Coulter: I can’t believe how much the media’s willing to lie about Arizona’s law

posted at 4:30 pm on May 1, 2010 by Allahpundit

Via the Right Scoop, I was planning a post on this very subject but now I see that she — and Byron York — have beaten me to it. No wonder we’re all in sync: Even by its usual standards of bias and screeching demagoguery, the commentariat really has outdone itself this time. Click that last link to see what I mean, being careful to note that it’s not just lefties with filth on their hands. The more I think about it, the more I’m convinced that Arizona’s law will be a spectacular success even if it never goes into effect. Look at how much it’s accomplished: It’s derailed the Democrats’ amnesty bill; it’s refocused national attention on the disgraceful state of border enforcement; it’s convinced some illegals that Arizona’s not worth the trouble; and it’s baited bottom-feeders in the media into all sorts of dumb, self-discrediting analysis. All that in just a week, before the law’s even taken effect. That’s some mighty efficient legislatin’ right there.

I’m giving you a second video below the Coulter clip along the same lines, to remind you (a) that some people are conscientious enough to read the bill before commenting on it and (b) that it’s a mistake to assume that all Latino citizens are against the bill. (But then, we already sort of knew that.) An important fact that’s often lost amid the shameless racial pandering on this subject: There are hundreds of thousands of Mexicans every year who do follow proper procedure in immigrating to the U.S. and most people are happy to have them come. In 2008, more than 230,000 native-born Mexicans were naturalized as American citizens, the most from any nation in the world and a number greater than the combined total from the next four countries on the list. In 2009, more than a million people became legal permanent residents; 15 percent were Mexican, the only country in double digits percentage-wise. Not everyone jumps the line, although why they don’t, given the shrieking resistance to enforcement against illegals among American amnesty shills, I have no idea.


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 3 4

Terrye on May 1, 2010 at 7:51 PM Part of the problem is that there are not enough laws to make it difficult for an illegal to live here. I think the idea of requiring proof of citizenship to rent or purchase housing or to open a bank account would be a good first step.
There are many millions of good citizens here from other countries; interestingly enough some of the strongest anti-illegal rhetoric I have witnessed here came from those who came here legally.
mad scientist on May 1, 2010 at 10:20 PM

We just need to take the fun out of looting & mooching here legally.

Mojave Mark on May 1, 2010 at 11:16 PM

The operative term for the PRESSSident behavior is

“Political Bigotry”

The left has replaced it’s pre-1960s racial bigotry with political bigotry. They basically have taken their old racial playbook and done a search and replace of ‘choose your non-white race’ with ‘Conservatives’.

Conservatives can’t take care of themselves, Conservatives are stupid, Conservative can’t be trusted with guns, Conservatives are dangerous, Conservatives don’t deserve the good life, etc, etc..

It’s long past time to let this political bigotry continue on without aggressively labeling it for what it is — political bigotry.

drfredc on May 1, 2010 at 11:47 PM

On a similar vein, here in the DC area, an outlying Virginia County started allowing the police to check immigration status on people they arrested and voila! crime rates and loitering have plummetted (sp?).

Red State State of Mind on May 1, 2010 at 7:58 PM

Exactly! Why are police “allowed” to check immigration status? That should be REQUIRED. They check for outstanding warrants, ask for proof of insurance, they can’t check for proof of status in the FREAKING COUNTRY?!? This shouldn’t be about whether enough immigrants are allowed in every year, or whether the hurdles to immigration are too high…it’s about requiring police to check lawful status in the country as a matter of routine the same way they would opt to run a warrant check.

ReaganRoxx on May 2, 2010 at 12:15 AM

And that’s the reason why you’ll always have an illegal immigration problem in this country. Because people like you refuse to compromise. (Proud RINO)
_______________________________________________________
I will be willing to Compromise when the last mile of 30ft high wall between Mexico and America is completed.
Of course this will include armed guards, hungry dogs, and a 20 foot high wall 100 meters north of this wall with more armed guards. Then and only then will a compromise be workable. See one cannot fix a leaking pipe until the water is turned off. Allowing illegals to stay, and attain green cards so that 12 million more show up in the next decade is rather stupid. Its been tried before and didn’t work. A benefit to this would be a revolution in Mexico once the ruling class has its relief valve shut off. It would be nice for Mexico to be a country where its people WANT to stay, rather than escape. We don’t hate LEGAL immigration, just illegal immigration. See the great wall of China for those who say a wall cannot be built!

JohnD9207 on May 2, 2010 at 12:56 AM

Check out the San Francisco anti-AZ protest: Che, SEIU, ANSWER coalition, Mexican flags

Django on May 2, 2010 at 1:53 AM

Conservatives can’t take care of themselves, Conservatives are stupid, Conservative can’t be trusted with guns, Conservatives are dangerous, Conservatives don’t deserve the good life, etc, etc..

It’s long past time to let this political bigotry continue on without aggressively labeling it for what it is — political bigotry.

drfredc on May 1, 2010 at 11:47 PM

As another poster said up-thread, we need to get out of reaction mode and take the initiative. “So we’re talking about unborn babies, right?” “We’re talking about illegal aliens, who are criminals by way of illegal border crossing?” etc. I’m tired of being trashed by the MSM, liberal/idiot politicians, et.al. because they seem to enjoy being jerks. I don’t enjoy confrontations, but it’s easy for me to be cynical and sarcastic.

Libs hate the sarcasm, and I love the cynicism. The lib will start nodding agreement, all worldly-like, until I make my point or state the facts. Facts usually reduce the witless git to a speechless, gobsmacked, deer-in-the-headlights simulation of a human being.

The time for politely nodding semi-agreement is OVER. Famous advise: “GET IN THEIR FACE!”

Who is John Galt on May 2, 2010 at 4:29 AM

Chunky coeds. Hah!

Kevin M on May 2, 2010 at 5:31 AM

It is not the just the news media that is lying about the Arizona Law. Entertainers like Linda Ronstadt and Shakira are using their influence to pass along similar lies and misinformation about the Law.

It amazes me how these celebrity types live in such a hermeutically sealed bubbel that they do not have a clue as to what is really going out there in the world, especially when it comes to issues like illegal immigration.

Shakira and Ronstadt should be condemning people who try to enter this country illegally, not praising them.

pilamaye on May 2, 2010 at 7:36 AM

Hate to ask the obvious but if the Constitution is a “living document” why does it matter whether the Arizona law is Constitutional or not?

miles on May 2, 2010 at 8:13 AM

Juan Williams continues to try to construct this demon of “show me your papers” and refuses to acknowledge that police can ask to see your “papers”/driver’s license and proof of insurance during any routine traffic stop. He won’t even acknowledge that a license is identification and serves as your “papers”. That doesn’t fit his effort to demonize the issue.

SKYFOX on May 2, 2010 at 8:48 AM

If Obama were behind this law all the media would LOVE it.

Mojave Mark on May 2, 2010 at 9:38 AM

Gabriella Ola, Thank you for being a true American. Gabriella clearly shows that the Federal lack of enforcement, made Arizona enact a bill saying “If the Federal Government fails to uphold the Constitution, we will evoke our right to uphold those rules, under the 10th Amendment and to enforce those laws.

My hats off to Gabriella who, like my wife a Korean followed the rules to become a legal citizen. If you ask her for her papers she will gladly show her Identification data.

MSGTAS on May 2, 2010 at 10:07 AM

All of the political outrage against this bill is simply pandering by weak kneed overly PC concious hypersensitive representitives. They have been told this bill is unpopular and so without readng it, or reading it and delibratly cnfusing the facts they are advocating the willfull disregard for federal and now Arizona state immigration laws.

Koa on May 2, 2010 at 11:18 AM

Ann is right.

AnninCA on May 2, 2010 at 12:06 PM

Exactly! Why are police “allowed” to check immigration status? That should be REQUIRED. They check for outstanding warrants, ask for proof of insurance, they can’t check for proof of status in the FREAKING COUNTRY?!? This shouldn’t be about whether enough immigrants are allowed in every year, or whether the hurdles to immigration are too high…it’s about requiring police to check lawful status in the country as a matter of routine the same way they would opt to run a warrant check.

ReaganRoxx on May 2, 2010 at 12:15 AM

That would solve the issue.

AnninCA on May 2, 2010 at 12:07 PM

Hate to ask the obvious but if the Constitution is a “living document” why does it matter whether the Arizona law is Constitutional or not?

miles on May 2, 2010 at 8:13 AM

Good Gawd Almighty but you detail FREAKS are annoying!

It’s about grand concepts and group identity. Get with the program, boy.

platypus on May 2, 2010 at 12:58 PM

Boy, it’s tough to click on links anymore over the ads.

AnninCA on May 2, 2010 at 2:43 PM

Ann is right.

AnninCA on May 2, 2010 at 12:06 PM

You really need to read her first book. But you never will, because it’s filled with Inconvenient Truths.

Del Dolemonte on May 2, 2010 at 4:49 PM

That second clip needs to go viral and be played on Rush and the boys…

Totally Aaaaaawwwwwwssssssoooommmmmeeeeee!!!!

Seven Percent Solution on May 2, 2010 at 7:47 PM

Here, again:

Mexico’s Immigration Law: Let’s Try It Here at Home
By J. Michael Waller
May 08, 2006
Mexico has a radical idea for a rational immigration policy that most Americans would love. However, Mexican officials haven’t been sharing that idea with us as they press for our Congress to adopt the McCain-Kennedy immigration reform bill.
That’s too bad, because Mexico, which annually deports more illegal aliens than the United States does, has much to teach us about how it handles the immigration issue. Under Mexican law, it is a felony to be an illegal alien in Mexico.
At a time when the Supreme Court and many politicians seek to bring American law in line with foreign legal norms, it’s noteworthy that nobody has argued that the U.S. look at how Mexico deals with immigration and what it might teach us about how best to solve our illegal immigration problem.
Mexico has a single, streamlined law that ensures that foreign visitors and immigrants are:
* in the country legally;
* have the means to sustain themselves economically;
* not destined to be burdens on society;
* of economic and social benefit to society;
* of good character and have no criminal records; and
* contributors to the general well-being of the nation.
The law also ensures that:
* immigration authorities have a record of each foreign visitor;
* foreign visitors do not violate their visa status;
* foreign visitors are banned from interfering in the country’s internal politics;
* foreign visitors who enter under false pretenses are imprisoned or deported;
* foreign visitors violating the terms of their entry are imprisoned or deported;
* those who aid in illegal immigration will be sent to prison.
Who could disagree with such a law? It makes perfect sense. The Mexican constitution strictly defines the rights of citizens — and the denial of many fundamental rights to non-citizens, illegal and illegal. Under the constitution, the Ley General de Población, or General Law on Population, spells out specifically the country’s immigration policy.
It is an interesting law — and one that should cause us all to ask, Why is our great southern neighbor pushing us to water down our own immigration laws and policies, when its own immigration restrictions are the toughest on the continent? If a felony is a crime punishable by more than one year in prison, then Mexican law makes it a felony to be an illegal alien in Mexico.
If the United States adopted such statutes, Mexico no doubt would denounce it as a manifestation of American racism and bigotry.
We looked at the immigration provisions of the Mexican constitution. Now let’s look at Mexico’s main immigration law.
Mexico welcomes only foreigners who will be useful to Mexican society:
* Foreigners are admitted into Mexico “according to their possibilities of contributing to national progress.” (Article 32)
* Immigration officials must “ensure” that “immigrants will be useful elements for the country and that they have the necessary funds for their sustenance” and for their dependents. (Article 34)
* Foreigners may be barred from the country if their presence upsets “the equilibrium of the national demographics,” when foreigners are deemed detrimental to “economic or national interests,” when they do not behave like good citizens in their own country, when they have broken Mexican laws, and when “they are not found to be physically or mentally healthy.” (Article 37)
* The Secretary of Governance may “suspend or prohibit the admission of foreigners when he determines it to be in the national interest.” (Article 38)
Mexican authorities must keep track of every single person in the country:
* Federal, local and municipal police must cooperate with federal immigration authorities upon request, i.e., to assist in the arrests of illegal immigrants. (Article 73)
* A National Population Registry keeps track of “every single individual who comprises the population of the country,” and verifies each individual’s identity. (Articles 85 and 86)
* A national Catalog of Foreigners tracks foreign tourists and immigrants (Article 87), and assigns each individual with a unique tracking number (Article 91).
Foreigners with fake papers, or who enter the country under false pretenses, may be imprisoned:
* Foreigners with fake immigration papers may be fined or imprisoned. (Article 116)
* Foreigners who sign government documents “with a signature that is false or different from that which he normally uses” are subject to fine and imprisonment. (Article 116)
Foreigners who fail to obey the rules will be fined, deported, and/or imprisoned as felons:
* Foreigners who fail to obey a deportation order are to be punished. (Article 117)
* Foreigners who are deported from Mexico and attempt to re-enter the country without authorization can be imprisoned for up to 10 years. (Article 118)
* Foreigners who violate the terms of their visa may be sentenced to up to six years in prison (Articles 119, 120 and 121). Foreigners who misrepresent the terms of their visa while in Mexico — such as working with out a permit — can also be imprisoned.
Under Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony. The General Law on Population says,
* “A penalty of up to two years in prison and a fine of three hundred to five thousand pesos will be imposed on the foreigner who enters the country illegally.” (Article 123)
* Foreigners with legal immigration problems may be deported from Mexico instead of being imprisoned. (Article 125)
* Foreigners who “attempt against national sovereignty or security” will be deported. (Article 126)
Mexicans who help illegal aliens enter the country are themselves considered criminals under the law:
* A Mexican who marries a foreigner with the sole objective of helping the foreigner live in the country is subject to up to five years in prison. (Article 127)
* Shipping and airline companies that bring undocumented foreigners into Mexico will be fined. (Article 132)

LarryG on May 2, 2010 at 10:24 PM

And again:

Mexico Works to Bar Non-Natives From Jobs
By MARK STEVENSON, Associated Press Writer
Sun May 21, 2006
If Arnold Schwarzenegger had migrated to Mexico instead of the United States, he couldn’t be a governor. If Argentina native Sergio Villanueva, firefighter hero of the Sept. 11 attacks, had moved to Tecate instead of New York, he wouldn’t have been allowed on the force.
Even as Mexico presses the United States to grant unrestricted citizenship to millions of undocumented Mexican migrants, its officials at times calling U.S. policies “xenophobic,” Mexico places daunting limitations on anyone born outside its territory.
In the United States, only two posts — the presidency and vice presidency — are reserved for the native born.
In Mexico, non-natives are banned from those and thousands of other jobs, even if they are legal, naturalized citizens.
Foreign-born Mexicans can’t hold seats in either house of the congress. They’re also banned from state legislatures, the Supreme Court and all governorships. Many states ban foreign-born Mexicans from spots on town councils. And Mexico’s Constitution reserves almost all federal posts, and any position in the military and merchant marine, for “native-born Mexicans.”
Recently the Mexican government has gone even further. Since at least 2003, it has encouraged cities to ban non-natives from such local jobs as firefighters, police and judges.
Mexico’s Interior Department — which recommended the bans as part of “model” city statutes it distributed to local officials — could cite no basis for extending the bans to local posts.
After being contacted by The Associated Press about the issue, officials changed the wording in two statutes to delete the “native-born” requirements, although they said the modifications had nothing to do with AP’s inquiries.
“These statutes have been under review for some time, and they have, or are about to be, changed,” said an Interior Department official, who was not authorized to be quoted by name.
But because the “model” statues are fill-in-the-blanks guides for framing local legislation, many cities across Mexico have already enacted such bans. They have done so even though foreigners constitute a tiny percentage of the population and pose little threat to Mexico’s job market.
The foreign-born make up just 0.5 percent of Mexico’s 105 million people, compared with about 13 percent in the United States, which has a total population of 299 million. Mexico grants citizenship to about 3,000 people a year, compared to the U.S. average of almost a half million.
“There is a need for a little more openness, both at the policy level and in business affairs,” said David Kim, president of the Mexico-Korea Association, which represents the estimated 20,000 South Koreans in Mexico, many of them naturalized citizens.
“The immigration laws are very difficult … and they put obstacles in the way that make it more difficult to compete,” Kim said, although most foreigners don’t come to Mexico seeking government posts.
J. Michael Waller, of the Center for Security Policy in Washington, was more blunt. “If American policy-makers are looking for legal models on which to base new laws restricting immigration and expelling foreign lawbreakers, they have a handy guide: the Mexican constitution,” he said in a recent article on immigration…
As we noted back in 2006, the AP’s headline and the general tone are actually misleading, since these anti-immigrant laws have long since been in place in Mexico.
And the restrictions are far more draconian and widespread than this article describes.

LarryG on May 2, 2010 at 10:26 PM

Gabriella Ola, God bless you! That was the perfect speech.

Sultry Beauty on May 3, 2010 at 12:55 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4