Welcome to Arizona Profiling




Utah considering Arizona style illegal alien law

Comments Off on Utah considering Arizona style illegal alien law

You just have to love  this, here we have California wanting to boycott Arizona because of their new Illegal Immigration law and right behind all this comes Texas and Utah saying they are considering the same legislation.

Utah Now Considering Arizona Type Immigration Law for Next Year – Which State is Next in Line? Texas that’s Who

This could turn out to be Obama’s worst nightmare. Other states are now considering following Arizona’s lead with their new immigration law. One Utah lawmaker (another is Texas), Stephen Sandstrom, has started work on drafting a version of Arizona’s law for the state of Utah. He claims he will use the Arizona law has a starting point and then adjust his bill as he progresses to address his states concerns. He stated he will submit it to the legislature in the 2011 session. If Utah follows behind Arizona, how long will it be before other states join in and create their own version of the law? And we all know the reason why, don’t we?

As Sandstrom points out, Arizona has gone through periods of tougher enforcement in the past which in turn has increased the flow of illegal aliens into Utah. Makes sense, but if that is the case which I believe it is, other Western states will be soon seeing the same problems. If illegals know they can’t operate freely in Arizona they will simply try to go somewhere else. Which really isn’t solving anything for anyone. I grew up in Utah and know the they have a large Mexican population, some citizens some I’m sure illegal aliens. The issue here is that the federal government is not doing its job and fulfilling its obligations to secure the border.

The  nightmare for liberals and Obama is that if several states get aligned on this Obama will be forced to address immigration, now, not after the 2010 elections. The key here is that the states are all for immigration reform, but they also want the laws of the Untied States enforced, which means picking up the illegals and sending them home, not giving them a path to citizenship, other than the normal routes now out there. States in general, as with the American people will not support amnesty for illegals and this is what Obama and the progressives in congress are trying to do. This issue covers several things including national security, like terrorists entering the country. Do you want to wait until we wake up to a nuclear explosion in an American city to find out the bomb came over the border? Now tell me this can’t happen.

The entire Obama administration (Bush was just as guilty) has failed in its constitutional obligations to secure the borders and protect American citizens from violence and other crimes being committed by illegals. Secure the borders now, then as a nation we can look at ways to help people immigrate legally into the United States. Liberals and Obama need to get it through their heads that amnesty is not immigration reform.


Team Obama Calls Out Swat Team on Tea Party Patriots


The SWAT Team was called in today at the Quincy Tea Party Rally. Obama was speaking at the convention center this afternoon. As you can see by the pictures below, these Quincy Tea Partiers looked very threatening and I can’t blame them for calling in a SWAT Team. This is unbelievable !

They didn’t want any violence from these threatening protesters.

In Full Riot Gear!!

They were singing “God Bless America” …A sure sign of violence.

They were worried about violence.

Big Government.com

Obama’s Budget Director: Powerful Rationing Panel (Not Doctors) Will Control Health Care Levels

Comments Off on Obama’s Budget Director: Powerful Rationing Panel (Not Doctors) Will Control Health Care Levels

Everyone made fun of us and Sarah Palin talking about “death panels” in health care. We were all made fun of and accused of fear mongering. Well here’s Obama’s Budget Director saying Congress was apprised of this before Obamacare was voted on. So when the Republicans were talking about “death panels” and being called Liars, it now comes out they knew what they were talking about:

Obama’s Budget Director Peter Orszag: Powerful Rationing Panel (Not Doctors) Will Control Health Care Levels

Vodpod videos no longer available.

High court supports Mojave cross in Calif

Comments Off on High court supports Mojave cross in Calif

Well there’s a little common sense left on the court I see.

High court supports Mojave cross in Calif.

This undated photo taken by Henry and Wanda Sandoz ...

The Supreme Court said Wednesday that a lower court went too far in ordering the removal of a congressionally endorsed war memorial cross from its longtime home atop a remote outcropping in California.

Signaling support for keeping the cross, the justices ordered the federal court in California to look again at Congress’ plan to transfer a patch of federal land beneath it into private hands.

The lower court had barred the land transfer as insufficient to eliminate concern about a religious symbol on public land — in this case, the Mojave National Preserve.

The ruling was 5-4, with the court’s conservatives in the majority.

The VFW erected the large cross in the federal preserve more than 75 years ago.

It has been covered with plywood for the past several years following the court rulings. Court papers describe the cross as 5 feet to 8 feet tall.

“Here one Latin cross in the desert evokes far more than religion. It evokes thousands of small crosses in foreign fields marking the graves of Americans who fell in battles, battles whose tragedies are compounded if the fallen are forgotten,” Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote.

In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens agreed that soldiers who died in battle deserve a memorial to their service. But the government “cannot lawfully do so by continued endorsement of a starkly sectarian message,” Stevens said.

Six justices wrote separate opinions and none spoke for a majority of the court. The holding itself was narrow, ordering lower courts to look again at the transfer of land from the government to private control.

Lower federal courts previously ruled that the cross’ location on public land violated the Constitution and that the land transfer was, in effect, an end run around the constitutional problem.

Kennedy, who usually is in the court’s center on church-state issues, suggested there may have been no problem in the first place.

“The goal of avoiding governmental endorsement does not require eradication of all religious symbols in the public realm,” Kennedy said.

Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas would have gone further than Kennedy and Chief Justice John Roberts, who joined Kennedy’s opinion.

Alito said he would allow the land transfer, barred until now, to take effect. Scalia and Thomas said they would not even have allowed the former National Park Service employee who complained about the cross to bring his objection to the transfer into court.

Roberts took a decidedly commonsensical approach to the matter. At the argument in October, a lawyer argued there probably would be no objection if the government took down the cross, sold the land to the VFW, and gave the VFW the cross to immediately erect again.

“I do not see how it can make a difference for the government to skip that empty ritual and do what Congress told it to do — sell the land with the cross on it,” Roberts said.

Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor also dissented.

Yahoo News.com

UPDATE:Tennessee Healthcare Freedom Act goes Behind the Budget

Comments Off on UPDATE:Tennessee Healthcare Freedom Act goes Behind the Budget

Not sure what this means whether it’s good or bad. Does anyone know?

California boycott Arizona? Don’t make me Laugh any more

Comments Off on California boycott Arizona? Don’t make me Laugh any more

Oh Puhleeze! Mexico condemning an act of one of the states? Have y’all turned the cannons on them? Here’s the best though, California urges a cut off of ties with Arizona. Ha! San Fransisco Mayor says moratorium on travel. Ha Ha! LA City Council says Boycott them…hahahahaaha! Maybe you folk in Arizona should point cannons toward the left coast too.  Well, for one, I’m with you.  Who would have believed that the Fed Homeland Security Idiot, who used to be Governor of Arizona would be looking to see if their law was unconstitutional…hahahahah, when that whole administration is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. LMAO!

Keep on Arizona! You have my envy for pulling up your bootstraps first. I hear Texas is not far behind…and hopefully our Tennessee legislators will grow a pair and do the same! Hip, Hip, Hooray for Arizona!

By Jonathan J. Levin and Catherine Dodge

April 27 (Bloomberg) — Mexicans in Arizona should carry documentation and “act carefully” after the state passed a law requiring local police to determine the immigration status of anyone suspected of being in the country illegally, Mexico’s Foreign Ministry said.

The ministry said the warning is directed toward Mexicans living, studying or planning to travel to the southwestern U.S. state, which shares a border with northern Mexico, according to the e-mailed statement sent today. It comes as members of U.S. President Barack Obama’s administration said they have concerns about the new law and may seek to overturn it in court.

“There is an adverse political environment for migrant communities and all Mexican visitors,” Mexico’s ministry said. “It’s important to act carefully and respect the local laws.”

The Arizona law makes it a state crime to be in the U.S. without proper documentation. The state has an estimated 460,000 residents living there illegally, the seventh highest total in the country, according to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Opponents say it will lead to discrimination and racial profiling by law enforcement authorities.

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer, who is running for re- election, signed the bill into law on April 23, saying it would address problems of violence along the border with Mexico and crime due to illegal immigration while protecting individual rights.

‘Murderous Greed’

“We cannot sacrifice our safety to the murderous greed of drug cartels,” Brewer said. “We cannot delay while the destruction happening south of our international border creeps its way north.”

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said during congressional testimony in Washington today that her agency has “deep concerns” about the law and that it will “detract from and siphon resources that we need to focus on those in the country illegally who are committing serious crimes.” U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said today that the Justice Department may go to court to challenge the statue.

The law, which goes into effect 90 days after the Arizona legislative session ends, states that police must investigate if they have “reasonable suspicion” that someone is undocumented, according to Gabriel Chin, a professor of Law and Public Policy at the University of Arizona in Tucson. Police officers may face lawsuits if they fail to do so, he added.

‘Angered and Saddened’

“It’s very hard for me to see how this law can be enforced without discrimination,” Chin said in a telephone interview today from Tucson. “It seems to be inevitable.”

Mexican President Felipe Calderon said April 26 that his country’s citizens are “angered and saddened” by the Arizona law, which he said “doesn’t adequately guarantee respect for people’s fundamental rights.”

About a quarter of Arizona’s 6.6 million residents are of Hispanic descent, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

U.S. Democratic Party leaders said last week that an overhaul of immigration law could advance through Congress this year if Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid can pick up enough support to muscle it through the Senate first, according to April 22 remarks by Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Pelosi told reporters that she will find the votes for the measure in the House — where Democrats have 254 of 435 seats — if the Senate can clear it.

Senator Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican who has been working with Democrats on an immigration overhaul, said rushing legislation this year would be a mistake because it doesn’t have the votes yet to pass.

“The worst thing we could do is bring up immigration reform and have it crash and burn politically,” he told Napolitano. “If immigration comes up this year, it’s absolutely devastating to the future of this issue.”