Props to Arizona

Props to Arizona state that it believes the State of Arizona is doing the right thing with its immigration law. I agree that, "It isn't fair for illegal immigrants to come to our country and try to get as many benefits as possible, when there are other immigrants doing it legally." Also being illegal leads to no jobs and more crimes. The American citizens would then be bombarded with taxes to provide for the illegal citizens even with deportation. There are plenty U.S citizens who have acquired their citizenships legally and worked very hard to do so. It would be very unfair to allow illegal immigrants to reside here without having to follow the procedures as other foreigners.

Arizona should do what it takes to be fair to their citizens who have worked hard to be legal and deserves to be safe when having done so. This protection has been sworn upon the U.S. citizens and seeking it is highly enforced. If the immigrants want to be American citizens you would think they could appreciate that fact. What is the problem with Identify your citizenship if you belong here? I understand and agree that the law can be determined as racial profiling and disagree with its verification tactics, but it lures me to think I would rather be profiled and know that I am legal, than to use one law to overlook another.  What type of citizen would you be as a manipulator of the law? In agreement with Brooke Christensen and "Props to Arizona," the illegal immigrants should be proud to have the opportunity to "show they did it the right way."

Ms. Anderson

Arizona Immigration Law

Attorney General Eric Holder stated in the article at cnn.com, that he intends to file a lawsuit against Arizona's Immigration Law. Arizona as with many other states have been experiencing the wrath of fed up Mexicans running from the poverty stricken lifestyles of Mexico. The immigrants have come to the U.S. to find a better way of life but faces an even bigger problem of no being able to find jobs due to their illegal status'. With this they have turned to crime for survival and have upset the state of Arizona. The U.S. have always protected its citizens from crime and intend to continue doing so.

The state of Arizona feel that in order to alleviate the amount of crime conducted by the immigrants a law has to be put in place. With this law, officers are allowed to I.D. anyone they suspect to be illegal immigrants. We all know that in order to do that, an individual would have to have some characteristics of a Mexican. Otherwise they would have to commit a crime. Committing a crime or doing something illegal is the one sure way to find out if they are legal or not.

I must admit that I feel a bit mugwomped, because the the law is actually needed but it also can be considered a form of harassment. The idea was to allow officers of the law to I.D. anyone they suspected to be in the states illegally. The problem with this idea is that it may lead to racial profiling because if an individual is innocently acting they may have to face an officer asking for identification due to their apparent resemblance of one with Mexican decent but immigrants also know that is illegal to reside in America without citizenship. However there are ways to go about it than the law implemented. As stated by many, "this is and can be an act of civil rights's violation." The attorney's actions on filing suit is well within reason for I too feel that racial profiling is imminent.

"Dear Government, can I leave my house today?"

Dear Author,

I definitely understand your take on abortion and women rights in your blog "Dear Government, can I leave my house today?" posted in A Citizen's Post and must say that I agree with some of what was stated. This is a very controversial and touchy subject for me so I will not agree or disagree with the government's take on abortion. Therefore, I have decided to actually comment on the writing itself as too the validity of the argument and your ability to reach an array of readers.

 Although there were many expressions of disagreement; there was no evidence as to why you feel the way you do besides maybe; personal feelings. I feel that there was no embedded link within the article to support what decides your take on the infringement of women's rights. What make you think that the government is trying to control your body if they are trying to protect the life of another? That is a question I would like to gain the answer to. Your explanation of a citizen's right to privacy was highly demonstrated but with a very biased attitude with an emotional feel the audience can immediately pick up on.

Reading your statements, it appeared that your experience in life which is one of a personal aspect reflected in the voice of the writing. The audience should be allowed to understand your angle with documented proof of the governments affect on an individual's life when mandating a law to hinder the right to privacy. An added link to Roe vs. Wade could help to support your argument. Too help assure or maintain your audience's attention, your blog should also be edited before posting. There are a few punctuation errors, fragments, and run on sentences that can be distracting may take away the audience's focus. Overall it was a good post and I can clearly pick up your voice on citizen's rights.

Ms. Anderson