Congratulations on being quoted in an article "Ariz. law comes after years of mounting anger" by Jacques Billead and Amanda Lee Myers, Associated Press Writers.
The articles included: Don Sorchych, editor and publisher of a small local newspaper called Sonoran News, says over the past 20 years his quaint Phoenix-area town of Cave Creek has seen illegal immigrants set up "villages" made of scrap lumber and canvas.
"I think people confuse racial profiling and being a racist," Sorchych says. "I'm not saying you should, but if you could profile, you'd be right 95 percent of the time. They wear a certain uniform, certain shoes, gloves in their back pockets, clothes from Goodwill."
“Sorchych got so fired up about illegal immigration he took photos of people who picked up day laborers and published them.”
Keep up the good work!
Here in Wisconsin there are a few who don't even know that Arizona shares a border with Mexico, i.e. Milwaukee County supervisor Peggy West said in a meeting, "Arizona doesn't border Mexico."
Add to the list of idiot politicians that are elected such as: Alvin Greene won the South Carolina Democratic Nomination for U.S. and Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) who remains clueless.
It is very obvious that voters don't take elections seriously which includes the "anointed one."
It would be great if those who did not live in Arizona kept their noses out of your business.
Dave Madison | Eau Claire, Wisconsin
America needs to think and act big in Fed-AZ dispute
As for the Federal suit against Arizona regarding recently legislated Arizona illegal immigrant law is already sub-judice, therefore all the matters (including identification and keeping the track of illegal immigrants in USA) will be taken care of by the judiciary.
Because whenever there is an injury (which there obviously is to USA, including Arizona and especially other border states, by illegal immigrants) there has to be a remedy and without remedy there is no law and it is hoped that U.S. judiciary will uphold this basic tenet of jurisprudence.
But merely leaving this matter to judiciary will not solve the basic problem and for this Americans ought to do the following in view of the following:
(1)- The main reason for thus-far failure of U.S. policy to address the problem of illegal immigrants in USA from Mexico is that
(i)- USA so far has been trying to put entire burden (like fencing, increased and high tech border patrolling, e-Verification, anti-illegal-immigrant laws, etc.) for the solution of this problem on USA only, while leaving offending country Mexico un-burdened.
(ii)- USA is not taking 'Rule of law', 'Sovereignty' and 'Human Rights' with requisite utmost seriousness.
(2)- Therefore USA (Fed and all the concerned State Governments in pursuant to legally expected judicial order in said sub-judice case) after identifying and keeping the track of these illegal immigrants and after ensuring better border security should immediately demand from Mexico to take their citizens back in order to put reciprocal burden on Mexico too.
(3)- In case Mexico refuses to do so then USA should
(i)- Demand commensurate territory from Mexico to sustain these illegal immigrants on U.S. soil.
(ii)- In deference to human rights, grant amnesty / legal status to all these illegal immigrants by due process of law by imposing reasonable fine on these illegal immigrants.
(4)- In case Mexico refuses to part this much territory then USA should, in a time-bound program, take this commensurate territory, militarily from Mexico.
(5)- Alternatively if USA considers it better, then USA should demand equitable exclusive mineral rights from Mexico in lieu of sustaining these Mexicans on American soil.
Whether Americans like it or not this Fed-AZ dispute, apart from having serious implications on American national domestic life, has global ramifications too for USA. Because the destiny has put the onus of providing leadership for the process of planting globalization all over the world on USA and without offering an example of upholding and defending (i)- Rule of Law (ii)- Sovereignty and (iii)- Human Rights, the Americans have hardly any chance of succeeding in this historic and extremely rewarding mission.
Therefore Americans have no other choice than to think and act big (as mentioned above) in on-going Fed-AZ dispute.
Hem Raj Jain | South Ridge Mankato, Minnesota
John McCain, the Maverick versus J.D. Hayworth, the Conservative
For years, GOP leaders have invited John McCain to assist American taxpayers and the GOP in supporting conservative legislation. Often, John McCain rejected the GOP leadership in support of liberal legislation as written and/or supported by liberal Senators Russ Feingold, John Kerry, Barack Obama, and the late Ted Kennedy.
John McCain worked with these 'liberal' Democrats on Capitol Hill to convert 'illegal immigration' into 'amnesty'. You and I are not prepared to exchange 'illegal immigration' and their criminal activity for 'amnesty'.
Now, you have a superior option.
J.D. Hayworth graduated 'cum laude' from NC State and served as 'Student Body President' during his senior year. As a congressman, J.D. was named 'Ronald Reagan Fellow' by Citizens United. He is a 'Paul Harris Fellow' of Rotary International, and an 'Eagle Scout'.
J.D. Hayworth has an 'A rating from the NRA', and has a voting record '100 percent Pro-Life'. J.D. Hayworth has compiled a lifetime rating of '89 from Citizens Against Government Waste' and a lifetime rating of '98 from the American Conservative Union'. You cannot get much better than that.
Yes, J.D. Hayworth is a true 'Conservative'.
In the end, do not be perplexed by John McCain's unjustifiable massive media advertising in support of John McCain and/or against J.D. Hayworth for U.S. Senate. As a maverick, John McCain opposed many conservative issues. That is not a positive record John McCain should be proud of.
J.D. Hayworth is a great conservative and will serve honorably as an Arizona U.S. Senator.
Oscar Y. Harward | Monroe, North Carolina
Arizona Border War
I recently contacted the Arizona Legislature and requested they work to get an Arizona State Border Security Force Authorized. As an Arizona citizen I feel that we must do something to prevent the invasion of foreigners from continuing.
The sovereignty of my State and this great nation depend on ONE loyal population.
Currently we have a multitude of hyphenated citizens and invaders whose loyalty, in many cases, lie with their parent country and in direct opposition to America’s founding principles. In my opinion, this is unacceptable.
As is Mexico’s stance concerning their own borders, Americas' Border Security is an ABSOLUTE MUST!!!!!
Be American – Vote American.
An American for Sovereignty ...
Frank Middleton Sanders | Via E-mail
I donít get it
I read some comments on your latest edition about the poor surfacing job done on Cave Creek Road and I wholeheartedly agree. We drivers had to endure weeks of slow and messy driving to let the resurfacing take place, and yet, when they finished, we were left with a still-bumpy road. It's really bad around Blue Ridge Dr. and Cholla Road. where half of the left lane still has the old surfacing – how do they let that happen?
Why not just make the road complete and also resurface the other half of the left lane? I don't get it.
Vincent Chien | Cave Creek
What if an Arizona state trooper pulled over Osama Ben Laden
What happened to our U.S. Constitution under which the Congress is to make the laws and the president is to enforce the laws? The system in vogue today is for the president to nullify any law with which he does not agree by simply signing an executive order that effectively makes the law null and void. Consider what happened in the closing days of the recent debate on HealthCare. A number of congressmen opposed the bill because it included provisions that would overturn current laws that prohibited the use of public funds to pay for abortions. To calm these fears and to regain the votes needed to pass the bill, President Obama pledged that if such provisions were in the final bill he would negate them by signing an executive order that prohibited his staff from enforcing that part of the law.
Today U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton sanctioned this principle. In ruling against Arizona’s immigration law she said that the Arizona law (which was in complete accord with the federal laws) interfered with the president’s “policy” to not enforce the federal immigration laws.
Let’s submit this newly found power of the president to a test. We have a federal income tax law. What if the president decided to institute a new policy by signing an executive order that prohibited the IRS from collecting taxes from union members?
If Arizona cannot enforce immigration laws because immigration crimes are a violation of federal law, what about kidnapping, bank robbery and terrorism which are also against federal laws? Is Arizona now prohibited from stopping and detaining a suspected kidnapper or bank robber? What about a suspected terrorist? What if an Arizona state trooper pulled over Osama Ben Laden for speeding? Should he simply write Ben Laden a ticket and let him go without calling the feds? After all, how is the trooper to know that the president has a policy of not arresting certain terrorists from certain countries for political reasons?
So this is what Judge Bolton’s ruling invites: Law enforcement in Arizona will no longer respond to amber alerts on Arizona highways; it will no longer respond to burglar alarms from banks and it will not notify the federal government if Osama Ben Laden is found in Arizona. I say “Go for it, Arizona.” Prove to the nation that our constitution has been trashed.
Jack C. McVickers | Scottsdale
We want to clear up the smoke that has developed around the Illegal Criminal Alien Invader issue.
Let's draw this line hard and deep, and be unshakably clear.
The Illegal Criminal Alien Invader issue IS NOT a race issue ... it's a nationalist issue. It's about the good ole USA being the good ole USA when we are rotted and decaying in the ground and our grand children being able to recognize the good ole USA as their home.
For the utterly ridiculous ... no one wanting racial equality is going to mass under another country's flag, spit on our flag, and propagate a campaign to make Spanish our national language. How bleeping blind stupid and crazy can you get.
These Illegal Criminal Alien Invaders – particularly the Hispanics – have NO DESIRE to be a part of us. Their plan is to get enough Hispanics in an area and overtly or ostensibly claim that area as Mexico.
And thank you very much but we don't need your snot nosed Sherlock what ifs or maybes. We were here as it all unfolded, and the '06 marches were supposed to be the climax that broke America's will. But sadly the Invaders found that a bunch of punchos waving Mexican flags and insulting American tolerance is not nearly enough to crack the back of this sweet land of liberty. It takes much more than that to dissolve our imperfect union. But what they did was damn near piss some of us off.
So if we hear you talking about those people in Arizona and other parts of the country addressing this invasion as a – racial – issue then we know YOU are the problem.
And the Central and South American Cartels can't buy enough puppet politicians to line up with Gutierrez to provide a smoke screen for their treason.
Is that clear?
Clean Congress, Repel the invasion, Bust the banks.
Any questions ...
M.E. Goodwin | Los Angeles, California
The common good
Ever hear the song "Went to a garden party?"
Well those words come to mind when I attended the July 19 Cave Creek Town council meeting.
Like the song – "I saw a lot of my old friends" but events ensued causing me to write this editorial because in the end "you got to please (be) yourself." An issue before the council was whether the town should apply for a grant with the NRCS for 1.4 million dollars to build barriers in a wash to protect 8 homes from potential future floods.
Properties of 8 homeowners were damaged during a recent flood – the master bedroom of one home was washed away.
A risk-averse position was presented by the staff in the town of Cave Creek. Unfortunately, only 2 councilmen – Mozilo and Trenk – had the courage to ask the tough questions.
After hearing from the staff of the town and 7 of the 8 homeowners, one council member said he was in favor of entering into the agreement because many of these folks are his friends and that the federal government is spending stimulus money on all sorts of things, so why shouldn't this money be used for this purpose. Other council members chimed in that they also wanted to help their friends. Only 2council members had the interests of the larger Cave Creek community in mind and ask whether the town's shrinking budget would be in jeopardy if various contingencies did not work out with respect to the grant.
In these times of federal deficit spending, it is this Creeker's opinion that the council members are there to serve Cave Creek at large and not to make decisions based on friendship, that spending stimulus money or federal funds should be done wisely regardless of what the federal government is doing, that the voice of opposing council members should not be snickered at when those members are trying to make fiscally responsible decisions, that council members were elected to make the tough decisions and not decisions to fulfill their need to be liked.
I am not judging whether the town should enter into the grant. Perhaps by doing so, future devastating events will be avoided, thereby protecting more than just these 8 homes. But decisions need to be made based on fiscally sound judgment and the needs of the community at large, not personal sentiment, especially if 5 of the 7 council members want to be reelected.
Finally, it should be noted that one of the eight homeowners was not in favor of entering into the grant. No problem – the council members entertained the possibility of condemning the property to get an easement. Did we know that by electing these officials, we gave them the ability to condemn our property in the interest of taking care of their friends? Council members, we elected you to care for the greater good. Be mindful of that responsibility.
Carol Maczka | Cave Creek
A first-class morale booster
Thank you for providing a first-class morale booster in the form of Kristen Burroughs’ guest column, “Choosing Choice” (July 28). With the Obama Administration using federal money and muscle to coerce states into adopting nationalized education standards, it is easy to grow glum about the inability of parents to exercise their rights in the near future to supervise their children’s education.
The column is a refreshing reminder that parents with willpower will always have choices. They can choose to home school their children. They can join with other parents and form a home-schooling cooperative. Increasingly, they can find solid instructional supplements – or even whole curricula – for their children online. They can choose a charter school, or private school, or technical academy, or, if they prefer, a public school operated according to ed-school orthodoxy.
The point (which Ms. Burroughs drives home creatively with examples) is that parents should choose choice. They should demand choice. They should not settle for anything less. Just be choosy. Always – no matter what standardized regime the government comes peddling.
Robert Holland | Senior Fellow for Education Policy, The Heartland Institute | Chicago, Illinois