Should they cut the powerlines that supply them with 25% of their electricity?

I say YES!

I say no.

Should Arizona lose all federal funding for passing an unconstitutional law that encourages racial profiling?

I say YES!

I am personally boycotting Arizona from a travel stand point as well as business that I am aware of being based out of Arizona.
This includes Best Western, Cold Stone Creamery, GoDaddy, P.F. Chang's, PetSmart, Taco Time and U-Haul (and I am moving in a week). There are many other companies that are less likely to affect me that I don't remember off the top of my head.

Sure, I think if Arizona's law wasn't illegal it would be within their right to fight fire with fire, but since state's can't pass immigration laws (and it is 100% racist) I think they should get over it andbe happy LA will still buy power from them. (yeah, I realize LA needs the power as much as AZ needs the money)

So I guess you need to boycott California too.

PENAL CODE SECTION 833-851.90

and before you go bla, bla bla they need to be working with the INS, read section 3.

834b. (a) 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.
(b) With respect to any such person who is arrested, and suspected
of being present in the United States in violation of federal
immigration laws, every law enforcement agency shall do the
following:
(1) Attempt to verify the legal status of such person as a citizen
of the United States, an alien lawfully admitted as a permanent
resident, an alien lawfully admitted for a temporary period of time
or as an alien who is present in the United States in violation of
immigration laws. The verification process may include, but shall not
be limited to, questioning the person regarding his or her date and
place of birth, and entry into the United States, and demanding
documentation to indicate his or her legal status.
(2) Notify the person of his or her apparent status as an alien
who is present in the United States in violation of federal
immigration laws and inform him or her that, apart from any criminal
justice proceedings, he or she must either obtain legal status or
leave the United States.
(3) Notify the Attorney General of California and the United
States Immigration and Naturalization Service of the apparent illegal
status and provide any additional information that may be requested
by any other public entity.
(c) Any legislative, administrative, or other action by a city,
county, or other legally authorized local governmental entity with
jurisdictional boundaries, or by a law enforcement agency, to prevent
or limit the cooperation required by subdivision (a) is expressly
prohibited.

More context for what you just posted?

read the bill detmer
read the bill

my prediction?
sometime in july obama reads the bill
he then invites the arizona governor to the white house for a cerveza summit

more context?
in mexico illegal immigration is a felony
americans are not allowed to own real estate
foreign nationals may not compete with citizens for contracts

is that policy a little too strict?
maybe but it is not racist

if america adopted it
the recession would be over in three months

Its alright, I figured out the context thanks to Google.

And I have read the bill...

I suppose the difference is California's law is old and not seemingly enforced to any significant extent. Arizona's is new which implies it will be enforced.

And I am glad to see you hold the US to the same standards as Mexico... I really don't care how unjust, inhumane or whatever some country's laws are - they don't have any bearing on what the US' laws should be.

And I sure don't see how that would end the recession. Do you think that foreign nationals getting US contracts has destroyed the economy? I think US companies outsourcing has a much larger effect.

no, i blame the spaniards, and their fascination with gold

It's essentially the same law passed by the Federal Government some years ago. Why is the stink just coming up now when it should have come up years ago?

Now, the Mexican president goes up before Congress and states that the Arizona law is rasist. Malbama agrees and the liberals applaud. Who in hell gave that ass-tard the right to dictate what our laws should be. He needs to fix his country so his people stay, but it's cheaper to send them here and let us deal with them.

There is one HUGE difference. In CA it is performing a background check on a suspected criminal. In AZ it is any lawful contact, which includes seeing someone reading a newspaper while waiting at a bus stop.

There you go again believing the nonsence the oppsition are spewing. Stopping someone just sitting at a bus-stop reading a newspaper isn't lawful contact.

That is lawful contact. Lawful contact is an ill defined term, as is reasonable suspicion. Until there are precedents set on what lawful contact it, it is 100% whatever one wants it to be.

Dey tok r jerbs!

If that's lawful contact. What stops police officers from doing it already? Even without that particular law. Its funny to attack the Arizona law when its just bringing the federal law to state level. Also, its easier to jump on the bandwagon of bashing the law without giving a good alternative solution to the matter.