« | »

Los Angeles Bans AZ Contracts, Travel

From a cheering Reuters:

Los Angeles to boycott Arizona over immigration law

By Dan Whitcomb Wed May 12, 2010

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – Los Angeles officials on Wednesday approved a ban on future business with Arizona in protest against its crackdown on illegal immigrants, becoming the largest U.S. city to impose such an economic boycott.

City Council members who voted 13-1 in favor of the punitive measure said it could affect about $8 million in contracts with Arizona, but Los Angeles must first decide which of those agreements it can break without triggering lawsuits.

Another $50 million in contracts will remain in place but the council directed city department heads to refrain from doing future business with Arizona or companies headquartered there whenever possible. The decision also suspends all city-related travel to the desert state.

As we have queried before, doesn’t this violate at least the spirit of our Constitution for one region to try to inflict harm upon another region within the borders of the United States? (If you will excuse us for using such a quaint term as ‘borders.’)

Wasn’t one of the primary reasons for writing the Constitution to improve relations between states, which were sometimes practically at war with each other under the Articles Of Confederation?

"I cannot go to Arizona today without a passport," Councilman Ed Reyes said before the vote. "If I come across an officer who’s had a bad day and feels the picture on my ID is not me, I could be summarily deported — no questions asked. That is not American."

Apparently, Mr. Reyes is in this country illegally. What is he doing serving on the Los Angeles City Council?

Arizona’s new law, which comes into effect at end-July, does not allow police to demand identification from individuals without cause or to summarily deport them. But it does require officers, during a lawful contact, to check the immigration status of anyone who they reasonably suspect is in the country illegally

Man alive, how stupid do you have to be to have a reporter from the AP correct you? And these kind of people are making our laws, running our cities?

Several other cities across the United States have considered resolutions to protest against the law or sought boycotts –among them San Francisco and Saint Paul, Minnesota.

A nationwide study by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press released on Wednesday found that 59 percent of adults approve of Arizona’s new law, while 25 percent support President Barack Obama’s immigration policy

Hopefully, the other ‘gateway states,’ Texas and New Mexico, will join Arizona is enforcing our federal immigration laws. Which will leave California as the only open door — the golden gate.

After all, they need all the illegal aliens they can get – to grow their economy. Which, we all know, illegal aliens do.

In any case, it is looking more and more like Arizona’s new immigration law might serve as a real ‘tipping point.’ It may finally cause everyday Americans to realize just insanely how out of touch with the rest of the country our leadership elite are.

History may look back at Arizona’s courageous stance as our first step on the path to returning our nation to an actual republic. A republic ruled by law.

At least we can hope.

This article was posted by Steve on Thursday, May 13th, 2010. Comments are currently closed.

17 Responses to “Los Angeles Bans AZ Contracts, Travel”

  1. Astravogel says:

    The prettiest sight I ever saw was Los Angeles in my
    rear view mirror. And that was 40 years ago! Never been
    back, never intend to. Passed through there on the way
    to Australia a few years ago; there was a riot going on
    outside the airport. I hereby announce a counter-boycott
    on all their products, ideas, plans, aspirations, and any
    thing out of San Francisco, also. They’ve pooped in their
    own stew-pot for years; now let them enjoy it.

  2. Yarddog1 says:

    This is probably good news to Arizona as California has no money anyway. How are they paying for these contracts to begin with? Businesses and travelers should boycott California, unless a medical school teaching abnormal psychology needs a field trip for observation purposes.

  3. Enthalpy says:

    We must have long memories about enlightened decisions of this kind. When these deluded fools come to us to bail them out of their self-inflicted fiscal mess, our response should be no. They deserve to be mired in it.

  4. tranquil.night says:

    Meanwhile in Sports, the Los Angeles Los Lakers (not kidding) will be playing the Phoenix Los Suns for the Western Conference Championship.

    Fans and city council members alike, when asked about the conflict between the upcoming game and the city’s recently approved boycott of the state over its immigration reform policy, responded: “Well we really hope they will only have to be there for two days [games].”

    Lakers fans were not discouraged from travelling to support their team. Rather they were asked to simply not spend any money there, by taking such advanced measures as packing one’s own snacks. And don’t forget the spare gas tank!

    Thank you Rush for your monologue on LA the other day. It is a clearer microcosm of our future than even Greece. A perfect representation of what happens when good people give up the fight and leave an infant monster community disorganizer alone to play with his toys.

    By the way, isn’t showing solidarity by simply putting the article “Los” in front of the English noun starting to get a bit offensively uh, white, yet? I mean, donde los respetar por español? Or maybe hypbrid dialects are how we do it in unique post-racial, post-border, post-everything America.

    • JohnMG says:

      Maybe the Lakers can just “deem” the championship won and not go at all! That’s the Democrat way.

      Just ask Nancy.

    • Rusty Shackleford says:

      Who cares what “Los Lackers” do?

    • proreason says:

      I stopped paying attention to basketball when it dawned on me that Mark Cuban actually owned a team.

      When the world’s oldest 13 year-old owns a sports franchise, that’s all I can take of that sport.

      And if that wasn’t enough, I started thinking about the sport and everything it stands for.

  5. JohnMG says:

    Since the LA city council is supposed to represent the residents,, and since the council is spending the residents’ tax monies, that would make all of the council (and by extension, all of the city’s residents) defendants in a series of breach-of-contract lawsuits. I say bankrupt ’em with lawyer’s fees, and then withhold the contracted services or goods until resolution of the disputes. Of course, Los Angeles is like the rest of California–stone broke financially. Nothing would please me more than to see these pompous assholes wither on the vine as a result of their own stupidity.

    I like Steve’s comment about this stellar brain-trust, Reyes, having to be corrected by an AP reporter. The Arizona law is a carbon copy of the federal laws being ignored by the Obama administration and congress. If our elected federal officials were doing their sworn duty,(enforcing immigration laws) Arizona wouldn’t have to do it for them. And speaking of immigration laws, read the following;

    1 There will be no special bilingual programs in the schools.

    2. All ballots will be in this nation’s language.

    3. All government business will be conducted in our language.

    4. Non-residents will NOT have the right to vote no matter how long they are here.

    5. Non-citizens will NEVER be able to hold political office

    6 Foreigners will not be a burden to the taxpayers. No welfare, no food stamps, no health care, or other government assistance programs. Any burden will be deported.

    7. Foreigners can invest in this country, but it must be an amount at least equal to 40,000 times the daily minimum wage.

    8. If foreigners come here and buy land… options will be restricted. Certain parcels including waterfront property are reserved for citizens naturally born into this country.

    9.. Foreigners may have no protests; no demonstrations, no waving of a foreign flag, no political organizing, no bad-mouthing our president or his policies. These will lead to deportation.

    10. If you do come to this country illegally, you will be actively hunted &, when caught, sent to jail until your deportation can be arranged. All assets will be taken from you.

    Nope. These arent Arizona’s new laws. They’re Mexico’s existing ones.

    Kinda makes you want to visit, huh?!

  6. Rusty Shackleford says:

    I really didn’t think that any state could pass legislation prohibiting cmmerce with any other state. Kind of defeats the purpose of how we set up our government, doesn’t it? Perhaps that’s the whole idea. But then, the laws of unintended consequences will take control thereafter.

    Stupid is as stupid does. Let your conscience be your guide. I have a cousin who does some SERIOUS, huighly specialized work in AZ. I wonder if the state of Cal-ee-fawwwn-ya will prohibit him from doing that as well.

    We have entered an age where the common sense arguments just don’t work against the liberal emotion-machine. As I’ve said before, we are now in the stage where the hippies are in their 50’s and 60’s and it’s the revisitiation of all the things they thought were “right” over 40 years ago. Now they are continuing their tantrum and having deliterious effects on the nation as a whole, much the way they did in the 60’s but back then, it was more localized. Now they intend on real “world-changing” activism and get ready for the “perfect harmony” song and more “flower power”.

    Their ignorance is surpassed by their naivte’ A very bad combination.

  7. U NO HOO says:

    El burro sabe mas.

  8. pamypo says:

    I think AZ should turn off the lights in LA. Az controls 55 percent of la power.

  9. Mae says:

    65 years ago in the small southern California town where I grew up, our city council, schools, sports teams, playgrounds, the police department, the fire department, doctor and dentist offices, just about every aspect of community, all became integrated during the 14 years I lived there until I moved to Los Angeles to look for work in 1963. We banded together to create harmony. And, yes, we did celebrate our Californio heritage and had Cinco de Mayo festivals where we dressed in Mexican costumes and performed the “Mexican hat dance” and other traditional dances. It was fun and no one got political about it. We went to friends’ homes; we went to church together; attended weddings, baptisms, funerals; laughed and cried together. In a few words–we all got along and were happy to do so. What happened in California was the liberals began to weave well-crafted lies with just enough truth in them to fool the gullible, foment grievances and seek more and more influence by saying that whites were not be trusted–they’re nice to your face, but they really don’t like you or your brown skin–after all, they stole your land and now they’re rich and you’re poorer. Then anti-capitalism, communist-influenced organizations began where liberals left off and the reconquista became real and hard-core in Latino communities. The liberals did as they always do and played along, hoping to retain whatever influence they could to remain viable and get just enough votes to remain in power state-wide. The Republicans did as they usually do–stand around and wring their hands with a lost look on their faces. The Conservative point-of-view was disparaged by everyone, of course. How did all this come about? How did the great state of California fall into this downward spiral? Democrats, liberals, leftists, communists work overtime doing what they do. Conservatives generally work hard at their jobs, not at politics. No doubt at all–we dropped the ball. But no more. After the disaster of Obama’s election, when we were at our lowest and most dispirited, someone, somewhere (can we even remember who it was?) got us to start believing that all was not lost, that we can fight, that we can organize to regain our country, that we can explain why the Left is wrong and that freedom, our Constitution, our way-of-life is the right path, that we can get back to the place where we get along together and are happy to do so…perhaps back to the do-unto-others-as-you-would-have-them-do-unto-you attitude that I grew up with more than a half century ago. The Left looked like it was winning but Arizona showed that it was not and is not true. We will win. We.Are.Americans.

  10. xdannyh says:

    Wow!
    This is rare: the :L.A. city counsel bans travel to AZ: Well but not for sports!!! after all La Raza might burn down city hall if they don’t get their sports brain candy.
    It appears to me that boycotts may be legal but the banning of travel and commerce between states is what the constitution, in part, was devised for. Could I be wrong here? Please help, I am not a Harvard trained Constitutional Scholar, like the Be…Knighted One….

  11. sheehanjihad says:

    It would be kinda funny if Arizona suddenly blocked ALL eastbound lanes in all highways and interstates, and left the westbound lanes open. Kind of like what Key West did in the “Conch Revolution”….

    If L.A. wants to boycott travel, force their hand! Stop ALL travel to Arizona, and the 94% of Los Angelenas who dont support the boycott will put some serious heat on the appallingly racist and stupidly ignorant liberal leftist government aparatchiks who started this folly ridden empty headed bullcrap in the first place.

    Boycott? Bullshit! Ban them!

  12. proreason says:

    Didn’t the states join the United States under an agreement that divided political responsibilities among the states and the federal government? They signed a document call the Constitution. It’s a form of contract among the entities.

    One of the thorny issues was regulating interstate commerce. A federation could easily dissolve if one of the states begins to impose tariffs against other states, or, as another example, impose boycotts against a state. That’s why the Constitution gives the Federal Government the power to regulate commerce among the states (but not within a state). It makes perfect sense and is certainly one of the cornerstones of our country.

    So how is it that a city can be allowed to regulat commerce outside its own state?

    Why isn’t the Federal government jumping all over this? Its a flagrant flaunting of the Constitution.

    And since the contract between Arizona and the United States is being violated, doesn’t that give Arizona the right to secede from the Union if it wants to. And of course, this isn’t the first illegal violation of the Constitution. When the federal government fails to protect Arizona’s (or Texas’) borders, isn’t that another breach of contract that essentially invalidates the agreement?

    Just asking.

    • BannedbytheTaliban says:

      Nope, the Constitution says whatever Obama and the Democrats deem it says. It is the entire basis of their party, liberal interpretation of the Constitution.

      But as a strict constructionalist, I would say yes, the federal government is in violation of the Constitution. However, the Constitution fails to describe any recourse for the states to rectify federal malfeasance. Secession would seem a likely, but drastic option. I would sue the federal government first. However, the Indian Removal Act and the nation’s First Democrat President, Jackson, proved a despotic president doesn’t have to the listen to the courts.

  13. shapter says:

    If you live outside of Arizona, but want to counter the AZ boycott by buying products from AZ, here’s a great site that’s keeping track of products/services from AZ:

    http://www.buycottarizona.com/

    The site also has a Facebook group, twitter feed, & a petition to sign.


« Front Page | To Top
« | »