Arizona Legislature Passes Bill Banning Ethnic Studies Programs


Arizona Legislature Passes Bill Banning Ethnic Studies Programs

It looks as though someone in this country is finally starting to make sense and stand up for what is right instead of cowtowing to special interest groups and political correctness.
Despite opposition from some areas of the country,several more states, Oklahoma, Texas and others are beginning to follow suit.
Hooray for Arizona!!

Quote from Fox news:

After making national headlines for a new law on illegal immigrants, the Arizona Legislature passed a bill Thursday that would ban ethnic studies programs in the state that critics say currently advocate separatism and racial preferences. 

The bill, which passed 32-26 in the state House, had been approved by the Senate a day earlier. It now goes to Gov. Jan Brewer for her signature.

The new bill would make it illegal for a school district to teach any courses that promote the overthrow of the U.S. government, promote resentment of a particular race or class of people, are designed primarily for students of a particular ethnic group or “advocate ethnic solidarity instead of the treatment of pupils as individuals.” 

The bill stipulates that courses can continue to be taught for Native American pupils in compliance with federal law and does not prohibit English as a second language classes. It also does not prohibit the teaching of the Holocaust or other cases of genocide.

State Superintendent for Public Instruction Tom Horne called passage in the state House a victory for the principle that education  should unite, not divide students of differing backgrounds.

” Traditionally, the American public school system has brought together students from different backgrounds and taught them to be Americans and to treat each other as individuals, and not on the basis of their ethnic backgrounds,” Horne said. “This is consistent with the fundamental American value that we are all individuals, not exemplars of whatever ethnic groups we were born into. Ethnic studies programs teach the opposite, and are designed to promote ethnic chauvinism.”

Horne began fighting in 2007 against the Tucson Unified School District’s program, which he said defied Martin Luther King’s call to judge a person by the content of their character, not the color of  their skin. Horne claimed the ethnic studies program encourages”ethnic chauvanism,” promotes Latinos to rise up and create a new territory out of the southwestern region of the United States and tries to intimidate conservative teachers in the school system.

But opponents said the bill would prevent teachers from using an academically proven method of educating students about history.They also argued that the Legislature should not be involved in developing school curriculum.

Clickhere to read the bill.

Schools that fail to abide by the law would have state funds withheld.

End Quote

For way too long , society has been teaching separatism, we are all Americans, we should all conform to the same ideals and principles. Since everyone in this country , except the native American Indians are immigrants, everyone wants to retain some of the culture of the country we came from, that is all well and good.

We don’t  all have to think alike, and not have different views and opinions, but if someone one immigrants to this country, they should be willing to learn of our values customs,and language. 

If they are coming here for a better life,with freedom and an opportunity to take advantage of all the positive things this country has to offer , why would they want to change America into the country they just came from?

The situation in Arizona has gotten desperate, with higher crime rates than New York City, it is way past time something is done. With the Federal government doing  nothing on immigration, it is time for the states to step up and do it for them.

Maybe this will encourage Washington to fulfill their duties and obligations of the federal government, instead of inserting their nose into matters they have no business trying to control.

Advertisements

The Oil Rig Explosion in the Gulf of Mexico


The oil rig explosion  in the Gulf of Mexico.


Are there any coincidences in life?

I, for one don’t believe in coincidences, everything happens for a reason. Case in point, suddenly Obama surprises the world and declares he is for off shore drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, something every self respecting liberal would never be in favor of.

The next week an oil rig blows up. I can’t ever remember an oil rig in the Gulf blowing up. Now we will see photos of  massive oil slicks, pelicans and other birds getting stuck in the oil and  not being able to  fly away, bring on the Dawn soap. This explosion ,if it doesn’t stop any new drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, will certainly slow it down.

All the oil experts say there are enough safeguards and technology available , something of this nature should never  happen.

This administration seems to have a way of “Mr. Fate” always  showing up at the best possible time to “help” them pass their  progressive agenda.

It seems pretty coincidental that during an election year, when the administration is trying to pass cap and trade, as well as forcing everyone to drive the cars they think we should be driving, that an oil rig would blow up . How convenient.

 


Free Shipping This Month Only!

A carefully crafted immigration law in Arizona


This article explains the new immigration law in Arizona, it’s not what the MSM would want to report. Common sense tells one they wouldn’t pass a law that wouldn’t stand up in court.

A carefully crafted immigration law in Arizona

By: BYRON YORK

April 26, 2010

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer signs the illegal-immigration bill —
which will go into effect this summer — at the Arizona Department of
Transportation in Phoenix on Friday. (David Wallace, The Arizona
Republic/AP)

The chattering class is aghast at Arizona’s new
immigration law. “Harkens back to apartheid,” says the Atlanta
Journal-Constitution’s Cynthia Tucker. “Shameful,” says the Washington
Post’s E.J. Dionne. “Terrible…an invitation to abuse,” says the New York
Times’ David Brooks.

For his part, President Obama calls the law “misguided” and says it
“threaten[s] to undermine basic notions of fairness that we cherish as
Americans.” Obama has ordered the Justice Department to “closely
monitor the situation and examine the civil rights and other
implications of this legislation.”

Has anyone actually read the law? Contrary to the talk, it is a
reasonable, limited, carefully-crafted measure designed to help law
enforcement deal with a serious problem in Arizona. Its authors
anticipated criticism and went to great lengths to make sure it is
constitutional and will hold up in court. It is the criticism of the
law that is over the top, not the law itself.

The law requires police to check with federal authorities on a
person’s immigration status, if officers have stopped that person for
some legitimate reason and come to suspect that he or she might be in
the U.S. illegally. The heart of the law is this provision: “For any
lawful contact made by a law enforcement official or a law enforcement
agency…where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who
is unlawfully present in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall
be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the
person…”

Critics have focused on the term “reasonable suspicion” to suggest
that the law would give police the power to pick anyone out of a crowd
for any reason and force them to prove they are in the U.S. legally.
Some foresee mass civil rights violations targeting Hispanics.

What fewer people have noticed is the phrase “lawful contact,” which
defines what must be going on before police even think about checking
immigration status. “That means the officer is already engaged in some
detention of an individual because he’s violated some other law,” says
Kris Kobach, a University of Missouri Kansas City Law School professor
who helped draft the measure. “The most likely context where this law
would come into play is a traffic stop.”

As far as “reasonable suspicion” is concerned, there is a great deal
of case law dealing with the idea, but in immigration matters, it means a
combination of circumstances that, taken together, cause the officer to
suspect lawbreaking. It’s not race — Arizona’s new law specifically
says race and ethnicity cannot be the sole factors in determining a
reasonable suspicion.

For example: “Arizona already has a state law on human smuggling,”
says Kobach. “An officer stops a group of people in a car that is
speeding. The car is overloaded. Nobody had identification. The
driver acts evasively. They are on a known smuggling corridor.” That
is a not uncommon occurrence in Arizona, and any officer would
reasonably suspect that the people in the car were illegal. Under the
new law, the officer would get in touch with U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement to check on their status.

But what if the driver of the car had shown the officer his driver’s
license? The law clearly says that if someone produces a valid Arizona
driver’s license, or other state-issued identification, they are
presumed to be here legally. There’s no reasonable suspicion.

Is having to produce a driver’s license too burdensome? These days,
natural-born U.S. citizens, and everybody else, too, are required to
show a driver’s license to get on an airplane, to check into a hotel,
even to purchase some over-the-counter allergy medicines. If it’s a
burden, it’s a burden on everyone.

Still, critics worry the law would force some people to carry their
papers, just like in an old movie. The fact is, since the 1940s,
federal law has required non-citizens in this country to carry, on their
person, the documentation proving they are here legally — green card,
work visa, etc. That hasn’t changed.

Kobach, a Republican who is now running for Kansas Secretary of
State, was the chief adviser to Attorney General John Ashcroft on
immigration issues from 2001 to 2003. He has successfully defended
Arizona immigration laws in the past. “The bill was drafted in
expectation that the open-borders crowd would almost certainly bring a
lawsuit,” he says. “It’s drafted to withstand judicial scrutiny.”

The bottom line is, it’s a good law, sensibly written and rigorously
focused — no matter what the critics say.

Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columns/Byron-York/A-carefully-crafted-immigration-law-in-Arizona-92136104.html#ixzz0mMIlMyDs

x

Let’s Stop Illegal Immigration


Written by : Gary Wonning

Let’s Stop Illegal Immigration

460,000 of the approximately 5 million people living in Arizona are Illegal aliens. That is almost 10%. That 10% is responsible for 80% of the crimes committed in Arizona.

Phoenix only ranks behind Mexico City as the city with the most kidnappings in the world. In certain areas of Phoenix , the are no signs or billboards in English.

 There are gun fights everyday between people sneaking into the country and their coyotes,(the people responsible for smuggling illegals into the country.) The problem arises because once the individual is smuggled into the country, more money is demanded from the individual, thus violence erupts. Often times in parking lots of legitimate businesses, thus putting law abiding citizens at risk.

Arizona is finally reacting because the federal government won’t do anything. Politicians play on our sympathies and don’t want to make any ethnic groups mad, the politicians are more concerned about getting votes than doing what is right for the country and it’s citizens.This has been a problem for many years. The present administration can’t be blamed for all of the problem although they should shoulder most of the blame because at this moment , they are doing nothing.

If he does react, Obama will only want blanket amnesty, which only makes(on paper only) law abiding citizens out of law breaking illegals. Every American welcomes law abiding immigrants to our country,we were all immigrants at one time or another, we want to share what we have with everyone, however, there are certain elements of society that should not be allowed inside our borders. We have enough law breakers already here, we don’t need any more.

Obama is a U.S. citizen , because his mother was a citizen, but he is not an American ,(there is a difference) he didn’t grow up in this country, he was raised in a home with communist values, thus he knows nothing of our values and heritage.

Politicians want the ethnic vote, what they fail to realize is that many law abiding Mexican , as well as other immigrants, don’t like the illegal problem and would welcome any politician standing up for what is right. The ones invading our country illegally casts a shadow of doubt on all immigrants and makes it harder on the people trying to go by the rules. I have a lot of empathy for immigrants trying to assimilate into our culture, the number of undesirables coming here makes it very hard for them to be accepted.

What people don’t realize is that elected officials who support illegal immigration only enact laws that support this kind of activity, thus over time,only makes the problem worse.

It is kind of amusing, seeing these illegals protesting and shouting they have rights too. The only right they have is to go back  where they came from and re-enter the country the correct , legal way. I was always told that if I didn’t do something right the first time , to do it over,they should do the same. When they are willing to assume the responsibilities of citizenship, then and only then will they will have rights.

 Gary has been a writer/ photographer for over 20 years, specializing in nature,landscapes and studying native cultures.Besides visiting most of the United States, he has traveled to such places as Egypt,the Canary Islands,much of the Caribbean. He has studied  the Mayan Cultures in Central America, and the Australian Aboriginal way of life.Photography has given him the opportunity to observe life in many different parts of the world!

He has published several books about the various cultures he has observed.

For more information and a link to his hard cover and Ebooks,and contact information: please check his website.www.commonsensejourneys.com

Your comments appreciated

 

Now you can follow me on Kindle.

Fujitsu America, Inc.

 

George Koritzer

 

Illegal immigrants


So, What’s wrong with this? We have a right and an obligation to enforce our
laws. being an illegal immigrant means you are illegal. What does illegal
mean?
Hooray for Arizona.
Ariz. law ‘an insult to American justice’ Gutierrez slams state’s crackdown
on illegal immigrants
Comments

April 24, 2010

SUN-TIMES STAFF, GANNETT NEWS

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer’s signing of America’s toughest immigration
enforcement law Friday has thrust the dormant issue of immigration reform
back into the national spotlight, energizing groups on both sides.

Chicago Democrat Luis Gutierrez, chairman of the Congressional Hispanic
Caucus, has been especially vocal as the measure — which will require local
police officers to question people about their immigration status if there
is reason to suspect they are illegal immigrants– wound its way through the
Arizona Legislature.

WHAT THE LAW DOES

• Makes it a crime under state law to be in the country illegally by
specifically requiring immigrants to have proof of their immigration status..

• Requires police officers to “make a reasonable attempt” to determine the
immigration status of a person if there is a “reasonable suspicion” that he
or she is an illegal immigrant. Race, color or national origin may not be
the only things considered in implementation.

• Allow lawsuits against local or state government agencies that have
policies that hinder enforcement of immigration laws.

• Targets hiring of illegal immigrants as day laborers by prohibiting
people from stopping a vehicle on a road to offer employment and by
prohibiting a person from getting into a stopped vehicle on a street to be
hired for work if it impedes traffic.
* *

The law makes it “open season on the Latino community in Arizona,” Gutierrez
said, describing it as “an insult to American justice and one of the
harshest assaults on basic civil rights in recent American history.”

In Arizona, “people in Latino neighborhoods are afraid to leave their
houses, afraid to be apart from their children for even a minute, and afraid
to walk the streets because they feel their arrest on suspicion of being an
undocumented immigrant could happen at any moment,” he wrote in an online
op-ed piece.

Gutierrez plans to attend a rally in Phoenix on Sunday to “let the people of
Arizona know that they are not alone in fighting against bigotry and
hatred.”

William Gheen, president of Americans for Legal Immigration Political Action
Committee, said his group’s members are already poised to take “clone
bills,” modeled on Arizona’s law, to state legislatures nationwide.

“Arizona is ground zero, and it’s just the start,” Gheen said.

Arizona’s proposal also makes it a state crime to be an illegal immigrant
and to work or solicit work in the state. There are an estimated 460,000
illegal immigrants in Arizona, and it is the state with the most illegal
border crossings.

The Arizona law has energized immigrant rights’ advocates to push for a
federal law that provides for a path toward citizenship for the estimated 11
million illegal immigrants already in the country.

President Obama called moderate Republican senators last week in an effort
to win bipartisan support for a centrist reform bill that Sen. Chuck Schumer
(D-N.Y.) wants to introduce. Schumer’s plan calls for biometric Social
Security cards to block hiring of illegal immigrants; increasing Border
Patrol agents and surveillance technology at the borders; creating a
temporary-worker program, and requiring illegal immigrants who want to
become citizens to pay fines and back taxes, perform community service work,
pass background checks and be proficient in English.

But anti-immigration groups say the furor over the Arizona law will scare
congressional lawmakers away from voting for reform in an election year that
is already expected to be a tough one for the Democratic majority.

Thomas Saenz, president and general counsel for the Mexican American Legal
Defense and Educational Fund, said he is poised to file suit to try to stop
the proposed law from taking effect. He will assert that it violates the
U.S. Constitution by interjecting the state into something over which only
the federal government has jurisdiction. He also will argue that it violates
equal-rights protections by sanctioning racial profiling — a charge that
supporters of the bill deny.

Free Personalized Golf Balls!

http://www.travelnsnap.com

Prayer: Seperation of Church and State


Prayer: Separation of Church and State

Much is being written today concerning the separation of church and state and how prayer shouldn’t be allowed in public places, under the guise that it might offend some one. The reason is often given that many if not all of our founding fathers never believed in God or the need for prayer. If one studies anything of our history during the formation of our country it is soon learned that this could not be farther from the truth.

The father of our country,George Washington expressed many times his belief in a supreme being and even stressed that divine intervention had been responsible for keeping him out of harm’s way.

The following is an excerpt from a speech Benjamin Franklin gave after the Continental Congress had reached a stalemate and couldn’t reach any agreement on how to proceed.

Mr. President:

The small progress we have made after 4 or five weeks close attendance & continual reasonings with each other — our different sentiments on almost every question,several of the last producing as many noes as ays, is me thinks a melancholy proof of the imperfection of the Human Understanding. We indeed seem to feel our own wont of political wisdom, since we have been running about in search of it. We have gone back to ancient history for models of government, and examined the different forms of those Republics which having been formed with the seeds of their own dissolution now no longer exist. And we have viewed Modern States all round Europe, but find none of their  Constitutions suitable to our circumstances.

In this situation of this Assembly groping as it were in the dark to find political truth, and scarceable to distinguish it when to us, how has it happened, Sir, that we have not hitherto once thought of humbly applying to the Father of lights to illuminate our understandings? In the beginning of the contest with G. Britain, when we were sensible of danger we had daily prayer in this room for the Divine Protection. — Our prayers,Sir, were heard, and they were graciously answered. All of us who were engaged in the struggle must have observed frequent instances of a Superintending providence in our favor. To that kind providence we owe this happy opportunity of consulting in peace on the means of establishing our future national felicity. And have we now forgotten that powerful friend? or do we imagine that we no longer need His assistance.

I have lived, Sir, a long time and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth –that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the sacred writings that “except the Lord build they labor in vain that build it.” I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without his concurring aid we shall succeed in this political building no better than the Builders of Babel: We shall be divided by our little partial local interests; our projects will be confounded, and we ourselves shall be become a reproach and a bye word down to future age. And what is worse, mankind may here after this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing Governments by Human Wisdom, and leave it to chance, war, and conquest.

I therefore beg leave to move –that henceforth prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven, and its blessings on our deliberations, be held in this Assembly every morning before we proceed to business, and that one or more of the Clergy of this City be requested to officiate in that service.

This along with several other instances clearly state the founding fathers had every intention of allowing one to participate in prayer in the public arena.

Not everyone agreed that prayer was important, however after prayer was offered, congress began to move forward with our new government.

From this excerpt we can see how important Franklin thought daily prayer was.

Offering a prayer in no way  constitutes a government endorsing a particular religion or belief. If one  doesn’t believe or participate all that needs to be done is to stand silent and be respectful until the prayer concludes. Nothing wrong with this. No one can force you to pray.

Thirteen of our founding fathers were masons, hence they had to profess a belief in a supreme being to be admitted to the lodge, many more held beliefs that were common to masonry, even though they themselves didn’t belong to the masonic order.

Many government buildings in our nations capitol display religious as well as masonic emblems, When George Washington dedicated the cornerstone to our capitol, he did it in masonic regalia.

A few years ago the Taliban went about the middle east removing all religious emblems from buildings and temples in that area, do we want to do the same in this country?

I think not. It’s time to put political correctness aside and return  our thinking to a more common sense approach, something more in line with the ideals our country was founded on.

Gary is a travel writer and photographer living in Sarasota, Florida. He maintains a website featuring some of his travel photos and markets a line of products featuring many of his photos.


Free Personalized Golf Balls!