Arizona congressman calls for a boycott of Arizona

Arizona congressman, Raul Grijalva, a long-time advocate for open-border policies has asked for a boycot of Arizona.

That's rich; calling for a boycot of your own state. Clearly the congressman has a problem with his loyalties. No, scratch that; he has no problem with his loyalties. When it comes down to his state versus Mexico, he'll take Mexico to be the winner every time.

Under federal law an alien must carry their green card with them at all times. This isn't a case where the police can just walk up to you and say, "Where is your green card, boy?" There is no violation of 4th Amendment rights. There still must be probable cause.

My suggestion for Grijalva would be to move to Mexico and become an ambasador to the U.S.

I still remember when Raul was on the Pima County board of supervisors and they were throwing thousands of tax-payer money on a ridiculous gun buyback scheme.

As I addressed the board with a lettter from noted attoreney, David T. Hardy, explaining how they were violating numerous laws under title 18 of the U.S. code, section 923 and a host of laws under Arizona Revised statutes, section 11, Grijalva had the following to say: "Everyone should have a machine gun!" I told him that I did legally own class III firearms.

A picture is worth a thousand words.

Note the Obama sticker in the back window.
Nuff' said.

Why should immigration laws not be enforced?

Wednesday, April 21, 2010
"We just want to be Americans."
How many times have we heard that Mexicans in this country illegally just want to become Americans? Really? Then why is it that every time they're telling us that they're waving the Mexican flag and pumping their fists in the air? How would I be treated if I was in Mexico, waving an American flag and protesting? It's a rhetorical question because we both know the answer to that question. I would be dead or in a Mexican jail and not treated with the kindness and kid (pardon the pun) gloves that these teens are being met with.


The Arizona Daily Star article shows a group of about 40 Tucson High students who walked out of their classes to join a reported 100 or so more teens at Armory park in Tucson to protest AZ state senate bill 1070.

The AZ Star article says "SB 1070 would overrule any policy or procedure of a city council or police department that keeps officers from enforcing federal immigration laws."

I have some thoughts on the subject (who knew?). Let's begin with the definition of illegal:
Adjective; prohibited by law; against the law; unlawful; illicit; also, not authorized or sanctioned, as by rules.
It is illegal for citizens of Mexico or any other country to enter the United States illegally. Entering the U.S. without proper documentation is illegal and therefore subject to criminal prosecution. Why are we even discussing this issue? Should we also have protests to prevent the police from enforcing drunk driving laws or other laws that are in place?

We're constantly told that we can't just deport these folks who are here illegall because, "They're just here doing those jobs that us Americans don't want to do and it would break up families."

Why not? Did they not know they were breaking the law when they snuck into the U.S.? Should rapists and murders also be spared in the name of not wanting to break families up? Sound like a ridiculous analogy? I don't think so. As a matter of fact, many of those here illegally are people who have raped and murdered and then use the border like a turn style at Disneyland to avoid prosecution.

Are some Mexicans here illegally who are just trying to earn a better living? Sure, but they are still here illegally and need to go through the proper channels. I will acknowledge that the immigration system is in need of overhaul. That doesn't mean that it be streamlined to allow an expressway to the U.S. There are reasons for immigration policy. We can't allow the U.S. to become even more over-populated with immigrants. We only have so many resources available and those resources should go to those in this country legally.

If you don't live in Arizona you may not be cognizant of the violence that comes across the Mexican border. And I'm up to here with those who claim enforcement of immigration laws are "mean-spirited"! Pima County Sheriff's Department had to add one sergeant and 7 deputies because fully 37% of the violent crimes in Pima County, where Tucson, AZ is located is committed by Mexicans here illegally.
How about the red light runner cameras designed to catch red light runners? Mexicans here illegally don't have to worry about it because Mexico won't share the info with the U.S. that would show who owned the vehicle. It doesn't end there. It goes much, much further.

A Douglas, AZ rancher was just murdered and they traced the tracks back to the Mexican border. This is far from an isolated incident.
Why should the Mexican here illegally receive preferential treatment over other groups of individuals here illegally?

Another comment I have is about the teens who decided to skip class at school and carry Mexican flags and pump their fists in the air. I would opine you couldn't find a handful of them who could give you a cogent argument about why immigration law should be ignored nor could you find a single one who could present a valid argument as to why ignoring the law is good for America. Looking at the "demonstrators" in the photos I'd surmise the average age is about 13-15 years old. Clearly some of the great thinkers of our time. I also have to wonder how many of them have parents and/or family members who are in this country illegally.

Some things never change. These are a bunch of rebels without a clue, it got them out of class, albeit it wasn't authorized by the school and will be an unexcused absence and it fed their need for behaving badly. It's the same mentality that causes basketball fans to overturn cars and set fire to things when their team wins the championship. The same group will behave the same way if their team loses the championship. Everything and anything is an excuse to behave badly.

Lord knows I've organized my share of protest marches. I've organized large demonstrations when Sarah Brady came to town. I've done the same when the so-called, "million moms" wanted to march. The difference being they were organized protests, I was able to provide a valid position and even more; I wasn't protesting against enforcement of an illegal activity.

Several years ago Ronald Reagan offered up an amnesty that was suppose to be the amnesty to end amnesties for those here illegally. Obviously, it didn't end the flow of illegals coming into the U.S. Rest assured if we had another amnesty it wouldn't slow the flow one iota.

We need to start enforcing our immigration laws. If not now, when?

For another person's take on this issue go to the following link. It's Ted Nugent, making sense of it all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjFiHENNf9Q&NR=1

Are cops being villified unjustly?

The following is an Associated Press story: Cops Getting Caught on Camera Increases Scrutiny Associated Press The same cell phones, surveillance cameras and other video equipment often used to assist police are also catching officers on tape, changing the nature of police work -- for better and worse. print email share recommend (2) CHICAGO - Minutes after a suburban Chicago police officer was charged with striking a motorist with his baton, prosecutors handed out copies of a video showing the beating -- taken by a dashboard camera on the officer's own squad car. In California, after a transit cop and an unruly train passenger slammed against a wall during a struggle and shattered a station window last fall, video from a bystander's cell phone was all over the Internet before the window was fixed. The same cell phones, surveillance cameras and other video equipment often used to assist police are also catching officers on tape, changing the nature of police work -- for better and worse. Some say cameras are exposing behavior that police have gotten away with for years. But others contend the videos, which often show a snippet of an incident, turn officers into villains simply for doing their jobs, making them targets of lawsuits and discipline from bosses buckling to public pressure. "We tell our officers all the time you've got to assume that everything you do is going to be videotaped," said Chicago Police Superintendent Jody Weis. "Everyone has a cell phone and almost every cell phone has a camera." Cook County State's Attorney Anita Alvarez said the video her office gave to the media on Tuesday shows police officer James Mandarino, from the Chicago suburb of Streamwood, hitting motorist Ronald Bell 15 times after a traffic stop last month. In the video, Mandarino is seen firing a Taser at a passenger in the car and then striking Bell, who is on his knees with his hands on his head. Bell suffered a concussion and cuts that required seven stitches. "It's a wonderful tool," Alvarez said of the video, which she says suggests that both men posed no threat to the officer. Though police-behaving-badly videos have become popular staples of cable news shows and the Internet, Weis said he doesn't believe his officers are overly cautious out of fears they'll be videotaped -- and their superiors are not advising them to be. Quietly, though, some officers say the prospect of being videotaped makes them hesitate even if they know they should act. "I've heard from officers who are sent to break up a fight in the street and see a group of people leaning out windows with handheld video cameras ... they go slower and are less aggressive," said Tom Needham, a Chicago attorney who has represented several police officers. But University of Chicago law professor Craig Futterman, who has studied police brutality, said videos are helping hold police accountable. "My own view is that YouTube has done more to expose the reality of police abuse than all the blue-ribbon commissions combined," said Futterman. A Chicago police officer who was arrested three years ago in the videotaped beating of a female bartender never would have been charged much less convicted if not for the video, Futterman said. Anthony Abbate initially was charged with a misdemeanor until the video played across the world. Ronald Bell's brother, Stacey Bell, said he doubts the Streamwood officer would have been charged with felony aggravated battery and official misconduct without the video and his brother still would have faced charges of drunken driving and resisting an officer, which were dropped. "I believe it would have been six witnesses against an officer and it would have been a different story," said Stacey Bell, who witnessed the alleged beating. The officer's attorney declined to comment. But some caution that incidents caught on tape can misrepresent police work. "The work of a police officer, even when done properly is ... not pleasant to watch," said Al O'Leary, spokesman for the Patrolmen's Benevolent Association in New York City. "We've had situations, circumstances where an officer doing his job by the book is caught on video is tagged as brutal. Sometimes the work is brutal but necessary." In California when the Bay Area Rapid Transit officer slammed into a window with a suspect during a violent arrest, the cell phone video -- viewed more than 160,000 times on one clip posted on YouTube -- ended up exonerating the officer whose actions brought claims of excessive force, a union official said. "It wasn't the suspect's head that caused the glass to break," said Jesse Sekhon, BART police officers union president. "When you freeze the video and enhance it you see it was the suspect punching it with his hand." What's more, video viewers rarely hear the frantic 911 call for help, rocks hurled at an approaching squad car or the countless times police have been called to the same house. In New York City in 2008, a man died after falling from a building ledge when police jolted him with a Taser. Video of the last few moments, including Iman Morales' fall, was posted on newspaper Web sites and played over and over again on local TV. But before the cameras were running, "this guy was stark naked, running up and down the fire escape, he tried to get into a woman's apartment by tearing out the air conditioner, terrifying the woman," and swung a fluorescent light bulb at police before Lt. Michael Pigott ordered him shot him with the stun gun, said Tom Sullivan, president of the NYPD's Lieutenants Benevolent Association. Eight days later, Pigott -- stripped of his gun and badge and demoted -- committed suicide, leaving a note saying he was trying to protect his men. His widow, who is suing the police department, said the discipline humiliated her husband. The department declined to comment. There is little chance that the videotaped scrutiny of police will slow. In fact, groups with video cameras follow police in cities all over the country, including Orlando, Fla., where George Crossley launched Orlando CopWatch in 2006. "If we come up on law enforcement, the whole shift knows immediately," said Crossley. "They get on the radio (and say) 'Watch out for CopWatch."' ______________________________________________
As someone who knows first hand the abuse of police power and how *some* police officers will lie through their teeth on a police report, lie under oath in a courtroom and has experienced gross abuse of power by police officers and prosecutors who will lie to a grand jury, I believe I can put my two cents worth in.

All police officers aren't bad; just as all police officers aren't good. All citizens aren't bad and all citizens aren't good. The problem comes when you have a police officer who has an "us and them" mentality that assumes and acts on their view that, "You aren't one of us, so you're one of them and I'm going to treat you like a criminal -- even if I find out that the facts show otherwise."

I also wouldn't want to be a cop who tries to do their job and has the ACLU and every other organization trying prosecute them for doing their job *and* tries to get a criminal off who has had no fewer than 37 witness who watched him do it and an signed confession.

I also learned the hard way that just because a person takes a plea-bargain, it doesn't mean they're necessarily guilty. As my attorney put it, "Of course you're innocent, but it's a roll of the dice and your public defender didn't even bother to force the State to show that you even broke a law or what that law was. The jury will probably believe they would never be in your shoes and they believe you must have done something or you wouldn't be here.

If you lose the roll of the dice, you're looking at 4-7 years of hard time for not even breaking a law. You just stepped on the wrong toes. I would advise against rolling the dice. If you take a plea, you'll get probation."

Ok, if you have a wife and family, are you going to take the plea -- even if you're innocent? Things aren't always what they seem. Oh, and by-the-way, the court of appleals ruled my public defender was incompetent. Didn't change anything, though. I digress. Catching bad cops lying and abusing their power is a good thing. They need to be exposed. It's also a good thing if they receive recognition for the good things they do, as well.

Are they coming after our guns?

Are they coming after our guns?
Watch this video and decide for yourself:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDMeDmV0ufU

Can I trust you, son?

The premise that a piece of paper (nuclear arms reduction treaty) can actually work is based on the premise that we can trust Russia, North Korea, China, Pakistan, Iran and others at their word.

That is naiveté at very best and would be the equivalent of handing the keys to the neighborhood kid and asking him if you can trust him with your attractive teenage daughter while you’re out of town for the weekend.

Why is Obama seemingly trying to destroy this nation?

Based on one thing after another, is Obama intentionally trying to destroy this nation?

Notwithstanding his taking over the private sector and promising to reduce our nuclear arsenal; despite Russia, China, North Korea and Iran all having nuclear capabilities and their obvious hatred of us, is there an agenda he isn't telling us about?

Watch the following video and see if you believe there is a hidden (actually, not so hidden) agenda.

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=tCAffMSWSzY

Michael rowed the nuke ashore

A Fox News reports "President Obama will rewrite America
s policy on nuclear weapons next week, haralding further reductions in the U.S. stockpile and giving a pledge not to develop new systems."

Well, isn't that rich! We're going to get rid of the single most effective deterent to nuclear attack from our enemies.

No doubt CNN will televise Obama, Russia, North Korea and China sitting around a beer and vodka summit while they all sing, Michael rowed the nuke ashore.

I'm reminded of the time when Japan's ambassador was in the U.S. engaged in peace talks as Pearl Harbor was being attacked.

Is this President really that naive or is it a concerted effort to destroy America by someone with Marxist leanings? Inquiring minds want to know.

List of Obama's broken promises -- so far

Please visit the following link to see a list of Obama's broken promises (so far).


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2iiirr5KI8&feature=player_embedded