« Latino Political Power Lacking in Greeley | Main | Monday Open Thread »



Who's in charge of Weld County Dems? No one? Everyone? Sounds like Pat Waak should make a visit ask what their up to and what their priorities are. They should have been front and center giving Allard hell over this.


Who's in charge of Weld County Dems? No one? Everyone? Sounds like Pat Waak should make a visit ask what they're up to and what their priorities are. They should have been front and center giving Allard hell over this.

Phoenix Rising

Since Pat's from Weld, you'd think she'd be on it. But things do occasionally slip past. You'd think Udall might be on it, too, since he's going to be gunning for that slot in '08.

Regardless, it's news now (again) here on Colorado Pols, and it's certainly egregious. I'm going to offer a bit of a diversion from my normal commentary: Sen. Allard, you know all of those veternarians are the same bad characters, practicing their love with animals. Jerk.


Sometimes I am just amazed at the poison people can spit at others and not have it blow back on them.


"Poison"? "Jerk"? I think these terms are a little harsh.

There is little doubt that "The more illegal immigration you have, the more crime you have" is a sweeping generalization. But if you agree that even 1 percent of illegal immigrants are involved in crime (not just illegally entering, mind you), it is an accurate statement.

Nevertheless, if you're offended by this generalization in that it seems to imply more illegals commit crimes than whatever percentage you happen to think is the case, why can't you just point out that X percentage of illegals are law-abiding folks, and that you are offended by the generalization because you think it implies 100 percent?

What is the "poison"? The generalization, which may actually be accurate? Or is it the implication of the generalization -- which you kind of have to infer.

Everybody makes generalizations that are offensive to some -- about immigrants, liberals, conservatives, etc.

I'm starting to think "poison" means anything you disagree with. I myself believe "poison" is the folks who commit crimes.

What about the racist remarks Democrats recently made? What about that? Oh, that's right. Dems can be racist and get away with it. But say a Republican is a racist and that is all is needed.

Ter Ducken

Why don't you point out one of these racist statements by a Colorado Democrat. Show us.

Phoenix Rising

But he didn't say that the more illegal immigration you have, the more crime you have. He said that illegal immigrants are all the same bad characters.

That's being a jerk and poisoning the debate.

PS - Hey, '', want to sign a name to your comments?


When I called Allard's "They're all the same bad characters" comment poisonous, I meant that completely. His statement doesn't imply 100%. It states it clearly - "all". I believe assigning a negative descriptor to every individual based simply on any ethnic-religious-gender-etc group that individual belongs to is encouraging prejudice of the nastiest kind. 'All' illegal immigrants are not 'bad' any more than all homeless people are lazy, all teenagers are rude, or all ___ are________.


Phoenix, he did say more immigration = more crime. That's one of the only non-parphrased quotes in the article. But you and LA both make a good point on the other quote and I agree with you completely . . . if that's in fact what the man said. Something just doesn't sound right to me.

***In fact, Sen. Allard, R-Colo., said the legislation would make Weld County more dangerous for his constituents. He said illegal immigrants bring prostitution and drug trafficking with them. About illegal immigrants, he said, "They're all the same bad characters.

"The more illegal immigration you have, the more crime you have," Allard said. "I think that just makes common sense. When they come illegally, they are criminals."***

While it certainly doesn't sound good, to give him the benefit of the doubt, of the three sentences actually quoted, none of them is "illegal immigrants are all the same bad characters." What we do have, immediately following some paraphrased language, is him definitely refering to a 'they' as being 'all the same bad characters.'

You would agree it's much easier to take something out of context if paraphrased language is involved, no? My general point is that there are 2 sentences 100 percent not paraphrased and 1 sentence the subject of which is paraphrased. Due respect, I think you have to have a 100 percent non-paraphrase factor before you trot out the terms "jerk" and "poison people can spit".

Further, and because something just doesn't seem right, could it be that he is talking about the illegals who go on to commit other crimes as bad characters? Or that he just views anyone who illegally crosses as a bad character simply because they are committing a crime by crossing the border? We must wonder thanks to the reporting. (and, I tend to think that a reporter for even a high school paper would have swiftly followed up with a "come again?" upon hearing a quote like that... again, something's not right).

Of the 3 complete sentences quoted, the other 2 fit a pattern of him saying illegal immigrants are criminals because they are illegal (by definition). If, as you and LATeach think, he is saying that 100 percent of illegals are bad characters, I certainly hope that's the basis and I don't think it makes him a poisonous jerk for having that opinion.

Still further, maybe he is making an argument that the ratio of illegal immigrants that are criminals is higher than other groups (for example, legal immigrants)? Even at this extremity, I must say I don't have the data to disagree that that's possible, mostly for reasons of accountability (no ID documents) and precedent (crossing the border).

Look, I don't entirely disagree with you -- I just have a theory that the threshold should be higher before the rhetoric gets heated, and thought this was a good place to weigh in.

Ter Ducken

That depends on what your definition of 'is,' is.


Thanks for asking us to think carefully and for thinking carefully yourself. If I were face-to-face with Allard right now, I would smile and speak politely. BUT, I don't have to make nice here and I will not pretend that remarks of the kind the article credited him with do not encourage people who don't have a lot of contact with diverse populations to think of illegal immigrants as criminals and bad characters. And since we have a large number of both legal and illegal immigrants from Mexico in this area, what people think about illegals will slop over onto their ideas about legals. Of course that is sloppy thinking, but prejudice is lazy, sloppy thinking... Prejudice = I don't have to get to know him/her, I know his/her kind. And if the words 'spitting poison' seems like an unfair description of the damage that kind of thinking causes you are blessed by not having seen it.


These remarks, by themselves, do not suggest that Allard is a racist. He is abysmally ignorant about immigration if he thinks illegal immigrants are criminals, but he isn't necessarily a racist. This is the same guy who, after all, a month ago suggested that the vigilante "Minutemen" that Tom Tancredo was palling around with ought to be federalized. President Bush thought this was a terrible idea and said so, even though the Colorado press largely ignored it. So on the issue of immigration I think even Republicans have to admit that Allard is a demogogue. That Allard has a poor record of representing Latinos is another matter altogether. I have always wondered how a U.S. Senator and former Congressman could serve so long and employ such a large staff (35-40 people) and completely avoid hiring Hispanics. He may have hired an occasional receptionist, but I find it telling that he has never had Latinos in a position of authority in his staff. Republican Hispanics ought to be ashamed of this record. Even Tancredo had a Latino press secretary for awhile.

Phoenix Rising

The Colorado Dems are on Allard's case (a bit belatedly); a press release went out today condemning the quotes. Yet another case of Colorado Pols being on the ball...


Oh good. I'm glad we are recycling this topic. I defy anyone on this board to explain to me how illegal immigrants are not criminals. I had no takers on the subject last week.


You're right, of course, we are talking about people who by definition have broken the law. To me though, it seems that if that act was the only law-breaking a person engaged in and since that time they have raised their children here, worked, invested their skills and paycheck in the US - at some point they ought to have earned the right to become 'legal'.


There are processes in place to come to this country legally. I don't profess to be the expert in immigration law, and I sure wouldn't defend the system as perfect. But, it doesn't take a lawyer to know that if you allow people to game the system (e.g. break the law) and there are no consequences for it, then the system is fairly worthless.

That is why we punish law breakers. Thieves and drunks go to jail and illegal immigrants get deported (sometimes). Different kinds of criminal acts for sure, but the wrongdoers are criminals nonetheless. Allard's statement may not have been the most articulate, but it was mostly accurate.

Phoenix Rising

Yes, they are breaking the law; but Allard went beyond that to implicating them in prostitution and drug trafficking.


I really do think he was referring to the proportion of illegals who happen to be involved in prostitution and drug trafficking as bad characters. I think that because he seems to be a well meaning if sometimes inarticulate guy (not being articulate can engender prejudice as well, not to mention party affiliation).

As far as the issue, I think that it's unfair to condemn anyone who takes a hard line on immigration. I choose not to associate race with the issue. It's a problem to have undocumented persons milling around (Mexican, Canadian [both nationalities not races], or Red, Yellow, or Purple for that matter) -- a problem for the undocumented person, and a problem for the area in which they live. It's not fair to them given their reduced opportunity for an above-board livelihood and marginalized status. It's not fair to the community because, like any segment of the population, illegals are gonna have their percentage of young, thoughtless hotheads (arguably higher given the challenges they face as illegals -- possibly Allard's point?), and the less documented they are, the harder the bad 'criminal' ones are to catch and/or deter.

I believe most people are good, illegal or not. And if I lived in Mexico and had to provide for my family, I might even jump the border myself if I couldn't make it work. But I darn sure wouldn't commit any crimes after I got here, and I'd expect to be dealt with pretty harshly if I did. And if I was a criminal, I'd probably feel a little less vulnerable to law and order because of my anonymity and ability to flee.

Phoenix Rising

perspective - I agree with your second and third points (except the anonymity part), but I'm having a hard time re-parsing Allard's statement to say what you think he meant to say. Personally, I don't know the man enough to make a firm judgement, but if I had to guess, he made something that could be mis-construed so that some people would mis-construe it and others wouldn't. As we've seen from his Q&A, his prepared statements are carefully worded and filled with political overtones; I can't ascribe inarticulate to the man.


I'm getting sick of people screaming racism when a person speaks out against illegal immigrants. If they are here illegally, then they are in fact braking the law. They are not paying income tax or into social security, most are commiting identity theft, and have no car insurance. These are a given. I won't even address the numerous other drains that they cause on the economy, or other problems that certain aliens bring. No I'm not pedjudiced, and I am in fact hispanic myself. But I am an American citizen who pays taxes, and has to help shoulder the burden of these aliens who contribute to rising taxes and increasing costs of healthcare. I'm sick of it, and are perplexed at people who support them being in this country.

The comments to this entry are closed.