Comments about ‘Nation ponders King in wake of Arizona shootings’

Dr. King's message was about inclusion and the recognition of human dignity, of human rights and making sure that all of our voices are heard," said Imani Perry, an African-American studies professor at Princeton University. "I hope people in Arizona, in particular, embrace that part of his message. The politics in Arizona recently have often seemed to revolve around excluding people."

The first of Mr. Perry's words about Reverend King ring hallow when he adds the exclusionary words about Arizona. It shows an unwillingness to include the voices of Arizona and through out the rest of America that urge and talk of the rule of law and the impact of crime on lives. If anything the incidence in Arizona, highlights the need for this inclusion and that local law enforcement is no better at doing its job in 2011 than in the 1960's when Reverend King was murdered at so young an age. Bless Dr. King's memory with inclusion of all Americans including those with a different view from Arizona or whereever.

The attempt to use this killing to villify recent actions by Arizona politicians makes no sense.

Ms. Giffords in general was a pro-immigration enforcement figure. No one has suggested her killer was motivated by opposition to all forms of immigration law enforcement, even though the judge he killed was one of the strictest enforcers of federal immigration laws on the bench.

Why? Because there is absollutely no evidence that the killer was even aware of these facts, let alone that he cared about or was motivated by them. He was convinced the government was brainwashing us, he was not at all in touch with real political debates.

Thus it is totally wrong to use the killing as an excuse to villify positions on immigration enforcement.

I am probably more guilty of needlessly villifying people over immigration policy than most, and I am a staunch advocate of more immigration, amnesty, paths to citizenship, and inclusion of labor as a free flowing item under NAFTA along with the right to bring any dependents.

However, it is wrong to use a killing that has no relevance to advance this agenda.

I first had a letter from me published advocating inclusion of labor as a good that freely moves under NAFTA in this paper back in about 2003 (it may have been late 2002).

I still think we should allow free movement of labor with the understood right to bring any dependent you want to bring.

I am also well aware that such a bill would be killed by Democrats. In this case it would not just be the five Democrats who voted against the Dream Act, nor just the others who failed to vote, it would be several other Democrats who are beholden to organized labor.

Still, I think such a reform would inprove conditions greatly.

The use of the Tucson massacre to villify those who favor enforcement of immigration laws makes no sense. There is no evidence that this was in any way a motivation for the killer.