Saturday, May 22, 2010

Check the definition.

So, in an effort to appease both its teeming masses of illegal residents and its teeming masses of tofu-breathing bolshevik natives, the Los Angeles city council has, with almost Bloombergian arrogance, announced that it will be boycotting Arizona over the latter's decision to enforce federal immigration laws.

Let us check our Webster's:
boycott ('boi-kät) v. : to engage in a concerted refusal to have dealings with (as a person, store, or organization) usually to express disapproval or to force acceptance of certain conditions.
The government of the Grand Canyon State, in turn, pointed out that one of the dealings that Los Angeles has with Arizona is the purchase of electricity, and they would be happy to assist the city council in their efforts at moral purity by not selling them any. It turns out that the LA council didn't really mean a, you know, boycott-type boycott.

This reminds me of a child announcing that she is on a hunger strike and therefore refuses to eat her spinach and, by the way, what are we having for dessert?

13 comments:

Pathfinder said...

FTB: "This reminds me of a child announcing that she is on a hunger strike and therefore refuses to eat her spinach and, by the way, what are we having for dessert? "

So, Tam, you saying the teeming masses of illegal residents and teeming masses of tofu-breathing bolshevik natives are children?

Works for me.

Desertrat said...

It has been reported that the city council of Austintatious has joined with LA in this boycott.

They probably didn't read the Arizona law, either.

I note in passing that the Arizona law is completely in accordance with mandates from the Homeland Security folks, as well as the Congress.

Art

phlegmfatale said...

...meanwhile, at my job, I have callers who speak perfect English request I access one of the interpreters my company provides. Typically, I answer the call in the proscribed form and they say in a high voice "you speakie espanish? and I tell them to hold while I get one (they never hang up after I tell them to hold) and then at the end of the call, they will say "thank you" in perfect English. Frankly, I think all border states should follow Arizona's good example.

Oh and they should definitely pinch off California's juice.

Hypnagogue said...

I'm blow away that CNN actually managed to get this story right.

I love the quote by the LA Water and Power manager that Arizona can't (CAN'T *gasp* CAN'T!!!) cut the power, because LA is part owner of the power plants. Hello genius, it's still in Arizona. Were you planning to only boycott companies in Arizona that are wholly-owned in Arizona?

Obviously a man with his head up his calderon.

Hopefully the local television stations have battery backup, so we can all watch the satellite feed of LA burning after the lights go out.

D.W. Drang said...

The Shitty of Seattle decided to join in the Arizona boycott.

They specifically exempted the (Arizona) company that runs their revenue generation (AKA red-light camera) operation.

brbiswrite said...

The folks in California should check their own penal code. They have a similar law on the books. I guess, like the feds, they choose to ignore it.
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=833-851.90

Boycott thyself?

BRB

D.W. Drang said...

@brbiswrite: It reads "Every law enforcement agency in California shall fully
cooperate with the United States Immigration and Naturalization
Service regarding any person who is arrested if he or she is
suspected of being present in the United States in violation of
federal immigration laws."
Since 1) INS no longer exists, per se, and
2) The Feds are doing bupkis about illegal immigration, Cali will probably argue that they are cooperating by exerting just as much non-effort as the Feds.

That's twice today I've used "bupkis."

Anonymous said...

There are NO Illegal Immigrants, only Unregistered Democrats.

Anonymous said...

LA may get 25% of it's jolts from Arizona, but they get ALL of their water from Arizona. If it really comes down to brass tacks, Arizona could turn off the water spigot. They've been wanting to do just that for years anyway, as Arizona is growing faster than LA, and they need to keep more of the water for themselves. "You don't want to do business with us anymore? Fine. We need the water more than you do anyway."

BoxStockRacer

brbiswrite said...

BoxstockRacer:

L.A. does NOT get ANY water from Arizona. your point sounds good in a post, but is totally false. The Colorado River is a border river. Where's the spigot?

I guess you never heard of the Feather River in California, or Lake Crowley and the Owens river project and Mulholland. Go rent Chinatown. That presents a clearer picture of L.A. water than your post does. Look at a map!
BRB

Desertrat said...

brbiswrite, it's a quantity thing. The All-American Canal is an absolute necessity for the greater LA Basin.

brbiswrite said...

Would you folks please look at a map. The All-American canal starts at the Colorado River near Yuma, AZ.
It serves the Imperial Valley, CA and ends hundreds of miles from L.A. basin.

I hate to nit-pick, but your credibility depends on getting the facts right.
BRB

Michael said...

One of the best suggestions I've heard is for Arizona to send all the illegals they find to L.A., since it's a sanctuary city and all.