Jon Stewart tries to educate himself on just what is going on in Arizona. He postulates that Arizona is the meth lab of democracy. Social commentary gets into Jon’s space.
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Law & Border | ||||
|
||||
24 Thoughts to “Jon Stewart: Law and Border in Arizona”
Comments are closed.
Stewart’s a riot! We have to find something to laugh at as America devolves into a police state.
Laugh it up, until we’re faced with the same level of misfortune as Arizona, then what will you have to laugh at? The tide keeps rolling in down south as we sit here bickering. Just think what will happen when our economy gets back on its feet. At some point even the softest supporter will be forced to say enough is enough, we’ve got to do something. It’s easy to heartlessly laugh at someone else’s misfortune as long as they are our own countrymen, but God help you if you so much as sneer at an illegal! Makes no sense.
No Starry, America is dissolving, period!
But how do you know who is an illegal?
@Moon-howler
You don’t Moon – instead you create the proper incentives. Comprehensive immigration reform is, first, to seal the border with Army and National Guard troops (secondary benefit is to reduce the drug trade) – now who could complain about that???, Second require proof of birth to get a drivers license – why is that offensive??? Third make hiring an illegal illegal with. a fine 10 times that of any wages paid – thank you for displacing American workers. Fourth, eliminate the Constitional provision over birth that has permited children born in the US to prevent the deportation of the parent(s). Consider them duel citizens and deport the family. It is a perverse incentive to get preganant the minute you get here. And finally, eliminate any access to any entitlements to include education and ObamaCare. Lets get back to taking care of our own. If charities what to fill in any gaps until they go or are deported – thats fine, so long as it is not at taxpayer expense. Now, the problem with this of course is that many countries will not allow us to send them home – they have actually prevented ICE planes from landing – and nobody wants somebody else’s problem, but, they can go home on their own. We have to stop the bleeding and its going to take some strong medicine and some serious political will to put America first.
You don’t know unless you check their ID. So, if you prevent checking ID’s then they have free reign over our sovereign land. It’s as simple as that. So now who doesn’t want ID’s checked……….. besides Elena?
I don’t. It’s anti-American for a person to be demanded to have to show his ID. Who I am is not anyone’s business unless I want it to be.
I refuse to ID myself anytime I am legally able to do so.
If I am not committing a crime, it’s none ya…none ya business!
City of Manassas likes to check IDS
Do what I do.. Tell them to pound sand by asking a simple question, “Sir, are you detaining me?” If they don’t answer yes, walk at a fast pace away. If you are being lawfully detained excercise your right to remain silent and cooperate with all lawful orders.
Even if you are assaulted, do not resist the assault. Do NOT strike an officer.
ID checks are the first step towards gun registration and confiscation. I side with the liberals (or more directly, those that support civil liberties) on this as the 4th Amendment is sacrosanct.
Much like any and all of the Bill of Rights – the government has to have a compelling reason (something more than, hey cause it’ll make our job ‘easier’) to squash a right.
So, I’ll stand arm to arm with Elena in a protest rally against REAL ID or any other threat to my guns and other civil liberties.
@PWC Taxpayer
1. no problem sealing the border. It is impossible to totally seal our border but5 we should try. Drug violence is way out of hand.
2. Proof of birth. Already done in Virginia. It was done because of terrorism originally.
3. There already is a fine.
4. birth right- any changes to the constitution require a constitutional amendment. I am curious as to what you would really consider an American. Constitutional amendments aren’t the easiest things to pass. I am rather used to being an American because I was born here.
I don’t know anything about ICE planes being blocked. Not sure those aren’t urban legends.
It seems that CIR might fix some of these problems.
ICE planes have not been prevented from landing. PWC Taxpayer probably read that on some other fool’s internet site.
The Arizone law is unconstitutional. The state does not have the right to detain individuals without due process of law, according to the United States Constitution. That is why I oppose the law. We must respect our country’s Constitution.
Starry, I’m curious. In what manner is it unconstitutional? I’m curious – did you see something that I didn’t see? Which part of it and for what reason?
Hey MH, why don’t you start a thread about the latest Obama video that was sent to thousands of his supporters? That should bring some interesting comments. After all the fuss because someone ‘thought’ some unknown person may have uttered the N word at those three black congressmen, we have the president singling groups out based solely on race and nothing about it on the news. I wasn’t aware that Rev. Wright was now his speech coach. Obama is half right, he apparently only represents half in America. So who represents us white guys? You know, the ones that orchestrated this country. Who else, I mean we’ve been told that we didn’t allow anyone else to participate, so we must have done it all. What was that speech now by MLK?
Second Alamo, not sure what you are talking about. Want to leave a link?
See what I mean? The news doesn’t cover it!
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0410/36346.html
I haven’t been around today to see the news.
I watched. Why do you want it posted? Does it offend you that the president wants young people, Blacks, Hispanics, women to remain involved in the political process? Shoot, my ‘group’ was in there. I am happy.
How about if he had said Evangelicals, soccer moms, Patriots, senior citizens or others identified by labels? He could have snagged me in that one also. Politics is all about demographics.
My fellow Americans can obviously be about anyone, even angry white men. Mr. Howler did the angry white man thing today. It isn’t a pretty sight.
For marinm – the Fifth Amendment states:
“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;”
I submit that the Arizona law allowing cops to arrest people for walking around w/o drivers licenses is a violation of this amendment.
A test of Arizona’s political character
By Michael Gerson
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
This law creates a suspect class, based in part on ethnicity, considered guilty until they prove themselves innocent. It makes it harder for illegal immigrants to live without scrutiny — but it also makes it harder for some American citizens to live without suspicion and humiliation. Americans are not accustomed to the command “Your papers, please,” however politely delivered. The distinctly American response to such a request would be “Go to hell,” and then “See you in court.”
The government of Arizona, it turns out, has been ambushed by its own legislature. If this vague law is applied vigorously, the state will be regularly sued by citizens who are wrongfully stopped. But if the law is not applied vigorously enough, it contains a provision allowing citizens to sue any agency or official who “limits or restricts the enforcement of federal immigration laws.” Either way, lawyers rejoice.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/27/AR2010042703894.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
Holy sh_t MH, all this talk about racial profiling and the Tea Party as being racist as to why they oppose Obamas actions, and you don’t see this as being racially offensive to white males?? My God if the next candidate for president made a speech saying that we had to rally white men to defeat this president you would never ever hear the end of it!! Are you seriously that blind! So Obama states that they have to rally blacks and Latinos to maintain his presidency and that’s OK? What the hell is the difference?
I look upon our President in this day and time as being the leader in treating people equally regardless of race and gender, and to judge people only by the content of their character as were the wishes of MLK. That makes perfect sense to me, and I try to subscribe to that. As I watch the comments about the actions of the Tea Party folks and the lawmakers of Arizona being constantly labeled as racist without foundation, it occurs to me that this will never be resolved. There always will be differences between groups for one reason or another, it’s just that race is so visibly evident and easily distinguished. However, the President is suppose to support and defend all the citizens of the US regardless of race and gender, and for Obama to segregate our nation by excluding white males in his bid for support is the most openly RACIST act I have seen. He basically stated that those are the people he stands for and none else matter to his party. So the next time I see someone create a commemorative act that doesn’t include blacks and Latinos I don’t want to hear one damn complaint from either group! And Obama was suppose to bring everyone together, well he sure has a strange way of going about it.
Obama never said that they have to rally blacks and Latinos to maintain his presidency.
I actually see where your coming from and don’t entirely disagree with what your driving at. But, Hiibel (Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District of Nevada) disagrees.
Additionally, it’s already a federal law that resident aliens carry ID as a condition of being legal but the federal law only mandated that they’d provide that ID to a INS/ICE agent upon demand. The Arizona law changes that to provide for a local law enforcement officer to demand it.
That’s why I am not a fan of stop & identify laws and have been fighting them in VA for a while now.
So, to make this ‘unconstitutional’ Hiibel would have to be overturned. And, I just don’t see that happening anytime soon.
Funny you left out the elimination of access to entitlements. Welfare is the tough one, I agree, but I say support them in custody as illegals while deportation is proceeding — oh wait that is the law today – and apparantly one that Arizona is prepared to take on. The one that really gets me is access to education and college at taxpayer expense – displacing Virginia citizens. On the ICE planes – its true – and its a recurring problem with some – not all – South American nations. I imagine that you can imagine who – they tend to be those socialist nations that have all the benifits of a peoples republic – including free health care.
I don’t consider education an entitlement. The Supreme Court has ruled on the issue.
As for college, I dispute that illegal immigrants get to go to college at taxpayer expense. If they live in the state, have gone through state high schools, then they should be able to attend with in-state tuition, if they qualify for the school. We are talking about kids for goodness sakes. They shouldn’t be entitled to anything above anyone else.