Thursday, December 02, 2004

Which country would you think that an election didn't matter?

Wrong, it's Liberal Amerikkka. they had a vote in Arizona where the voters, tried of paying out the ass for illegals voted to tie gov't services to citizenry. The liberals are going to court to stop this "discrimination." In case you didn't know, the majority of Arizona voters are citizens of Hispanic extraction.

William Perry Pendley writes in Mountain State legal
, , , " Not so in Arizona. There “liberals” are in court claiming that an initiative adopted overwhelmingly by Arizona’s voters will cause “intimidation” because it will, in part, require voters to prove that they are citizens of the United States and entitled to vote in its elections. It is a legal battle that, at some time in the future, could be argued before the U.S. Supreme Court and that, even today, is being argued by citizens of other states where similar legislation is being considered.

More than 190,000 Arizona residents signed petitions to place the Arizona Taxpayer and Citizen Protection Act initiative, Proposition 200, on the ballot. On Election Day, despite the opposition of Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano and senior U.S. Senator John McCain, to name two prominent politicians, the initiative passed by a vote of 56 to 44 percent. Given that the annual cost of providing public benefits to Arizona’s illegal aliens exceeds $1 billion, or about $700 per household, voters felt something had to be done about illegal immigration.

Whether “something” will be done is yet to be determined. Days after the election, the American Civil Liberties Union, Mexican American Legal Defense Fund, National Council of La Raza, Service Employees International Union, Chicanos Por La Causa, and Valle del Sol all announced their intention to sue to prevent certification and implementation of Proposition 200. (Some of these groups went to court earlier to strike the initiative from the ballot; those efforts failed.) A week later, Arizona’s Attorney General ruled that Proposition 200’s requirement of proof of U.S. citizenship for receiving public benefits—such as welfare, public housing assistance, disability, retirement payments, and taxpayer-subsidized postsecondary education—is narrower than proponents and voters intended, , ,"

Notice that the bold (no pun inteded) groups are the same ones you hear about whenever America wants to get back to her roots of Moral law, and personal responsibility?

Read the rest.

No comments:

Post a Comment