GOP congressman: Arizona’s law is “un-American,” Gestapo-like

posted at 8:22 pm on April 30, 2010 by Allahpundit

An utter disgrace. I can almost forgive this as a misunderstanding given that Arizona’s legislature felt the need to clarify its own law, but misunderstanding is one thing and Nazi analogies are quite another. Every other Republican who’s expressed concerns about the civil-rights implications of the law has managed to avoid the sort of rhetorical filth that the left routinely flings. Not Connie Mack.

“There’s no question that our nation’s immigration policies are in dire straits. We all agree that inaction by both the Bush and the Obama Administrations has compounded this problem and forced states like Arizona to take drastic measures.

“But the new Arizona law strikes a severe blow to freedom and the principles that make our nation strong. This law of ‘frontier justice’ – where law enforcement officials are required to stop anyone based on ‘reasonable suspicion’ that they may be in the country illegally – is reminiscent of a time during World War II when the Gestapo in Germany stopped people on the street and asked for their papers without probable cause. It shouldn’t be against the law to not have proof of citizenship on you.

“This is not the America I grew up in and believe in, and it’s not the America I want my children to grow up in.

“Instead of enacting laws that trample on our freedoms, we should be seeking more ways to create opportunities for immigrants to come to our nation legally and be productive citizens. We must improve our border security both north and south, and make certain that we have sufficient resources in place to enforce our immigration laws.

“America has always been, and should always be, a beacon for those seeking freedom. But as a wise man once said, a government big enough to give you everything is big enough to take it all away – and that includes our freedom to live our lives as we see fit.”

The boldfaced bits are, of course, flatly incorrect, and the part about it being illegal to lack ID is astoundingly demagogic. Nothing in the bill says that; in fact, the section on ID was included as an easy way for suspects to create a presumption that they’re here legally. If you’re stopped and the cop suspects that you’re an illegal, showing him ID is sufficient to put that suspicion to rest. Or, as Kris Kobach (who helped write the law) put it, “[I]t gives any alien with a license a free pass if his immigration status is in doubt.” In other words, lacking ID isn’t grounds for suspicion — which, I remind you, only comes into play after someone’s been detained on suspicion of criminal activity anyway. Rather, having ID is actually a defense to it.

But maybe we’re giving Mack a bad rap. He posted that yesterday, before Arizona revised its law to clarify it. Surely he’d have a different opinion today, right? Nope: Check out his interview with Cavuto this afternoon. Informed criticism of what Arizona did is one thing, bottom-feeding Nazi hyperbole is quite another. Appalling. Exit question for Mack: Why is “reasonable suspicion” in the immigration context a Hitlerian nightmare but reasonable suspicion in the criminal context — which was okayed by the Warren Court more than 40 years ago — peachy keen?

Update: Here’s a nice story to cap off Mack’s diatribe: Earlier this afternoon, an Arizona deputy was shot in the stomach by a suspected, ahem, “undocumented immigrant.” I guess the Gestapo got what was coming to them, right, Connie?

Update: Simply unbelievable. A textbook example on why political discourse between the two sides is now impossible.



Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Dave Rywall on April 30, 2010 at 9:31 PM

So, like–if the immigration sponsorship law were changed a little, would you sponsor an illegal?

Liam on April 30, 2010 at 9:35 PM

So, like–if the immigration sponsorship law were changed a little, would you sponsor an illegal?

Liam on April 30, 2010 at 9:35 PM
———–
No.

Dave Rywall on April 30, 2010 at 9:37 PM

No.

Dave Rywall on April 30, 2010 at 9:37 PM

Why?

Liam on April 30, 2010 at 9:38 PM

What an idiot. *sigh*

On a side note, I’m listening to the Laura Ingraham show on local radio (delayed, of course), and she’s rambling about what a crappy and utterly stupid Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is, agreeing with Shakira (sp?), and maybe Shakira would make a better AG because at least she’s only stupid because she didn’t go to law school, but Alberto Gonzales is supposed to be knowledgeable about these things, yadda yadda.

How f-ing embarrassing.

Um, why does she not know that Alberto is no longer AG, that Eric Holder is AG, and why is no one in her studio smart enough to whisper it in her ear or pass her a note or something to keep her from sounding so f-ing stupid?

Midas on April 30, 2010 at 9:42 PM

Someone please call this doofus and ask him what is the first thing a police officer is going to ask him if he gets stopped for any traffic violation, including driving at night without your lights on?

“May I see your driver’s license, registration and insurance ID”. If you don’t present them what happens next?

The police officer is not going to stop you unless you are not obeying the law. I am sure that when this law gets implemented EVERY officer will be given specific instruction on WHAT NOT TO DO when they are doing their duty.

Connie Mack is should be taken to task for his inept stupidity by all his constituents.

belad on April 30, 2010 at 9:42 PM

Why is Arizona such a bed wetting nanny state?

Why do its citizens agree with having the government tell them they have to carry proof of citizenship around?

Dave Rywall on April 30, 2010 at 9:31 PM

False concern is no concern.

Seeing your state swamped with illegal alien scofflaws, economic drainers, identity thieves, and immigration line-jumpers might make you rethink your pseudo-distress.

But you couldn’t care less, as long as the resultant chaos weakens, balkanizes and ultimately undermines arrogant America, apparently.

A nation without secure borders is like a ship without a secure hull.

Blub… blub… blub… will be its feckless epitaph.

profitsbeard on April 30, 2010 at 9:43 PM

Dave Rywall on April 30, 2010 at 9:31 PM

You dropped a lovely turd. Have you any other talents?

Really Right on April 30, 2010 at 9:44 PM

No.

Dave Rywall on April 30, 2010 at 9:37 PM

He has enough to deal with taking care of himself and his family, why should he take on a second one? /s

belad on April 30, 2010 at 9:45 PM

Why is Arizona such a bed wetting nanny state?

Why do its citizens agree with having the government tell them they have to carry proof of citizenship around?

Dave Rywall on April 30, 2010 at 9:31 PM

LOL, speaking of f-ing stupid.

Midas on April 30, 2010 at 9:46 PM

On a side note, I’m listening to the Laura Ingraham show on local radio (delayed, of course), and she’s rambling about what a crappy and utterly stupid Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is, agreeing with Shakira (sp?), and maybe Shakira would make a better AG because at least she’s only stupid because she didn’t go to law school, but Alberto Gonzales is supposed to be knowledgeable about these things, yadda yadda.

Midas on April 30, 2010 at 9:42 PM

Left to his own devices, George Bush would have nominated this racist idiot as SC Chief Justice rather than John Roberts.

bw222 on April 30, 2010 at 9:48 PM

I sense a primary challange coming on for Rep. Mack.

t.ferg on April 30, 2010 at 9:48 PM

This is my entire point: liberals speak but they never really want to take the walk. If they ‘care’ so much about illegals, why won’t they actually do something other than protest?

Liam on April 30, 2010 at 9:49 PM

There’s an alternative way of handling the immigration problem:

End the Entitlements

CrazyGene on April 30, 2010 at 9:51 PM

I’m beginning to think that Happyfeet’s six-pack of Bipple may be just about a can short.

trigon on April 30, 2010 at 9:57 PM

Yeah. I’m sure that’s what the shot deputy’s AMERICAN family is thinking right about now. Illegal MEANS ILLEGAL!!!! Get them the heck out of here already!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Government, do your freaking JOB!!!!!!!!!!!!

UnderstandingisPower on April 30, 2010 at 9:58 PM

There’s an alternative way of handling the immigration problem:

End the Entitlements

CrazyGene on April 30, 2010 at 9:51 PM
—–
OMG SOMEONE WITH A FU*KING BRAIN AROUND HERE

AMAZING

Dave Rywall on April 30, 2010 at 10:02 PM

Update: Simply unbelievable.

McFarlane must’ve been off manatee.

Jorge Bonilla on April 30, 2010 at 10:05 PM

I have said it till i am blue in the face.These idiots in congress are so damn stupid they could not get a job flipping hamburgers at mickey Dee .This fool mack should take the time to read the new law before he opens his pie hole.He,s just another RINO.

thmcbb on April 30, 2010 at 10:06 PM

If this is ‘un-American’, then let’s see this joker fix it. As a Congressperson, he’s in position to introduce legislation.

Where’s his bill?

Liam on April 30, 2010 at 10:14 PM

Why is Arizona such a bed wetting nanny state?

Why do its citizens agree with having the government tell them they have to carry proof of citizenship around?

Dave Rywall on April 30, 2010 at 9:31 PM

You need a lesson in logic. You’re point is like saying apples are oranges. Your stupidity level has been eclipsed. Congrats!!

CWforFreedom on April 30, 2010 at 10:14 PM

So to whom can I send my legal American hard working GREEN cash? Who is up for replacing this tool!?!?
I’m putting my money towards the candidate who remembers that AMERICANS should be able to live in a state that follows the law and puts the citizens of that state FIRST!!!!

christene on April 30, 2010 at 10:14 PM

This fool mack should take the time to read the new law before he opens his pie hole.He,s just another RINO.

thmcbb on April 30, 2010 at 10:06 PM

This fool mack should take the time to read the new law before he opens his pie hole.He,s just another STOOOOPID RINO.

FIFY!

belad on April 30, 2010 at 10:18 PM

Connie Mack is married to RINO bimbo Mary Bono (Sonny’s former wife). She took over after Sonny tried playing demolition derby with a giant oak.

bw222 on April 30, 2010 at 10:19 PM

While Dave Rywall is gracing us with his presence, all straight Canadian males with IQs over 20 are watching the Stanley Cup Playoffs. Dave’s preference is pink figure states.

bw222 on April 30, 2010 at 10:22 PM

Okay, this fool is on the list of RINO’S to get rid of! Take note of his name and vote him out!

hopefloats on April 30, 2010 at 10:25 PM

I live in his district. He doesn’t have half the brain his old man has.

He is an idiot and needs to be removed from office.

Hurricanes on April 30, 2010 at 8:34 PM

We are a very conservative area, and I am not happy. I plan on writing him this weekend, and over his vote for the Puerto Rico sham last night.

Connie Mack has always been a staunch conservative… I’ve no idea what he’s thinking, other than trying to panic to the Hispanic vote for this year.

Enoxo on April 30, 2010 at 8:54 PM

We are a VERY conservative district. Ugh! Connie, you dumb s*** You’re definitely not your dad. Or your sister – or your cousin, by the way. All great people.

Wait till I tell your former babysitter. She’ll give you the what-for.

Our new local radio talk show guy is going to have a field day with your remarks on Monday. Be sure to call in, Connie, and face the wrath of your constituents – which will be brutal.

This is embarrassing.

Marybeth on April 30, 2010 at 10:26 PM

Florida needs to clean house maybe they can take a cue from Arizona?

Dr Evil on April 30, 2010 at 10:33 PM

https://mack.house.gov/?p=Email

reshas1 on April 30, 2010 at 10:43 PM

I’m ashamed to say that I once saw the Phillies play at Connie Mack field.

OxyCon on April 30, 2010 at 10:47 PM

profitsbeard on April 30, 2010 at 9:26 PM

I don’t think you’ve read your Nazi history. The Nazis started with measures designed to make the Jews emigrate. They moved on to more drastic measures when their attempts did not produce the results they desired. Consider how the United States got a new citizen called Albert Einstein.

And, to square the circle, consider how many Jews the USA took in during the run-up to from Judenfrei to Judenrein, and also consider that the reason for this small number was exactly the anti-immigrant sentiment associated with laws which create “illegal aliens” in the first place.

unclesmrgol on April 30, 2010 at 10:53 PM

If the existing law on sponsorship for immigrants were to be changed a little, would you sponsor an illegal who’s already here?

Would you be willing to vouch for an illegal, sponsor him/her and their family already in the US?

Liam on April 30, 2010 at 9:07 PM

Ah, the “if abortions were made illegal, would you adopt an unwanted child” meme. Works almost every time.

unclesmrgol on April 30, 2010 at 10:56 PM

We are a VERY conservative district. Ugh! Connie, you dumb s*** You’re definitely not your dad. Or your sister – or your cousin, by the way. All great people.

Wait till I tell your former babysitter. She’ll give you the what-for.

Our new local radio talk show guy is going to have a field day with your remarks on Monday. Be sure to call in, Connie, and face the wrath of your constituents – which will be brutal.

This is embarrassing.

Marybeth on April 30, 2010 at 10:26 PM

Sure hope we here get an update when he backpedals at the speed of sound on his official webpage.

Marcus on April 30, 2010 at 11:07 PM

A textbook example on why political discourse between the two sides is now impossible.

I couldn’t agree more!

Darth Keller on April 30, 2010 at 11:13 PM

I will donate to whomever runs against POS turd.

Hummer53 on April 30, 2010 at 11:16 PM

The Nazi references are expected. How many times do we use “hope and change” against Dems, Obama specifically? Words work, coming and going.

The “papers please” punchline is obvious and painfully on-point…as far jokes are concerned. We know that humor does not require preciseness only understanding and resonance. The only time any of us have ever heard the phrase was when used some nasally-Nazi in some movie. Now it’s the perceived Arizona state motto.

AZ legislators should have seen this coming. The Nazi references, as usual are, inaccurate and unfair but not unexpected.

The Race Card on April 30, 2010 at 11:19 PM

There’s an alternative way of handling the immigration problem:

End the Entitlements

CrazyGene on April 30, 2010 at 9:51 PM

Like that might ever happen.

A couple of days ago MA Democrats voted down a budget amendment to screen illegals out of programs such as welfare, food stamps and public housing.

Coincidentally, in just a few days we are supposed to hear the latest court ruling on Aunt Zeituni’s application to stay.

Wouldn’t it be great if President Obama took the serendipitous opportunity promote and highlight the legal path to citizenship by sponsoring his own family member who was ordered to be deported 6 years ago but is still illegally leeching off my state.
He would also get to boast about all the money he’s saving the taxpayer’s as a bonus.

He always reminds us that this is a country of laws but continuously publicly refuses to lead by example.

racecar05 on April 30, 2010 at 11:20 PM

I don’t think you’ve read your Nazi history. The Nazis started with measures designed to make the Jews emigrate. They moved on to more drastic measures when their attempts did not produce the results they desired. Consider how the United States got a new citizen called Albert Einstein.

And, to square the circle, consider how many Jews the USA took in during the run-up to from Judenfrei to Judenrein, and also consider that the reason for this small number was exactly the anti-immigrant sentiment associated with laws which create “illegal aliens” in the first place.

unclesmrgol on April 30, 2010 at 10:53 PM
You obviously didn’t see my earlier post-I know you were answering profitsbeard-but comparing a state law that only exists because the Feds refuse to enforce the Nation’s borders to Nazism is OFFENSIVE!
My family were citizens that lost their citizenship, livelihoods, property ,and later lives merely because they were Jews. They weren’t illegal until Hitler’s goons invaded and made them that way.
Arizona is only trying to protect its citizens and economy from people that aren’t suppose to be in the country to begin with.
I wish Illinois would follow AZ’s lead-but it wson’t.

annoyinglittletwerp on April 30, 2010 at 11:20 PM

Midas on April 30, 2010 at 9:42 PM

I didn’t hear this but could it be that former AG Gonzales made a statement (everyone else has) that basically agrees with what the entertainer said? It sounds like something he would do. For some odd reason in Washington people are always called by their “titles” even when they no longer hold the position, I doubt she is confused about who is the current AG.

Cindy Munford on April 30, 2010 at 11:21 PM

A textbook example on why political discourse between the two sides is now impossible.

Well, if you mean ‘discourse’ that doesn’t involve:

Shouting. stereotyping (albiet with some truth), strawmen/ad homenims/misc. logical fallacies, uncompromising “with us or against us” attitude…

It truly IS impossible anymore!

Anymore we don’t get debate, we get a tug-of-war, with both sides digging in their heels and pulling with all their might.

Dark-Star on April 30, 2010 at 11:24 PM

Arizona is only trying to protect its citizens and economy from people that aren’t suppose to be in the country to begin with.
I wish Illinois would follow AZ’s lead-but it wson’t.

annoyinglittletwerp on April 30, 2010 at 11:20 PM

That’s the part with which I disagree. I’m in favor of free immigration. You come, you prove that you are worthy of being a citizen by your industriousness at lawful work, and you become a citizen. If you show you are not worthy of being a citizen, you are shown the border than never allowed to reenter.

The whole concept of “illegal alien” is different to a person of my mindset. Again, I ask you — why didn’t the USA take in more Jews when the Jews were so sorely oppressed? If you look carefully, you will find the answer rooted not only in anti-Semitism, but in isolationism and nativist sentiment.

unclesmrgol on April 30, 2010 at 11:38 PM

unclesmrgol on April 30, 2010 at 11:38 PM

It’s a lovely thought but we can’t even get rid of the ones who have proven themselves unworthy of being citizens by being criminals and leeches on public assistance while contributing nothing. We may as well annex Mexico and see what we could do about cleaning it up.

Cindy Munford on April 30, 2010 at 11:50 PM

Oh Family Guy, you’re soooo edgy.

galenrox on May 1, 2010 at 12:04 AM

unclesmrgol on April 30, 2010 at 11:38 PM

The very first step to demonstrating worthiness is compliance with the laws that govern immigration to this country. The second step of demonstrating worthiness is the willingness to assimilate ( learn the language and culture. The next step to demonstrate worthiness is working and staying off the public dole.

belad on May 1, 2010 at 12:18 AM

“But it makes an immigrant laugh to hear the fears of the nationalist, scared of infection, penetration, miscegenation, when this is small fry, peanuts, compared to what the immigrant fears – dissolution, disappearance.”

crr6 on May 1, 2010 at 12:19 AM

Why is Arizona such a bed wetting nanny state?

Why do its citizens agree with having the government tell them they have to carry proof of citizenship around?

Dave Rywall on April 30, 2010 at 9:31 PM

You really are an idiot, the federal government requires any legal immigrant to always carry that proof. They have done so since 1940 when FDR and the Democrats made it a law.

bluemarlin on May 1, 2010 at 12:36 AM

“But it makes an immigrant laugh to hear the fears of the nationalist, scared of infection, penetration, miscegenation, when this is small fry, peanuts, compared to what the immigrant fears – dissolution, disappearance.”

crr6 on May 1, 2010 at 12:19 AM

The immigrant fears that why? Maybe because he is breaking the laws of this great nation?

bluemarlin on May 1, 2010 at 12:39 AM

Connie Mack, the next governor of Florida…DLW

Gohawgs on May 1, 2010 at 1:05 AM

OMG SOMEONE WITH A FU*KING BRAIN AROUND HERE

AMAZING

Dave Rywall on April 30, 2010 at 10:02 PM

What? Jealous?

trapeze on May 1, 2010 at 2:09 AM

MacFarlane, who is also behind the TV series “American Dad!” and “The Cleveland Show,” was the latest celebrity vacuous leftard who we are supposed to care what he thinks because he’s rich and popular but his understanding of the law is completely unsullied by actually having read it (because actually reading a law or proposed law before opining on it means they might have to use logic and doing so would make their stupid little heads explode) to speak out against the measure.

FIFY

trapeze on May 1, 2010 at 2:09 AM

Isn’t it funny how Dildo Dave never manages to put forward and defend a point of his own? If he had an iota of skill at civil discourse, he would have disagreed with the need for a law and instead suggested that one way to dry up demand for entry by illegals would be to yank the plethora of entitlements thrown at them by both parties from under their feet. No lure, no demand, no illegal stay.

Instead all Dildo Dave can do is prance around with stupidity gift wrapped in a lovely shade of cutting edge sarcasm.

Way to go, Dildo Dave! Keep adding to the knowledge base, f*cktard.

BTW I agree that in a perfect world the path to immigration would be streamlined and no entitlements would be offered to anyone until they had gained entry legally and remained here at least five years afterward, unless they came in under a business visa (that is, having brought their own cash to start up a business) or having an occupation or skill that was recognized as being in high demand.

What I just proposed has little difference from immigration laws currently in force in the UK, Australia, and New Zealand.

That’s how you argue a point rationally, Dildo Dave. You also actually read the law and argument/counterargument regarding its supposed sticking points before you open your mouth. I have done so and I see nothing there in the AZ law that remotely allows police to stop someone and demand “papers” without first having a justifiable reason to stop them in the first place (i.e. the suspect has demonstrated behavior that suggest he has broken or is engaging in breaking a law).

Oddly enough, I don’t recall any leftists complaining about police pulling over motorists for traffic violations and during the stop, checking the person’s license, registration, and administering a breath test for possible alcohol/drug use. Nor do I recall them complainig that if someone in such a situation is charged with a crime unrelated to the reason for the original traffic stop (e.g. no drivers license; stolen vehicle; reported fugitive). And driving without a license is a crime.

Think on that, Dildo Dave.

Wanderlust on May 1, 2010 at 7:40 AM

High time for Connie to be retired

AH_C on May 1, 2010 at 8:27 AM

Why do its citizens agree with having the government tell them they have to carry proof of citizenship around?

Dave Rywall on April 30, 2010 at 9:31 PM

If you weren’t such a provincial Canadian shut-in, you’d realize that US immigration law is pretty lax compared to most of the world. In Japan, you are required to carry a foreigner card with you at all times. If you overstay your visa, they can ban you from the country for 10 years. If you are there illegally and have a child, your child is not Japanese.

You are in the public library all day trolling American political sites on the computer…why not do a little research while you are there?

Asher on May 1, 2010 at 8:27 AM

High time for Connie to be retired

AH_C on May 1, 2010 at 8:27 AM

Oh no. In the GOP, we don’t retire politicians who crap on their base with bombastic statements over policy disputes. We run them for President; and then wonder why we got our collective a**es handed to us.

austinnelly on May 1, 2010 at 8:43 AM

Connie just wanted a little face time. Must be running for re-election. Shakira looks blond so she gets a pass. They ruminate with talking points but never seem to point out specific sections in the law that proscribe violations of human rights or that is unconstitutional. Could you be more specific, Ms. Shakira?

Kissmygrits on May 1, 2010 at 9:38 AM

Connie Mack has obviously not read the bill. He is spewing the same propaganda talking points that have been non-stop from the mainstream media. Mack, like Shakira, is exhibiting responses based on ignorance of what the bill actually says. How do politicians this intellectually bankrupt ever get elected? Never underestimate the illiteracy of the American electorate.

volsense on May 1, 2010 at 10:29 AM

Just another RINO who refused to actually READ the law before flapping his stupid gums. This guy has got to go.

jdawg on May 1, 2010 at 4:32 PM

Guess who else are Nazis today? Americans serving in Iraq;

UNM: Anti-America column displays wisdom

Today we must recognize: the continued American occupation of Iraq has as much justification as Nazi Germany’s invasion and occupation of Poland. In both cases the aggressor falsely claimed homeland defense with the murderous assault. It is a natural consequence that to the illegal occupier every movement of the occupied looks suspicious. Countless war crimes have resulted from the suppressed sense of guilt…

Joachim L. Oberst
UNM instructor

/comments thread open

Terp Mole on May 1, 2010 at 5:07 PM

Connie Mack is …. :( my congressman. I’ve sent him numerous emails, usually thanking him for his vote on something or inquiring about his position on something. He always responded… usually with a letter. I finally sent him a note saying simply voting on the conservative side of an issue was no longer good enough… he needed to become more active and outspoken on issues, not just vote. I didn’t hear back.

He has been suspect since he married the former Mrs. Bono (Cher’s replacement that took Sonny’s job when he was skiing and found out that “soft pine” isn’t really soft). I was always curious how he managed…. a job in DC… Florida is his “home” and a wife that’s a congresswoman from California. Probably too late this cycle to beat him in the primary, but not the next one.

CC

CapedConservative on May 1, 2010 at 6:15 PM

to Midas on April 30, 2010 at 9:42 PM
“… Um, why does she not know that Alberto is no longer AG, that Eric Holder is AG …”
===============
Fox News seems to have a thing about calling people by their former titles (don’t know if it’s official policy or if they think it makes their interviewees more comfortable). Mike Huckabee is always “Governor” to an interviewer, John Bolton is always “Mr. Ambassador”, and so on. I don’t think Laura Ingraham is being ignorant here, I think she’s following corporate culture..

A_Nonny_Mouse on May 2, 2010 at 1:18 AM

Fox News seems to have a thing about calling people by their former titles (don’t know if it’s official policy or if they think it makes their interviewees more comfortable). Mike Huckabee is always “Governor” to an interviewer, John Bolton is always “Mr. Ambassador

Official and/or elective office titles are valid for life.

Mr. Grump on May 2, 2010 at 7:54 AM

“It’s too much. It’s kind of a slap in the face, it’s not the way to handle it…Nobody but the Nazis ever asked anybody for their papers,” MacFarlane told Reuters Television in an interview on Thursday.

I don’t get it. Every time you get stopped for a traffic violation you get “asked for your papers” -

May I see your license and registration please?

A driver’s license, unless it’s written in crayon, is sufficient identification as a practical matter.

I’d say I was going to boycott “Family Guy”, but since I already never watch, the point is moot.

dissent555 on May 2, 2010 at 12:10 PM

Probably too late this cycle to beat him in the primary, but not the next one.

CapedConservative on May 1, 2010 at 6:15 PM

Alas, it looks like it is too late to defeat Connie Mack in the Primary.

According to
http://www.fec.gov/DisclosureSearch/HSRefreshCandList.do?category=disH&stateName=FL&congressId=14&election_yr=2010 no other Republicans have filed financial reports to run against him in the Primary. And the deadline to file as a Primary candidate was 4/30. But fortunately 2012 is not too far away.

This is why we must all ask every single one of our Federal, State and Local candidates to define their position on ILLEGAL immigration at every single campaign event they attend.

We should never be surprised by a candidate like this again!

wren on May 2, 2010 at 8:09 PM

Comment pages: 1 2