PM EST
    I don't think anyone here was alive long enough to see this all go down.

    But it is important to understand history in order to figure out how we got here, and why things are the way they are before we assume entitlement.  I'm not saying we should give Texas back to Mexico (although... :)) but it is important to realize the effects that taking it might have had for the rest of the country.  And the other things we have done north of the border that affect the people to the south.  I wasn't making up the stuff about the Rio Grande.  You're from so. cal I believe so you should know how intense the water battles get in the S.W.

    And to me, the main point about mentioning how we got Texas and California to begin with is that there is a sense of historical irony here with the immigration rhetoric.  I think that's something we can all appreciate.

    But no self loathing here, at least not on that count - my family wasn't even here back then.  I've got enough of that going on from my German side :)

    Parent

    CST, (none / 0) (#89)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 03:56:41 PM EST
    I have a BS in Civil and Environmental Engineering. I lived for a time in Tucson and went to U of Arizona. I have written quite lengthy papers on water in the S.W., including the historical context. I live in LA. I am very aware of what you speak. I'm not sure why you would think I was not, as none of my comments were in reply to any of yours...

    Parent
    well (none / 0) (#91)
    by CST on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 04:16:12 PM EST
    "I believe you know" would indicate I did in fact think you were aware.  I know you weren't responding to me, but my point is that taking land is not just about lines on a map.  And it's still happening today, not to the forefathers of the forefathers of those who lived there before us.

    Parent
    ok ok (none / 0) (#92)
    by CST on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 04:17:32 PM EST
    I misquoted myself, I did say "I believe you should know".  Take out the should.  It was a bit condescending in retrospect.

    Parent
    No worries. (none / 0) (#93)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 04:25:59 PM EST
    You can acknowledge error (none / 0) (#87)
    by jondee on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 03:44:16 PM EST
    without turning it into a neurosis.

    There always seems to be a lot of this swinging back and forth between indignation about or rationalization of the past, that never seems to get us anywhere vis a vis "learning the lessons of history".

    Parent

    What specific error are you speaking of? (none / 0) (#90)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 03:59:18 PM EST
    I'm down... (none / 0) (#27)
    by kdog on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 06:50:58 PM EST
    and live like an Apeman:)

    Parent
    Classic! (none / 0) (#29)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 06:54:20 PM EST
    Ray Davies (none / 0) (#81)
    by jondee on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 03:09:55 PM EST
    my favorite Apeman.

    Parent
    crossing my fingers (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by CST on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 06:19:31 PM EST
    I just got a phone call and found out I may get to go to Afghanistan for engineering work sooner rather than later.  I never thought this would happen before my P.E. and/or a master's degree, but just goes to show, you should always keep talking about what you want, you never know who might be listening.

    It's still up in the air though, I may be going somewhere else (like Columbia) for a few weeks instead, or it could still all fall through.  Crossing my fingers for the 6 month gig in Afghanistan.  That would definitely be the dream.

    CST is hardcore... (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by kdog on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 06:44:21 PM EST
    Afghanistan?  I was just reading about the nightlife in Time.

    Hope it works out for ya!

    Parent

    hope so! (5.00 / 2) (#34)
    by CST on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 07:30:01 PM EST
    I could certainly use some of that hazard pay, although I don't expect to be making anything remotely close to the "average" in that article.

    I have been wanting to go for a while now.  If only to see for myself what's really going on over there, and try to do my part re- damage control/ hearts and minds.  Although I doubt I'll really get out of the capital much, I would not exactly be going as a journalist.  Plus I've never been to the middle east and it's always been high on my list.

    I really hope this works out.  Trying not to get my hopes up, but it's not working.  And I think the odds are pretty solidly in my favor.  They specifically asked if I would be ok with Afghanistan.  I think they are having a harder time finding takers for that gig.

    Parent

    Colombia, or Columbia? (none / 0) (#15)
    by jeffinalabama on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 06:30:20 PM EST
    Family in Colombia, but the river? not so much...;-)


    Parent
    heh (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by CST on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 06:31:53 PM EST
    I'll admit, spelling is my downfall.

    There is no logic to it.

    Parent

    Been to Colombia, loved it. (none / 0) (#28)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 06:51:58 PM EST
    Afghanistan, wow. Well, I hope it all works out for you!

    Parent
    Good luck CST (none / 0) (#40)
    by ruffian on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 08:45:54 PM EST
    I admire your nerve. What kind of engineering work do you do, or would you be doing overseas?

    Parent
    thanks! (none / 0) (#59)
    by CST on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 10:37:13 AM EST
    I work in transportation, so it would mostly be roadway planning and design.

    Parent
    Oy (none / 0) (#60)
    by squeaky on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 10:52:12 AM EST
    Hope that you do not have to work on the notorious Khyber Pass.

    From what I have read that area is a death zone..

    Parent

    When Tom Tancredo... (5.00 / 4) (#24)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 06:41:37 PM EST
    ...thinks you've gone too far, chances are you've gone off the really, really deep-end.  

    Ha! Tancredo is truly a piece of (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by christinep on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 07:14:07 PM EST
    work! On the much-quoted commented today, I'm guessing that he had a momentary lapse and remembrance of his own Italian immigrant grandparents. (BTW, I wonder what they would think of him now.)

    Parent
    Guess what? (5.00 / 8) (#38)
    by Dr Molly on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 08:15:14 PM EST
    The Gulf oil spill is enormous in magnitude (currently covers 1800 square miles and spreading fast), they have no idea how to stop it, and it will have huge ecosystem effects. Guess what else? Big oil aggressively and successfully fought off new proposed federal safety and environmental regulations based on studies of previous spills, just prior to this spill.

    I'm shocked I tell you, shocked.

    Drill Baby, Drill.

    they sure went out of their way (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by ruffian on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 08:50:55 PM EST
    to assure us there was no spill with this, I guess until they could no longer hide it. The first report I heard about the whole thing said there was no pumping going on at the time of the explosion, so there likely would be no major spill. Then on NPR one morning late last week there was a report that they had sent a robotic camera down to check, and the well was sealed.

    Freaking liars.

    Parent

    Obama still supports off-shore drilling (none / 0) (#47)
    by caseyOR on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 10:15:58 PM EST
    Recent comments by Robert Gibbs, WH press secretary, seem, to me, to be just a bit cavalier. When questioned about whether this recent spill might cause a reconsideration at the WH, replied [http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/04/22/1593431/obama-pledges-federal-help-on.html].

    Parent
    Okay, that didn't work (none / 0) (#48)
    by caseyOR on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 10:17:57 PM EST
    Gibbs made a comment to the effect that this wasn't the first spill and wouldn't be the last.

    Try this link.

    Parent

    Drill Bama Drill (none / 0) (#100)
    by MyLeftMind on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 05:59:15 PM EST
    n/t

    Parent
    I live in L.A. and never had a problem until... (5.00 / 2) (#49)
    by mexboy on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 10:43:33 PM EST
    Pete Wilson started stirring up the hatred towards "illegal aliens" in California.

    I was at a public laundromat, doing my laundry, and had a lot of it to do. An anglo man thought I was taking up too many drying machines and told me: "I don't know how you do things in your country, but that is not how we do them in America."

    I, not being timid, and a citizen, yelled at the top of my lungs, so that everyone in that place could hear me: "What did you say to me, em effer?

    He pleaded for me to be quiet, but I challenged him to say it out loud so everyone could hear him. When he didn't, I told everyone what he told me and informed them I was a citizen. I added colorful words like coward and  racist pig to my outrage.

    He took his wet clothes and went home.

    I've felt but a small dose of stirred up hatred for looking different. It is humiliating and dehumanizing.

    I applaud everyone on this site who stands up and does the right thing. It's heartwarming.

    You might be suprised to know (none / 0) (#64)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 12:33:03 PM EST
    that a white person in a hispanic area can also experience this type of thing...

    Parent
    I don't understand your point (none / 0) (#75)
    by mexboy on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 02:14:16 PM EST
    Since I was referring to a personal experience linked to a political act. And no, I don't condone such behavior towards anyone.

    Parent
    Fair enough, (none / 0) (#79)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 03:05:56 PM EST
    this thread seems to have a certain amount of "whitey is bad" sentiment, and I am heartened to know you were not jumping on that bandwagon.

    Parent
    I've never been on that wagon, (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by mexboy on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 05:48:22 PM EST
    and I'd like to think I have a certain amount of self-awarness that would red flag the hypocrisy of such act.  But thanks for having me in check.

    I also don't see any "whitey is bad"  sentiment, as you put it, either, but it is clear you found it,  took it personally and decided to warn me, just in case.

    Parent

    I have been very very busy (5.00 / 3) (#50)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 02:22:46 AM EST
    and had not checked in with Little Sis for a week.  Tonight during a sleepless period I went and checked in and they have a profile on Richard C Perry who is responsible for starting a misinformation campaign about the "insolvency" of Social Security and how it needs to be privatized so that it can "be solvent" in the future.  That's pretty funny considering what they did with our IRA before we removed it from their solvent grasp. I sure hope that everyone notices that hedgefund managers/past Goldman Sachs employees who are close friends with Rubin are on the advisory council for the Hamilton Project.  The masters of the universe really really need the only real savings account that America has left these days in order to stay masters of the universe.....and that would be your Social Security.  They are the ones facing insolvency with tons and tons and tons of toxic assets on everyones books.......it isn't Social Security that is insolvent at all.  But they need your hard cold cash, what little of it you have left.

    Badges ? We ain't got no badges! (none / 0) (#3)
    by Saul on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 05:59:27 PM EST
    "Papers? We ain't got no papers! We don't need no papers! I don't have to show you any stinkin' Papers!"


    Yeah (none / 0) (#5)
    by squeaky on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 06:10:16 PM EST
    Makes sense that the conservatives are distancing themselves from the radical right...because they are worried about money?

    They point out that had not Gov. Brewer signed the fascist screed, she would not have been re-elected. What a state, and I thought Texas was bad.

    Arizona (none / 0) (#32)
    by christinep on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 07:15:53 PM EST
    The home of Barry Goldwater and John McCain.

    Parent
    A real profile on courage there (none / 0) (#42)
    by ruffian on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 08:53:42 PM EST
    Does she need that job that badly? Surely she was a productive member of society before last January.

    Parent
    I still think the best way (none / 0) (#6)
    by nyrias on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 06:11:32 PM EST
    is to embarrass them. Boycotting works a lot less effectively than embarrassment.

    Have some prominent Hispanics (congressman, professors, business leaders, George Lopez! what no ...) travel to Arizona .. sooner or later they will be detained and CNN can descent upon the Arizona like sharks seeing blood.

    I can't wait Larry King interviewing the Arizona governor grilling him if important people are being detained by this law.  

    Boycotting Is Embarrassing (5.00 / 2) (#7)
    by squeaky on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 06:16:30 PM EST
    And gets them in the only place they seem to care about..

    Parent
    I agree, boycotting is embarrassing (none / 0) (#12)
    by KeysDan on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 06:27:59 PM EST
    in all the right places.  An effective sidecar is ridicule; while it may just get defenses up in some so as to dig in their spurs, others will not be so immune.  Moreover, ridicule may be supportive of the boycott.

    Parent
    Why the dichotomy? (5.00 / 6) (#11)
    by Cream City on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 06:24:51 PM EST
    This need not be an either-or discussion; why not do both?  And anything else that may work?

    Boycotts do work.  See the interview on CNN today with the mayor of Phoenix, getting lots of phone calls from organizations with conventions upcoming, as he desperately attempts to reassure them that the law will not be in effect quite yet . . . while he also is attempting to tell prospective conventioneering organizations that this will be fixed.  He said that Phoenix will sue the state because of even the threat of boycotts and what this will do to the city's economy.

    I do hope that my city's convention bureau, in this state in which tourism is the leading industry, also is making lots of calls -- to all of the organizations that were committed to or considering Phoenix.

    Parent

    More evidence that boycotts work (5.00 / 2) (#45)
    by Cream City on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 09:31:12 PM EST
    and this one already is working in Arizona.  Ya gotta love this cancellation:
    The American Immigration Lawyers Association notified JW Marriott in Scottsdale  that it's canceling a meeting of about 300 scheduled for later this year. George Tzamaras, an association spokesman, says, "We didn't feel it was appropriate to have a meeting in (the) state."

    And the head of the Asian American Hoteliers group is calling for action against Arizona, too.  Pssst: Asian Americans own 40% of that industry.

    Just give the boycott train a bit of time, and you'll see -- as Arizona did in the '90s, when it would not recognize the MLK holiday.  The result:  More than 170 conventions cancelled meetings there.

    Parent

    Check all whites on purpose (none / 0) (#10)
    by Saul on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 06:21:09 PM EST
    The law is wide spread and is looking for any illegal immigrant regardless of color  (although they are only looking for Hispanics)  So let those police officers who are against this bill start stopping all whites and asked them for their papers.  

    Yeah you are white but maybe you are an illegal Irish or German, etc.  Then when the whites complaint about this injustice then tell them it was your AZ congress and governor who told us to enforce this law.  

    I doubt very seriously that this law will come into play in 90 days as scheduled.  Some judge will will claim it unconstitutional very quickly and issue an injunction.    I give it two weeks before this happens.

    Parent

    I doubt you'll find... (none / 0) (#19)
    by kdog on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 06:36:01 PM EST
    many police against the law...they just want more money.

    Parent
    You might be surprised, Kdog... (5.00 / 4) (#21)
    by jeffinalabama on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 06:37:39 PM EST
    remember, I was a cop in Arizona some years ago for about a year. Lots of cops despise stupid laws.

    Parent
    You right man... (none / 0) (#26)
    by kdog on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 06:46:21 PM EST
    old prejudices are hard to kick.

    Parent
    Lots of Hispanic cops there, so they say (none / 0) (#37)
    by Cream City on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 07:50:04 PM EST
    in claiming that the Arizona cops will be all fair and balanced when stopping people.

    Perhaps those Latino and Latina cops will stop all those Euro types, looking for illegal Germans and Irish. :-)

    Parent

    A real concern (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by christinep on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 08:40:41 PM EST
    in addition to the whole wacko Arizona law: I understand there is a provision that specifically provides for citizen suits if the police are deemed not to be zealous enough in enforcing that law. How volatile! First, you have this new law; second, you acknowledge (as governor) that police officers will need to be trained to not fall into racial profiling; third, you create a pressure cooker by specifically adding a citizen suit enforcement provision, which could be expected to pressure police officers to be more vigorous in enforcement. IMO, this Arizona concoction is worse than and much beyond racial profiling. It first had to create the law which created the crime which necessitates a type of vigilante enforcement. It is a device in search of a crime for which to arrest Latinos/Latinas.

    Parent
    Exactly (none / 0) (#43)
    by ruffian on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 08:57:05 PM EST
    I bet there are plenty of police officers against this law. Only a matter of time before someone brings one of these actions. It is  exactly what the writers of the law had in mind.

    Parent
    Yikes. And it need not be said (none / 0) (#44)
    by Cream City on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 09:25:28 PM EST
    that there clearly are a lot in Arizona of the sort who would just so enjoy waging litigious warfare against any officer of the peace who tried to live up to that term.

    Your last sentence says it all (and so grammatically!).

    Parent

    Law enforcement and lawsuits... (none / 0) (#67)
    by jeffinalabama on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 12:43:05 PM EST
    Most sworn officers have to carry some insurance for lawsuits. the officers are often (not always, but often) named in the suits, as well as the department, the city, and sometimes supervisors of the officers, sergeants and lieutenants.

    The city and department have their attorneys. The officers, as named plaintiffs, ought to have their own representation. A city or department will try to pass the blame downward, and make the officer responsible for the big damages.

    Parent

    And let's not forget our border neighbor (none / 0) (#51)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 02:24:55 AM EST
    to the North - Canada.  

    Parent
    This is (none / 0) (#14)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 06:29:12 PM EST
    a horrible bill and I'm telling you it's going to be a PR disaster sooner or later. We had some stupid immigration bill passed here in GA and the SBI raided a small town with a lot of hispanics in it. Well, needless to say they arrested american citizens of latino descent because after all who carries "their papers" with them? I sure as h*ll don't have anything other than a driver's license which proves no citizenship. So all you had to do was look latino to be arrested. Anyway, many of the people even the right wingers who rant and rave about "them illegals" were really embarrassed by it. a lot of the right wingers realized that hispanics are REAL people with REAL families who do REAL work in their town not some imaginery character made up by the likes of Tom Tancredo.

    The editorial mentions (none / 0) (#17)
    by jeffinalabama on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 06:32:52 PM EST
    the Douglas Roundup, when Sheriff's deputies from Jo Arpaio's Posse stopped and interrogated people in the unincorporated area of Douglas Arizona. Already a bad history in Maricopa County.

    Parent
    And I had the gall to make fun of spelling (5.00 / 2) (#20)
    by jeffinalabama on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 06:36:31 PM EST
    in CST's post... Joe Arpaio.

    Karma.

    Parent

    Brown---it's the new black! (none / 0) (#23)
    by observed on Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 06:41:29 PM EST


    Here is a link (none / 0) (#52)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 03:06:48 AM EST
    To videos from the Roosevelt Institute's 'Make Markets be Markets'.  Stiglitz kicks it off.  The best solutions are coming out of these people.  But these folks really aren't Obamas BFF, those savvy businessmen and women would be at the Hamilton Project and many of them took part in various frauds and wholesale fleecings of Americans.

    And the deficit hawks (none / 0) (#54)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 03:58:48 AM EST
    come out to play tomorrow per this article.  I actually didn't know anything about this until just moments ago.  I hope everyone interested in protecting Social Security reads this link.

    And this too at FDL (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 04:11:46 AM EST
    from Rep. John Conyers about Obama's "Debt Commission" meeting tomorrow and the secrecy they are shrouded in.  Where in the feck is the transparency?  Don't even try to tell me they aren't up to something.  Conyers is ON IT though, he seems very well lined out on the misinfo campaign and who is running it too.  Social Security is not insolvent, but all the entities that they would like to funnel it into to "privatize it" are.

    Parent
    Fiscal Sustainability (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by Anne on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 07:13:00 AM EST
    Teach-In Counter Conference, to be held April 28th in Washington, for the express purpose of, well, countering what is likely to be the propaganda that comes out of Petersen's summit.

    "The Fiscal Sustainability Teach-In Counter Conference will be the important event in Washington on April 28. Unlike the other meeting, this one will feature important work by honest scholars. It deserves at least equal attention, and very much more respect."

    --- James K. Galbraith, The University of Texas at Austin. [April 19, 2010 via email]

    Check out selise's post on this at Down Wtih Tyranny, and Corrente and FDL have info as well.

    From letsgetitdone's post at Corrente:

    What is badly needed is an immediate answer to the President's Commission and the Peterson Conference. Our answer is entitled "the Fiscal Sustainability Teach-In Counter-conference." We plan to hold it in Washington DC, on April 28, 2010, from 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM, at The George Washington University's Marvin Center, Room 310 (The Elliot Room) and to make it a free event open to the public.

    The purpose of our conference and teach-in is to look at fiscal sustainability relative to public purpose, including full employment, and also to teach the new economic paradigm of Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) and its application to fiscal sustainability. We want to propagate an alternative message about what fiscal sustainability means in the mainstream mass media, and in the blogosphere, on the same day as the Peterson Foundation Conference.

    Worth checking out; this is what ordinary people can do, with not much time, and a whole lot less money, in pursuit of truth.

    Parent

    Thank you Anne (none / 0) (#57)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 08:01:14 AM EST
    I can't say that the propaganda machine won't do everything in its power to have a jump on us and "invest our Social Security" for us, obviously many people out there are doing what they can to get the truth out and to make the public aware as well.  Doesn't look like much about this showed up at dailykos while I was busy this week.  Very disappointing, such an important issue but geniune criicism of the Obama administration will barely be tolerated.

    Parent
    Selise did put up a diary at DK (4.00 / 4) (#58)
    by Anne on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 08:25:42 AM EST
    Time to Sweep the Vampire Squid Off Our Faces and Make Room for the Real Change

    It has a whopping 21 comments; I guess maintaining the Obama-love over there is such that it's hard to take the time to get into the details of real fiscal issues that are about to be perverted to screw us again - especially when it is Obama himself who is fully on board the make-them-eat-cat-food train.

    Yeesh.

    Parent

    Troll rating a comment (4.00 / 4) (#61)
    by Anne on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 11:34:51 AM EST
    just because you cannot stand to have Obama criticized is completely lacking in class and substance, as well as being against this blog's rating policy.

    If you don't agree that Obama is looking for ways to cut entitlements, have the courage to say so, and then we can have an actual discussion where you provide support for your view and I (and others, if they wish) provide mine.

    Parent

    Why when I read that (5.00 / 3) (#70)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 01:12:36 PM EST
    "J" and BTD were going to be extremely busy did I immediately know that some would be sooooo happy that the babysitter was dead around here?  I hereby vow from this point on to ignore squeaky until babysitters return or hell freezes over, whichever comes first :).  

    Parent
    Thank You (none / 0) (#71)
    by squeaky on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 01:20:33 PM EST
    The feeling is mutual. Sad but true.

    Parent
    LoL (3.00 / 2) (#62)
    by squeaky on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 11:41:17 AM EST
    Nice double standard...

    Troll rating a comment.... is completely lacking in class and substance, as well as being against this blog's rating policy.

    Oh right, I left out the only reason Anne has a problem with troll rating:

    just because you cannot stand to have Obama criticized

    Stating a principal selectively, and particularly only when you are the target, is called hypocrisy....

    Are we surprised.... no


    Parent

    With all the comments you have made (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by Anne on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 12:55:09 PM EST
     - and there have been many - even though I have often disagreed with them, and even though so many of them were solely designed to bait me and others, I don't believe I have EVER troll-rated you - not for comments you have made to me, and not for comments you have made to others.  I've never troll-rated Howdy, either, for that matter; I did, just recently, give you a "5" for a omment, and I've thrown a few of those in Howdy's direction, as well.

    I didn't even sink to the level of rating sher for her spiteful rating of my comment.

    So, all you've managed to do is once again reveal the splendor of your own shortcomings and your fondness for turning the sandbox into a litter box; nice work!

    Parent

    OK (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by squeaky on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 01:07:55 PM EST
    Although I never claimed that you have ever troll rated a comment.

    What I have claimed is that the injustice you speak of only seems to come up when it is you getting troll rated, or one of your pals.

    Many of your pals regularly troll rate, but do you ever complain, never. That is hypocrisy.

    If you want to bellyache about someone troll rating you, well fine, go ahead and cry. But when you state some grand principal about troll rating, and characterize someone who does troll rate in a negative way, yet only complain when it suits your agenda, don't complain if you are called a hypocrite.

    Parent

    My "pals?" (5.00 / 3) (#72)
    by Anne on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 01:32:26 PM EST
    Now, I'm responsible for them, too?  Who knew?

    See, here's the reason it'a always a good idea to think before one hits "Post:" I can probably count on one hand the number of times I've been troll-rated, and I don't complain about it - but you can check my comments if you're looking for something to while away the afternoon.

    I could have responded to sher by hiding behind a rating, but I chose to instead express a preference for actual dialogue and debate on the issue; this is "bellyaching?"

    When someone says something to me, or issues a rating with regard to something I have written, I think it's perfectly acceptable to respond - I would go so far as to say that's pretty normal.  How others choose to respond to the ratings of their fellow commenters is their province, not mine.

    Unless you are now the blog monitor, I think you should quit while you're where you always are: scouring the blog for commenters you can harass.

    Parent

    Riiight (3.00 / 2) (#76)
    by squeaky on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 02:29:40 PM EST
    Troll rating is rampant at TL. It only started when those that came to TL from elsewhere to support Hillary. And ever since it has been rampant, almost exclusively by those who came here to support Hillary...  Your cries about rules and principals ring hollow, imo.

    Personally if I were you I would be happy that at least someone reads you comments.

    Parent

    You two should (none / 0) (#77)
    by jondee on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 02:55:08 PM EST
    get a room. And then invite me along :)

    Parent
    Actually, "troll rating" (none / 0) (#78)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 02:57:34 PM EST
    started the very day J switched the blog to a format that allowed rating. That is why the ability to give a comment a "0" rating is disabled. Must have been before your time.

    Parent
    No (none / 0) (#82)
    by squeaky on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 03:10:12 PM EST
    I was here long before the new system kicked in. Just because the system was in place, did not mean TL commenters used it to troll rate.

    Troll rating did not happen to TL, on any noticeable scale until after Jan 2008 when the refugees started pouring in. Must have been a common practice at the blogs from where the refugees came.

    Parent

    As a refugee, I protest! (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by mexboy on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 06:01:11 PM EST
    Boy, I'm really screwed now.

    I just found out that in Arizona I can be stopped by the police, who will demand papers or put me in jail for 6 months, based on the color of my skin,  and that at my favorite blog, Talk Left, I am a refugee.

    Do I need some sort of papers to blog here?

    Is there a path to lose the refugee status and become a full fledged Talk Left poster?
    Or should I just accept my status as a lesser member of TL and limit my posts to avoid taking the space that is rightfully reserved for real TL posters?

    I had no idea TL was such an elitist club.

    Parent

    Ha, the opposite is more likely. (none / 0) (#102)
    by MyLeftMind on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 06:11:29 PM EST
    I just got kicked out of the Democratic Party by Talk Left's political correctness police.

    Parent
    Elitist Club? (none / 0) (#103)
    by squeaky on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 06:15:13 PM EST
    That is a laugh..  you are a member... lol

    Parent
    Not according to you (none / 0) (#105)
    by mexboy on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 06:33:16 PM EST
    I came here after the primaries because this was the only safe place to voice my support  for Hilary without being attacked.

    Parent
    WTF? (none / 0) (#106)
    by squeaky on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 06:43:55 PM EST
    Not according to me???  What I said is that after the refugees came to TL troll rating increased.

    How does that translate to this:

    I just found out that in Arizona I can be stopped by the police, who will demand papers or put me in jail for 6 months, based on the color of my skin,  and that at my favorite blog, Talk Left, I am a refugee.

    Nice non sequitur

    Do I need some sort of papers to blog here?

    Evidentially not

    I

    s there a path to lose the refugee status and become a full fledged Talk Left poster?

    Only if you believe that refugees are of a lower status. If so it sounds like you are a bigot.

    Or should I just accept my status as a lesser member of TL and limit my posts to avoid taking the space that is rightfully reserved for real TL posters?

    Your comments define your status, and please let me know when you figure out what your status is. And if you do not believe that you are a real TL poster, you may need to start taking some anti-psychotic medication. Consult your doctor.

    Parent

    Easy there buddy (none / 0) (#108)
    by mexboy on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 08:24:59 PM EST
    My post seems to have hit a sore nerve somewhere in your system.

    Let's try to follow the logic here. You call the posters who came to TL after the primary "refugees" who increased the troll rating of the obviously native TL posters.

    People in Arizona made all Latinos guilty of being undocumented immigrants, who usurp the resources of the legal residents, until we  prove otherwise.

    Refugee:

    Any person who is outside any country of such person's nationality or, in the case of a person having no nationality, is outside any country in which such person last habitually resided, and who is unable or unwilling to return to, and is unable or unwilling to avail himself or herself of the protection of, that country because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. 8 USCSection 208(a)

    As far as non sequitur, my comment was quite logical. I was illustrating two disappointments in one day. You calling posters like me  refugees and the law in Arizona targeting people who look like me. But who needs logic when attaching is so much more fun.

    You took the humor of my post way too seriously. It is obvious I do not need your permission or approval to post here. It was an illustration.

    Parent

    Yeah (none / 0) (#109)
    by squeaky on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 10:38:19 PM EST
    I came here after the primaries because this was the only safe place to voice my support  for Hilary without being attacked.

    A safe place to voice your support....

    What do you think a refuge is? That makes you a refugee by your own admission.

    As for the rest of the implied second class citizen sh*t, that is your projection.

    Parent

    you have a serious way of twisting things, (none / 0) (#111)
    by mexboy on Wed Apr 28, 2010 at 01:42:21 AM EST
    to rationalize your point of view, and you totally miss the irony of your own words. Which was my original point, but if you don't get it, you don't get it. It's not your fault!

    Parent
    Oh (none / 0) (#83)
    by squeaky on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 03:12:39 PM EST
    And when it first started all of us were "trusted users". A "1" rating sent the comment into "hidden mode", that feature was also disabled. I do not think that there was ever a "0" rating available.


    Parent
    Yes, there was a "0." (none / 0) (#85)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 03:25:48 PM EST
    A "0" sent the comment into hidden mode. The "0" was abused and, therefore, disabled. Now, no "0" and, as a result, no hidden comments...

    Parent
    OK (none / 0) (#94)
    by squeaky on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 05:01:09 PM EST
    We remember it differently. Troll rating aka "1" was disabled, it used to disappear comments. Ever since, rating a "1" did nothing.  

    Parent