China and human rights violations? Big deal! We profile Mexicans.

We don't like their human rights policies yet we take their money...

 

but employers obviously still do it, reading through the bill, it sounds like they get slapped on the wrist and just have to do a little more monthly paperwork, that is if they get caught. If they get caught again, if i am reading this right, they get slapped on the wrist again if it happens after their probationary period.

 

the thing is, red, obama is wrong about this. so it really ticks me off that he is apologizing for something he is wrong about. you know, because you are in favor of it, that the ariz bill mirrors the federal law, basically just giving the same laws for fighting illegal immigration that the feds have. if this were "wrong" or a human rights violation, then the federal government has been doing so for a hell of a long time.

this is far from the civil rights struggle. i find it demeaning to the civil rights movement that some are equating the two. the civil rights movement was for a group of people to receive the same rights as other american citizens. the arizona law is to enforce laws against law breaking non-citizens. imo, there is a big difference.

let me clarify, the obama administration as a whole. i still find it amazing that holder had not read the law when he made pronouncements about it.

 

res ipsa loquitor

It speaks for itself. You are trying to rationalize this Administration's behavior when most Americans see it for what it is, i.e., espousing weakness.

 

Doesn't matter if I read it or not...I could still be Attorney General. BHO=any member of the current administration. You think they'll say anything totally different than what BHO wants? The AZ law is way different than human rights issues. We don't kill or torture illegals.......hell, we give them sh!t!

America is against human rights abuses. Bam. Nothing further needed. But no, the current administration (lots easier to type BHO) insists on including how bad America is, using an example that BHO is against, that has nothing to do with true human rights, and that his Attorney General is against but hasn't read the law.

 

The law before or after they had to amend it?

 

i read a headline that he apologized, and it appears that was in error.

the reason i disagree with this is it is not a debate about human rights. it is a debate about enforcing the law. to even half way equate it with any debate on china's human right record is ludicrous imo.

then why not an outrcy against federal laws, which the arizona law mirrors?

i bring up the civil rights movement because some opponents, including some in the obama administration, have brought up the correlation between the two. imo, the jim crow laws were a rights violation in the manner i listed above.