SB1070 For Dummies & Hayward Hung By The Toes

This YouTube video from 4409 “Wake Up America” Productions is what people really need to understand about ‘that law’ that everyone is talking about when not picturing BP exec Tony Hayward in some contraption from one of the Saw movies.
==================================================
“Please don’t kill me, America! I promise another ad campaign and more toxic dispersant!”
==================================================
This is not about immigration. This is about encroaching on civil liberties first with racial profiling and then moving forward from there to effect all groups.
At least five lawsuits have been filed thus far to fight against the Arizona law coming on behalf of the ACLU and others.
AZCentral.com:

A group of 14 civil and immigrant-rights organizations and 10 individuals on Monday filed a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Arizona’s new immigration law. It is the fifth legal challenge of the law, which goes into effect July 29 and makes it a state crime to be in the country illegally.

All the lawsuits seek to prevent the law from going into effect. However, this latest case names Arizona’s county officials as defendants, while previous suits were filed against state officials.

Participants in this case include the American Civil Liberties Union, Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, National Immigration Law Center, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, National Day Laborer Organizing Network and Asian Pacific American Legal Center.

Since I put “for dummies” in my headline I’ll move forward slowly about the why on this show-me-your-papers law signed by Jan Brewer is unconstitutional. Instead slamming a bunch of legalese at you it’s much better to simply look closely at the Section B paragraph of AZ SB 1070:
“For any lawful stop, detention or arrest made by a law enforcement official …”
This just means anything at all that might be contact with the police. If they flag you down on the street when you are walking, that is a “lawful stop.” It has very little to do with vehicles and everything to do with the security of your person from harassment from the police. Even when a police officer who has mistaken your identity, let’s say, it is still a committing a “lawful stop” to detain you and discover your true identity. In short, this opening clause of the law is both sweeping and overreaching in terms of the authority it grants. In this language alone that law has isolated undocumented workers from seeking police services should they be attacked or threatened in their safety for even requesting police services: a 911 call is nothing more an invitation to legal harassment and then deportation.
“… where reasonable suspicion exists that a person is alien and is unlawfully present in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall be made … to determine immigration status of the person”
Many advocates for this draconian law claim it mirrors the existing federal immigration law, but this is completely false. No standing U.S. law fails to define what exactly “reasonable suspicion” is to be recognized as in regards to infraction in question. You may have heard the phrase: “What does an illegal look like?” This is what these people are referring to. There is no standard set within any part of this law as to what exactly is the definition of “reasonable suspicion” of being here under undocumented (“alien”) status. This failure to define what the terms of “reasonable suspicion” entail creates a violation of the Fourth Amendment’s protection against “unreasonable search and seizure” which requires “probable cause” be clearly established prior to such “reasonable attempt”s of the Arizona law to toss you in a cell or search your person in any manner. Furthermore, the Fifth Amendment also protects any person, be they citizen or not, from incriminating themselves so this very act of having state authorities asking a person to identify their status with the federal immigration bureau is a “reasonable attempt” to force the affected party to admit to a minor misdemeanor. Which still ultimately amounts to a form of self incrimination. Another way to understand this is know that if a undocumented worker knew their rights at the time of a “lawful stop” taking place they would be within their rights to claim the Fifth Amendment protections while being asked by a state official their federal immigration status.
“… may not consider race, color or national origin in implementing the requirements of the subsection …”
This clause was added after the initial drafting of the law and fails to clarify just exactly how an officer is to determine immigration status without the use of “race, color and national origin” as the primary factor is raising the question. Had the misguided authors of this law inserted their media commentary that “clothing” was a factor to be decided upon it would have held more weight than this rather self defeating clause. As I stated above, without the method of attaining “reasonable suspicion” of being here under undocumented status outlined in the this law it remains the only standard in which to enforce such a law would be racial profiling. This clause turned a simply unconstitutional law into a literally unenforceable law.
The greatest layer of the unconstitutionality of AZ SB 1070 is the very top layer:
It is not the business of state authority to tread upon the direct charge of federal agencies. Even when they have a false charge of “inaction” on behalf of the federal government, the state laws never supersede federal authority on existing issues. Before any of the other elements of unconstitutionality would be considered this first brazen disregard for the Constitution will get this anti-civil liberties and pro-racial profiling law thrown out of court.
My point from the beginning is it is disgusting and un-American of all involved with this law to even have to drag this veiled racism mixed with an unconstitutional power-grab into our courts in the first place. Striking down this law effectively and immediately is the only course of action that will save both money and freedom in one swift movement.
==================================================
Colbert knows what to do with those Tony Hayward types…
What I myself find especially funny lately is this strange group of people out there, I guess we’ll call them the “Blame No One Party” because that seems to be their game here. They are trying to convince us that blaming someone for the catastrophe that they oversaw and helped create is some act of mad lunacy. That we all should be looking forward. To what exactly I’m not too clear. The next environmental disaster that Big Oil will bless us with? I’ll be over here with my burning Tony Hayward effigy and “Boycott BP” signs, thank you very much.
Don’t forget this is the “worst oil spill in U.S. history” and has turned the Gulf of Mexico “into a dead zone.”
I’m for cutting all our government contracts with BP, and cutting their jet fuel arrangement with the Pentagon as well. A company like BP has no place working under federal auspices of any sort. They have effectively destroyed America. Were this deliberate and not rampant greed and arrogance it could easily be classified as some form of terrorist or economic attack on all of America.
It seems when extremists blow people up: it’s a crime and everybody is mobilized to catch the criminals. But when careless suits at BP blow people up: it’s something to be ignored and just accepted as part of modern life.
UPDATE:
IPC has backed my statements here in their Q&A Guide.

Advertisements

Marble-Cake Federalism And Health Care Reform

health_care_providers_385x261

In the midst of civil and uncivil protests against any type of reformist action on the medical insurance corporations and their stranglehold over health care options in the United States there has been a proposed amendment to the bill that I feel best represents the embodiment of liberty and American Values.

The Kucinich Amendment proposes that the federal option remains intact but each state would be allowed to elect into a single-payer system if they chose to do so.

66332-marble-cake
We live in a system of government called Marble-cake Federalism where the federal government and state governments share powers over specific matters.

The best example being the issue of Gay-Marriage and the nature of how each state can decide for itself at this point if it is a legal practice or not, but if a federal law were to pass that either granted or denied the right to all citizens of the nation that would be nationwide legal practice from that point forward.

By granting a public option and in the same motion granting the state’s powers to establish a single-payer model is the best representation of Progressive Reformist action.

I would grant a lot more credit to the protestors of recent days to their commit to their cause and their willingness to do what it takes to heard, except for the facts that the values of non-violent protest seems to lost on far too many of their numbers and that the outright falsehoods coming from their mouths.

If there is a complete absence of logic and desired direction in any movement then ultimately there is one course in it’s direction: violence.

I understand a person if they speak about their fears about over reaching government powers into our lives. But I’m more interested to talk about The Patriot Act and The Homeland Security Department than I am to talk about a bill moving through Congress.

When the same group of people remained mute or even in support of expanding federalism when George W. Bush did it and then shout down their own representatives when they come to speak it becomes clear that some certain number of these people are just the most perverse of political partisans.

We the people do indeed need to find a way to take back the massive expanses in federal and executive powers but lacking a clear message beyond obstructionism of any government action regarding health care reform I am left to question the very motives of these protestors at their very core.

I also believe it to be true that a certain number of these people are paid-provocateurs working for the for-profit insurance agencies in order to make it appear that a vast majority of people support monopolies over the availability of health care in America.

Tracking The Stimulus Money

The most obvious choice for a tax-payer who is interested in learning more about the stimulus money and how it is being spent is Recovery.Gov.

There is also the addition of the website Recovery.Org to the mix.

But the most open-sourced transparency and best place, in my opinion, to address this issue while using the internet as a source would be at the George Mason Unversity’s Mercatus Center who recently released the website StimulusWatch.Org.

If you desire to take a more direct approach to tracking the funds you should visit ShovelWatch.Org.

Tobacco Taxes

1.cigarettes

I only think one thing about the issue of Tobacco Taxation:

Alcohol Taxation
.

I only think one thing about the issue of Tobacco Company Regulation:

Drug Company Regulation.

—–

Alcohol Taxation:

If the drug being taxed was alcohol instead of tobacco the public outcry would tear down the establishment in days, if not hours.

I’m not even against a “Sin Tax.

I just think that smokers have become the latest minority to persecute at the benefit of the masses. That’s all.

Drug Company Regulation:

Double-blind studies on all FDA approved pharmaceuticals and removing all conflicts of interest between FDA regulators and drug companies are far more important matters for the FDA to address than clamping down on the Nicotine-Addiction Industry.

Once again I’m not directly opposed to the new federal regulations placed on the Tobacco Industry.

I only think that this wastes time and uses yet another federal agency in a futile misdirection of vital government resources.