« Goddard on Thomas | Main | A Great Divide »


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Well spoken Greg. I remember Ben Miranda on an interview with Bruce Jacobs on KFYI a couple years ago. Miranda was asking why not go after the people who hire the illegals.

I just kept thinking, be careful what you wish for, you might get it.

I also suspect our dear gov has likely locked up herself a seat in the US Senate if she desires.

But as a chess aficionado you must understand that by accepting the Queen's Gambit they have left the center open and in the control of White.

I agree with Greg that the Governor is an able politician, but I disagree with the comments that this issue has given her a U.S. Senate seat. The Governor is anathema to most if not all Republicans and with her as the Democratic nominee in 2010 she will unite the state Republican Party like no other candidate has in recent history.

What about her serving as Hillary Clinton's AG?

Remember the old adage about sausage and laws? Speaking of overplaying a hand, politics makes strange bedfellows!

It looks like the latino contingent just put themselves in the position of pivot man in this sausage making scenario. You can't write this stuff or make it up!

Chalk one up for the good guys as la raza, reconquista, etc., become the proverbial pinata at this party!

To select two quotes out of this article, I'm wondering if, when, the Latino Caucus said this:

"Businesses will be very reluctant to hire anyone who is even perceived to be an immigrant. Any person of color will be subject to (discrimination)," said Democratic state Rep. Steve Gallardo.

Did Linda Valdez re-run her article saying this:

"The hypocrisy meter exploded at the Legislature ..."

I am sure the Republicans for Napolitano led by Joe Arpaio are already organizing for her run for McCain's seat.

Very interesting analysis. I was watching Horizon and a landscaper business owner was saying how they will pass on their additional costs associated with this bill to the consumer. What this really is about are tough choices that defy traditional partisanship. People want illegal immigration to stop but they also want to pay low prices for landscaping and other services. When I was president of an HOA I did research and we paid more for landscaping in the late 1970s than we did in 2003, and that did not even account for inflation, that was just in REAL dollars!! Because Anglos with benefits were scooping up grass, the cost was more...you think this is interesting now, wait a few years..

The direct cost of landscaping may be less, but the costs for the education, medical care, judicial, law enforcement, incarceration, auto insurance hikes, home insurance rates, transportation gridlock costs, and other personal/societal costs for those landscapers cannot be over emphasized either financially or lifestyle deterioration.

Those costs cannot be absorbed by our citizens any longer. It is a like bone cancer - very hard to see on the exterior, but destroying the very core of the victim.

From what I understand the cost of landscaping (if you will be able to find one after January 15) will be going up! Some landscapers have already seen their help go to other states. Watch fo lots of 'Now hiring' signs around town after Jan 15. Also hotels well be screaming for help when the Phoenix Open and Super Bowl come to town.

The false assumption is usually that the cheaper labor results in cheaper prices for the rest of us. What happens is that more cheap labor shows up for a given job which means they can do more jobs on the same day. This savings goes in the pockets of the landscaping companies. The only benefit we see is the laborers spend less time on a particular job.

Anyone remember the Bracero program? We need to control this situation. The workers are being exploited, the consumer is transferring the savings to increased societal support, as stated earlier, and those running cheap labor are laughing all the way to the bank on the backs of La Raza and Reconquista.

My point is some tough choices will have to be made. No one's going to like them. I agree there needs to be a comprehensive approach. I like Greg's approach that if you have a Dream Act you also have an act that purges the criminal element who put our officers and public safety at risk...

Also Greg, you should really provide the link for the image of the pawn:


The comments to this entry are closed.