Spitzer is trying to help the Dems become the latino party of choice

[mdmc]

Spitzer is pushing an unpopular drivers license for illegal aliens.

70% of NYS voters that were polled oppose this plan (I support it, for the record).

Spitzer is fighting for this in NYS because the GOP is too weak in NYS to do anything about it.

By fighting for the rights of illegal aliens, he helps solidify our position as latino political party of choice.

This helps Dems all over the country win.

This is good politics.

[Nite Owl]

1. I support it too

I was talking to my assembly person this weekend and it seems that he's gotten 100 letters against this and 0 for. He's a dem (sort of) and did not have kind words for the Guv.

[mdmc]

3. All the locals are against it down here too

But Spitz and the Dems will ram this through with plenty of pork for the Senate republicans...

All Spitzer needs to do is promote a couple more GOP state senators to his cabinet, then we will have all three houses of government.

[NYVet]

2. Unless you believe in the rule of law..

And think that illegal aliens who would not be here unless they broke the law to come here.

And this issue is splitting Democratic Underground to a certain extent.

[cuke]

4. Should we deny drivers licenses to anyone who has broken the law?

Speeding ticket? Then you don't have enough respect for the law to have a driver's license
Littering ticket? Then you don't have enough respect for the law to have a driver's license

After all, what's the point of having laws if they're not enforced?

[NYVet]

5. If you get enough speeding tickets, you DO lose your license...

Littering is punshable by a fine.

And as for the PRIVILEGE of getting a driver's license, there are criteria that need to be met to be licensed.
The last time I checked, one of those criteria is US citizenship or presentation of proof that you are a resident alien.

[cuke]

6. Changing your argument, or just avoiding the question?

Originally, it was about believing in the rule of law. You said that because they broke the law, they shouldn't get driver's licenses. But it seems that its OK to break certain laws and still keep your license.

"Littering is punshable by a fine." - but no suspension of a driver's license

"And as for the PRIVILEGE of getting a driver's license, there are criteria that need to be met to be licensed.
The last time I checked, one of those criteria is US citizenship or presentation of proof that you are a resident alien. "

Yes, that is what the law says. Spitzer is trying to change the law. If he succeeds, being a resident alien will no longer be a part of the criteria and non-citizens will be able to get drivers licenses legally, which ought to relieve your concerns about the Rule of Law

[NYVet]

7. Didn't know that answering your question was avoiding it.

I guess I should have explained myself a little better.

Now how should I put this?


The issue of littering has no bearing on the issuance of driver's license. It is a completely seperate act that has its own criminal code and related fines and punishments.


Breaking federal law and coming into the country without permission or overstaying your visa currently do have relavance when you are talking about the issue of the driver's license.

I am AGAINST the issuance of a driver's license to people who are breaking the law by being in the country without permission of the federal government.

[cuke]

8. Yes, you should have explained yourself

The question was if anyone who broke the law should have their driver's license revoked. You didn't answer the question. You merely stated the penalties for littering and speeding.

"The issue of littering has no bearing on the issuance of driver's license. It is a completely seperate act that has its own criminal code and related fines and punishments."

And immigration has no bearing on the issuance of a driver's license (aside for the fact that the law links them, a law Spitzer would like to change) and is a completely seperate act that has it on criminal code and related fines and punishment.

Yet, you want to deny licenses to people who break one law, while not doing the same for people who break other laws. Your argument was originally about the rule of law. Now we see it's about the rule of some laws. The least you can do is explain what is so special about the immigration law that makes it important to deny licenses to people but not to those who commit crimes like murder, rape, littering and speeding.

"Breaking federal law and coming into the country without permission or overstaying your visa currently do have relavance when you are talking about the issue of the driver's license."

Maybe, maybe not. I'd be more likely to see your point if you actually explained why you believe that instead of expecting me to believe it merely because you say it is so.

Where is the "relevance" between immigration and driving? I don't see it.

"I am AGAINST the issuance of a driver's license to people who are breaking the law by being in the country without permission of the federal government."

Yes, you've already made that clear. Repeating your opinion doesnt make it more persuasive. Explaining why breaking THIS law should keep people from getting a license while breaking other laws does not would be more persuasive.

[NYVet]

9. How about this bit of information.

If they did not break the law to come here, they wouldn't have the ability to get a license.


Why are you supporting giving people who are not even allowed to be in the god damned country privliges that they are not entitled?

[cuke]

10. And Spitzer is going to change that

If and when the law is changed, it will be perfectly legal for non resident aliens to get a license.

But I'm glad to see you tossing your BS about the rule of law, and instead have taken up your real argument - you don't like immigrants

"Why are you supporting giving people who are not even allowed to be in the god damned country privliges that they are not entitled?"

Because I believe in compassion and equal rights

And again you fail to explain why breaking the immigration laws s/b singled out for such a penalty while allowing rapists and murderers to be free to get a driver's license

[NYVet]

12. Glad to see that you psychic

And are able to read my mind and tell that I am a zenophobe without ever meeting me.

I guess that while taking the time to decide that I am against immigrants you didn't take the time to find out that my uncle is full blooded Italian, my sister is married to a Mexican who came here legally and I have 3 neices and nephews that are half Mexican. (He has a Visa and is working on getting his citizenship in the next couple of months.)



And for the 10th time...







Screw it, I can't get through to you that ILLEGAL immigrants do not have the privlidge of getting a driver's license because their very presence in the US is a violation of federal law.

[cuke]

13. Still avoiding the question?

"I can't get through to you that ILLEGAL immigrants do not have the privlidge of getting a driver's license because their very presence in the US is a violation of federal law."

Murder is a violation of federal law also, yet people convicted of felony murder are still allowed to get a drivers license, and you have yet to explain why this OK.

All you can do is repeat things like "ILLEGAL immigrants do not have the privlidge of getting a driver's license" but when (and if) Spitzer changes the law, it will no longer be true.

[BuyingThyme]

16. If they had equal rights, many of them would be doing time in prison

for tax fraud. But they don't have equal rights. They have far more rights than average American citizens. They are above the law.

[High Plains]

24. What a crock.

[mdmc]

18. I think that the law is immoral

and that it is not enforced because corporations refuse to allow it to be enforced.

The only way out of this is to unionize the legal workforce. But we can't have workers with rights, right?

[iverglas]

11. wayward puritans ...

Damn. Somebody might be getting something s/he doesn't deserve. Can't have that. Even if it doesn't hurt anybody else.

On the other hand, I wonder whether the society in question might be getting something valuable. Like a mechanism for exercising control over who is operating vehicles on the public highways that it doesn't seem to have now. Just for starters.

It also just might be that someone whose existence and activities are legitimized in this way could feel more allegiance to, and more bound by, the rules that govern the status of licensed driver that s/he has been given.

Is this really a question of the "rights of illegal aliens", or a question of the public interest?

I'd be asking whether it is more in the public interest to issue licences than not to issue licences, myself.

(Of course, I've also had a soft spot for Elliot Spitzer ever since he went after unethical anti-choice organizations a few years ago, so I may be just biased. ;) )

[cuke]

15. You don't get it. It's a "reward" for crossing the border

They have no problem with murderers getting a license. They're livid because the license is a "reward" for crossing the border. Didn't you realize that Spitzer wants to put govt workers on the border so they can hand out licenses to anyone that crosses the border?

[BuyingThyme]

14. That's what Harry Reid did TWICE. It Backfired TWICE.

[mdmc]

17. NYS is blue

pure and true

[slackmaster]

20. It backfired here in California on Governor Gray Davis and his would-be successor

Then Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante.

They got their asses handed to them on a platter. The licenses for illegal aliens issue was a factor in the Davis recall and subsequent election of Arnold Schwarzenegger.

[pampango]

21. It's ironic that it always seems to be Democratic politicians,

e.g. Davis, Spitzer, Kennedy, that we here are mad at for sympathetic treatment of illegal immigrants. I suppose that these politicians, and others like them, are the reason that Hispanics are more likely than ever to vote Democratic. (Well the RW freeper base going apeshit over "amnesty" during the immigration reform debate last summer helped tremendously, too.)

Many posters claim that "all the Hispanics they know" oppose illegal immigrants and any effort to integrate them into society. The polls, OTOH, indicate that Hispanic American voters are more likely than ever to vote for Democrats who are the only politicians who ever seek to do anything favorable for illegal immigrants. It would seem likely that, if all "Mexicans whom we know agree with me" opposing illegal immigration that Hispanic voters would be voting repub in support of Rush, Tancredo and the Minutemen who most conspicuously oppose illegal immigration at every turn.

[slackmaster]

23. Hispanic support of Democrats is not a result of Democrats supporting illegal immigrants

Many posters claim that "all the Hispanics they know" oppose illegal immigrants and any effort to integrate them into society.

Opposing illegal immigration and opposing the basic human rights of people who have immigrated illegally are two different things. Immigrants that I know, Hispanic and otherwise, feel strongly that anyone wishing to immigrate should play by the same rules they did, and they tend to be very active voters because they have a deep appreciation for our process. Many other Hispanics who vote now are second- or third-generation immigrants, who hold the same values as their parents or grandparents with regards to doing things the right way.

It would seem likely that, if all "Mexicans whom we know agree with me" opposing illegal immigration that Hispanic voters would be voting repub in support of Rush, Tancredo and the Minutemen who most conspicuously oppose illegal immigration at every turn.

I think you are making an invalid assumption, that Hispanic US voters would necessarily base their party affiliation on that one issue. Most Hispanics are indeed Democrats, but not because Democrats are seen as supporters of people of similar ancestry who have chosen to break the rules. The ones who have chosen the GOP did so because of similar factors that lead whites and others to go that route - Perception of friendliness to business, fiscal conservatism, social issues like abortion, etc.

I detect a tinge of racism in the thought process that leads to assumptions that Hispanic voters see themselves as Hispanic first, US citizen second. For most of them it's just not that way.

[pampango]

25. Didn't mean to imply that Hispanics were single issue voters, just

that there had been a significant shift in the polls regarding Hispanic voters during and after the immigration debate.

My point is that Democratic politicians are, by and large, doing a better job appealing to Hispanic voters and are perceived to be more sympathetic to the plight of immigrants than Republicans are. There obviously could be for any number of reasons for our better polling numbers with Hispanics, but it is coincident with the RW anti-immigrant (often spilling over into anti-Mexican) hysteria of the immigration reform debate.

The fact that our party has nationally known politicians, like Kennedy and, as far as I know, all of our presidential candidates who express support for immigrants, while the Republican party has few, certainly none of their candidates other than McCain, who will take this position, is a good thing for our party.

[slackmaster]

19. None of the Latinos I know support that kind of "rights" for illegal aliens

I live and work in San Diego, so there are plenty of Latinos to meet and interact with.

[riverdeep]

22. Will this be good politically?

I don't think so. The pick up of Latino voters is not going to make up for the loss in independents. These people might have been on the fence about voting Dem, some for the first time in their lives, and issues like this will make sure they go pub. Hell, some of the public employees of New York State are coming out against this and say they won't enforce it. Putting aside the ethics, strictly horserace, it's a losing proposition.