Because it's Really About Principles

I dislike Arizona's new immigration law as much as the next guy, but the sight of financially (and morally) bankrupt left-coast city councils passing noisy "boycotts" of the Copper State leaves me a bit cold. Especially this one:

Seattle has joined several other U.S. cities in protesting Arizona's sweeping new immigration law. […]

The council's resolution was written to protect the only substantial contract Seattle has with an Arizona company—a $106,000-a-month deal with American Traffic Solutions. The Scottsdale-based company operates Seattle's 29 red-light cameras.

Link via drlari's Twitter feed.

Comments

[John]

We hate Arizona, unless you are providing our red light cameras, then they are okay.

It is all about priorities Matt.

[MikeP]

More principle from San Jose…

Councilman Pete Constant questioned whether the council would be violating its own policies by meddling in the affairs of Arizona. Council policy states that the city should not take a position on actions of other states “when no impact is felt upon the government of the city of San Jose.”

But Vice Mayor Judy Chirco said Arizona’s law “does affect us because we have the same type of population Arizona does.”

I guess unvarnished collectivism trumps all other considerations or rules.

[Night Elf Mohawk]

Looks like her own personal little commerce clause. Read the words so broadly as to swallow the whole. Good job.

[posttton]

that’s patently false. seattle does NOT have the same “type of population” that arizona has.

the demographics aren’t even close

and i’m not talking about flannel shirts

[MikeP]

That article was not about Seattle: it was about what San Jose, California, is proposing to do when the council meets next month.

[posttton]

lol … my bad.

“nevermind cheddar”

🙂

[DoDoGuRu]

“I dislike Arizona’s new immigration law as much as the next guy”

So…. you’re 60%-70% in favor of it?

[Kroneborge]

+1

[democratsarefascists]

The latest number I saw was 73 percent in favor of the AZ law, which means support is growing FOR it. This is consistent with all boycotts. When the sad Hippies start one, it does nothing but hurt them.

Leftists live in an echo chamber populated only by their own kind, which explains why so many people from Left Coast states, as well as New York and Illinois, have their heads up their Obamas.

[MlR]

Score.

[PM770]

I am boycotting everything I have never bought and never intend to buy from Arizona.

I’m still going to watch the Fiesta Bowl, though.

[robc]

Hmmm….Tostitos Fiesta Bowl.

Tostitos
Fiesta

Those dont sound very ‘merican to me.

[fresno dan]

Are tostitos made in Arizona?
Are the players made in Arizona?
And I have no idea where fiesta ware was made.

[?]

So…. you’re 60%-70% in favor of it?

It must be more than that. He said next guy, and men are less likely than women to give a pollster a proper polite-society answer. And statistically, the next guy isn’t “Hispanic,” so Welch is probably pushing 90.

[alan]

+1 goes to Welch. The preening assholes only marginalize themselves with these kind of actions. There is never any consistency in the causes for which they stand. You know every damn one of them would lift the trade embargo with Cuba in a heartbeat (as would I), but they are hellbent on punishing Arizona for committing 1/millionth of the crimes of that Communist regime.

Look at the protestations of the Obama administration. The same people who have done nothing to reverse the cruel Clinton created practice of capturing Cubans at sea and sending them back to that hellhole.

Fuck the left for its inconsistency. Fuck the left for its insincerity. I shit on the left.

[grrizzly]

The Left has successfully convinced African-Americans that the Right is deeply racist. Now, they want to do the same trick with Latinos.

This probably gives too much credit to the Left but it would be rational even if cynical.

[ChicagoTom]

The Left has successfully convinced African-Americans that the Right is deeply racist. Now, they want to do the same trick with Latinos.

This probably gives too much credit to the Left but it would be rational even if cynical.

Yes, obviously it has nothing to do with what the Right says or does, like passing anti-brown people laws or fetishizing the confederacy.

It’s all “the left’s” conniving treachery.

And isn’t it just a tad insulting (maybe even racist) to insinuate that whole classes of minorities are so dumb that they can be manipulated by “the left” into believing things that aren’t true voting against their own interests?

You seem to think that these tricked minorities just aren’t capable of thinking for themselves and judging “the right” based on it’s deeds and words.

I mean seriously do intelligent people really believe that the only reason minorities are running as fast from the GOP and the right as they can is because of “the left’s” ability to hoodwink them? You don’t think that maybe things like Arizona’s anti-hispanic laws aren’t sending a message to minorities about how “the right” feels about them?

There is so much stupid in that belief.

[grrizzly]

No, it’s not just the Left’s conniving treachery that makes Blacks believe that racism is everywhere. Blacks, obviously, support affirmative action. But how can they rationalize receiving preferential treatment based on the color of their skin? It’s either widespread racism whistled by every right-wing dog or acknowledging that African-Americans cannot possibly succeed without discrimination against people of other races. Is it so hard to understand that the former explanation is much more palatable?

Thus, both the Left and African-Americans strongly want to believe in racism on the Right.

To be sure, forty years ago there were things much worse than the dog whistle. But they are hard to find nowadays. Similarly, there’s a kernel of truth that the Arizona immigration law has some anti-Hispanic undertones. That’s why it’s important to start working right now on permanently co-opting Latinos into the Leftist camp.

[jtuf]

Are large portion of ethnic minorities are hoodwinked by the left into falsely thinking that the left is racist. For that matter, a large portion of White Jews are hoodwinked by the left into thinking that the right is anti-Semitic. A significant portion of Christian Whites are hoodwinked by the left into believing that Democrats will bilk the “rich” instead of them. It’s not that any one particular group is stupid. It’s that peddling tribalism and hate works for politicians in the short term, and the left has been playing that game for as long as I’ve been old enough to remember.

[democratsarefascists]

“You seem to think that these tricked minorities just aren’t capable of thinking for themselves and judging “the right” based on it’s deeds and words.”

Hilarious, considering it is the Left’s belief in just this idea that leads them to force their paternalistic and insulting control over minorities. Hence your labeling of blacks like Clarence Thomas and Condoleeza Rice as “Toms.”

Leftists are RACIST by nature.

[Spaceno38]

Wow, so much wrong with this.

The Left’s goal is to make people depend on them.

Left – “The state will take care of you. You’ve been oppressed”

Right – “Everyone can be someone with hard work”.

Obama won the election with 95 to 5 percent of the black vote. I thought voting for one’s skin was a racist? When Obama won, people were in the street saying Obama was going to pay their mortgage.

Do you know why Steele, Thomas and such are defamed by the Left? They aren’t victims. Any successful black that doesn’t think their way is be littled.

The Left wants the same think with the hispanics. They want a class beholden to them because than they can stay in power. The Left think that they know better than you how to run your life.

As for most intelligent people – we believe in voting for someone that is best for the job not because they have a D or R or I in front of their name.

[Michael Ejercito]

Yes, obviously it has nothing to do with what the Right says or does, like passing anti-brown people laws or fetishizing the confederacy.

What anti-brown people laws?

And isn’t it just a tad insulting (maybe even racist) to insinuate that whole classes of minorities are so dumb that they can be manipulated by “the left” into believing things that aren’t true voting against their own interests?

Germans were manipulated into thinking that National Socialism was a good idea.

Russians were manipulated into thinking that Communism was a good idea.

Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza Strip were manipulated into thinking that militant Islamism was a good idea.

Do you think minorities are somehow less prone to manipulation than Germans, Russians, or Arabs?

[ARTICLE 1, SECTION 10]

I fart in the Left’s general direction.

[democratsarefascists]

I’ll second that fart.

[John Thacker]

Unfortunately for San Diego, its city council doesn’t have contracts with all the prospective tourists that like to visit in the summer.

[MacGhil]

Then there’s this:

Calif. penal code pertaining to immigration similar to Ariz.’s SB 1070
http://www.washingtontimes.com…..s-ariz-la/

[MikeP]

California’s code does not make it a state crime to be in violation of federal immigration law. Arizona’s does.

(Of course it runs completely against the duties of public office for government bodies to boycott Arizona over this.)

[MacGhil]

I don’t like the law. I’m just saying…

In our 25 years in business, we have had many Mexican nationals in our employ, a few since its inception. We pay them market wage, and also provide medical insurance. (White boys are too good to dig ditches, dontcha know, no matter what wage you pay ’em.)

I might also add, our Mexican employees think my salsa kicks ass. They ain’t lying!

[Kroneborge]

I don’t have a problem with the law at all. It’s following federal law, and really isn’t any different than CA law.

Will Mexians get harrased more? Probably not any more than minorities already get harrased. Moreover, I imagine that how you are dressed etc will continue to play a bigger part than your skin color. If you look and act like a Mexican American, you will probably be fine, if you look and act like a Mexican that happens to be in America, they will probably hassle you.

[MikeP]

Where does California’s code make being an illegal alien a state crime like Arizona’s does?

13-1509. Willful failure to complete or carry an alien registration document…
A. In addition to any violation of federal law, a person is guilty of willful failure to complete or carry an alien registration document if the person is in violation of 8 United States Code section 1304(e) or 1306(a).
…
D. A person who is sentenced pursuant to this section is not eligible for suspension of sentence, probation, pardon, commutation of sentence, or release from confinement on any basis except as authorized by section 31-233, subsection A or B until the sentence imposed by the court has been served or the person is eligible for release pursuant to section 41-1604.07.
E. In addition to any other penalty prescribed by law, the court shall order the person to pay jail costs. and an additional assessment in
the following amounts:
1. At least five hundred dollars for a first violation.
2. Twice the amount specified in paragraph 1 of this subsection if the
36 person was previously subject to an assessment pursuant to this subsection.

[MacGhil]

MikeP, the outrage has been directed more at the “Papers, please.” aspect, and turning all state employees into ICE agents (but they sure don’t mind turning all businessmen into immigration officials (E-Verify, which we use!), and medical insurance providers, and tax collectors, and social workers ensuring dads pay child support, now do they?), rather than the state crime aspect of the thing.

I’m with Gary Johnson and Barry Goldwater on this issue.

[Kroneborge]

@ MikeP,

Making state crimes of things that are already federal crimes really doesn’t seem like a big deal to me. Either way, illegal is still illegal.

[Alice Bowie]

Did u think it was illegal when black people forced into the back of buses Kroneborge?

[posttton]

this is a stupid analogy (and fwiw, i’m against the AZ law as a matter of policy).

[cynical]

It was locally legal to practice segregation, and eventually found to be federally illegal to do so. Punishment for those who immigrate to the US without government sanction is currently legal at both levels.

[MikeP]

Yes, the outrage is towards the “Papers, please” aspect of the Arizona law.

But I get annoyed when people say that it isn’t any different from federal or any other state’s law when it clearly is. No other state fines or imprisons someone found in violation of immigration law.

As for who I’m with on this issue, I think immigration law amounts to the single greatest violation of individual rights the US (and now Arizona) commit today.

[posttton]

what is your underlying belief here? do you believe that there is some sort of “individual right” to enter a sovereign country w/o permission?

or is it merely the way we enforce our immigration laws?

[MikeP]

I believe that migration, residence, and employment are inalienable individual rights — exactly those rights that governments are instituted to secure.

When governments instead abrogate those rights without a specific and individually applied reason in the compelling public interest, they are behaving illegitimately.

Quotas are neither individually applied nor in the compelling public interest.

[posttton]

ok, well then we strongly disagree. i believe that nations have the right to control their borders. period.

i do not think that migration is a right, inalienable or otherwise.

but thanks for the clarification on your views.

[MikeP]

ok, well then we strongly disagree. i believe that nations have the right to control their borders. period.

And I would never use the words “nations have the right”. Period.

[cynical]

Unlimited immigration doesn’t work with democracy if the demos is tied, in feudal fashion, to an arbitrary geographical region. If the demos is a community of individuals, it would work, but only to the extent that integration and assimilation would practically be required to truly join the demos.

[democratsarefascists]

So you’re arguing that a state law can’t make violating a federal law a crime?

[MikeP]

No. I am arguing that California’s law is not similar to Arizona’s because California does not make illegal residence a state crime.

[Rich]

Careful with this fervor. People might start boycotting “products” of DC.

[Dan T.]

Tough crowd – you would think that when a local government makes even a symbolic gesture in support of liberty and freedom it would at least get some kudos here.

As for Seattle’s boycott, it pertains to future business dealings, which is why the current contract is excepted.

Never mind that if Seattle had broken that contract, one of the Reason staffers would use that as an example of how governments cannot keep their word on things.

[alan]

I shit on you.

Your ass is too low to the ground from the vantage point of my justifiably high and mighty horse to shit back, lefty.

[MikeP]

Passing a resolution of condemnation: a symbolic gesture.

Boycotting business dealings: a violation of the public fiduciary trust.

See the difference?

[Jersey Patriot]

Contradiction troll contradicts.

[alan]

Warm Frothing Shit For Trolls

1 cup my shit
1/2 cup of my urine

Dump shit in a bowl, slowly stir in urine. Serve in a bowl with several crackers on the side.

makes 1 serving.

[Paul]

No, Dan T. no.

When you boycott something, you stop. If it doesn’t cause you any pain, discomfort, or force you to make any changes to your process, then it’s not a boycott, it’s noisy posturing.

We laughed at the Christian groups when they boycotted Disney, then held their convention at Disney World, I laugh at the City Council of Seattle.

What’s the point, Dan, if you give up smoking for Lent, but you’re not a smoker?

[jtuf]

There’s currently a bill in the US House to double the diversity slots for immigration. It has only one sponsor, a Democrat from Texas. The other hundred something Democrats in the house have not sponsored the bill. They are too busy making politically advantageous speeches against the Arizonia law to actually make it easier to immigrate legally. If Seattle passed a resolution to encourage their reps on Capital Hill to raise the number of diversity slots, I would applaud it. Instead, the Seattle council jumped on the band wagon to make themselve feel superior to Arizonia. I don’t have much respect for intellectual circle jerks.

[DJF]

What is a “diversity slot”? Sounds like another racists quota system for approved races.

[JW]

“We condemn these outrageous actions of Arizona that are approaching the level of a police state! What’s next? Cameras on every corner to monitor the activities of every person, whether they be citizen or immigrant?”

[Hacha Cha]

why would we care if they defund red light cameras?

[Paul]

Aside from the obvious, it’s not a boycott until they do. Or at least fund them through a corporation not in Arizona.

[Pro Libertate]

Just a note for the apologists: Is this the greatest injustice a city commission can waste its time on? Pretty much any statement or ordinance operating outside its borders is bullshit of the highest order, but this sounds more political than moral or ethical.

[Paul]

These municipal declarations are always bullshit, but this one is bullshit with whipped cream and a cherry on top.

“We take a principled stand against this immigration law by boycotting Arizona products… except the products we really like… that bring us revenue.”

[Sam]

Arizona should provide free transportation for “undocumented” welfare receivers to Seattle, San-Franc, WA-DC etc instead of trying to do job federals won’t do..

[yes, yes, say it again]

+++++999

[Ken Shultz]

I don’t have a problem with any law that requires the state police to arrest illegal aliens for being illegal aliens, but I’m a little sick of the culture war myself.

This has become like the gay marriage issue for a certain strain on the left–just a culture war wedge issue. It’s hard to see the connections between culture war issues because people’s reactions aren’t tied directly to what they’re reacting to…

But just as Arizona’s immigration law is a reaction to school layoffs and local budget cuts, etc., I think boycotts like what we’re seeing from the cities like San Francisco, Seattle and others are a reaction to Gay Marriage bans, etc.

It’s just become further ammunition for more volleys in the culture war. It doesn’t really have anything to do with the immigration issue at all, and it just pushes any real solutions to the problems surrounding immigration even further out of reach.

Thanks for throwing kerosene on the fire, Seattle, San Francisco, et. al. If the immigration weirdos on the right stayed up all night trying to think up new ways to make middle of the road people like Arizona’s immigration law more, they couldn’t have come up with anything better than having the cities of San Francisco and Seattle weigh in.

[Apogee]

Yes, the culture war is a nice, unsolvable distraction from governments economic failures.

Emotional rallying is great for political donations!

[Ken Shultz]

Yeah, I don’t know what’s going on in Seattle’s city politics, but if it’s anything like everywhere else, those politicians could use the distraction come November.

“Look, over there!”

Their hand-waving is meant to distract us.

[veelin]

Hey, what about those moronic Berkeley students and their hunger strike that was allegedly about the Arizona law, only they tacked on some unrelated shite as well? One of the strikers hadn’t even read the whole bill! Ha ha ahahaha…

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/…..1DFVR9.DTL

[Ken Shultz]

Yeah, that was another one!

I’m leaning against Arizona’s law, and even I was hoping they’d starve to death.

I think that’s a middle of the road thing too–if Berkley students will go on a hunger strike to oppose it, then it can’t be all bad!

[veelin]

Yeah, Berkeley students protesting and trying to martyr themselves don’t bring out the humanist in me either. I wonder what percentage of Berkeley undergrads chose to attend just to be part of the tradition of witless protesting.

[Slap the Enlightened!]

Doesn’t seem to be working out so hot for San Diego, either.

[Adonisus]

Seattle, huh? I wonder what Peter Bagge thinks about this….speaking of which, we haven’t heard from him in a while….

[Paul]

I’m glad you guys picked this up. I was going to send it yesterday.

[Dagny T.]

I’m actually pleasantly surprised there are only 29 red light cameras in the city- I’d have expected more. Now if only we knew where they were.

But, fuck City Council’s pointless posturing. If you care about racial profiling, how ’bout getting the SPD to stop beating up Mexicans?

[P B]

The City of Austin just passed a resolution condemning the AZ law and won’t send their employees to AZ on official business due to potential harrasment.

In other news there will still be sobriety check points and MANDATORY blood draws this Memorial Day “no-refusal” weekend

[veelin]

“MANDATORY blood draws”

Is this real? They’re hiring phlebotomists to participate in police roadblocks and do involuntary blood draws? If so, it should be grounds for losing one’s certification. You know, in a righteous society. But it would be the State of Texas that certifies them in the first place.

[P B]

Those that refuse roadside sobriety tests and smell off booze are carted off to the nearest hospital to have blood drawn. Granted, some RN’s are refusing but the APD are going to hire phlebotomists to handle the workload. Our city council are a bunch of nannystate fascists.

here be a link

http://www.myfoxaustin.com/dpp….._Labor_Day

[P B]

If someone refuses to do the field sobriety tests then they are take to the nearest hospital to have blood taken with court order. Some of the hospital workers refuse to draw, ergo the Austin PD is looking to hire their own phlebotomists.

Link
http://www.austindwiattorney.org/no-refusal/

[Coeus]

It’s worse than that. They’re training cops all over Texas. And the training requirements are less than those that actual phlebotomists have to finish.

[veelin]

Thanks for the info. Now, any thought I ever had about relocating to Austin has gone out the window. Not that I was super-serious, but I did not consider it out of the question.

[P B]

Other than the creeping police state and the maternalistic city council, like all other cities, it is the best place in Texas.

[Nash]

Where were all these people who hated the law BEFORE it was passed?

I mean the entire Mormon church bankrolled proposition 8 in California. The people who hated the AZ law couldn’t put together enough scratch to run a campaign of their own to fight it in the court of public opinion?

Granted one is a ballot measure and the other went through the legislature but still, that kinda pressure can work.

As far as I’m concerned it’s none of our damn business at this point. Either it’s unconstitutional and will be overturned OR it’s a state law that doesn’t violate the constitution and we either STFU about or at the very least don’t move there.

[posttton]

i have no problem with boycotting states that have unjust laws. let’s assume arguendo that their law is constitutional. imo, it’s still bad policy. is that policy “bad” enough to make me think about boycotting?

let me give another example. it used to be (until it was invalidated by judicial review) that certain private sexual acts were (technically) illegal in a certain southern state. imo, that law was so grossly unjust as to justify boycott of that state. what people do in the privacy of the bedroom should be their own fucking business (pun intended).

similarly, those of us who support RKBA should think about boycotting states (and cities) that pass ridiculous restrictions against same.

[Nash]

I don’t have a problem with a personal boycott I just think demanding that the Dodgers don’t play the Diamondbacks or the City Council of Los Angeles voting to pull several hundred thousand dollars of business out of AZ are more pandering than effective.

[posttton]

i can agree with that. also, in that case we have govt. agents enfocing the boycott for all, vs. people individually choosing to boycott.

[ChrisO]

I’m not fond of the AZ law, but the nature of its vocal opponents makes me want to like it…

[posttton]

seattle, via their statist outbound mayor recently tried to violate both the 2nd amendment AND the WA state constitution (as well as WA state law) by prohibiting firearms in seattle city parks, etc.

by (shades of bush) EXECUTIVE order.

whatever one thinks of the arizona law (i’m against it) it is at least less obviously UNconstitutional than what Seattle tried to do

the hypocrisy is astounding

[jtuf]

I suggested to tripling the quotas for legal immigration to half a dozen Tea Partiers and Republican so far. All of them were in favor of the idea. I proposed it to one Democrat so far, and his response was, “Those Tea Partiers will never go for it.” Granted it’s a small sample size, but so far the results suggest that the right wants to enforce immigration laws and increase legal immigration while the left wants to get on a high horse and insult the right.

[Slap the Enlightened!]

A True Thing of Beauty.

[Pat in NC]

I’m glad to see that Seattle is taking such a bold stand to stop any deals with AZ except for all the deals Seattle has with AZ.
Way to stick it to ’em Seattle! And really stand up for your values.
I’m sure this action makes the illegals in Seattle feel much better GIVEN THAT THE SEATTLE POLICE WERE FILMED A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO BEATING A HISPANIC AND SAYING “I’M GOING TO BEAT THE F**KING MEXICAN OUT OF YOU”. (Google “police beating i’m going to beat the mexican out of you”)
No profiling going on in Seattle…

[TeamBarstool]

The police here don’t need to ask of papers, They can just wait for illegals to turn themselves in.

[TeamBarstool]

grrrrrrr, sugarfreed the LINK

[ray dusek]

I’m from scottsdale az, and thank you for letting me know where these camera are from, it gives me good reason to go to the next town meeting and get those things yanked out of this state because what you are doing