A Fair Question? Hardly.

The Daily News Record: Editorial Opinion

This is a response to the editorial on May 20, One Fair Question - Critics Haven’t Read Arizona’s Law. The "Fair Question" was simply, "Did ______ read the Bill?" It was presented as a rhetorical question and the answer was deemed "No." The conclusion was that all criticism is unfounded, that Arizona was right in passing a radical, unconstitutional "Papers Please" law. (Yes, this writer has read the bill.) The rhetorical question being asked is factually correct but the logic being applied is false. "If you didn't read the Law, then the conclusions you reach about it are wrong."

Who reads entirety of immigration law? Who reads the entirety of the law concerning the religious freedom in America? Who reads the all of the law concerning civil rights and fiduciary responsibility of States, Counties, and the Federal Government?

Mr. Editor, you and I depend on our lawyers, the sources we trust, and our own reading of bills (amateurs though we are) to assess the worth of legislation. Members of Congress, Attorney Generals, pundits, and yes, Presidents, depend on legal counsel to sort out the legal issues involved with legislation. The logic presented in the editorial assumes that those who "don't read the law" may not in good faith make commentary, advocate a position, make a speech, blog or editorialize about those laws. By your own logic, perhaps you should not be allowed to comment or write further concerning this topic or the others mentioned above until you show or document that you have "read the law."

If you are simply expressing an opinion based on your knowledge of the issue at hand, as readers would expect on the editorial page of a newspaper, then you must be willing to accept that the President, Senators, Members of Congress, Attorney Generals, pundits and citizens are allowed the same freedom of opinion. If you rightly assert that readers assume that you have indeed “read the law,” then you must acknowledge the assumption that critics must have also “read the law.”

The law in question does indeed mirror federal legislation that is already on the books. It does reflect a general frustration in the lack of action by the Congress to address the issue of immigration reform. This excerpt is from Arizona Law SB 1070:

FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE, WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. THE PERSON'S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c). [source] (http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070s.pdf)

The underlined parts of the bill are the primary cause for concern and controversy. The language is vague, and open to possible abuse or misinterpretation. "Such intellectual laziness and ignorance born of arrogance...." should not be the basis for editorial commentary. A consultation with legal staff and thorough research would lead to possible interpretations or outcomes of the above language and would spare readers the nakedly partisan demagoguery that has been presented as editorial opinion.

Color me Liberal. Letter to the Editor May 19

Color me Liberal. Letter to the Editor May 19

My letter recognizes the necessity of Progressivism and Conservatism but left unstated is the poison of radicalism. Liberals and Conservatives will always find some areas of agreement. Radicals will reject any and all policies that don't meet their very strict and limited criteria. This is reality.

In this forum, radical ideas from the right are often presented with gravitas as though they are well reasoned and insightful,fulfilling the needs and desires of most citizens. The AZ law is radical. It marginalizes ALL latinos. It is a policy that was borrowed straight out of the playbook for Apartheid in South Africa. "Papers Please" also echos the frightening history of pre-WWII Europe.

If this is a reasonable policy, require EVERYONE to carry their proof of citizenship. Further, require all corporations that hire workers of every wage level prove that they've verified legal work status. Of course that would take a competent government regulatory organization and a compliant corporate citizenry. Conservatives wouldn't have much of a problem with this but the radicals who dominate the political debate on the right only would weaken government regulations and strengthen the hand of corporations who seek cheap illegal workers.

Radicals rarely care about contradictions like this. It is radical to insist that corporations exist to create wealth and should be allowed to create wealth by any and all means available without concern for the law, the environment, the citizenry, or the economy. It is radical to take charge of government and then systematically break down it's regulatory function essentially making it subservient to the plutocracy. It is radical to insist on lower and lower taxes and a higher and higher defense budget. It is radical to insist that NO power of the federal government save the common defense is as valuable as the preservation of private wealth.

In reality, this radicalism is poison.

DNR editor is the glassy eyed dreamer. He’ll take us to the promised land… um…

DNR editor is the glassy eyed dreamer. He’ll take us to the promised land… um…

This, as we hear about GOP senators meeting with the Oil Lobby to plot a strategy for more drilling, as we read about Gov. McDonnell signing another gun rights bill, (this one lets folks carry loaded weapons into bars and is legal if they don't shoot them, HUH?) and shills for Oil drilling off Virginia's coast. This, as Arizona loses millions of dollars and becomes the scorned state because of their racist immigration law, as Sarah Palin pronounces that the law of the land should stand on the "God of the Bible." 

Then we read that Tennesee and other states seek to follow Virginia's lead on Gun control and Florida and other states are following Arizona's lead on immigration. We find out that Goldman/Sachs is so big that they can sniff and puff and ignore Congressional oversight.  We read that the ENTIRE spill in the Gulf only costs BP about a week's worth of profit.  We weep as they write off all the damage as "collateral" or the "cost of doing business."  This (DNR) editor calls it the "march of industry" and reflects that the risk is worth it.

All this while the specter of the gulf spill right before hurricane season looms heavy over the gulf coast states.

The RightWing is pushing hard. They are pushing hard against the will of the country. They feel empowered, they feel it is their time. Please know that this writer views this as a turn towards Fascism as we increasingly become a Corporate Nation, where representation is bought and rights are only for the few and the chosen.

The Right seeks to purefy itself, then it turns its "salvation" army on the rest of us. They'd kill us to save us... I'd love to be proven wrong.

Life in an Oligarchy. Let’s all hold our breath and hope that none of them make a fatal mistake.

Life in an Oligarchy. Let’s all hold our breath and hope that none of them make a fatal mistake.

Robert Reich. Voice in the Wilderness. Read on.

The infamous “Bikini Graph” It’s all about jobs, and the hope of finding one.

The infamous “Bikini Graph” It’s all about jobs, and the hope of finding one.

This is the way we turn the economy around... and the wheels on the bus go round and round.

Real jobs for real folk. For some, reality like this sucks... it doesn't fit the "real jobs" definition.... Spinning to ensue..

ScArizona - It’s about Voter Suppression, not Racism.

ScArizona - It’s about Voter Suppression, not Racism.

The attorney general firings by Bush/Rove come back to haunt us... This is pretty blatant and smelly political maneuvering. Dems do it to, but this is egregious.

Kent State 40 years after. Neil Young “Ohio”

Kent State 40 years after. Neil Young “Ohio”

While some would say that the extreme behavior of the students on that Day in 1970 caused the deaths, I can only think that these were students. They carried books, not guns. They were idealists. They were at risk by being eligible to be drafted and sent to a war that they didn't understand and they knew would be a tragic failure.

Some students committed violence that weekend. The ROTC building was burned, students shouted, sang with the passion of enraged youth. They were shot on the school commons, not on a battle ground, not behind a bunker, not holed up in a hideout in the hills. They were unarmed.

This diary is a good summary and worthy of passing along.

Human Capital is just as important as Wall Street Capital.

Human Capital is just as important as Wall Street Capital.

Unrestrained Recklessness egged on by Unrestrained Consumerism

Unrestrained Recklessness egged on by Unrestrained Consumerism

I'm doing lots of posting and blogging on the Amplify.com site now under the name "Old Blue in the Valley." Come join the discussion.