SCOTUS takes SB1070: República wants “clarity”

This morning’s editorial titled Some clarity would be good, begins: Like Gov. Jan Brewer, we welcome any clarity that may come from the Supreme Court’s decision to look at Senate Bill 1070. Unlike Brewer, we do not support the controversial immigration law that was considered the toughest in the nation until Alabama went a few steps beyond.

Clarity? Okay. Let’s be clear. The only “clarity” the Periódico de la República de Arizona (Arizona Republic) actually desires is the upholding of the Ninth Circuit Court’s decision to issue a temporary injunction against the law — a law the newspaper is unable to mention without describing it as “controversial.”

Editorial policy, under the guidance of Linda Valdez, is solidly pro-open borders, pro-amnesty.  In a relentless campaign of liberal propaganda, multi-page puff pieces sympathetically covering illegal aliens are passed off as news reports. There is no effort to conceal the abhorrence of border enforcement legislators such as former Senate President Russell Pearce, whom the paper savaged on a near daily basis. It was Pearce who was the architect of SB 1070, so he ignited the Republic’s inky fury to the point that they endorsed an open borders opponent, supported by radicals and Democrats in a recall election, erroneously passed off as a primary, resulting in Pearce’s removal.

Ditto the enmity against Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, also besmirched by the newspaper daily. His crime?  Enforcing the law Valdez and her cohorts despise.

Policy at the Arizona Republic has been to downplay the other states that have followed Arizona’s lead in enacting laws of their own to combat a massive incursion into the United States by illegal aliens. So we were surprised to see the admission that in the first six months of this year, state legislatures across the nation have introduced 1,592 bills or resolutions on immigration (underreported in the editorial. The actual number is 1,607) emulating our popular — not “controversial” law. In 2005, only 300 such bills were introduced

There must be a reason. It’s called clarity.

4 Responses to SCOTUS takes SB1070: República wants “clarity”

  1. Matt DeGennaro says:

    The flimflammers at the AZ Republic don’t want clarity. They want the law to go away. Their ultimate goal is a borderless nation overrun by amnestied non-citizens who vote Democrat.

  2. Joe Evans says:

    This practically non-existent newspaper is a worthless piece of garbage that is committed to its own demise. It grows skinnier by the day and is routinely filled with nothing more than leftist vantage points while never seeing an illegal or same-sex duo they didn’t embrace. I sometimes scan it at the office (always on an empty stomach!) and wouldn’t pay a thin dime for this collection of odious rubbish.

  3. Arizona Conservative Guy says:

    The editorial is BS and so is the newspaper. We canceled our subscription and have never looked back. The only time I see anything that these liberals put out for public consumption is when I see it here, which is the sole complaint I have with this otherwise conservative site. I have noticed that SRAZ rarely links directly to the newspaper articles or editorials, which I appreciate.

  4. Kent says:

    This is the updated and abbreviated version of Roy Beck’s enlightening gumball presentation. It’s well worth your time.