"Reductio ad Hitlerum" Part II
[SEE UNIFIED POST ABOVE. THE COMMENTS ON BOTH STAND ON THEIR OWN.]
posted by Robert at 6:17 PM
Wednesday, May 05, 2010
About Me
- Name: Robert
- Location: North Georgia mountains, United States
I have no personality, I am not compatible with anyone, and those E-Harmony ads are totally bogus. I'm the person your parents warned you about.
Previous Posts
- "Reductio ad Hitlerum" Part I
- Who is this child, and why should we care?
- Items of apparel
- I get mail...
- The Cat Food Question
- Sammy's eulogy
- A Canine Obituary
- Instant karma?
- A cautionary tale on the eve of destruction
- "Look, hon! Democrats!"
4 Comments:
Possum,
Having read the Arizona law, I feel compelled to comment on one of yoour points:
if carrying and producing on demand my identity papers will for one moment impede the activities of the border predators, then my markedly Libertarian self will be glad to oblige.
I appreciate and agree with the sentiment, but the Arizona law does not require citizens to carry papers (their identities can be verified from DMV records, even if they forget to have their driver's license with them), only legal aliens (those who are not yet citizens).
Well thought out commentary, as usual.
As for Arizona, something ought to be done; they're doing what they can, but the Feds really should do their constitutional duty...
Possum,
First of all, "Reductio ad Hitlerum" should probably be "reducto ad Hitler". To the best of my knowledge "reductio" is not a Latin word. "Reducto" means "to lead back, bring back; restore; reduce." The "um" you added at the end of Hitler's name makes it Latin-sounding, but it's extraneous. You wouldn't call Caesar "Caesarum" for example. You can find a latin-english translator here...
http://www.stars21.com/translator/latin_to_english.html
if carrying and producing on demand my identity papers will for one moment impede the activities of the border predators, then my markedly Libertarian self will be glad to oblige... If I get pulled over by a cop, I have to produce a drivers' license, vehicle registration and proof of insurance. To get a drivers' license, I have to show (3) forms of ID including a birth certificate (which ticks me off that Obama doesn't have to produce his... but that's another story). If I want to put money in the bank, I have to produce ID to meet new Homeland Security regs. For all practical purposes, we already have to "show our papers" to the authorities. Frankly, I don't see what all the fuss is about.
The federal government has abdicated its role in protecting the border. That fact does not eliminate the obligation of the sovereign state of Arizona to protect its citizens. The crime rate is up in Arizona due to crimes being committed by illegal aliens. They must be stopped.
The federal government has failed to fulfill its obligation to protect the border. The sovereign state of Arizona petitioned the federal government at least (5) times to do something, but Arizona's pleas were ignored. If the federal government fails to fulfill its obligation, then the state government must step in to get the job done.
The sovereign state of Arizona also has an obligation to use its tax money wisely. The burgeoning population of illegal aliens in Arizona ends up costing the taxpayers extra money. Schools teach illegal children. Hospitals care for illegal patients. Jails house illegal criminals. That is NOT the best use of taxpayer money.
The federal government has NO constitutional right to be involved in health care, but it does have a constitutional mandate to protect the citizens of the United States and to deal with foreign powers.
Obama should take the trillion dollars he wants to spend on healthcare and dedicate it to securing our borders. Then the state of Arizona wouldn't have to do HIS job.
Nice work and thoughtful, as usual!
I would say that the new law is simply Arizona's attempt to take control of a situation the Feds have ignored. I don't know anyone that is a bigger stickler for freedom or more opposed to intrusive government powers than I, but in this case it really does not appear that this law in any way lessens the freedoms of a legal citizen nor does it make harassment of minorities any more likely.
Post a Comment
<< Home