Jul 29 2010
In World War II the rallying cry was “Remember the Arizona”- to recall the attack on Pearl Harbor and unite in fighting for the survival of the nation and its unique constitutional form of government. It is ironic how the cycle of human history can evolve around something so innocuous as a name.
In 2010, the rallying cry for the elections will be “Remember Arizona”, where the socialist-progressive forces had the 2nd Pyrrhic victory of the year:
AÂ Pyrrhic victory (pronouncedÂ /ËˆpÉªrÉªk/) is a victory with devastating cost to the victor; it carries the implication that another such will ultimately cause defeat.
The first Pyrrhic Victory of course was the destruction of our health care system, a system now so cruel that special needs families are being punished with brutal new taxes:
5. Theâ€œSpecial Needs Kids Taxâ€ takes effect Jan. 1, 2013: This provision of Obamacare imposes a cap on flexible spending accounts (FSAs) of $2500 (Currently, there is no federal government limit). There is one group of FSA owners for whom this new cap will be particularly cruel and onerous: parents of special needs children. There are thousands of families with special needs children in the United States, and many of them use FSAs to pay for special needs education. Tuition rates at one leading school that teaches special needs children in Washington, D.C. (National Child Research Center) can easily exceed $14,000 per year. Under tax rules, FSA dollars can be used to pay for this type of special needs education.
This is rationing, plain and simple. These tax hikes are the results of behind the door death-panel deliberations. This is unconscionable, since all the FSA’s do is make sure special needs are taken care of by the family with pre-tax dollars. Uncle Sam has surely become a greedy old miser under the Pelosi-Reid-Obama ‘regime’ if he must steel money from special needs kids.
But the completely bogus and propaganda-riddled court decision on the Arizona immigration law will be universally felt across this nation – and rejected for the lie it is. This is the 2nd Pyrrhic Victory.
We all have seen court shopping, but this incident was ridiculous. The Judge wrote an opinion against something that was not even in front of her, completely irrelevant to the case. She twisted the language of the law to create a myth (apparently the only talent a socialist-progressive has).
In enjoining Arizonaâ€™s landmark immigration law, U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton maintains the Obama administrationâ€™s carefully cultivated fiction: that what concerns the White House regarding S.B. 1070 is its effect on legal, rather than illegal, aliens. Almost nowhere in the governmentâ€™s briefs or the judgeâ€™s ruling is the arrest and detention of illegal aliens addressed.
The only lawful aliens to whom the judge could point who would not necessarily have proof of status â€œreadily availableâ€ to them, however (neither the federal government nor the judge asserted that proof of status was â€œunavailableâ€ to such individuals), were visitors from visa-waiver countries, asylum applicants who have not yet received a green card, victims of certain enumerated crimes such as trafficking who are assisting law enforcement, and women who have petitioned for relief under the Violence Against Women Act. But presumably the lawful status of such aliens would be known to the federal government. If an Arizona officer inquired into those aliensâ€™ immigration status, ICE would tell the officer that the person is authorized to be in the country, ending the investigation.
The Arizona law is completely consistent with federal law. The judge, however, twisted to concept of federal law into federal enforcement practices (or, as it happens, lack thereof). In effect, the court is saying that if the feds refuse to enforce the law the states can’t do it either because doing so would transgress the federal policy of non-enforcement … which is nuts.
The judge also employs a cute bit of sleight-of-hand. She repeatedly invokes a 1941 case, Hines v. Davidowitz, in which the Supreme Court struck down a state alien-registration statute. In Hines, the high court reasoned that the federal government had traditionally followed a policy of not treating aliens as “a thing apart,” and that Congress had therefore “manifested a purpose … to protect the liberties of law-abiding aliens through one uniform national system” that would not unduly subject them to “inquisitorial practices and police surveillance.” But the Arizona law is not directed at law-abiding aliens in order to identify them as foreigners and subject them, on that basis, to police attention. It is directed at arrested aliens who are in custody because they have violated the law. And it is not requiring them to register with the state; it is requiring proof that they have properly registered with the federal government â€” something a sensible federal government would want to encourage.
The decision makes no sense at all. Does that mean state law enforcement cannot participate in any aspect of federal law? Both states and the federal government have gun laws. In VA we use the federal gun law as a way to send violent criminals to jail for a minimum sentence. It is up to the state to determine the use of the federal gun law, and append its penalties to any parallel state laws. How about when states modify social security or medicare laws, or interpret education laws?
Whoever this ‘judge’ is she is beyond activist – she’s seeing things. As McCarthy notes, the answer for Americans is simple:
The upshot of it is to tell Americans that if they want the immigration laws enforced, they are going to need a president willing to do it, a Congress willing to make clear that the federal government has no interest in preempting state enforcement, and the selection of judges who will not invent novel legal theories to frustrate enforcement. They are not going to get that fromÂ the Obama/Reid/Pelosi Democrats.
You can be a fan of the ridiculous concept of deporting or chasing all illegals from the country and this decision of course bothers the heck out of you. No doubt these people will be lining up out the door to vote in November.
But you can also be a fan of the more realistic Bush-Kyle-McCain approach of setting up a process to document migrant workers, limit their time here, throw out the violent criminals for life if they commit a single violent crime (after doing their time of course) and for long term illegals to be provided a one-time option to pay back taxes and penalties and become legally documented – and this act also bothers the heck out of you. Because no matter what, we cannot have open borders and lawlessness. There are only a few doe-eyed liberal know-nothings who believe in complete anarchy along our borders.
If there are no laws, or the laws are gleefully ignored on a select basis by the nut jobs who are in power in DC, then we don’t have a constitutional government for the people and by the people. We would have become vassals to imperial Lords & Lady’s who do as they please and demand we pay for their luxuries, greed and debauchery (i.e., taxes).
Arizona is rapidly being stripped of its American roots, becoming more a way-station for the destitute to migrate to the point where they will be abused by greedy employers, renters, insurance agents, check cashers – and yes pols who want votes so they can stay suckled to the government till. The violence and destruction of this wave of humanity is blatantly obvious, requiring even the federal government to put up warning signs to keep Americans out of now dangerous areas of America.
Without laws America is gone – and this is a simple and basic set of laws we are dealing with here. You have to be in this country legally to live and work here, not to mention suck off the government services. So here we sit in 2010, with a rallying cry to save our unique constitutional government that has echoed through the decades of our history from a different kind of battle. We will still “Remember Arizona“, as we line up in November to save this wonderful and unique shining city on the hill.