Someone brought the picture below to my attention.  It was taken during one of the protests against the Arizona immigration bill.  See below:

The sign (or signs if you will) carry two messages.  On the first sign, the protester lists a series of goods and services he wants for free – a “package” that currently no one receives.  Even those under the poverty line have to find their own jobs and pay some money to live within a house or apartment. 

The second sign, on the other hand, can be taken as a threat.  “Unless our demands are met…” is the oft-used phrase in many television and movie dramas by criminals when negotiating with the police, especially when the criminals are holding hostages.  In this case, the “threat” is that the mysterious “we” will keep shooting at the police until their demands are met.

How do you view this picture?  Do you think the sign is a threat?  If so, what should be done to the person carrying the sign?

Can someone out there help me? I think my approach towards politics and policy is all wrong. For some reason, I find it important to research an issue before I talk about it. If you want to reflect back to my post on the Health Care Reform discussion I had back in March, I said:

Now I do admit there are times where I will comment on a piece of legislation before fully reading the text, something that even our elected officials are guilty of. My excuse, if you want to call it that, is that I do have a full-time job which leaves me with very little time to dive into bills that are sometimes over 2,000 pages. However, I will research a topic before posting about it to make sure that my arguments are founded on fact … especially when the topic is very emotional.

So, when I wrote my article about the Arizona Immigration Law when it was passed, I spent a few minutes to read the bill before questioning if it would survive a legal challenge. I even provided a link to bill SB1070 so you could read it for yourself. Well, it seems that the Attorney General and the Homeland Security Secretary are not reading the U.S. Common Sense blog, let alone the recently passed Arizona bill.

During a hearing before the House Judiciary Committee, Eric Holder was asked by Representative Ted Poe:

And I understand that you may file a lawsuit against the law. It seems to me the administration ought to be enforcing border security and immigration laws and not challenge them and that the administration is on the wrong side of the American people. Have you read the Arizona law?

To which Holder replied:

I have not had a chance to — I’ve glanced at it. I have not read it.

Haven’t had a chance? Seriously? I had a chance to read it, and it has nothing to do with my job. But he is in good company, since Janet Napolitano has not read it yet either. During a Senate Homeland Security Committee hearing, Senator John McCain asked:

Have you had a chance to review the new law that was passed by the state of Arizona?

To which Napolitano replied:

I have not reviewed it in detail, I certainly know of it, senator. … I believe it’s a bad law enforcement law.

She hasn’t read the law, but knows it is a bad law?

Come on folks. As citizens of this great nation, you need to be aware of the laws that are passed that impact this country. In addition, you should demand that your politicians know and understand the material they are debating and voting on, especially since they are your representatives to our nation. There is no excuse that these two individuals, who knew that they would have to (or already have) comment on the bill, to spend the few quick minutes to read it. And if they didn’t think that they would be asked questions about it, then I seriously have to question their competence in their assigned positions. We deserve better.

I was honored this week to write a guest post for our friends over at the BoBo Files. I chose to write about the fiasco in California on Cinco de Mayo. The following is that article.

Five youths attending the Live Oak High School in California were threatened with suspension for showing up to school wearing t-shirts and/or bandanas depicting the American flag. That’s correct. They were threatened with suspension for displaying the symbol of their nation.

According to the school officials, wearing the shirts and bandanas depicting the American flag on Cinco de Mayo was disrespectful and incendiary to the children of Mexican heritage who attend the school. One of the Hispanic students said, “I think they should apologize cause it is a Mexican Heritage Day … We don’t deserve to be get disrespected like that. We wouldn’t do that on Fourth of July.” A Mexican Heritage Day?

Every year, the Cinco de Mayo display goes up at a near-by grocery store highlighting the Corona beer, Doritos, and other “Mexican” party supplies. And every year, I wonder what people in the United States are actually “celebrating.” Cinco de Mayo honors the day that the Mexican Army defeated the French forces at the Battle of Puebla. This surprising victory is similar to the victory by George Washington and our Revolutionary forces over the British Army at Princeton. While neither battle won the war, they were key moments in their battles against (what was then) the Superpowers of their days.

Another thing that these two events share in common is the lack of any official celebration of those wars in their home countries. In the United States, we remember battles such those from Lexington, Concord, and Antietam (from the Civil War) more than Princeton, but those remembrances pale to that of the Fourth of July – our Independence Day. The same is true in Mexico. Cinco de Mayo is not nationally observed unlike El Grito de Independencia, or Mexican Independence Day.

So, if Cinco de Mayo is such a minor day of remembrance in Mexico (it is primarily celebrated in the Mexican State of Puebla), why should the Hispanic student feel so much disrespect? The student referred to it as a “Mexican Heritage Day.” It is, since it was a remarkable victory by the underdog, but does that mean that citizens of the host country (the US) have to set aside their own national pride to mark an event from a foreign country?

Honoring special days in the United States that immigrants bring from their nation of origin isn’t new. Since we are a nation of immigrants, it is only natural that our cultures will blend. For example, the nation stops and celebrates St. Patrick’s Day every March 17th. St. Patrick was a Catholic Bishop who was instrumental in introducing Christianity to Ireland during the 400s. With the mass immigration of Irish Catholics to the colonies, and later the States, the tradition of honoring this Saint was brought with them and adopted by the local population to create the festive holiday we enjoy today. Even the Protestants (who fought against the Catholics for years) in the United States participate in the event.

Non-Mexicans in the United States celebrate Cinco de Mayo in the same way. Most Americans do not know the history of the event, but find it entertaining because of the history of the culture the holiday comes from. This is why the stores sell so many cases of Corona’s and bags of Doritos.

Maybe this should be a lesson taught to the Hispanic-population at Live Oak, as well as the school officials. When you move to the United States, you add your culture to our melting pot, and not the other way around. The respect that the Hispanic student was looking for was misplaced on his part. He should respect the culture (not to mention national pride) of his host nation, and as such appreciate that the five youths in this case were not chanting down nor threatening them over the Mexican holiday. For the school officials, they should host a school-wide presentation teaching all the students on what Cinco de Mayo symbolizes and place it in context with the openness and tolerance the United States offers to immigrants.

I’m glad to hear that the School District has issued a statement expressing their disappointment over the actions of the school officials. Maybe this will ensure that future non-Mexican students will not be threatened with suspension for wearing patriotic attire in the future. One could always hope.

In many ways, Arizona has been on the front-line in the battle over illegal immigrants for a long time. Because the state shares a border with Mexico, illegal immigrants are constantly trying to make their way into the United States through Arizona. With favorable geographical conditions on the southwest border and the protection of the mountains on the southeast border, there are many routes illegal immigrants can sneak into the country while trying to avoid our Border Patrol agents. Because of this, the state has taken action on their own behalf to defend their territorial sovereignty.

An example of their action against the influx of illegal aliens is the “Coyote law.” In 2005, the state legislature passed the law, making it a state felony to smuggle illegal aliens into the state. This was an overlap of the existing federal law, but it empowered the state to take action where they felt the federal law enforcement was weak. Operation Jump Start is another example. In 2006, Arizona National Guard forces participated in the two-year program to help the U.S. Border Patrol through administrative and engineering duties so the agents could better monitor the border.

This week, however, Arizona took the next step that will put it on a collision course with the Federal Government. On Monday, the Arizona legislature passed SB 1070 that allows the makes it a crime to be in the state illegally. In addition, it requires the police to enforce federal immigration laws. This tough measure is meant to deter illegal immigrants from choosing Arizona as their point of entry. By removing or deterring illegal immigrants, the state hopes to protect the population from violence, especially on the heels of the death of Rob Krentz. Krentz is believed to have been killed in March by an illegal immigrant who crossed into the US near Krentz’s property.

This legislation has already stirred up controversy, with advocacy groups such as the ACLU and the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce stepping up and claiming it will result in racial profiling as well as establishing a police state-mentality. Law enforcement would not be required to have a warrant “to arrest a person if the officer has probable cause to believe that the person has committed any public offense.” The legislation would allow the state to find “a person guilty of trespassing if the person is … not carrying his or her alien registration card.” Since trespassing is an offense, detractors to the bill fear that the police would round up Hispanics who do not have identification on them, just because they “look” like an illegal immigrant (even if they are citizens or here legally).

In my view, I don’t think the bill would survive a Supreme Court challenge. Unlike the Coyote Law, I think this one not only overlaps federal law, but it also infringes on the powers reserved to the Federal Government. While illegal immigrants are not an invading force, securing and policing of the border from foreign elements is a federal responsibility. I do believe the Federal Government has done a poor job with the Southern border, especially following 9/11. There is no reason why we have millions of illegal immigrants roaming around our country, especially after they were arrested once and released without being deported. I understand the frustrations the border states have as a result, and I do support them in attempting to pick up with the Federal Government has left off, but this bill just won’t pass the Constitutional test. (I do expect the Governor to sign it though, just to send a message to the Obama Administration.)

Related articles:
Yahoo! – “Mexican gov’t slams Arizona immigration law”
Hispanic Business – House Hispanic Leaders Ask Obama to Block Arizona Illegal Immigration Bill”
Detroit Free Press – “Ariz. lawmakers pass toughest illegal immigration law in U.S.”