Who Are You Calling Racist?

Your racist column would have made the old Soviet propagandist proud indeed. While seeming to dismiss the report of racial slurs toward black congressmen by the Tea partiers, you enforced and kept it alive knowing full well that not a single scrap of evidence has been found to substantiate those claims.
The bad news for you is that that page out of the old play book no longer has the chilling effect it once had on the American people, unless you want to count the divisive alienating effect designed for political gain.
As a result of articles like yours those we once viewed as political opponents we now see as enemies.

I had to write to say you latest article ( Who are you calling racist) was very well thought out and written. I agree with almost everything you saidbut one thing bothered me. You present as fact that a black congressmen was spat upon and called the N word by those at a tea party event recently. I've seen the video and honestly can't conferm or deny these clames in my own mind. Also these "facts" have yet to be confirmed by any undesputable evidence. Shouldn't you have refered to them as alleged? Otherwise I enjoyed the read.
Thanks
Steve Earle Hill NH

Ms. Harrop,

As a 30-year resident of Arizona I must take issue with your article entitled "Spotting racism..." that appeared in the Wednesday, May 12, 2010 edition of The Arizona Republic.

You state that the law singles out Latinos. I believe, from my understanding of the law as written that this is an an inaccuracte statement. The law applies to illegal immigrants from anywhere in the world. It just so happens that the vast majority of Arizona's illegal immigrants come from our unsecured southern border with Mexico. This is a condition of geography and one that is widely misunderstood/ignored by those not on southern border states ( Rhode Island would seem to qualifer here).

Secondly, the police are not authorized to demand papers of anyone suspected of being in the country illegally. They are only authorizd to do so with "reasonable suspicion" (which apparently has a legal meaning in the justice system) when a legitimate contact is made with an individual who may have violated ANOTHER law or in some cases a municipal code. They are not authorized to wantonly stop people on the street and ask them for "papers." And I ask, how many times everyday are normal everday legal citizens requested to present their identifications during traffic stops, at airports, or at national borders. And in the private sector, at banks or retail outlets when presenting credit/debit cards. Before you say yes, but that's not the government, many (or most if you want to believe their employers) illegal immigrants survive in this country because they are carrying false, forged documents. Furthermore, federal law REQUIRES non-resident aliens to carry with them "papers" that prove their right to be in this country legally. The Arizona law does no more than that.

In closing, until you have lived here for a period of time and have seen cl ose-up the social, economic, and criminal problems we have here in Arizona as a result of mass illegal immigration, I suggest that you refrain from unwarranted and uninformed attacks on those of us who do.

Those on the liberal left and in parts of the country far removed from those of us in the southwest are sorely "misguided", and more so than the Presient accuses us of being.

Tom Matheson
Arizona

Who cares About Taxpayers' Rights Not to Pay for Illegals?
Arizona has been overrun by illegals who are a tremendous financial drain on Arizona taxpayers. The federal government is not enforcing its own laws, therefore, Arizona had to do something, so they're going to enforce them.
The fear of racial profiling hasn't even materialized, yet there is overwhelming national attention, even hysteria over it. At the same time, the majority of taxpaying citizens get very little attention and compassion for their real woes which have materialized.
It's a case of clashing rights, and it seems like minorities' rights are respected, but the majority's are not. You'd think opponents of the new law would feel just a little compassion for taxpaying citizens who have been so very negatively impacted by illegal immigration for many years now. Their rights absolutely have been violated by having to pay for illegals' health care, schooling and incarceration (let alone the increased crime they endure).
I have a friend in Phoenix who tells me what it's like to live in the epicenter of the current debate. Besides the crime, drug trafficking, and emergency rooms full of illegals, she describes the subtle impact (about which little is heard) of illegals bombarding Arizona. Here are just two examples of many she gave me:
She has grandchildren in Phoenix public schools where the teachers have to spend so much time trying to teach illegals' kids who only speak Spanish that the American kids get shortchanged. How much time can a teacher spend on each child? Not enough when many can't speak English!
Her son used to have a landscaping/lawn care business which was enough to support his family at a very modest level. Once the illegals infiltrated, he could not support his family because he had to cut his prices so much due to competing illegals working for so little. Should American workers have to cut their wages so much (to 3rd world levels almost) that they would have to pile several families in one apartment, as illegals often do, in order to afford housing? Maybe some think so because "competition is the American, capitalist way"?
If I were a legal Hispanic American, instead of protesting and worrying only about my rights, I hope I would acknowledge that the taxpayers have rights too. I hope I would have enough respect for my fellow citizens (the majority) to understand that Arizona has a crisis, 70% of Arizonans support the law. I hope that I would not fly the Mexican flag at protests. I hope that I would learn English and be in support of English being declared as the one official language of America. If stopped by police for a traffic violation, I hope I would respectfully accept the authorities checking my citizen status. (Don't we all carry our driver's license with us at all times? Is it such a big deal to show it when lawfully requested to do so?)
I understand fears that police stops could violate civil rights, and do not take that fear lightly. Wouldn't one solution be to have a “Sunset” clause in the law which would end the law after one year and then evaluate it? I agree with Jonah Goldberg's April column in which he said yes, it's bad and un-American to have police check citizens' status, but it's absolutely necessary in Arizona's extreme crisis situation; it's the same when our rights are violated in an airport security pat down search: ugly, regrettable -- and utterly necessary. Life isn't perfect; sometimes we must choose between the lesser of two evils.
I do wonder how police could possibly stop someone who simply looks Hispanic. 30% of Arizonans are Hispanic (mostly legal, of course). Additionally, there's a large population of native Americans in Arizona who have brown skin. That seems too large a population who look Hispanic to racially profile even if they wanted to! Besides, probably 30% or more of the police are Hispanic. Maybe the racial profiling aspect is being overblown?
Governor Brewer says they will use non-racial criteria which indicates they could be illegal. For example when they see a large van overstuffed with people near the border, in a corridor known for bringing in illegals, it seems only common sense to stop them. Under current law they can't.
The longterm solution is first and foremost to secure our borders; second, it's to take away the incentive for illegals to come here. And certainly parents should present proof of citizenship when registering their children for school and social services. But, until that happens, I don't blame 70% of Arizonans for trying to protect themselves and their rights. The way people are protesting across the nation, you'd think the KKK has been invited to Arizona to rid the illegals!