“I also understand that as a non-minority I might not fully appreciate how threatening some of the provisions in the law might seem.”

I don’t expect CNN to get it right but here? Come on, pay attention to details.

There is nothing about the law that is threatening. The “threat” has been from the way the left has portrayed the law and the leftist media has sold the issue.

If you want to say “I can understand based on what people have been told about the law why some folks feel threatened…” ok. I agree.

There is nothing about the provisions of the law itself that are threatening to any ethnic group.

along with the citizens of Mermphis, TN.

Others here can come with other examples.

The common denominators seem to be that he does not talk with those whom 1) he thinks he can bully and intimidate into obeying his dictates, or 2) they aren’t part of his voting constituency..

God help us.

Obama’s action against Arizona will be a ‘cut and paste’ of the ACLU class action suit filed May 17 per US Rep. Steve King of Iowa. Per King’s news release yesterday, “The ACLU, SEIU and the Muslim American Society are calling the shots at the Justice Department.” It wouldn’t matter if all 50 governors met with Obama.

…popping bottles all night with Calderon.

Oh wait…

why the heck does the esteemed Governor of Arizona even want to meet the current occupant of the White House?

If Jan Brewer wants to meet with Obama, then it shows just how willing she is, to explain to him, how bad things are over there. This is the typical reaction of any person with a conservative bent. We believe that explaining ourselves, instead of using words like “racist”, like libs do, is a better way to do things. I’ve read the law too, and being a non-minority, I found nothing inherently scary, ie: cops breaking down doors, hauling children away in the middle of the night. This is what Obama, and our dumbocratic buddies want you to believe.
Lies, lies, lies…

that a law like Arizona’s is even required, rather than being cooked into the system by its very design.

Police, during the normal function of their duties, are always looking for things that don’t belong where they are. A door ajar, a car parked where it shouldn’t be, someone walking down the street dragging a corpse.

And when they stop someone for traffic, they first have to see if the car is stolen or if the registered driver is dangerous. Someone driving on a stolen identity or unregistered vehicle raises suspicion of either common criminality or immigration problems.

So if police, during the normal function of their duties, find someone who appears to be an illegal alien, what should they do, if not turn them over to the feds for processing?

I also resent the inference that Hispanics have any reason to feel threatened by the law. Hispanics will benefit more than other Arizonans from the new law since they are more endangered by illegals than us whiteys. Many, many Hispanic Arizonans support the bill. I understand the author’s attempt at empathy, but, in my opinion, that misrepresents the views of many Arizonans and contributes to resentment. Education regarding the benefits to Hispanics not pandering to their “fears” is the answer.

Unfortunately for her, the Sec of Homeland Security has learned that the the Supreme Court has been asked to overturn an immigration enforcement law the Napolitano signed off on when she was Arizona’s gov.

The law is not as broad as the new one. It deals more with workers/hiring/ employers aspect. She wasn’t fond of it but she signed it, and now it apparently is making its way to ‘The Nine”.

It probably won’t touch J.N. who will distance herself far away from this.

“I understand that aspects of the new Arizona immigration law are contraversial. I also understand that as a non-minority I might not fully appreciate how threatening some of the provisions in the law might seem.”

Sorry but that is a pretty clear and very wrong statement.

The law is not controversial and there is nothing in it to “fully appreciate” that justifies feeling threatened.

What the left has done in its sales job and intentionally misrepresenting the law, stirring up anger to drive the left’s agenda, create voter blocks, etc., is the problem, it is 100% the problem and there is nothing to “understand” about the law that justifies the organized and divisive activity of the left. The left’s activity is understood not by looking at SB1070. The left’s activity is understood by looking at the open border/amnesty crowd AND the left trying to create a voter block.

So again I find myself wondering just what Red State’s position is on this matter? Is Red State’s position there is something in SB1070 that warrants the reaction to it, something we need to “understand” that connects the reaction to SB1070 and SB1070?

Or is SB1070 a good law and the reaction to it is about the left’s agenda and not about the law in anyway?

now that the Israeli PM has cancelled. But The Great One probably needs a nap after his busy weekend away.

So Obama doesn’t have time to talk to Governor Brewer and you consider that a bad thing? I think Brewer’s way ahead of the game. We all know Obama doesn’t want to hear from anyone but his minions about what’s going on in America. Brewer is working to clarify, Obama’s working to confuse. She doesn’t need that.

To paraphrase the wonderful, compassionate women regulars on “The View”, “What is it with Democrat women [in charge of federal agencies] named Janet?”. Note to one and all: It’s Illegal Alien. In law and in fact. (To paraphrase the most famous line from the movie “Treasure of the Sierra Madre”: “¿Passporto’s? ¡We doan’ need no stinking passporta’s!”) Anyway: “Don’t Worry, Bob’s here!” That was the punch line from a rather memorable commercial for a temp agency from a few years ago. I took that line, applied it to illegal immigration and came up with the following tongue in cheek essay: “Don’t worry, B.O.B.’s here!” “B.O.B.” stands for “Bag limit? Or Bounty?” (If Bounty, “Dead or Alive?”) It went on from there. Unfortunately, it’s lost somewhere in the old, real old computer it was created on. You, however, I believe, get the idea. Of course, the “progressives” who read it were “outraged, simply outraged” by it. I saw this reaction as a good sign, since they usually are by the truth. I also was saddened by the realization that “A Modest Proposal”, or something similar, could not be published in todays world of “Politically Correct, New Speak”. I have also suggested that we fire up the nation’s “Mothball Fleets”, work out a suitable deal with say, Argentina’s Terra del Fuego, or Singapore, or maybe Somalia, to serve as debarkation point(s) and have Mexico (or whatever country of origin applies) pay us a barrel of oil a day (or week, or month) for each and every day an illegal is here. These ships would be convoyed all the way with US Navy protection on training exercises in the area(s) involved. Another suggestion I’ve made over the years was to clear a ten to twenty five mile wide swath along our southern border – salt water to salt water – and turn this strip of land into a live fire, combat training range subject to continuous, unannounced live fire exercises. From small arms to howitzers, aerial bombardment to shore batteries, booby traps to bouncing betty’s. 24 hours a day, everyday of the year, there will be continual and unpredictable live fire exercises and armed patrols, aided by UAV’s (unmanned aerial vehicles) equipped with electro-optical/infrared sensors, with standing orders to interdict all attempts to go through, under, around or over this combat training ground and intercept all trespassers. Then, when convenient, remove them to a staging area to be subjected to a biometrical scan and entered into a national database, then unceremoniously taken to the nearest border crossing and sent packing immediately. Oh, yes. It should be called the General “Black Jack” Pershing Military Reservation.