Arizona Boycott & Where did this word come from?

The word boycott entered the English language during the Irish "Land War" and is derived from the name of Captain Charles Boycott, the estate agent of an absentee landlord, the Earl Erne, on Achill Island in County Mayo, Ireland, who was subject to social ostracism organized by the Irish Land League in 1880. In September that year protesting tenants demanded from Boycott a substantial reduction in their rents. He not only refused but also evicted them from the land. Charles Stewart Parnell, in his Ennis Speech proposed that, rather than resorting to violence, everyone in the locality should refuse to deal with him. Despite the short-term economic hardship to those undertaking this action, Boycott soon found himself isolated—his workers stopped work in the fields and stables, as well as the house. Local businessmen stopped trading with him, and the local postman refused to deliver mail.

The concerted action taken against him meant that Boycott was unable to hire anyone to harvest the crops in his charge. Eventually 50 Orangemen from Cavan and Monaghan volunteered to harvest his crops. They were escorted to and from Claremorris by one thousand policemen and soldiers—this despite the fact that Boycott's complete social ostracism meant that he was actually in no danger of being harmed. Moreover, this protection ended up costing far more than the harvest was worth. After the harvest, the "boycott" was successfully continued. Within weeks Boycott's name was everywhere. It was used by The Times in November 1880 as a term for organized isolation. According to an account in the book “The Fall of Feudalism in Ireland” by Michael Davitt, the term was coined by Fr. John O'Malley of County Mayo to "signify ostracism applied to a landlord or agent like Boycott". The Times first reported on November 20, 1880: “The people of New Pallas have resolved to 'boycott' them and refused to supply them with food or drink.” The Daily News wrote on December 13, 1880: From Wikipedia:

Yes, Arizona has taken the preposterous position of protecting its borders.  They have decided to actually enforce federal law.  Somehow, ANYTHING the state does to enforce federal law requires racial profiling ... got that?  If you're a lib, it make perfect sense to you.  Never mind the fact there are a kazillion "hispanic" American citizens in Arizona who want the law enforced, that doesn't matter.

Notice also that no Democrat politician will actually come out and say "we should have open borders."  Yet, they fight EVERY attempt to enforce immigration law.  Isn't that funny?  They'll say things like  "we need comprehensive immigration reform" because that's how stupid they think the American people are.  I think they can say "reform" all they want but all I hears is "amnesty."  I predict even AFTER they give the current illegals amnesty, they STILL won't enforce the border ... because the point is, they (libs/Democrats) want open borders (so they can get more votes.)

While I'm at it, let me just congratulate Arizona on another good move -- ending "ethnic studies" classes.  I remember a long time ago when these first came out.  It started with thing such as "Afro-American Studies" -- then "Women's Studies " etc.  Even way back then I thought to myself, "What a load of crap. How is this helping someone become educated in a classical sense?"  To me, all it did was divide people ... a bunch of touchy-feely nonsense to help peeps "be proud of their heritage."  Meanwhile, what about their American heritage?  Well, THAT, my friend, was something to be disdained.  Why don't they just go ahead and start an "America Sucks" curriculum ... oh wait, after checking out the current state of affairs on college campi, I guess I'm too late.

Anyway, hey ... if you want to take "ethnic studies,"  go ahead,  just don't steal my money and make me pay for it ... same with underwater basket-weaving.