In the immortal words of Manuel, '¿Que?'

Such is my reaction to all this hoopla over Arizona's recent immigration bill. More like que the hell to be honest. I certainly have issue with it, but more from a 'it's far cheaper for Arizona taxpayers to have the Fed. Gov. deport them than it is jail them in the state' angle. It is really quite astonishing that many of these people don't even consider this and just seem to think illegal immigration shouldn't be a crime. I can understand, at a stretch, the worry over the alleged profiling mandated by the bill, but seriously, illegals scatter like cockroaches whenever any vehicle with a siren comes in eyeshot. Contrary to what the morons of the ACLU and other lefty propaganda ministries might have you believe, I seriously doubt the cops in Arizona, many of whom are Hispanic, will stop at random any slightly brown-looking person with an accent. I'd imagine they'd focus their efforts on the groups huddled outside the McDonalds parking lot at 7:00am, waiting to get hauled off in a pickup.

But you know what really bothers me? According to Associated Press, 'Activists [will argue the bill] encroaches encroaches on the federal government's authority to regulate immigration and violates people's constitutional rights by giving the police too much power'. That these activists, many of whom are Democrats (Rep. Raul Grijalva addressed protesters the other day), would dare bring up the Constitution makes me physically ill. Where were they when Obama forced every American on threat of criminal prosecution to get health insurance, or asked the American people to spy on and report their neighbors who refused to swallow his red pill of socialism? These people don't give two tugs of a dead dog's dick about the Constitution. It's even more laughable that the White House is considering legal action. Obama in a year has done more than enough to warrant impeachment. His entire modus operandi is about finding new ways to undermine the Constitution.

But the absurd levels of talking utter crap don't stop at Washington. Thomas Saenz, the president of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, said that 'if every state had its own laws, we wouldn't be one country; we'd be fifty different countries.' Sorry Tommy Boy, but every state does have its own laws. It's why I plan on never living anywhere near a coast or above the Mason Dixon line. You'd think Saenz, a lawyer, would know that. See, the key word here is STATE. Now, you may have grown up in America being told that the word 'state' means something different in America than it does in the rest of the world, but that's complete crap. America is a federation (hence 'federal' government). The fifty states (or commonwealths) that comprise it are by definition sovereign territories and by design membership in said federation is voluntary.

Let's look at the E.U. for a minute. It may not be as centralised on paper as America, or have any sort of pan-European national identity, and therefore the great states of Europe may appear to have slightly more tangible independence from Brussels than American states do from Washington, but the legal reality is the opposite. Yes, that's right, New Jersey, South Carolina, Delaware - take your pick - they all have more legislative independence than the United Kingdom, Ireland, Spain, etc do. So just like the U.K., the E.U., and the U.S.S.R, the U.S.A. is a group of independent states united in a voluntary political union. Or in plain English for Mr. Saenz, fifty different countries united as one federal power. Article that pissed me off can be found here:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100427/ap_on_re_us/us_immigration_enforcement