It's Time to Boycott Arizona

[DomnNC]

The point is that the people who reside in Arizona who posted in this thread have said, more than once, they voted and they DID NOT vote for her or her policies and they feel like they are still being slammed and grouped in with those who DID vote for her by all the "blanket" statements being made about people who reside in Arizona as a whole. They registered their protest with their vote as you just said but are still being held accountable for every other Arizonians vote. Just because they believe that a boycott is not the answer for their state does not make them bad people or complicit in what has happened by other peoples votes.

Btw, I am a registered voter and I do vote in every election. You can't take a gun to other complacent voters heads and make them go to the polls. I agree that a lot of voters need a swift kick in the ass to get to the polls. There could have been a different outcome in Arizona if every registered voter did go to the polls but it is not our place to heap condemnation and group blame upon those that in fact did go vote and vote against the current administration there thereby registering their protest.

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by DomnNC

The point is that the people who reside in Arizona who posted in this thread have said, more than once, they voted and they DID NOT vote for her or her policies and they feel like they are still being slammed and grouped in with those who DID vote for her by all the "blanket" statements being made about people who reside in Arizona as a whole.

Except people keep bending over backwards to make it clear that they aren't saying that the people HERE believe the law to be just. Now, I am curious if a boycott and/or mass exodus of Hispanics is NOT the answer, what is? Let's grant, for the moment, that a boycott isn't the way to deal with this? What then? Obviously we know how this turns out at the ballot box--the backers, proponent and apologists for this law win. So if money continues to pour into Arizona then there is no economic consequence to be paid for this law. So politicians who backed the law pay no political price and the state, as a whole, pays no economic price. At that point what is there to discourage Arizona from passing an even more draconian law?

That pretty much leaves the mass exodus of Hispanics which I still hold would probably be the *most* effective form of protest. At first, one might witness the spectacle of Arizonans singing "na na na, na na na, hey hey hey, good-bye" and that would probably go through the wave. After that, well, it starts to have an economic effect. Suddenly there are a lot fewer people doing everything from washing dishes to teaching classes. As I said yesterday, when they leave their dollars go with them. Tax revenues decline. The tourism and hospitality sectors of the economy will be hit particularly hard as they lose cheap labor.

I get it that the Arizonans don't want any of these things to happen to their state. I fully understand that. However, it makes no sense to suggest that those either targeted by this law or horrified by it simply shrug our collective shoulders in order to avoid hurting someone's feelings.

They registered their protest with their vote as you just said but are still being held accountable for every other Arizonians vote.

No, they are not. They are choosing to take a very justified critique of this law and the Arizonan politics that birthed it in a personal fashion. I'll try--again--to explain the distinction.

"In 1940, America was a fundamentally racist country."

Now, according to the logic being deployed here, I have just claimed that every single American living in the borders of this country in December 1940 was a racist. I have insulted--personally--every single American living at that time. Except I haven't. My parents were alive in 1940, both of them turned 18 that year. They were the *targets* of racism but they were not, themselves, racism. Does that mean that America wasn't a fundamentally racist country? No, the statement still stands because the *laws* of America mandated segregation in public accommodation, the military, etc. One can make the observation that America was a racist nation in 1940 and *still* not be saying something that any given person alive in 1940 was a racist. Likewise, one can say that Arizona has passed a law that is an invitation to racial profiling without saying that any given Arizonan is in favor of racial profiling.

Just because they believe that a boycott is not the answer for their state does not make them bad people or complicit in what has happened by other peoples votes.

I am going to go out on a limb and suggest that the good people of the Birmingham Bus Company did not think that the Birmingham Bus Boycott was the answer for the problem of blacks sitting in the back of the bus. I'm going to also suggest that the good people of the Woolworth's company didn't think that a boycott of the Woolworth's lunch counter was the right way to deal with that manifestation of segregation. The targets of a boycott NEVER think that it's a good idea--that's kind of the whole point of a boycott is to motivate people to change the conditions that precipitate the boycott.

However, I'm all ears. If a boycott isn't the answer and a mass exodus of Hispanics isn't the answer, what is?

Btw, I am a registered voter and I do vote in every election. You can't take a gun to other complacent voters heads and make them go to the polls. I agree that a lot of voters need a swift kick in the ass to get to the polls. There could have been a different outcome in Arizona if every registered voter did go to the polls but it is not our place to heap condemnation and group blame upon those that in fact did go vote and vote against the current administration there thereby registering their protest.

So at what point--if any--are people responsible for what happens in their locality? To use another (fairly) recent example; there used to be a country called Yugoslavia. When the Soviet empire dissolved, Yugoslavia broke up. What followed was, by even the most strict definition, a genocide of Bosnian Muslims and Croats by Serbs. I'll spare the gory details but suffice to say that in just one city, Sarajevo, which was under siege for over a year, atrocities took place daily. Serbs who were NOT involved, who wore no uniform, knew of the atrocities and did nothing to stop them. Using current American zeitgeist logic, the only people who should feel even the most trivial pang of guilt are those who pulled the trigger.

Cheers
Aj

[apretty]

my expert opinion:

i lived there, i still own a house there and i still think boycotting the beautiful state of arizona is a great idea. though, moving away is probably safest if you present 'brown' in any way.

[DomnNC]

"I get it that the Arizonans don't want any of these things to happen to their state. I fully understand that. However, it makes no sense to suggest that those either targeted by this law or horrified by it simply shrug our collective shoulders in order to avoid hurting someone's feelings."

So am I to assume that since you are so horrified by it and any other person who is horrified by it that does NOT live in Arizona are going to leave the comfy confines of their homes where this isn't an issue, move to Arizona and start a grass roots movement to get Brewer and her cronies tossed from office in the next election?

We can all raise our collective voices and scream at the injustice of it from whatever state we live in, does it do any good? NO, because the people in Arizona were elected by the majority and they will be in office until they are ousted on their rear ends by the said same collective majority!

And no, the comments here have not been "bend over backwards" to ensure that the posters from Arizona have not made to feel like they are being targeted by these posts.
Cody stated he didn't vote for Brewer, some took exception to some of his terminology, Cody even stated he was half Native-American with blue eyes. Another poster implied with their post that he was lying about it. Did I see you as a moderator take that person to task, did another moderator step in and say, whoa wait a minute, that was a little unjust and unfair? NO that was not done, what was done was more criticism was hurled his way because of wording that he used even after he stated time and again that he wasn't a supporter of this policy, so much so to the point that he just disengaged altogether. What if he was a supporter, the amount of criticism heaped upon him lost him from the discussion when something could have been said to persuade him to change his vote at the poll in the next election was lost. That is never a good thing.
He mentioned "the look" and was taken to task for using those words, forgive me but isn't racial profiling all about "a look". If they look to be Hispanic, black, purple, yellow, green whathave you what racial profiling is all about? It was completely unnecessary as far as I'm concerned.

People seem to forget that during these economic hard times that some people cannot afford television, radios, newspapers, or treks into a nearby larger city where one may learn of political activism and what is going on in their own back yard. Not all people are as educated as you, as I, as the person to your left or to your right, that does not give us the right to take an air of superiority over any one when there is a discussion going on. And yes, that is the road this discussion is taking, making some feel less than when there is no need for that when they have stated they did NOT vote for these idiots and they refuse to have their feet held to the fire with the majority who did.

Please, keep the topic to the current situation, I'm fully aware of past atrocities of people before my time and your time. It just muddles, confuses and blurs the lines of the current situation.

So if those that are so indignant and horrified about the situation perhaps as I said you should pack up the comfy confines of your current home, move to Arizona and start a grass roots effort to oust the current political regime, however you should be prepared to move to the other 22 states who are NOW also considering adopting legislation similiar to Arizona's to deal with the influx of illegal immigrants.

I don't know what the answer is and I'm pretty sure you don't either, no one does, otherwise the situation would have already been corrected. I do know that bankrupting a state is not the answer, it only creates a whole host of other issues.

I've had my say about when now, all I did was happen upon the thread and was kinda taken aback by some of the commentary directed towards other members of this site and misinterpretation of a post.

[apretty]

wtf, mexicans didn't bankrupt the state.

and that was pretty much me blowing my entire load--i don't really have a lot of energy/extra time to argue over blatant racism (which you know, as i write that statement--sounds pretty fucking privileged of me to 'opt out' and i am owning that, this conversation makes me tired.)

[The_Lady_Snow]

There are NO green, purple, or pink people targeted by this heinous law.

I as a traveler in Az had to lie (left my purse in SD) about my status in this country. I used my tricks and made myself look white.

I get offend with good right when white folk describe POC with terms such as "that look"


If you are deflecting for Cody by saying he can't afford the TV he clearly haz interwebs! He could of read ALL THE FACTS posted in this thread


How one can live in denial I can't understand, wait I
can. White skin gives one privileges I'll never get

True story

[Corkey]

Did you know that other states are looking at SB1070 as a template for enacting this racist law? No? Well the state I live in is and so is Texas and New Jersey. It has nothing to do with the boarder being secure, it is racism pure and simple. So I will rail against it in AZ in PA in TX in NJ and any other state that even thinks this is a good idea. It isn't it is RACISM.

[Greyson]

Originally Posted by Corkey

Did you know that other states are looking at SB1070 as a template for enacting this racist law? No? Well the state I live in is and so is Texas and New Jersey. It has nothing to do with the boarder being secure, it is racism pure and simple. So I will rail against it in AZ in PA in TX in NJ and any other state that even thinks this is a good idea. It isn't it is RACISM.

Right now in California there is a petition being circulated state wide to gather enough signatures to put a California version of SB1070 on the ballot in the next election cycle.

[Novelafemme]

Originally Posted by Greyson

Right now in California there is a petition being circulated state wide to gather enough signature to put a California version of SB1070 on the ballot in the next election cycle.

What do you think the outcome will be, Grey?

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by Greyson

Right now in California there is a petition being circulated state wide to gather enough signature to put a California version of SB1070 on the ballot in the next election cycle.

The Republican Party is just *determined* to immolate itself in California aren't they? Don't they get it? I'm reminded--in the fractally strange way my mind works--of an old Frantics skit called Tai Kwan Leep. At one point the sensei, who has just given an obnoxious student Ed Gruberman a 'boot to the head', is challenged by another student and asks "have you learned nothing from the lesson of Ed Gruberman"?

In this instance, Ed Gruberman is the Republican party of California and the boot to the head is the results of the midterm elections.

Because the President and the Congress are Democratic the Republicans should have done well--it's what typically happens and despite all the breathless crowing about tidal waves and never before has any sitting President lost seats in a midterm, the fact is that what happened earlier this month was pretty much in line with what has generally happened--the party of the President loses seats. Except in California.

Governor? Went to a Dem. Senatorial race? Went to the Dem. Attorney General? Went to the Dem. House races? Largely won by Dems. Hell, the Democratic party picked up seats in the California Senate! Why? Because of the Hispanic vote. Hispanics turned out in droves and voted their self-interest. They did the math, realized where the GOP wanted to go, and voted for the Dem. Same thing happened in Nevada. Harry Reid should have lost and yes, Angle was a spectacularly bad candidate but he *still* should have lost. But she ran an anti-immigrant campaign and paid the price.

The GOP seems bound and determined to make themselves a rump party. It may not happen in 2012, it could certainly happen in 2016 and by 2020 if the GOP doesn't get it that racism doesn't pay they will learn it then.

Cheers
Aj

[Nat]

Originally Posted by Corkey

Did you know that other states are looking at SB1070 as a template for enacting this racist law? No? Well the state I live in is and so is Texas and New Jersey. It has nothing to do with the boarder being secure, it is racism pure and simple. So I will rail against it in AZ in PA in TX in NJ and any other state that even thinks this is a good idea. It isn't it is RACISM.

As a Texan I am very concerned about the spread of this crap which is one of many reasons it matters so much to me that Arizona feel the negative impact of this. If it is economically and politically rewarding, it will spread like wildfire through many more states.

[asphaltcowboi]

i have ban myself from porting in this thread.. my statements were not made clear enough for several and my abilty of speach does dont comepete.. please refain from using my name on this thread or assuming what i am or may /may not have or know. i do not know you nor you me.
thanks
cody

Originally Posted by The_Lady_Snow

There are NO green, purple, or pink people targeted by this heinous law.

I as a traveler in Az had to lie (left my purse in SD) about my status in this country. I used my tricks and made myself look white.

I get offend with good right when white folk describe POC with terms such as "that look"


If you are deflecting for Cody by saying he can't afford the TV he clearly haz interwebs! He could of read ALL THE FACTS posted in this thread


How one can live in denial I can't understand, wait I
can. White skin gives one privileges I'll never get

True story

[The_Lady_Snow]

Originally Posted by cody

i have ban myself from porting in this thread.. my statements were not made clear enough for several and my abilty of speach does dont comepete.. please refain from using my name on this thread or assuming what i am or may /may not have or know. i do not know you nor you me.
thanks
cody

Um look Cody, why not call out DNC for using your name in his post? Hence my reply using your name.

As far as your "unclear" statements, this is what is odd to me, white folks can use the most colorful descriptors when it comes to POC and then brush it off as "we" misconstrued such adjectives.

So with that said, I did not assume, YOU chose to use "that look" I stand by it was not the best choice of adjectives to describe us, why? Cause it is fucking offensive, just as offensive as "wet back" "beaners" and my favorite everyone still uses no matter how many times we asked you don't

ILLEGAL.

I am not illegal, I did not come from another planet here I came from a land where MY ancestors ( I have direct bloodlines to Pancho Villa AND can prove it) roamed freely.

So please don't wag your finger at me for your name use, at least I did not use an offensive descriptor.

Thanks

[QueenofSmirks]

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

...That pretty much leaves the mass exodus of Hispanics which I still hold would probably be the *most* effective form of protest....

I'm actually reading post by post, oldest to newest of today's post, so I may have a lot more to say on this later, but for now I want to say that I actually agree with this. To me, this puts the power in the hands of the people who are being discriminated against and allows them to make their own choices, and by doing so, effectively hurts the people trying to cause them harm. I'm all for this type of action.

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by QueenofSmirks

I'm actually reading post by post, oldest to newest of today's post, so I may have a lot more to say on this later, but for now I want to say that I actually agree with this. To me, this puts the power in the hands of the people who are being discriminated against and allows them to make their own choices, and by doing so, effectively hurts the people trying to cause them harm. I'm all for this type of action.

To me this is just a boycott by another name. As I said before, I do not think you or Cody or any other person posting on this thread supports SB 1070 or thinks that racial profiling is a great idea. That said, SB 1070 exists, the law in question puts a big 'racial profiling welcome here' sign at the border of Arizona and I do not think that it helps if there are NO consequences to be paid. If Arizona gets away with this and banning, for all practical purposes, the teaching of any form of ethnic studies then other states will be emboldened to do something similar.

As far as voting, only 46.49% of Arizonans who were eligible voted a month ago. What that means is that 53.51% of Arizonans, by not voting, voted for Brewer by default. Not voting is always a tacit vote for whomever ends up winning the election. Again, I want to make it clear that I'm not talking about you or Cody I'm talking about Arizona as a polity and the results of the choices that Arizona has made. A majority of eligible voters were comfortable enough with the prospect of Ms Brewer as governor to not vote.

That doesn't mean that I look down on Arizonans, I don't. It doesn't mean that I think that all Arizonans are racists or think that racial profiling is the best thing to happen since oxygen. It means simply that more than half of all eligible Arizona voters failed to exercise their right to vote and are thus responsible for what happens.

It is sad that you and other Arizonans of goodwill will be caught up in this.

Cheers
Aj

[DomnNC]

FYI - Voters Rights - Straight from the website of the National Coalition for the Homeless.

http://www.nationalhomeless.org/proj...galissues.html

Some states had previously required registrants to live in a “traditional dwelling” in order to register to vote. Judicial decisions in court cases and the enactment of state and federal laws have eliminated that requirement. Today, homeless individuals in all states--including those people who are living on the streets--have the right to register and vote. When registering to vote, homeless voters only need to designate their place of residence, which can be a street corner, a park, a shelter, or any other location where an individual stays at night.

Concerning mailing addresses: The address provided may be that of a local advocacy organization, shelter, outreach center, or anywhere else willing to accept mail on behalf of a person registering to vote. Some states, like Arizona or Nebraska, allow homeless people to use county courthouses or county clerks’ offices as their mailing address. Some states will not allow registrants to use a P.O. Box as a mailing address. A registrant’s mailing address does not have to be the person’s residential address.

Concerning lack of ID: If a registrant has neither a current driver’s license number nor Social Security Number, then the registrant will be assigned a voter ID number once her or his registration is approved.

You can read the rest at the website. Every American has the right to vote, homeless or not.

[I'mOneToo]

Speaking as a (formerly) "real homeless person" (though i preferred the term "houseless")

because none have come forth, I'll give you a first person account

I *DID* have: (and still do have, it's not a "home address" that legitimizes a person)

A post office box

A voter registration card

A valid driver's license

A healthier diet than some "housed" folks (heck, even myself right now -- I could afford better food then!)

An up-to-date auto insurance policy

A bank account

A life without debt



I did *NOT* ever:

Stay in a shelter

Stay in a halfway house

Make national or global current events my first stop on the information highway when availing myself of internet access

NEVER NEVER NEVER bought alcohol

NEVER NEVER NEVER bought cigarettes

NEVER NEVER NEVER bought illicit drugs of any kind

NEVER NEVER NEVER made assumptions about how "real homeless people" feel -- i.e., for me it did not HURT ME to be homeless in any way. What hurt at times was people making incredible assumptions about me, my life, and my feelings. But no, MY TRUTH did NOT hurt.

I would not feel ashamed if any of my "nots" had been "yesses" on the list, however. Hope I've dispelled some of the myths abounding about what kind of rights homeless folks have. Not everyone has *ACCESS* but no one is denied the *RIGHT* to vote, to drive, or to live without fear of being judged for living in less than what some consider "a proper home."



I'll be back after I marinate on my thoughts about how so many of you have suggested that my family and friends in arizona should suffer dire economic consequences (in other words, that my friends and family deserve to die?) because "their state" has adopted racist policies.

When anyone says "boycott a state" they are recommending bankrupting all of the residents. Bankrupt people starve to death. It's hard to move an entire family to make a political statement -- just as it is difficult for everyone HERE to move TO arizona to make a political statement.

hmm... but why *aren't* we ALL moving *TO* arizona to register to vote as arizonans to change things? How can anyone EXCEPT a privileged individual expect *others* to make sacrifices to make america better, instead of taking the bull by the horns ourselves? the ONLY pro-active measures are votes, according to this thread. So... if you're not a registered arizona voter, GET THERE AND REGISTER.

There was an article that came out a couple of days about about how next door in Nevada they are considering their own version of SB1070.

http://www.nevadaappeal.com/article/...ntProfile=1058 - "2 Nevada lawmakers to push for immigration law"

sooooo..... BOYCOTT ARIZONA and while you're at it, BOYCOTT NEVADA ... and BOYCOTT THE OTHER 20 STATES CONSIDERING SIMILAR MEASURES TO SB1070

http://colorlines.com/archives/2010/...s_sb_1070.html

in case everyone is unaware, the latest racist policies of arizona are driven by a rigged corporate game. I'll be back with details of that, too. early in the thread, someone named dean robert hit it on the head.

Originally Posted by DomnNC

FYI - Voters Rights - Straight from the website of the National Coalition for the Homeless.

http://www.nationalhomeless.org/proj...galissues.html

Some states had previously required registrants to live in a “traditional dwelling” in order to register to vote. Judicial decisions in court cases and the enactment of state and federal laws have eliminated that requirement. Today, homeless individuals in all states--including those people who are living on the streets--have the right to register and vote. When registering to vote, homeless voters only need to designate their place of residence, which can be a street corner, a park, a shelter, or any other location where an individual stays at night.

Concerning mailing addresses: The address provided may be that of a local advocacy organization, shelter, outreach center, or anywhere else willing to accept mail on behalf of a person registering to vote. Some states, like Arizona or Nebraska, allow homeless people to use county courthouses or county clerks’ offices as their mailing address. Some states will not allow registrants to use a P.O. Box as a mailing address. A registrant’s mailing address does not have to be the person’s residential address.

Concerning lack of ID: If a registrant has neither a current driver’s license number nor Social Security Number, then the registrant will be assigned a voter ID number once her or his registration is approved.

You can read the rest at the website. Every American has the right to vote, homeless or not.

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by I'mOneToo

I'll be back after I marinate on my thoughts about how so many of you have suggested that my family and friends in arizona should suffer dire economic consequences (in other words, that my friends and family deserve to die?) because "their state" has adopted racist policies.

Actually no one has said or implied anything remotely like the idea that anyone should die. I will, however, reiterate that laws have consequences.

When anyone says "boycott a state" they are recommending bankrupting all of the residents.

No, they are recommending putting pressure on the state of Arizona to change the law. The whole idea of a strike or a boycott isn't to ruin businesses, it is to put pressure on them. Right now, Arizona has a law that is explicitly racist and is an open invitation to racial profiling. It is meant to make a particular population feel unsafe and unwelcome and like second-class citizens. It is meant to intimidate citizens. That law must be repealed.

Bankrupt people starve to death. It's hard to move an entire family to make a political statement -- just as it is difficult for everyone HERE to move TO arizona to make a political statement.

No one is suggesting that people move to 'make a political statement'. I do believe it would behoove Hispanics living in Arizona to find the exits but that is not about making a political statement, that is about making sure that they are safe. Whites living in Arizona have no reason to move. Let them stay. As I said last night, an exodus is a boycott by another name. I think that Hispanics should leave the state of Arizona and move somewhere they will be welcome.

hmm... but why *aren't* we ALL moving *TO* arizona to register to vote as arizonans to change things?

Why should ANY person of color put themselves in harm's way? If it were *just* this law, maybe you would have a point but it isn't *just* this law. There's the 'no teaching ethnic studies in school' regulation with its attendant 'no teaching if you have a 'thick' accent' provision. There's the billboards showing a Hispanic family as "the biggest threat facing our nation". And then there's this gem; on 3 Oct 2009 an interracial couple was walking through a park and a man came up to them and asked the black man what he was doing with a white woman. They walked on, he got into a car, followed them and shot them. She died, he lived. In 2009. Over interracial dating. In Arizona.

How can anyone EXCEPT a privileged individual expect *others* to make sacrifices to make america better, instead of taking the bull by the horns ourselves? the ONLY pro-active measures are votes, according to this thread. So... if you're not a registered arizona voter, GET THERE AND REGISTER.

Except that sword cuts both ways. It is always people of color who have to exercise infinite patience. At each step in the last century, black people were told we had to wait. ONE day, but not today, we could go to any school. ONE day, but not too soon, we could live in any neighborhood. ONE day, but wait for it to come, we will be able to marry anyone we love. And on and on and on. Even today, if someone says something offensive it is always and forever people of color who are supposed to be patient, forbearing and understanding.

Votes have consequences or they should have. Arizona, a state in a democratic republic, elected people who passed a law that in 2010 makes a segment of the population second-class citizens. The state, by its democratic behavior, made a choice and yes it absolutely sucks that people who made another choice will feel pain because of it. They don't deserve it. But neither does the Hispanic mother deserve to have to fear being pulled over by a cop when she was just running down to get a few items at the grocery store and so doesn't have her birth cert on her. For that matter, neither does the Hispanic father who may have to hold it together while he is humiliated by some cop who asks him questions along the "so how long have you been in this country" line. You have not truly tasted of life's bittersweet tragedy until you have had to watch your father hold it in while his very dignity is assaulted in front of his family. They don't deserve it either.

I'm not talking about people in the country without proper documents or people who have overstayed their visa. I'm talking about people whose bloodlines have lived on the same patch of land since not long after the last ice age ended. They are citizens. I'm talking about people born here. They, too, are citizens. After the Civil Rights movement, I and many others thought, it would appear incorrectly, that we had at long last settled the issue in this country of whether you could make laws designed to make a group of people second-class citizens based upon race. Since Arizona has chosen to take a step backward, I think two things should happen until the state comes to its senses:

1) Every Hispanic person who *can* leave the state should give very serious consideration to finding a new zip code.

2) People should not vacation in Arizona, organizations should not have their conventions in Arizona.

The people who *own* the businesses in Arizona want to continue doing so. If they begin to feel the pressure, they *will* pressure their government to repeal the bill. That's how strikes and boycotts work. That's why they are used.

There was an article that came out a couple of days about about how next door in Nevada they are considering their own version of SB1070.

http://www.nevadaappeal.com/article/...ntProfile=1058 - "2 Nevada lawmakers to push for immigration law"

sooooo..... BOYCOTT ARIZONA and while you're at it, BOYCOTT NEVADA ... and BOYCOTT THE OTHER 20 STATES CONSIDERING SIMILAR MEASURES TO SB1070

Any state that passes a similar law should have to fear the exact same set of consequences. Perhaps that would give them a moment of pause.

in case everyone is unaware, the latest racist policies of arizona are driven by a rigged corporate game. I'll be back with details of that, too. early in the thread, someone named dean robert hit it on the head.

They may be driven by that and I think that a number of us are aware of it. However, that does not change, substantially, the effects on the ground. Racist laws should have consequences for states that pass them and NOT just the sole consequence that the ethnic minority targeted by them gets to live in fear.

Cheers
Aj

[Nat]

As a person who doesn't live in Arizona, SB1070 is concerning to me because

1. I live in Texas and if Arizona gets away with this sort of blatant, threatening and harmful discrimination, it's likely to spread.

2. I'm invested in this country's purported protection of civil rights, and Arizona's violation of those rights threatens the future of this country.

3. I am a human being and I care about human beings who are being violated, threatened and harmed by the government. It's not okay with me, and I don't know why it would be okay with anybody else either.

I understand why Latinos would be leaving Arizona, and I do hope Arizona suffers for the loss. I think I would leave too, because I would feel threatened, isolated, afraid and at risk.

To pick up and leave your home - it's a big deal. It's expensive, it's destabilizing. It means losing connections, support, friendships. For a person to feel the need to move, to uproot their family, to quit jobs in this terrible economy, in order to escape state-sanctioned racial discrimination - these people are making great sacrifices - not simply protesting something they disagree with. It's tragedy due to state-sponsored injustice, not simply protest.

If Texas experiences a mass exodus of Latinos due to a similar law, it won't be Texas anymore to me.

When people who have privilege stand by silently and shrug their shoulders when things like this happen to people with less privilege, they are lending their tacit agreement to these laws - which is all that's needed to turn this country into a much uglier place. I don't understand how any person could defend SB1070 or think it's okay that Latinos are leaving the state in droves because their safety is so threatened.

I think it's really ironic that the majority of Americans who talk about the threat of big government are largely the same people (mostly white people) who have no issues with government overstepping its bounds and violating the civil rights of people of color.

-------------------------------------------------

By the way, today's a great day to call your senators and voice your support of the DREAM (Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors) act to help young people at risk of deportation obtain temporary residency and have a chance for conditional permanent residency if they complete two years in the military or two years at a four year institution of higher learning. *

Http://www.senate.gov/general/contac...nators_cfm.cfm

[BullDog]

I already posted this in another thread, but I will post it here because the connection is meaningful to me. Today is the 55th anniversary of the day that Rosa Parks refused to give up her bus seat to a white person. I am 48 years old. That means people slightly older than me went through a time, particularly in the South, where people of color were supposed to sit in the back of the buses and be segregated on what they could do and where they could go based on race- there were laws on the books (Jim Crow) that supported some of those things. What is happening in Arizona (and elsewhere) reminds me of those times.