sundries

[rm]

I will probably be super scarce until after work hours today.

Yesterday's food: 1 vitamin water (defense flavour), 3 miniature gluten-free apple pies, chana masala, Chipotle chicken burrito bowl (no beans, mild & medium salsa and sour cream), some of the chocolate pomegranate candy, a bowl of white rice with olive oil (after my stomach decided WTF about what I'd eaten yesterday, which is a shame, because I made Patty a gorgeous dinner).

Consumers are starting to cut the cord on cable. Interestingly, everyone I know in the biz already has.

I want to take a moment to talk about Arizona. Because I'm upset. I'm upset at being told I haven't read the law (I have). Or that I'm stupid (I'm not). Or that I'm overreacting (it's not up to you to police my emotions).

And I'm upset at declarations of "all __________ feel ___________ about this law."

I am an American citizen who, because I don't drive, very often happens not to carry ID. This is not a political statement; it's just a fact. The passport doesn't fit neatly into everything, sometimes I forget to change it between jackets. I don't always have ID.

And, historically, legally, that's been okay. There is no national ID card in America. There is no legal requirement that I be able to identify my citizenship and residency status for any reason at any time. I cannot be stopped on the street for no other reason than how I look and be asked for my papers. If, in the course of some other event, cops ask me for ID, if I don't have it on me, yeah, that'll be a hassle, but it's not a crime in and of itself (reality is slightly more complicated than that, but I'm going with brevity and the assumption that I'm not committing a crime at the time of said hypothetical police interaction).

The Arizona law, to my reading, changes that in Arizona. To my reading of the political climate of Arizona and its particular issues, people can make all the noise they want about this law being directed at all illegal immigrants, I still read this as specifically targeting the Latino population for reasons that - while it may include some legitimate concerns about the very screwed up state of immigration, immigration laws and immigration enforcement in the US - absolutely, positively look like racism to me.

And, while I have not, nor do I intend to, refer to the people who have put this law into action as Nazi's, because that is hyperbole (and not useful hyperbole), I will saw unequivocably that one of the reasons the law makes me uncomfortable, beyond its racism, beyond the distraction it provides from deterring crime with clear-cut and immediate victims, is because I'm a Jewish person. Full stop. Other Jews may or may not feel that way. I do.

And guess what? I'm allowed to.

I am too fucking old to "agree to disagree" on some aspects of some issues. These include racism and civil rights. Does a person in Arizona have more meaningful commentary to offer on this law than I? You bet. Do Latino people? Also yes. Do people with personal immigration-related experiences? Yup. Here's the thing though, we all get our perspective. And I can't speak for anyone else. So I'd like people to stop speaking for me or telling me how I should speak.

You can think anything you damn well want about the law in Arizona. But the voicing of opinions has consequences - for me and for you. For everyone. And I won't socialize with people who think I'm less than human because of any of the various categories I fit in to.

That also means I'm not interested in socializing with people who think those sorts of things about others because of their categories. We're all a little bit racist and a whole lot ignorant; it's the human condition and I can live with it, especially when we're all trying to do better. But it's the a lot racist and the proud of ignorance thing I've got a problem with.

And don't call me stupid. Ever.

Iowa Bird Story.

The man who designed New York's iconic coffee cup has died.

"Crush" is the most hilarious, awesome, awkward, painful, weird Buffy episode ever. I love the Dawn/Spike friendship. I feel, oddly, really bad for Spike even though he's a creepy stalker asshole. And the whole thing was just unsettling and smart.

Meanwhile on Angel it's the return of Ann. That fundraiser thing was so ridiculous; weirdly it reminded me of the most useless White Collar episode ever, witht he mortgage fraud. It was that same sort of "ignore the actual boring thing driving this plot" problem.

Angel and his humans are so useless without each other. I loved the demon from the 1920s Angel has the fight drama going on with. Great character, great performance. I like Wesley around Gun. It makes Wesley seem like he's actually getting to be a boy, and it strikes me that that's unusual for him, like he had to be a serious little adult at nine. I mean, I did, and I wasn't a Watcher. ;)

Comments

[delchi.livejournal.com]

I think the people who are comparing the law to Nazi activity and making " may ve zee your paperz " comments are stupid. I spent about 12 hours on the road the other day listening to people on talk radio go on and on about this. If there is a better word than stupid to describe comparing this law to the policies of the Nazi party, I'm unaware of it. About every fourth caller to the show I was listening to was Jewish and irate ( and IMHO rightfully so ).

The only legitimate argument I've seen is along the lines of being racist , only in so much as the possibility of police officers abusing the law via racial profiling ( which is strictly prohibited in the law itself , and it was recently altered to provide more strong wording to that effect ). The thing is , if you are going to attack a law because of the possibility of a cop abusing it, you could attack ANY law for the same reason.

What did raise my eyebrows was the man who called in from VA who owns a construction business and said that he didn't care about any laws, he was going to keep hiring illegal immigrants because of their work ethic. He specifically said he didn't care about state federal or any other law.


My confusion is how people can say this law is based on racial profiling when it is expressly forbidden in the law to perform racial profiling - and because of that I'm sure many cases will be thrown out. The other thing that throws me for a loop is that it is a state level law, that mirrors a federal law that has been in place for some time, but is not actively enforced. As it is now a state law as well it can be enforced actively at the state level even if it is not enforced at the federal level.

Just to be clear though , talking about it , voicing opinions about it , or even protesting it if that's the thing is not stupid. You personally? Not stupid. However I maintain that anyone that compares this law to Nazi policies is a complete total idiot.

[azn-jack-fiend.livejournal.com]

The law enforces racial profiling. There is no way to interpret "reasonable suspicion" other than racially.

The Southern Poverty Law Center has a good explanation of connections involving Nazi sympathizers.

Given the authors of this law, no one should be surprised about its intended targets. The law was drafted by a lawyer for the legal arm of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), whose founder has warned of a “Latin onslaught” and complained about Latinos’ alleged low “educability.” FAIR has accepted $1.2 million from the Pioneer Fund, a racist foundation that was set up by Nazi sympathizers to fund studies of eugenics, the science of selective breeding to produce a “better” race. The legislation was sponsored by state Senator Russell Pearce, who once e-mailed an anti-Semitic article from the neo-Nazi National Alliance website to supporters.

[delchi.livejournal.com]

There are many ways to both correctly use and abuse reasonable suspicion. It's already in place for other laws , such as if a cop were to " smell " marijuana in your car they have reasonable suspicion to search your car for illegal drugs ( I saw a lecture on this recently ).

A few examples of reasonable suspicion in this case have been tied to lack of expected documentation. Again, they can not just stop you to check your papers. It has to be in the process of some other action such as a traffic stop, or some other lawful action. Usually the first thing a cop will ask for is some form of ID , such as a drivers license or state ID card. These have been taken as Prima Facie evidence of citizenship ( AZ Lawyer ) so that woudl stop it right there. If they did not have an ID , or any other proof of being licensed or the car not being registered, that could be considered reasonable suspicion of many things.

Can it be abused? Yes. Will it? Probably. Does this happen already? Yep. The bottom line is, within the auspices of this law you can not just randomly stop someone because of their race and demand to see their papers. It woudl be thrown out almost instantly.

There is a big difference between Nazi sympathizers and actual Nazis. When Arizona cops start stripping people, forcing them to wear labels on their clothing, and sending them off to death camps then I'll accept the Nazi comparison. Until then it's just Goodwin material.

[lovefromgirl.livejournal.com]

So being wary of something that mirrors my country's history makes me a total idiot, huh? I mean, I can ask my great-aunts how they'd feel about having to carry ID again, just like in the thirties and forties.

Also, expressly forbidding racial profiling in this law will not eliminate the practice if nobody's watching the watchmen. In order for law to work, it must be enforced. I do not trust that this part of the law will be enforced.

[delchi.livejournal.com]

So being wary of something that mirrors my country's history makes me a total idiot, huh?

Nope, try again. I said that the people who were comparing it to the practices of the Nazi party were idiots.

I mean, I can ask my great-aunts how they'd feel about having to carry ID again, just like in the thirties and forties.

It has been pointed out , not just by me, that in the US (in most states , I can't say for sure all of them ) are required to carry some form of ID - or face a misdemeanor charge. It's been that way for a while. I'm unsure what your country is, so I can't speak to the history therein, but here in the US since I came of legal age I have had to carry ID.

I do not trust that this part of the law will be enforced.

I said as much myself. I clearly said can it be abused? yes. Will it be abused? Probably. However given all the publicity that this is getting I'm fairly sure there will be plenty of people watching the watchmen.

[lovefromgirl.livejournal.com]

Which, yes, I did. I compared it to what the Nazis asked of Germans during the Third Reich... because that is what happened.

If there are laws requiring people to carry ID on the books in New York, certainly nobody's ever enforced them or even publicised them. Of course, being white, who'd ask me?

[delchi.livejournal.com]

Being white, I've been asked in NYC for my ID when I use my credit card, when I was pulled over by the NYPD, to get into most clubs, access into many professional buildings, and when doing things like renewing my license , getting a lease on my apartment, and other day to day life things. Many places have signs that state that you must show ID to enter , and in fact many people write on their credit cards " ASK FOR ID " in order to deter fraud. I am one of them. I jsut completed a roadtrip across five states and in each case when I checked into a m/hotel I was asked for my ID.

I don't know if you saw , but in another comment I went into detail about how the NYPD threatened me with DHS, jail, and tearing my car apart for having expired plates ( but a good license , insurance, and registration ).

Also , as I pointed out, if the Nazis did not like your papers, or they were missing or if you met their criteria, off you went to a death camp. Maybe I'm wrong here - but to the best of my knowledge no one in Arizona ( or anywhere else ) has been sent to a death camp for not having papers. You might be deported, 3 hots and a cot until a bus ride to Mexico or a return flight to whence you came , but no one gets send to be exterminated. The day that we start rounding up people and shoving them into shower rooms filled with poison gas I will be on the streets protesting , or taking other civil action.

So far no state has had border stops inside of the US ( Unless you are a trucker then you have to show your CDL and have your truck weighed to ensure that you are not over weight limits ) , and as yet even with the law in AZ no one can stop you and demand to see your papers for no clear reason. Now you missed it last time I said it so I'll repeat it - yes this does get abused and bad cops do exist - everywhere - but that will happen in any system of government.

[delchi.livejournal.com]

See also : http://bigjournalism.com/aliciacolon/2010/04/29/from-one-hispanic-to-others-re-arizona-youre-being-had-by-the-media/


"I am an American of Hispanic heritage and I look the part. I can’t count how many times I’ve been asked, “Do you speak English?” According to the rhetoric being showered in the media I’m supposed to be upset at being asked for my “papers.” Oh really?

Ask any American of every ethnicity how often they are asked for picture ID. The answer is it happens on a daily basis- checking into hotels, using credit cards, at job interviews. We should be used to this by now."

[lovefromgirl.livejournal.com]

...but not for no apparent reason other than one's ethnicity. Which appears to be what's got people up in arms, here.

You go your way. I'll go mine. We will never agree on this subject.

[delchi.livejournal.com]

The possibility of it is what has people up in arms, and as I admitted it is possible, but not within the letter or the spirit of the law. Just because it could happen does not mean that the whole idea is bad.

As for the rest, agreed.