April 30, 2010

Dems: "Show Me Your Papers"

Let me see if I understand this logic.

The pro-criminal immigrant lobby is crying that Arizona's self-defense immigration law is the equivalent of Nazi Germany and other totalitarian states requiring people to carry onerous documentation everywhere they go, drudging up the ominous imagery of MP40-toting German soldiers demanding, " show us your papers."

The Democratic response?

Something even more intrusive:

Democratic leaders have proposed requiring every worker in the nation to carry a national identification card with biometric information, such as a fingerprint, within the next six years, according to a draft of the measure...


“The cardholder’s identity will be verified by matching the biometric identifier stored within the microprocessing chip on the card to the identifier provided by the cardholder that shall be read by the scanner used by the employer,” states the Democratic legislative proposal.

The American Civil Liberties Union, a civil liberties defender often aligned with the Democratic Party, wasted no time in blasting the plan.

"Creating a biometric national ID will not only be astronomically expensive, it will usher government into the very center of our lives. Every worker in America will need a government permission slip in order to work. And all of this will come with a new federal bureaucracy — one that combines the worst elements of the DMV and the TSA," said Christopher Calabrese, ACLU legislative counsel.

It sounds crazy, right? Not hardly. You just need to understand their agenda.

The government-loving nanny-state left wing would want more control over the lives of our nation's legal citizens... even as the proposed law would do absolutely nothing to stop criminal immigrants that work in the underground economy, off the books, as millions of criminal aliens already do.

The simple fact of the matter is that importing as many criminal aliens as possible and converting them into voters is the long-term survival strategy of the Democratic Party, and they will never champion laws that protect the integrity of our nation's borders or strengthen our national defense if those run counter to the needs of the Party.

The Democratic Party—and I wish to clarify that I mean the progressive left wing that currently runs the Party—are driven entirely by their desire to grow their power and exert control over this nation's citizens through intrusive government, and are quite content to use invaders who are not citizens as pawns in that game.

This latest stunt is just one more example of their strategy, and another reason the left wing must be destroyed to restore this nation to the land of opportunity our Founders intended.

Posted by Confederate Yankee at April 30, 2010 09:44 AM

But when the Democrats do it, it's for your own good, you racist!!! Sorry about that, couldn't resist. Remember: Dissent is Racist!!

Posted by: TimothyJ at April 30, 2010 10:17 AM

Well, see, asking someone to prove they are a citizen is unConstitutional if they are NOT citizens but perfectly OK if they ARE citizens.

That makes sense, right? Isn't that the way it has always been anyway? I mean, no country anywhere has ever required non-citizens within their borders to carry visas or such, and everywhere police stop people just to make sure that if they are citizens they have papers to prove it, yes?

"But you need ID to rent a hotel room!" Maybe. Which is a decision of the hotel, not a legal requirement. Yes, I need ID, by law, to drive a motorized vehicle on public roadways and to purchase alcohol. But I do NOT have to have ID on me to walk to the store and buy a gallon of milk.

Posted by: John A at April 30, 2010 11:10 AM

Some major distinctions. The proposed national ID would be required to get a job, NOT for the privilege of walking the streets. If you can control employment of illegals, you dry up the immigration.

So no, this is NOT another version of "show us your papers"...except at the time of hiring. The bill states that the card will NOT be used for any purpose other than to verify immigration status.

So you are not deputizing every law enforcement officer in the country as ICE, which ought to take the strain off of local LEO and keep us OUT of police state mode.

Posted by: anselm at April 30, 2010 11:30 AM

Well, I'm a little confused. The Democrats are for a national ID which would basically be a 'right to work' ID which would severely limit illegal immigration because it would dry up the jobs? The DEMOCRATS?

Posted by: Kat at April 30, 2010 12:08 PM

This sounds rather Biblical. I remember reading that you will need a mark to participate in commerce.

Next, the underground economy, using cash, will expand prompting the government to outlaw cash and require you to link your bank account with your national ID card, as a debit card.

Yet, they can't require ID cards to vote...go figure.

Posted by: gruntle at April 30, 2010 12:32 PM

Not a Dumocrat thank you, but I wish these morons, and everyone else would remember that since the 1940s it is a FEDERAL LAW that if you are a legal immigrant/resident you have to carry your work visa or green card AT ALL TIMES. So what do the Dumocrats have to say to that... *crickets*

Posted by: Steele at April 30, 2010 12:33 PM

Isn't it disingenuous to equate the Arizona law with this proposal? As anselm notes above, the card can only be asked for when applying for a job, which makes it just a slight step above a Social Security card now, except that Social Security cards can be forged, or you can just give out a number that may or may not be yours.

In fact, the language in the document the Democrats released makes it explicitly clear that no one can be asked for the card UNLESS they are applying for a job:

It would be "unlawful for any person, corporation; organization local, state, or federal law enforcement officer; local or state government; or any other entity to require or even ask an individual cardholder to produce their social security card for any purpose other than electronic verification of employment eligibility and verification of identity for Social Security Administration purposes."

So I guess I answered my own question. Is it disingenuous to link this card with the Arizona law? Yes, it is. Very.

Posted by: Paul at April 30, 2010 02:17 PM

Isn't the Evil Party the ones that threw a hissy fit over asking people to display proof of identification in order to vote?

Just a little MORE hypocrisy from the Left.......

Posted by: Mark at April 30, 2010 07:14 PM

The national ID card is just another way to track everything you do, buy, and possess. Information is knowledge and knowledge is POWER!

How does this apply to you personally? Try guns and healthcare. In the leftist world you are under single payer, you also have to show and have recorded on your card that you own, or purchased a gun and then if you already own one off the books, your ammo buying is recorded. So? Well you will have to at some point apply for healthcare. Here is how it will go. "Well Mr Yankee, I can see you want government health insurance, good choice. Let me have your card. Oh, my.. when I swiped it the records show you own a gun. Now, Mr. Yankee, far be it for me to say you can't. It is your right. HOWEVER, this is tax payer funded insurance and we all know how dangerous guns can be in the home. So yes we can give you insurance you will have to pay an extra premium because of the risk. It would not be fair for the rest of the people to pay for your bad choices, now would it? Of course, if you got rid of that nasty thing we could move right along, couldn't we?"

Resist this. It is also why I had some issues with the Arizona law as it gives the liberals one more reason to argue "Well, if it is good for them, why not all of us?"

Posted by: archer52 at May 1, 2010 07:38 PM

The other day I tried to borrow "Rules for Radicals" from the library. The public library, for God's sake!

Some Nazi at the desk asked me for a card.

Posted by: Jim at May 2, 2010 07:17 AM

I suggest that every legal resident of Arizona carry a gun in that state; even the illegals could carry a gun just to stand as a check against over-reaching government officials. They can do that there, can't they.

Posted by: Steve Schwab at May 3, 2010 07:30 AM

I - a US Citizen, born and raised in Boston (home of Obama's illegal aunt) was traveling south on I93 in northern New Hampshire about 16 years ago when I was stopped by an INS patrol. The agent asked me where I was born. I told him. He asked me where I lived. I told him. He asked to see my driver's license. I showed him. He thanked me and I was on my way in about 5 minutes. Should I feel violated? Should I have started screaming about my rights being violated - called the ACLU or Al Sharpton? No - I had a valid right to be where I was and I was able to back up my identity with "papers." To tell you the truth, I felt more violated when I went to vote once and was not allowed to because someone else had already done so using my name. They can't ask for an ID - it's against the law! WOW does this country have it's priorities screwed up. I have no problem showing papers proving who I am - I got nothing to hide! I'm here LEGALLY!

Posted by: Pierre at May 5, 2010 01:49 AM