Perhaps you are disgusted by the comparison because you don't understand it.

What do Nazi crackdowns in the 1930s refer to? Well, let's go to wikipedia, admittedly not the best source, but appropriate when the history should be common knowledge:
"Many scholars date the beginning of the Holocaust itself to the anti-Jewish riots of the Night of Broken Glass ("Kristallnacht") of November 9, 1938, in which Jews were attacked and Jewish property was vandalized across Germany. Approximately 100 Jews were killed, and another 30,000 sent to concentration camps, while over 7,000 Jewish shops and 1,574 synagogues (almost every synagogue in Germany) were damaged or destroyed. Similar events took place in Vienna at the same time."
So it refers primarily to rounding up people of Jewish descent, by targeting their places of business, and forcing them to leave the areas where they lived (the last part seems fairly close to the definition of "deportation"). You concede the truth of the comparision with the phrase "rounded up".

The comparison does not refer to genocide, because death squads and mass killings occured in the 1940's. I suspect this is why Ms. Vera was so specific. I find it more offensive that you don't even know the basic history surrounding the Holocaust.

Please, check your facts.

Just another attempt to shape the language by the same Madison Avenue crowd who stole the word gay from the dictionary and redefined it to mean homosexual and who stole the rainbow forever from children by associating it with the same thing. Symbols, language, it's all about shaping opinion and selling an agenda.

These same people voted against civil rights, and call Republicans racists.

These same people are led by some of the richest people in the country, and claim the Republicans are the "Party of the Rich."

These same people say they are for freedom of expression, yet strongly stifle speach they disagree with on campuses and elsewhere and have outlawed many kinds of speech in regards to elections.

These same people regularly sell a bogus bill of goods to the gullible half of this nation.

These people are the liberals / Democrats / "progressives" (haven't heard them using that word in the last few months.)

You've gotta be kidding me amused. Just because the official holocaust killings didn't start until the 1940's that's your reasoning? You don't think they picked the Nazi's for a reason? For the symbolism it invokes especially among those who couldn't tell you when WWII started?

The simple fact is they've started enforcing the laws in little drips and drabs. If they raid a sweatshop full of Asians are we going to get the same reaction? The same compairison?

amused,

you are kidding, right?

Observer, assuming that you are correct, and Rosa Rosales (whom you mis-identify as "Vera") is referring to Kristallnacht and not the later Holocaust, her comparison is still quite unfair. Unlike the violence of Kristallnacht, there were no illegal aliens killed, no Hispanic-owned shops damaged or destroyed, and likewise no Hispanic-majority congregation churches damaged or destroyed. The major distinction, however, is that while the Jews in Germany were targeted simply for being Jews, the workplace raids target people for being in the U.S. illegally. In other words, behavior, not identity, is the reason for these raids. If I'm not mistaken, those Jews and their families had been in Germany for centuries, having seen its political map re-arranged many times.

Now I will agree that it would be racist to target people simply for having "brown faces". But I would add that it is equally racist to use one's brown face as an excuse for violating the law. This, of course, is equally true for every other color face.

What I'd like to tell Ms. Rosales is this: If Americans want to work outside the U.S., we do so at the pleasure of whatever country will host us, in accordance with their rules. There is nothing racist about expecting non-Americans who want to work here to obey ours.

Furthermore, I would tell Ms. Rosales, the real bigots in the illegal alien/border/amnesty debate are those who refuse to acknowedge any of the non-racist reasons for opposing illegal immigration, such as the damage to the environment (25 million pounds of trash dumped by illegals in AZ alone) and the unfairness to legal immigrants.

Or let me suggest a simple slogan:
OBEY OUR LAWS, WE'LL TREAT YOU WELL
DEFY OUR LAWS, THEN GO TO HELL

First things first:
"Rosa Rosales (whom you mis-identify as "Vera")"
From the article cited:
"This unfortunately reminds me of when Hitler began rounding up the Jews for no reason and locking them up," Democratic Party activist Carla Vela said. "Now they're coming for the Latinos, who will they come for next?"
I think it's fair for me to assume the comparison was also made by her, read the article.

Now, I agree that the comparison is probably not accurate and it is misleading. That's not the point. My argument is that it's ridiculous for you to call the comparison "offensive" and "disgusting", because it does not liken genocide to the events in any way. Politicians and activists use inflated rhetoric 24/7, that's all this is, and it should be taken as such. Whatever you believe on the subject of illegal immigration, do not pretend like this comment is a massive slight against Holocaust victims. These Hispanic groups compared the raids to a very specific part of the Nazi regime, which is why they talked about the 1930's, and didn't even use the WORD Holocaust.

Let's take it a step further and look at the blatant hypocrisy here. Where were you when Inhofe compared environmentalists to Nazis, and called theories of global warming "The Big Lie"?

well- i'm with the righty's on this one- or at least the sensible righty's ;-) Something i really find intriguing is overlap of my own moderate views leaning left and those of moderates on the right (kinda 1 and the same i suppose). But i will admit Nancy and the gang are wrong on this one. But so is W. somewhere there are a few on the left and a few on the right that have common agreement- kick Illegals out!

I mean give me a break- loans, laws, literacy (school) and many other letters that lead to B.S. with illegals. How many veterans (myself included) are beyond furious that an illegal has more benifits than a disabled vet? This pisses me off. I am infuriated at pickig up the tab for non- citizens of this country. HEy- i have kids, shouldn't they get a crack at education, liberty, life ahead of someone illegally here?

i doub't I'll get little oposition to this view on this list. Yes WE CAN AGREE!!! :-)

oh- and kick that ho- bag out of the church in Illinois. give me a break.

along with MRS. Salvation i should toss in the tragedy of the 2 sentanced border gaurds. WTF is going on in this country? is everything just back asswards?

You are asking for similarities
Families separation...parents deported to thier countries and thier kids (US citizens) in foster home....
Implcity that if you look like hispanic, u might be stop and ask for papers, in holocaust, your were sopposed to wear a band in your arm, to make easier to recognize, now he have skin color

thanks

Straw man. Attack your real opposition, for as usual, you're missing your target.

I am deeply offended that some Hispanic leaders want to equate the Dec 12 raids to Nazi Germany's attack on the Jews. Whether it is Kristalnacht, when law abiding Jews and legal Jewish businesses were attacked, or the later "Final Solution", there is no comparison to what happened in the Swift raids. Illegal immigrants were using stolen identities (Can anyone say "Identity Theft") to get around the documentation checks. These were NOT law abiding citizens or guests!!!!

So, pp, if my brother breaks a law he should not be arrested becaue it would separate him from his family? Are you for real?

You are completely wrong in your assertion that if one has brown skin he is stopped and asked for his papers. In my town, and in hundreds if not thousands across the country, police do not (or are not allowed to) ask about a person's legal status. Ditto for schools and hospitals. This is true even if the person in question does not speak a word of English and requires a Spanish translator. So please quit making stuff up. Even if your post was coherent it would not make sense because it is not accurate.

You also seem to be saying that if a raid were to also scoop up some Russians and Brits and Aussies who were here illegally and who were using other peoples' identities, they would not have been arrested. You'd better be able to prove that.

Your silly allegations of racism are nearly as silly as your silly claims that the raids had the slightest thing in common with Nazi persecution of Jews.

When a person makes the decision to flaut our laws, he makes the decision to live with the consquences. This is part and parcel of breaking the law in the first place. You don't want to run the risk of being arrested, don't do anything illegal. What is so hard about that?

(Well, some limp-wristed whiny Libs seem to be having trouble with it---just as they have trouble telling the difference between law enforcement and persecution. Guess when you are deeply invested in victimhood as a way of life, you tend to apply it to everything.)

When a person decides to reproduce, knowing that he is here illegally and can be taken away at any time, he is so irresponsible, so uncaring of the welfare of his children, so wrong to put innocents in that kind of position, that he should be held accountable for that as well. But you seem to think that he can just generate a bunch of kids knowing that he might be leaving them fatherless or motherless or parentless, without being liable for any contempt at all.

Now, those arrested in these raids broke a minimum of two laws: they entered the country illegally and then they stole the identities of others. Are you truly arguing that just because they procreated they should be given a pass? Hey, that's a brilliant idea---you might present it to your legislators: only single people without children can be expected to pay for their crimes. Duh.

Maybe if YOUR name had been hijacked, and YOU had Social Security claims made in YOUR name for dependents, or YOU had loans issued in YOUR name to someone you had never met, or YOUR credit had been damaged by someone else using YOUR name and YOUR social security number to get credit cards, loans, and so on, maybe if YOUR ox had been gored you might think differently.

Ooops, sorry about that. I meant FEEL differently, as thought is clearly not an arrow in your quiver.

So glad the so-called observer is so easily amused. Most of us do not indulge in smug smirks at the prospect of having our laws broken, our identities stolen, and our security weakened.

Somehow his "amusement" sounds like that self-satisfied snigger that really means a feeling (wholly unfounded, of course) of superiority. It sounds like the amused observer sets himself above the hoi polloi, peering down at them from the heights of his imagined moral and intellectual high ground.

Based, of course, on pure delusion. He sounds kind of like Meachem, smug in the assumed superiority he thinks is conveyed by a zip code. I guess we should just be grateful for the opportunity to be patronized by a condescending self-styled intellect, and not mind being fodder for his bemusement.

Almiranta-

It's easy to sit down and make fun of a name I thought of in 5 minutes. It's harder to actually, you know, make an argument, like reasonable people do when they have a disagreement.

The comment about equating the Nazi's round up of Jews to raids on local undocumented workers in the article about the immigration raids was spoken by Carla Vela, identified as a Party activist. She is not a Party activist but she is the Bexar County Democratic Chair. (San Antonio, Tx.) She is also not a member Of LULAC and has strongly been disavowed by LULAC. I posted the article on www.walkerreport.blogspot.com which I edit to promote Democrats. Racist remarks cannot be tolerated on either side. Having relatives who died in the holocaust because they were Jewish, that comparison is especially heinous.

Posted by: Steve Walker at December 23, 2006 10:30 PM

IMHO you just pretend to not get it. What we see going on in this country is what we know is the same exact things that led up to what happened in Germany that *we thought* ended with the end of WWII.

It's your "early morning wake up call", my friend.

Hey, "amused", I DID make a point. I made SEVERAL points. I just happened, along the way, to note the smugness of being "amused" at everything other people say. I thought it condescending. And even if you only took ten seconds to come up with the name, it came from your own subconscious, and as such must reflect some aspect of your personality.

So stop being a victim and try reading and understanding what people say.

Stan, we get it. We get that you are a tinfoil-hatted anti-Bush paranoid, convinced that we are going to hell, or at least to a recreation of Nazi Germany, in a handbasket.

Of course to believe this you have to rewrite history, redefine terms, ignore fact, wallow in bigotry and blind hatred, and generally act like a typical uber-radical left-of-left nut.

Because the nazis were on a leftist continuum, much as you all hate to admit that. You have this construct of nazis as far right, when in fact the name itself is a contraction for National Socialists. Almost averything about the nazis was consistent with leftist regimes.

Conservatives are not in favor of dictatorships, or total government control. They are politically and philosophically in favor of small government and very few government controls---falling short of utopian achievement of those goals, but believing in them and pursuing them nevertheless.

I know it would be painful for you socialists to see nazi-ism for what it was---an extreme version of socialism---but get over it. And yes, I KNOW what we were taught in school. So???

We are no more in danger of following the example of 1930's Germany than we are in ever taking the wild-eyed nutcase Left seriously.

We are in far more danger of following the example of 1930's Britain, and ignoring a huge threat to our national security and our whole way of life, due to a bunch of whiny wimpy Lefties who can't see the obvious in spite of it jumping up and down and waving and screamming "We want to kill you! Yes, YOU!"

Steve -
> ... Because the nazis were on a leftist ...

So please tell me what the belt buckles on the nazis said if not like "God is on our side".

Sorry, I guess I was responding to Almiranta's post. Gee ya'll's posts look exactly the same.

Almiranta-

Unfortunately, none of what you said dealt with my argument.
Like I said...
"Whatever you believe on the subject of illegal immigration, do not pretend like this comment is a massive slight against Holocaust victims."
Whether or not we need tighter immigration laws, etc, is a completely different and larger issue. My point is that the comparison they drew is not offensive (although certainly inaccurate), and it is false and hypocritical for you to claim that it is. Do you have a response to that?

Well, amused, I guess it is just how you view trivialization of truly awful events by comparing them to relatively minor events.

If your sister were raped, you and she might find it deeply offensive to hear someone who had her jacket stolen and worn by someone else claim she felt that she had been "raped".

Those who have experienced true torture have every right in the world to feel offended, and, yes, slighted, to hear anything that is not pleasant described as "torture". Having your eyelids pinned open so you are forced to watch a dozen men rape your two year old daughter before gutting her is torture. Being forced to wear panties on your head is not, and I stand by the assertion that trivialization of serious affronts to humanity by using the same terminology to describe whatis basically harrassment is, yes, "a slight". Much much more than a slight, it is an insult.

So trying to compare the arrest of criminals with the ritualistic starving, enslavement, (real) torture, and mass slaughter of millions IS deeply insulting to those who experienced the latter.

And yes, it IS a "massive slight" to those who truly did suffer, through no fault of their own.

So my response is that it is NOT "false and hypocritical" to be deeply and profoundly offended, slighted, and insulted at having a relatively minor event, which is a natural and predictable result of a decision to commit criminal acts, compared in any way to the gross savagery of the brutalization and butchery of innocent millions.

As I discussed a different aspect of the article, I am not sure why you targeted me for your irrelevant challenge, but I did respond. As a matter of fact, the closest I ever got to saying it was a "slight" to compare the Holcaust to a round up of criminals was this:

"...just as they have trouble telling the difference between law enforcement and persecution."

Find something I actually SAID and claim it is "false and hypocritical" and we'll talk about THAT, OK?

Stanley, is there a point in your rant?

BTW, as I don't go around fixating at what is at belt buckle level---and below---I have no idea of what was inscribed on Nazi belt buckles. And neither, it appears, do you. It sounds like you're trying to remember somethign Ranty Rhodes said once upon a time, in one of her anti-religious tirades.

In any case, the use of a phrase designed to impart the aura of respectability to achieve acceptance hardly cancels out the simple fact of political analysis.

But if you want to claim that using God in a slogan is the only criterion for nazi-ism, or fascim, or being right-wing, go ahead. It won't make any more sense than anything else you have posted.

So then, what's your response to these points:

1. They weren't making a comparison to genocide, but assaults on places of business, so the comparison is not "offensive and disgusting", just normal political rhetoric. (so your argument is false)

2. Certain members of the Right have drawn even more drastic comparisons, such as when Inhofe compared environmentalists to Nazis and claimed that global warming was the equivalent of "The Big Lie". (so your argument is hypocritical)

If you didn't have a problem with my arguments, then you shouldn't have posted a bunch of inane and ridiculously pompous comments about the name I picked.