Opinion Forum

Satire: Compassionately Augmented Boycotts of Arizona Must Succeed

May 31st, 2010

(This article was first published at Blogcritics.)

There are many “sanctuary cities” in the United States where illegal aliens are welcome. Although Google provides several lists, that information may not be available readily to those most in need of it. This article suggests compassionate ways to fill that lamentable void.

Those so unfortunate as to be forced to cower as common criminals or worse in places where they are unwanted should be encouraged — not forced — but gently offered opportunities to go where they will be given the consideration and respect they clearly deserve. In view of the patently hostile attitude toward them in that wretched cesspool of human rights and compassion ironically named Arizona — after a type of corn grown in Latin America — most illegal aliens would doubtless jump at this opportunity and become respected, proud, productive and law-abiding residents of their new homes elsewhere. It is only fitting and proper that they be afforded that opportunity. Many of them will probably have to go in any event, due to the impact of the various boycotts of things Arizonan by the good folks in the sanctuary cities; boycotts that will most likely increase the exodus to new lands of hope and promise.

If the State of Arizona insists on enforcing its unlawful, regressive, perverted and obviously racist new laws, as the highly respected chief lawyer for the United States and indeed his boss and revered Constitutional Scholar, the President, have told us — after deep thought and study that it is (although there was no need for them to actually read the new law, since the newspapers and television broadcasts told them all they had to know), those detained pending acceptance by the federal government for status determination and possible deportation should be offered an alternative: (1) free one-way bus transportation to the nearest sanctuary city for them and all family members who want to accompany them, (2) modest grubstakes of five hundred dollars or more per family to help with resettlement — to be delivered in cash upon arrival at the destination — and (3) such other humane relocation assistance as might be needed.

Information on sanctuary cities should also be posted for all to see (without, of course, profiling of any sort to determine where to post the information or in which of the world’s multiple languages to post it), with contact information for those willing to help financially and otherwise with the unfortunately necessary transition. These signs should reflect the humanitarian and compassionate nature of the sanctuary cities anxious to receive them. There should be no need for illegal aliens to cower in terror waiting to be arrested while out for innocent family strolls to ice cream parlors in order to avail themselves of these opportunities.

Since most of the residents of sanctuary cities are doubtless charitable and well meaning souls who prize compassion and despise greed, it is reasonable to expect that they would not only welcome this initiative but gladly fund it as well. Clearly, they eagerly await Arizona’s tired, her poor, her huddled masses yearning to breathe free. Like Lady Liberty, they sweetly beckon, “Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me; I lift my lamp beside the golden door!” Vile right wing commentaries to the contrary (such as this poorly researched hit piece by Faux News) are merely obvious attempts to stir the pot of hatred and should be ignored. A boycott of Faux and its enablers should also be considered. Clearly, such paradises as Oakland, California would be delighted to help:

Oakland City Council members voted 7-0 Tuesday to boycott Arizona and Arizona-based businesses, joining a growing movement against the state after it passed a far-reaching anti-illegal immigration law.

As the President of the City Council wisely asked,

How do you know if someone is illegal?… They can’t answer that question in Arizona. Is it when someone’s in a coffee shop? Is it when they’re walking their child to school? Is it when they’re standing on the corner waiting for work?

The Oakland boycott, with some exceptions, urges city officials not to enter contracts with or purchase goods from companies with headquarters in Arizona, calls on city staffers to review existing contracts with Arizona companies, and aims to keep city employees from traveling to Arizona on official business.

It has been reported, falsely, that President Obama is ambivalent about the boycott. He is not, as he clearly stated:

“I’m the president of the United States, I don’t endorse boycotts or not endorse boycotts…That’s something that private citizens can make a decision about.”

It is reassuring that there are some few such opportunities remaining, and we should be grateful for each of them as long as we have them.

The president reiterated his disapproval of the Arizona measure, which was signed into law last month and goes into effect in July. It requires immigrants in the state to carry documents verifying their immigration status and requires police officers to question a person about his or her immigration status during a “lawful stop” if there is “reasonable suspicion” that person may be in the country illegally.

Good on Him! Since He disapproves of the new law, all law-abiding people should as well, showing their support for His wise views by the only effective means at their disposal, boycotts.

Prompt implementation of this proposal would produce a win-win-win result. The beleaguered illegal aliens would be helped to achieve the new life for which they risked their old lives, the sanctuary cities would benefit from their presence in numerous ways, including the enhancement of their own self esteem coming from knowledge of good things well done, and the racist jerks in Arizona would have to find other non-problems with which to occupy their copious leisure time, now granted them by the slave-like labor of those whom they so hate. In their diminished leisure time, they would have to find other targets for their blind hatred. True, they might later repent of their racist ways, but by then it would probably be too late to encourage the previously disparaged and poor but then prosperous souls to rejoin them.

Once the Arizona boycotts have been successful, plans should be made to boycott all things fabricated in China, the human rights violations of which are only slightly less egregious than Arizona’s. Until China rejects her wicked ways, all things Chinese should be shunned, thus punishing not only China, but her enablers who market Chinese wares to feed their own greed for profit at the expense of their innocent customers, who apparently don’t realize the human costs of their purchases.

Articles written by Dan Miller
Tags: Arizona, boycott, Holder, illegal aliens, Oakland, Obama, racist, satire
Categories: Humor, Law, News, Politics | Comments (21) | Home

21 Responses to “Satire: Compassionately Augmented Boycotts of Arizona Must Succeed”

Brianna Aubin | May 31st, 2010 at 12:07 am

Errr… the last bit about China being not quite as bad as AZ makes me believe that this piece is sarcastic, but in this day and age it can sometimes be hard to tell when someone is joking (for example, when Obama won the Nobel peace prize). Reassurance, please?

David | May 31st, 2010 at 1:55 am

Another op-ed by and about a bunch of criminal loving weirdos who haven’t read the law. Or perhaps they just like to pick and choose which laws apply to them, since they clearly know so much better than those of us who favor facts over emotional outbursts.

American citizens are being murdered, as are dan miller’s beloved illegal aliens.

I need that sanctuary city list so I’ll know which cities to boycott.

Good luck with that China thingy…

Tom Carter | May 31st, 2010 at 4:32 am

You’re missing the satire. The headline now makes it a little more clear….

d | May 31st, 2010 at 7:34 am

L.M.A.O., Good one Dan! Satire is the first word,Brianna. Sad when you have to write the word ,satire, on your article,then some still don’t get it.
We all need to go to Arizona for the buycott,to buy all our stuff from Arizona. Go Arizona,come on Texas,follow their lead.

Dan Miller | May 31st, 2010 at 8:02 am

Brianna,

I can’t imagine why anyone would think it satire. Now that I have modestly pointed the way, I am confident that all true defenders of truth, justice, compassion and the American Way will joyfully come through and welcome the teeming masses yearning to be free from the vile racist oppression daily suffered in Arizona. They needed only a little ~~divine~~ guidance from a true believer such as myself in the values they so obviously hold dear to disperse the clouds of confusion and show the way.

Just as soon as I receive my share of the wealth left to his son by the former King of Nigeria, whom I am helping to get his funds out of the clutches of the base Nigerian government still under control of Bush and Cheney, I plan to donate at least ten percent — a tithe if you will — to the cause. The funds may take some time to get to me because I will have to go personally to Nigeria to help with the good fight. I must confess that I am a bit overwhelmed by the costs of doing so, but with the help of the former King’s son am opening a secret numbered bank account in Somalia to which all right thinking people will be asked to contribute.

Nils | May 31st, 2010 at 10:09 am

I have to agree with d, above — satirically speaking, of course.

I am astounded that your piece is being taken so seriously, Dan.

Must be something in the water…

Dan Miller | May 31st, 2010 at 12:05 pm

My very helpful new Nigerian friend has graciously offered to take most of the burden off me and is himself setting up a new website to solicit contributions to defray the costs of getting his money out of Nigeria. He has asked no more than that I provide the e-mail addresses of everyone I know, so that he can contact them directly and offer them an investment opportunity almost too good to be true. He has assured me that, in addition to sharing his riches with me and with them, he will contribute twenty percent to the cause I have so vigorously urged on behalf of the oppressed victims of racist aggression in Arizona and elsewhere.

What a guy! I am delighted that my modest article moved him to take these generous steps and that, unlike certain cynics I might name, he took my comments no less seriously than I had intended.

Brianna Aubin | May 31st, 2010 at 1:46 pm

“Satire is the first word,Brianna”

It wasn’t there when I read the article.

Tom Carter | May 31st, 2010 at 2:58 pm

Brianna, you’re right — it wasn’t there when the article was first published. My fault; sorry.

Tom Carter | May 31st, 2010 at 3:07 pm

Well done, Dan, in the best spirit of Johathan Swift! I’ve wondered about the hypocrisy of “sanctuary cities” and states and little burgs that have threatened to “boycott” Arizona, or have taken action to do it. I thought an appropriate response from an Arizona official to California was that if California boycotts Arizona, Arizona will cut off their electricity — they get about 25 percent of their supply from Arizona. That, of course, was considered to be grossly unfair….

I still don’t like Arizona’s law on illegal immigrants. But maybe it will serve the purpose of finally getting the federal government to do their job.

Brianna | May 31st, 2010 at 5:58 pm

The sanctuary cities have indeed been little hypocrites in this game. The federal government, when the indicated that they might refuse to look into illegals that AZ officials referred to them, were worse than hypocrticial.

Benito | June 1st, 2010 at 11:09 am

I hope that every American, regardless of where he lives, will stop and examine his conscience about this and other related incidents. This Nation was founded by men of many nations and backgrounds. It was founded on the principle that all men are created equal, and that the rights of every man are diminished when the rights of one man are threatened. All of us ought to have the right to be treated as he would wish to be treated, as one would wish his children to be treated, but this is not the case.

I know the proponents of this law say that the majority approves of this law, but the majority is not always right. Would women or non-whites have the vote if we listen to the majority of the day, would the non-whites have equal rights (and equal access to churches, housing, restaurants, hotels, retail stores, schools, colleges and yes water fountains) if we listen to the majority of the day? We all know the answer, a resounding, NO!

Today we are committed to a worldwide struggle to promote and protect the rights of all who wish to be free. In a time of domestic crisis men of good will and generosity should be able to unite regardless of party or politics and do what is right, not what is just popular with the majority. Some men comprehend discrimination by never have experiencing it in their lives, but the majority will only understand after it happens to them.

d | June 1st, 2010 at 7:12 pm

I assume you think I have never been discriminated against? L.O.L.
I am a woman,and blonde,GEEZE. Big difference, I am not illegally here,that’s the operative word,Benito. ILLEGAL. This country was founded by all kinds and they made LAWS,if you are here illegally,then why do you have so many rights?To get free medical treatment,to go to our schools free,when we have to pay taxes to go and even not to go,to comit crimes,to boycott,to march,demonstrate,because you don’t get enough of legal citizens stuff. Then nobody arrests you,wow,a hard time, being illegal. Now,Arizona has the audacity to,oh, not arrest you because you look illegal,but to ask if you are illegal,if you are commiting a crime,awful,how horrible they are. This is already the law,they just want to be allowed to enforce the law. If you want to live here,great,do it the legal way,obey the laws this country was founded on,and for gosh sake,learn English,don’t try to force us to change our language. We would never try this in Mexico,probably would not get away with any of it.

Brianna | June 1st, 2010 at 10:33 pm

Benito – if you had actually read the law, you would have discovered that the only type of person the law discriminates against is the person who is here illegally. If you had chosen to fight this battle on the grounds that the immigration laws to this country suck, I would have heartily agreed with you, but seeing that AZ has no power to change these laws, I believe that AZ deciding to enforce these laws is the best in a set of very nasty options for them as a state and for us as a nation.

Immigrants to this country should not get welfare (for that matter, neither should citizens). It is an unfortunate fact that one cannot have a liberal welfare policy and high immigration rates at the same time; people come for the free goodies and suck the country dry (and if you don’t believe me, you should ask Europe and Canada). I am willing to talk liberal immigration policies if you are willing to talk about cutting back the welfare state. I am also willing to talk programs to citizenship for current illegals if you are willing to talk about liberalization of the immigration policy and a removing of government incentives for illegals to cross the border. You’ll also have to get rid of the idea that we should cater to immigrants’ cultures, promote “diversity,” and refrain from teaching them English or urging them to become Americans. But given the situation as it is, and the range of AZ’s options, I support the attempt of the Arizonans to secure the border, which given the fact that they do not have the power to change federal immigration policy is the only thing they can really do with regards to the illegal problems within their state.

d | June 2nd, 2010 at 6:30 pm

Brianna, awesome,we agree.

Benito | June 4th, 2010 at 2:13 pm

“All Men are created equal”! The founders had it right, when attempting to form a perfect union and they also knew that they were not there yet but knew we one day would get there. Lincoln moved us forward as did JFK and LBJ. This Nation was founded by men of many nations and backgrounds. It was founded on the principle that all men are created equal, and that the rights of every man are diminished when the rights of one man are threatened.

It is my contention that this AZ law is not constitutional and will fail when challenged (unless, of course, they keep adding more amendments), pretty funny for this so called perfect law, that many internet blogs claim it was copied “Word for Word” from the Federal law, which I frankly do not believe, if it was then no amendments would have been made, right?, of course.

As for the undocumented workers, as was attributed to Ronald Reagan “It’s the Economy, Stupid”. When the economy is good we say let’s all celebrate “Cinco de Mayo, my brothers” but when the economy is down “it’s all your fault, you damn immigrant”. This too will pass. The real problem is the narcosis/drug and people smuggler that’s what the focus should be on.

Don’t you find it funny that no one ever voted for Brewer for Governor, it’s all about politics and getting elected, do not be fooled. Busy Brewer has passed S.B. 1070, no permit conceal weapons law, the famous Birthers law, banning Ethic studies law, and if history is a lesson she should look up Arizona’s House Bill 2779 from two years ago (which failed when legally challenged) and the craziest one the boycotted Martin Luther King Day, not wanting another holiday, how crazy is that. I believe there is an undercurrent to their enactment of new laws, they real love following a distinct pattern. Poor Brewer, she had a bad week, first she said her Dad had died in Germany fighting the Nazi and we find out he never was in German and died in California and then she went to Washington and came back empty as always, poor dear.

Brianna | June 6th, 2010 at 6:23 pm

Benito – All men are indeed created equal, but they are not all created American citizens and a country has an absolute right to secure its borders. Otherwise they wouldn’t be “countries” as we currently understand the term.

While I’d love to see a significant liberalization of the federal immigration laws, Arizona does not have that option. The only choice AZ can make personally as a state is to enforce or not enforce federal law, which this new law is indeed in line with. The phrase “in accordance with federal law” actually pops up several times in the text, which again you’d know if you actually read the law.

Brianna | June 6th, 2010 at 6:25 pm

Benito – also, if you wish to comment on the ethnic studies law, I did write a post defending it which you are free to excoriate.

Benito | June 11th, 2010 at 1:13 pm

It is my contention that this AZ law is not constitutional and will fail when challenged (unless, of course, they keep adding more amendments), pretty funny for this so called perfect law, that many internet blogs claim it was copied “Word for Word” from the Federal law, which I frankly do not believe, if it was then no amendments would have been made, right?, of course.

Brianna | June 11th, 2010 at 2:08 pm

Well, you could always read the law and check for yourself. But I suppose that would force you to question your assumptions.

Tom Carter | June 11th, 2010 at 2:57 pm

Benito, you’re entitled to an opinion, but I have to wonder how you came to the conclusion that the law, as changed, is unconstitutional. Could you, perhaps, provide a rationale for that opinion — 14th Amendment, or whatever?

I personally don’t like the law. I don’t think states should be involved in enforcing U.S. immigration law and border protection. I also think it will result in an unacceptable degree of profiling, despite the intent of the law. However, I sympathize with the problems of the people of AZ and other states with high numbers of illegals, and I’m not sure what they should be expected to do as long as the federal government continues to fail to do its job.