Arizona Legislature sends immigration bill to gov
POSTED BY: Niki2
UPDATED: Sunday, December 12, 2021 09:28
VIEWED: 4635
PAGE 1 of 1
Why are we moving backwards on civil rights??? Bad enough that Dumbya did it, but now Arizona is going nuts on its own!Quote:
http://www.accessnorthga.com/detail.php?n=228771
A sweeping immigration bill intended to ramp up law enforcement efforts in Arizona has been approved by state lawmakers.
Passage by the Senate on a 17-11 vote Monday sends the bill to Gov. Jan Brewer, who has not taken a position on the measure championed by her fellow Republicans.
The bill would make it a state crime for illegal immigrants to not have an alien registration document. It also would require police to question people about their immigration status if there's reason to suspect they're in the country illegally.
Other provisions allow citizen lawsuits against government agencies that hinder enforcement of immigration laws, and make it illegal for people to hire illegal immigrants for day labor or knowingly transport them.
You do realize that "reason to suspect they're in the country illegally" gives the police power to stop ANYONE they can show they had "reason" to question? How far does/could that extend, I wonder...
Not only that, but:Quote:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/04/21/arizona.immigration.bill/index.
Now that Arizona lawmakers have passed what's considered some of the toughest immigration legislation in the country, other states are watching to see whether they should follow in the state's footsteps or stand back.
html?hpt=T2
Say it isn't true!!!
"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Bump 'cuz I can't believe nobody cares...for all we rant and rave and debate about things, to me crapping on civil liberties is worth talking about. Maybe that's just me tho'...
"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I'm sure PN is just torn to shreds on this one. On the one hand, it targets hispanics, so he loves that part of it. On the other hand, it's basically an update of the Nazi-era "Your papers, please" kind of laws that he rails against.
He probably can't tell if he just shit his pants or pissed himself. He's all twisted up!
Just remember, folks, this latest piece of totalitarianism is being brought to you by the Republicans and the Tea Party people.
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
How is this in ANY way 'moving backwards' on civil rights ?
Seriously.
The worst part about all this is that the border states are having to do all the heavy lifting on what has become a national crisis. 
Bones: "Don't 'rawr' her!"
Booth: "What? she'rawred' me first."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Niki, I think it's cause most folk who care at all about this issue are pretty sure the Arizona state government is quite, quite insane.
Come on, these are the folk who keep a nutter like Sheriff Joe Arpaio in power, which is about all the evidence one needs to prove it.
-F
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Niki, I think it's cause most folk who care at all about this issue are pretty sure the Arizona state government is quite, quite insane.
Come on, these are the folk who keep a nutter like Sheriff Joe Arpaio in power, which is about all the evidence one needs to prove it.
-F
So, if you AGREE that there should be open borders, and rapists, thugs, drug runners, criminals and the like should all be granted equal access, and be lumped in with law abiding, hard working, honest and productive people, wanting to become full fledged citizens, then you " care " about the issue ?
Really?
Bones: "Don't 'rawr' her!"
Booth: "What? she'rawred' me first."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You may be right, Frem. But I think it's definitely something to rise up against, given it's unequivocally racial profiling and "papers, please" and would affect not only the police department's ability to go after REAL criminals, but surely require the expense of hiring additional cops, and the ways it could be abused by racist policemen is beyond MY imagination!
Just to have proposed it shows how insane Arizona is--added to their legislation that any candidate for Prez. has to show a birth certificate! We'll have to shove them down the map with Texas if they decide to secede, eh?
Of course, "Non-Maverick" McCain is right in there pushing it, yazzah... But then, who takes HIM seriously these days, either?
"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
So, if you AGREE that there should be open borders, and rapists, thugs, drug runners, criminals and the like should all be granted equal access, and be lumped in with law abiding, hard working, honest and productive people, wanting to become full fledged citizens, then you " care " about the issue ? 
They are, of course, all just what you described... yes, siree...Watch out, Craps, your racism is showing!
Exactly WHAT parallel universe DOES Crappy live in? 
"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
...it's unequivocally racial profiling
Ahhh yes... the standard " IT'S RACISM " cry.
Bones: "Don't 'rawr' her!"
Booth: "What? she'rawred' me first."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You're not worth responding to, but what the hell: "rapists, thugs, drug runners, criminals and the like" as describing who comes across the border is rather obviously illustrative of your racist bent.
"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
So, if you AGREE that there should be open borders, and rapists, thugs, drug runners, criminals and the like should all be granted equal access, and be lumped in with law abiding, hard working, honest and productive people..
We already have those.
They're called Republicans.
-F
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:You're not worth responding to, but what the hell: "rapists, thugs, drug runners, criminals and the like" as describing who comes across the border is rather obviously illustrative of your racist bent.
So, does this selective reading slant ALL your views ? That would explain much.
What do you call the immigrants who come to our country who are " law abiding, hard working, honest and productive people, wanting to become full fledged citizens " ???
Or do you blanketly imply that anyone who crosses the border IS a rapist, a thug, a criminal, and that NO ONE could possibly come here who was law abiding, hard working, honest and productive... ??
Clearly, if anyone here is a bigot and a racist, it's YOU.
Why not try at being less of a coward and stop cherry picking my comments. Try dealing w/ the totality of my remarks, for a change.
Bones: "Don't 'rawr' her!"
Booth: "What? she'rawred' me first."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Frem: Good one! 
Crapper: Nice try, but it failed. 
"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Crapper: Nice try, but it failed.
The only one who failed is you. Too stupid to reply, too much a coward to try. All you have are your juvenile emoticons to speak for you. Sad.
Bones: "Don't 'rawr' her!"
Booth: "What? she'rawred' me first."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
We already have those.
They're called Republicans.
-F
Ahh yes. Democrats. Model citizens.
Bones: "Don't 'rawr' her!"
Booth: "What? she'rawred' me first."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"AHHHH, YEEEESSS! FEED ME YOUR HOSTILITY, PIERCE ME WITH YOUR HATRED!!"
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
How is this in ANY way 'moving backwards' on civil rights ?
Seriously.
The worst part about all this is that the border states are having to do all the heavy lifting on what has become a national crisis.
Who SHOULD be doing the "heavy lifting" on this issue? The federal government? Isn't that a catch-22 situation? If they hire more border patrol agents at the federal level, you'll whinge and whine about the big government pushing the little bitty states around.
Should this be a states' rights issue? Or should it be a federal issue? And are you willing to stand behind the federal government if you say it IS a federal issue?
I don't see this as a "national crisis", but I'm not as fearful, paranoid, or easily manipulated as you are, either.
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:Quote:
...it's unequivocally racial profiling
Ahhh yes... the standard " IT'S RACISM " cry.
Wait - are you trying to tell us that this will be applied to white people at the same rate it's used to hassle brown people? Care to put money on that?
Niki called it "racism" because it's using a law to target one race over another. That's pretty much a textbook case of racism, when you get right down to it.
Rappy, do you have YOUR immigration papers in order, in case you ever find yourself in Arizona? How can you PROVE that you're a U.S. citizen, with just the stuff you carry in your wallet?
Or do you naturally assume that YOU would never be asked such questions? And THAT is the racist part of it.
Just for the record, you know you're overreacting when your standard response is "Round 'em all up!" when it comes to certain races or groups of people.
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"I'm not as fearful, paranoid, RACIST or easily manipulated as you are", crappy wind...there never WAS an "issue" where you're concerned. From the very first reply to me, all you've done is made racist, stupid, derogatory and assumptive cracks about what others have posted. That requires no response.
p.s. thank you Mike, but I doubt he'll make the connection even with you explaining it. Being racist often means you don't THINK you're racist, even tho' it blatantly obvious to everyone around you...sound familiar?
Or, how about, just before I leave for the day to get something actually CONSTRUCTIVE done:Quote:
No, crappy wind, that's what YOU did, remember?
you blanketly imply that anyone who crosses the border IS a rapist, a thug, a criminal
Gotcha! Bye....
"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
So, if you AGREE that there should be open borders, and rapists, thugs, drug runners, criminals and the like should all be granted equal access, and be lumped in with law abiding, hard working, honest and productive people, wanting to become full fledged citizens, then you " care " about the issue ?
Really?
So that's the dichotomy you see? If you're not with us, you're against us, eh? If you don't support draconian laws, concentration camps, and round-ups of suspected illegals, then you support open borders, rapists, drug runners, and thugs. Is that it? That's how you see it? Either or? No in between?
Huh.
In your own words,
Quote:
...simple minds want to deduce such things to, well, the most simple of terms.
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Of course he does, Mike, you should know that by now.
Personality traits of high RWAs:
1) a high degree of submission to the established, legitimate authorities in their society;
2) high levels of aggression in the name of their authorities; and
3) a high level of conventionalism
The aggression is always there, the belief in established authorities, and the conventionalism.
And remember the fear thing?Quote:
He FEARS them, so that's what he sees, rapists, drug dealers, thugs, criminals AND THE LIKE. I guess all the "and the like" represents all those who don't fit those categories; but they're ALL out to get him, in his world. (I couldn't find the really relevant passage about "fear", which extends beyond "potentially threatening" to a much wider mindset; I know it's there, but don't want to search further as it's in pdf.)
High RWAs tend to feel more endangered in a potentially threatening situation than most people do, and often respond aggressively.
Also,Quote:
So you see, he can't see that his thinking reflects bigotry, he's been told to see it as "protecting" us by "law and order".
Why do high RWAs want to censor, for example, a racist when they themselves are
prejudiced? Because they don’t know they are, so a racist is a socially condemnable
outsider to them. Furthermore, experiments show authoritarian followers are turned
off by blatantly racist appeals. A skilled demagogue knows you play the “race card”
best by disguising it as something else, like law and order.
Put the two together, and voila; you could have predicted Crappy's response to this topic easily. I think most of us did.
"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I'm still awaiting PN's take on this issue. It might prove... enlightening, to say the least.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The really sad part is that it might well be more illuminating than Rappy's, and PN will prolly put more thought (such as it is with him) into it than Rappy does.
Makes me wonder sometimes who's crazier.
-F
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Oh, I've no doubt PN's the crazier of the two. He's also orders of magnitude more intelligent than Rappy. Crazy and smart often seem to be close acquaintances.
Rappy is nothing but a brainwashed mouthpiece for whatever talking point the right wants him to vomit forth today. PN serves a far more valuable purpose, often serving as the check valve on the stuff the MSM *DON'T* want us talking about.
Seriously, which one do you think would provide a more interesting dinner guest?
ETA: And yeah, Frem, that's why I've been waiting for PN's take on this. I knew before he even responded that Rappy would be down with the jackboots on this one. Anywhere the Republicans tell him to go, he goes. It's funny how he doesn't want this giant, big, bad government all up in everyone's business - until he DOES want them up in everyone's business. Well, everyone's business, so long as they're something other than lily white, that is.
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Gotta love that the people bitching about Government interference will cheer on a step towards becoming a full-on police state.
As long as it's brown folks who have to show their papers, they're just fine with a bit of fascism.
"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:Quote:
...it's unequivocally racial profiling
Ahhh yes... the standard " IT'S RACISM " cry.
Bones: "Don't 'rawr' her!"
Booth: "What? she'rawred' me first."
A very appropo reply to fucking racism, you tool.
"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Frem,
Message received, and I couldn't agree more. I had the same thought! 
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well, it's not like I can help it, Authoritarians and their whole gig with extremist rationality at the expense of their own humanity sets off a strong desire to crush them utterly by drowing them in something they cannot comprehend, much less analyse, raw humanity unburdened by reason, kinda like Albedo here - the dude takes creepy to a whole new level.
(WARNING: Even though it's from a game, the entire clip is like oh-so-seriously disturbing!)
For those better read, that is also exactly how and why Johann Karlsen could consistently beat the Berserkers at every turn and corner, because by their nature the machines were fundamentally incapable of understanding that which makes us truly human.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berserker_%28Saberhagen%29
-F
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Gotta love that the people bitching about Government interference will cheer on a step towards becoming a full-on police state.
I know; it's surreal, isn't it? It's as silly as the gunbunnies gathering in the national parks to scream that Obama's going to take their guns away - when he was the one who signed the legislation ensuring their right to take their guns into the national parks!
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer signs US's toughest immigration law; Obama says you ain't arresting me bitch!
"We in Arizona have been more than patient waiting for Washington to act," Brewer said after signing the law. "But decades of inaction and misguided policy have created a dangerous and unacceptable situation."
www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2010/04/23/2010-04-23_president_bara
ck_obama_slams_arizona_immigration_law_as_misguided_and_a_threat_t.html#ixzz0lz9Hy55H
I say bring the US military back to USA, put em on the border, and shoot to kill.
US troops killed 2.7-million Iraqis who never set foot on USA, so it's only fair to kill 2.7-million Mexicans. Not like we haven't done it before.
If any liberal Commies want to get in the way, so be it. Kill em all, let Gaia sort em out.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by piratenews:Quote:
Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer signs US's toughest immigration law; Obama says you ain't arresting me bitch!
"We in Arizona have been more than patient waiting for Washington to act," Brewer said after signing the law. "But decades of inaction and misguided policy have created a dangerous and unacceptable situation."
www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2010/04/23/2010-04-23_president_bara
ck_obama_slams_arizona_immigration_law_as_misguided_and_a_threat_t.html#ixzz0lz9Hy55H
I say bring the US military back to USA, put em on the border, and shoot to kill.
US troops killed 2.7-million Iraqis who never set foot on USA, so it's only fair to kill 2.7-million Mexicans. Not like we haven't done it before.
If any liberal Commies want to get in the way, so be it. Kill em all, let Gaia sort em out.
So it's not genocide or murder ("...it's only fair to kill 2.7 million Mexicans.") that you're worried about, and you don't mind the murder of American citizens ("If any liberal Commies want to get in the way... kill 'em all.") without any due process. So what's your problem with abortion, again?
I may have misspoken when I asserted that you were smarter than Rappy. Seems you don't really care about life, humanity, or anything else, just as long as there's a big body count you can jack off to.
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
I don't see this as a "national crisis", but I'm not as fearful, paranoid, or easily manipulated as you are, either.
That you don't see this as a national crisis only shows you're not as informed as me either.
Bones: "Don't 'rawr' her!"
Booth: "What? she'rawred' me first."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Dammit PN -
That Gatlin Guns Blazin' video is about the coolest thing I've seen here ( even though most of the clips are just recycled and looped, over and over )
You suck.
Bones: "Don't 'rawr' her!"
Booth: "What? she'rawred' me first."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
I don't see this as a "national crisis", but I'm not as fearful, paranoid, or easily manipulated as you are, either.
That you don't see this as a national crisis only shows you're not as informed as me either.
You said "informed" where you meant "brainwashed".
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
You said "informed" where you meant "brainwashed".
And that's the sum total of your argument. You can't offer up any substantive, reasonable reply, other than dole out insults and dismissive, personal comments.
The body of Rancher Rob Krentz and his dog were found shot to death on his ranch. Krentz, who always was good-natured and willing to help people, had called in that he had found an illegal alien at one of his watering holes and was assisting him. That was the last that was heard from him before his body was discovered.
Rob Krentz was a lifelong rancher in Southeastern Arizona, 12 miles north of the U.S./Mexico border and 25 miles northeast of the city of Douglas. He was the father of three children. The ranch has been in his family for three generations, more than 100 years - since 1907, and sits on about 35,000 acres with 1,000 head of cattle. Running a ranch is hard work and with the influx of illegal aliens increasing, Rob was at ground zero of the stampede that is destroying the fragile desert landscape.
The Krentz family has received numerous threats in the past by illegal aliens trespassing on their property. In 2002, the family was physically threatened when one of them stumbled upon a group of 39 illegal aliens. They were told to get off the land and they made threats. The Border Patrol did catch the illegal aliens after they were called, but we all know that illegal aliens, if deported, come right back across.
In 1999, Krentz and his wife Susan did an interview with PBS when they came around asking about the issue of illegal immigration and its impacts on the local ranchers.
http://www.diggersrealm.com/mt/archives/003355.html]
Violence Surges Along U.S.-Mexico Border
by JOHN BURNETT
February 12, 2006
John Burnett reports one the recent surge of violence along the U.S.-Mexico border. In the past weeks, gunmen have fired on U.S. Border Patrol agents, Mexican drug traffickers have attacked Texas lawmen, and last week, gunmen stormed the offices of a newspaper in Nuevo Laredo, Mexico.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5203014
Thu Apr 1, 11:11 pm ET
MEXICO CITY – Mexican officials are responding to the decision of New Mexico's governor to send more National Guard troops to the border by calling for more cooperation with the U.S. on border violence.
The Foreign Relations Department says Mexico respects the right of U.S. authorities to determine how to provide security along their side of the border, but adds that increased cooperation is the answer.
The department's Thursday statement says U.S. officials should step up efforts to curb smuggling of weapons and cash into Mexico.
New Mexico ordered more National Guardsmen to the border this week to beef up surveillance after an Arizona rancher was shot to death. Investigators believe he was killed by an illegal immigrant who fled to Mexico. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100402/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/lt_mexico_us_bor
der_violence
You ( hopefully ) get the idea. There'a a serious issue here, as was made plain back in '06, when Bush tried to address the issue, with what amounted to blanket amnesty. America stood up and didn't WANT that as the solution.
Bones: "Don't 'rawr' her!"
Booth: "What? she'rawred' me first."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Wonderful; that's one I'm going to keep and throw back at you, because you do that more than anyone else here.
And that's the sum total of your argument. You can't offer up any substantive, reasonable reply, other than dole out insults and dismissive, personal comments.
As for what you cited (thank you for specifics!), nobody is arguing that there isn't a major problem on the border; there is and we all know it.
The argument is against MAKING policemen accost anyone who LOOKS like they might be an illegal alien. It's totally absurd on the face of it; those actual criminals with the money will probably change their mode of dress, etc., and it'll be harder to recognize them...which means perfectly legal citizens will be accosted.
The ONLY possible good that will come of this is it will push the administration to get serious about the issue. We'll see.
But this is no solution. For one thing, anyone coming in from another state who doesn't know about the law (and there will be many; most people don't pay attention to, or remember, such things) runs the risk of being jailed because who in other states walks around with their "papers"? The guy on TV last night who said there are many ways to recognize illegals, by their dress, even their SHOES??? So, now warned, criminals can go out and buy different shoes, and only poor immigrants will wear "recognizably Hispanic" shoes. Great solution.
I assume you're one of those who wants every illegal alien in America hunted down and deported. It's just not possible, it's ludicrous to think it could ever be achieved. So some kind of immunity has to be established, some kind of "back-of-the-line" thing and work program. It's not that "America" doesn't want something done, it's that those who want immigrants deported don't want it, and those who have no problem with immigrants don't want to deal with it.
By lumping all illegal immigrants into the categories of "rapists, drug lords", etc., "and the like", you are omitting the VAST majorit of illegal immigrants and focusing only on the unsavory element, addressing the issue as if all illegal immigrants fall into that category. That is as racist as saying any cateory of people are all one thing or another. That IS racism, pure and simple. I know you can't see it, I imagine most racists can't see their own racism, but that is a perfect example of how it comes out.
This is going to pull cops off their protective duties, require money to hire more cops, destroy the trust between the cops and their community (which is where they get a LOT of cooperation in getting the actual criminals among them), give bad and/or racist cops freedom to abuse their power, harrass actual citizens who don't carry papers because they don't know about it, forget about it, or whatever, and cause a further rift between both illegal and legal-citizen Hispanics and the rest of the citizenry. Who WOULDN'T feel persecuted if only their own race were targeted?
This is not a good way to deal with the problem. It will cause more trouble than it solves, wait and see.
"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
That you don't see this as a national crisis only shows you're not as informed as me either.
And that's the sum total of your argument. You can't offer up any substantive, reasonable reply, other than dole out insults and dismissive, personal comments.
Hey, that's pretty handy!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Numerous law enforcement agencies, by the way, are against the new law:Quote:
http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/153028
The bill raises concerns by some in law enforcement because it is unfunded and may lead to racial profiling. It also allows individuals to sue local police departments if they believe they are not fully enforcing the law. Municipalities could be fined between $1,000 to $5,000 per day in such instances.
Arizona Association of Police Chiefs oppose the measure. It contends that it would hinder the investigation of more serious crimes and erode the trust between police and immigrant communities.
“We’ve opposed the law from the beginning,” said John Thomas, a lobbyist for the group.
Even the day before Brewer signed the bill, Mesa’s elected officials worried about the cost of jailing those arrested under the law. Mesa police told the City Council to expect more arrests and substantially higher jail costs.
“This is an unfunded mandate,” Mesa Mayor Scott Smith said. “There’s no money, just demands.”Quote:
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/04/21/arizona-immigration-police/
AACOP STATEMENT ON SENATE BILL 1070
The Arizona Association of Chiefs of Police (AACOP) remains in opposition to Senate Bill (SB) 1070. The provisions of the bill remain problematic and will negatively affect the ability of law enforcement agencies across the state to fulfill their many responsibilities in a timely manner.
While AACOP recognizes immigration as a significant issue in Arizona, we remain strong in our belief that it is an issue most appropriately addressed at the federal level. AACOP strongly urges the U. S. Congress to immediately initiate the necessary steps to begin the process of comprehensively addressing the immigration issue to provide solutions that are fair, logical, and equitable.Quote:
http://immigration.change.org/blog/view/police_oppose_immigration_enfo
Arizona Sen. Russell Pearce (R) defended a wasteful new anti-immigrant bill with the claim: "The greatest threat we have to some of our neighborhoods is the illegal alien invasion." Maybe Pearce is lucky enough that the only "threat" to his neighborhood is undocumented immigrants trying to eke out a living there, but the state's police think some other threats are a bit bigger -- such as murderers and rapists, to name a couple
Under the proposed legislation, any nativist Tom, Dick, or Harry who thinks their city or county police department isn't doing enough to hunt down undocumented immigrants can sue over it. Never mind that, as Rep. Daniel Patterson (D) pointed out, this is an unconstitutional requirement: "The U.S. Constitution specifically gives the enforcement of our nation's borders and immigration to the federal government." Sure, everybody's all "law and order" until it comes to legislatures (or our favorite sheriff, Joe Arpaio) respecting federal jurisdiction.
Never mind that this is an unfunded mandate, which Pearce ludicrously claims will have "no cost." Local cops don't currently receive extensive training in understanding and enforcing complicated federal immigration law (you know, because it's not supposed to be their jurisdiction), so that will have to be paid for. And as Jennifer Allen of Border Action Network points out, skimping on the training is liable to open police departments up to racial profiling and wrongful arrest suits, when untaught cops are forced to enforce laws as best they can without official know-how.
rcement_policies_in_arizona_and_texas Quote:
http://www.kc
San Francisco Police Chief George Gascon told CBS 5 that there are several consequences of the new law.
“For police officers it’s a severely unfounded mandate. They’re going to have to start aggressively seeking the immigration status of people that may not necessarily be committing any other violations,” said Gascon.
Chief Gascon also says the law is likely to give rise to lawsuits against police departments which will be costly and take focus away from other police work.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:You keep saying that, but it simply isn't true. Not even remotely.
Quote:Wonderful; that's one I'm going to keep and throw back at you, because you do that more than anyone else here.
Originally posted by Niki2:And that's the sum total of your argument. You can't offer up any substantive, reasonable reply, other than dole out insults and dismissive, personal comments.
Quote:
As for what you cited (thank you for specifics!), nobody is arguing that there isn't a major problem on the border; there is and we all know it.
Well, no one except Kwickie. To which those remarks I made were directed. But fret not, I'll not lay HIS idiocy at the feet of others.
Quote:But that's not what this law does. So, while you DO have a valid claim, it's really not applicable here on this matter.
The argument is against MAKING policemen accost anyone who LOOKS like they might be an illegal alien. It's totally absurd on the face of it; those actual criminals with the money will probably change their mode of dress, etc., and it'll be harder to recognize them...which means perfectly legal citizens will be accosted.
Quote:Hey, we agree - sorta. The LAST administration sure as hell didn't have a reasonable plan, and the country sure let them know about it.
The ONLY possible good that will come of this is it will push the administration to get serious about the issue. We'll see.
Quote:Well,if the guy on t.v. said it, then I guess that settles it.
But this is no solution. For one thing, anyone coming in from another state who doesn't know about the law (and there will be many; most people don't pay attention to, or remember, such things) runs the risk of being jailed because who in other states walks around with their "papers"? The guy on TV last night who said there are many ways to recognize illegals, by their dress, even their SHOES??? So, now warned, criminals can go out and buy different shoes, and only poor immigrants will wear "recognizably Hispanic" shoes. Great solution.
Quote:Hell yeah! Roll out all those unused school buses Nagin had down in N'awlins, slap some bars on the windows and drive them illegals the HELL out of dodge! WOOOOO HOOOo!!!
I assume you're one of those who wants every illegal alien in America hunted down and deported.
:Sarcasm:
Quote:Doesn't HAVE to be possible. All we need to do is
It's just not possible, it's ludicrous to think it could ever be achieved. So some kind of immunity has to be established, some kind of "back-of-the-line" thing and work program. It's not that "America" doesn't want something done, it's that those who want immigrants deported don't want it, and those who have no problem with immigrants don't want to deal with it.
- control the border, and make it LESS inviting for folks to try to come in here ILLEGALLY.
- crack down on companies who employ illegals, there by making it NOT worth their while to risk paying pennies on the $$.
Quote:There's not a god damn thing "racist " about it. The flow of illegals contains its share of dirt bags. You cut off (or realistically, slow down ) that flow, you cut down the # of dirt bags IN that flow, and it makes them easier to spot. Hate to break it to ya sweetie, but those " unsavory types " are slipping in through the cracks, and causing all manner of chaos. All I'm saying is , plug those cracks, direct the legit immigrants through more regulated channels, while creating a more open, honest
By lumping all illegal immigrants into the categories of "rapists, drug lords", etc., "and the like", you are omitting the VAST majorit of illegal immigrants and focusing only on the unsavory element, addressing the issue as if all illegal immigrants fall into that category. That is as racist as saying any cateory of people are all one thing or another. That IS racism, pure and simple. I know you can't see it, I imagine most racists can't see their own racism, but that is a perfect example of how it comes out.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Obviously you didn't bother to read the cites FROM POLICE AGENCIES saying it's a bad idea.
As to not MAKING police do what the new law mandates, yes, it is true:Quote:
http://www.hispanicvista.com/HVC/Columnist/HVC/Opinion/Commentary/0415
Further, the law allows for private citizens to “sue” a police department if they believe that they are not enforcing the law to their satisfaction.
10_HVC_Editorial.htm
It is a MANDATE.
The guy on TV saying it is just an INDICATION of the mentality which will cause police to accost anyone who "looks" illegal. That mentality exists everywhere, and you know it. It also gives rise to racist police making an extra effort to harrass people they see as Hispanic, illegal or otherwise...which goes on already and this will make it legal.
As to cutting down the flow helping to cut down the "bad guys"...that's not what this will do. The bad guys will find ways to get around it, never doubt it, while everyone else who looks Hispanic risks jail time if they don't have their "papers".
As to the police themselves, as many of their agencies have said, it's an UNFUNDED mandate, as well. It WILL cost, that's been calculated.Quote:
Oh, give me a break! They're going to pull over blondes, and tourists in t-shirts and shorts? Leave us not be redic!
The only thing which separates illegals and anyone else is the law, not their skin color.
It's not worth debating with you; your refutation of the facts I have presented shows you're unwilling to look at the realities of this law. I'll leave you to believe what you choose to believe; the FACTS speak for themselves.
"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Posted by Rappy:Quote:
As for what you cited (thank you for specifics!), nobody is arguing that there isn't a major problem on the border; there is and we all know it.
Well, no one except Kwickie. To which those remarks I made were directed. But fret not, I'll not lay HIS idiocy at the feet of others.
You seem to have some real problems with basic English comprehension, boyo. Please show me exactly where I said there isn't a problem on the border. I said there isn't a "NATIONAL CRISIS" - your words - in illegal immigration. As usual, you see bogeymen everywhere, and want to hide your head in the sand. Or in your ass, more commonly. It isn't a *national* crisis - it's a problem that border states have.
The idiocy here is entirely laid at YOUR feet.
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Well,if the guy on t.v. said it, then I guess that settles it.
Well, in truth, that "guy on TV" IS a Republican representative in Arizona, so I'd say it can safely be assumed he's lying if his lips are moving...
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:Quote:
The argument is against MAKING policemen accost anyone who LOOKS like they might be an illegal alien. It's totally absurd on the face of it; those actual criminals with the money will probably change their mode of dress, etc., and it'll be harder to recognize them...which means perfectly legal citizens will be accosted.
But that's not what this law does. So, while you DO have a valid claim, it's really not applicable here on this matter.
Actually, that's exactly what this law does. From the text of Arizona S.B. 1070:
Quote:
A. NO OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE MAY ADOPT A POLICY THAT LIMITS OR RESTRICTS THE ENFORCEMENT OF FEDERAL IMMIGRATION LAWS TO LESS THAN THE FULL EXTENT PERMITTED BY FEDERAL LAW.
B. FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE, WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. THE PERSON'S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c).
ANY "lawful contact", an attempt "SHALL BE MADE", etc. This is legalese for saying that police MUST hassle anyone they suspect of being illegal. Not "MAY be made", but "SHALL be made". There's a difference, not that I expect you'll be able to figure it out.
As usual, you're lying, making shit up where you really have no idea what you're talking about. You really should stop; you're embarrassing yourself. Not that this is a new condition for you...
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
ANY "lawful contact", an attempt "SHALL BE MADE", etc. This is legalese for saying that police MUST hassle anyone they suspect of being illegal. Not "MAY be made", but "SHALL be made". There's a difference, not that I expect you'll be able to figure it out.
As usual, you're lying, making shit up where you really have no idea what you're talking about. You really should stop; you're embarrassing yourself. Not that this is a new condition for you...
Doesn't say or mean anything of the sort. You're the one lying here, making shit up about what the law says when it plainly states nothing remotely what you claim it does.
" That's legalese for saying cops can come into your house, make a sandwich and take as many cheeze its as they like "
You're such a dumb ass. Because YOU blatantly misinterpret what something says doesn't make your case. Not by a long shot.
Bones: "Don't 'rawr' her!"
Booth: "What? she'rawred' me first."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Wow. Just wow.
I knew you couldn't really comprehend English. I guess I never realized before that you can't even READ it.
Next you'll be telling me all about the 95% of people who pay no taxes.
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Crappy, damn it, did you even READ where anyone who thinks the cops AREN'T stopping (or stopping enough) potential illegal aliens can be SUED?!?!
It is a MANDATE: "an authoritative command; especially: a formal order from a superior court or official to an inferior one". Can you grasp that? They bloody-well BETTER do as the law mandates, or they can be involved in a lawsuit, get it??
Not that there won't be tons of lawsuits anyway, if they already haven't begun. Because it's going to wreak havoc with law-enforcement agencies statewide.
Do you understand "unfunded mandate"? It means they're REQUIRED to do something, but they're not given any funds to hire extra cops to do it; ergo, the cops they have will HAVE TO spend a certain amount of time checking out "potential illegals" on any given day, time they would otherwise be using for real crimes, BECAUSE THAT'S THE LAW.
Try, Crappy, try to understand.
"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The current law in 49 states says:
Quote:
"That's legalese for saying illegal aliens can come into your house, make a sandwich and take as many cheeze its as they like"
After all, borders are bad, including your front door.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Crappy, damn it, did you even READ where anyone who thinks the cops AREN'T stopping (or stopping enough) potential illegal aliens can be SUED?!?!
It is a MANDATE: "an authoritative command; especially: a formal order from a superior court or official to an inferior one". Can you grasp that? They bloody-well BETTER do as the law mandates, or they can be involved in a lawsuit, get it??
Not that there won't be tons of lawsuits anyway, if they already haven't begun. Because it's going to wreak havoc with law-enforcement agencies statewide.
Do you understand "unfunded mandate"? It means they're REQUIRED to do something, but they're not given any funds to hire extra cops to do it; ergo, the cops they have will HAVE TO spend a certain amount of time checking out "potential illegals" on any given day, time they would otherwise be using for real crimes, BECAUSE THAT'S THE LAW.
Try, Crappy, try to understand.
I know Rappy is incapable of understanding the difference, but there really IS a difference between the words "SHALL" and "MAY" when they're written into bills. I know; I've run into that difference when it comes to concealed-carry permits. Some states have laws that say the Chief Law Enforcement Officer (CLEO - usually the country sheriff or the chief of police) "MAY" issue such a permit upon completion of qualification and training, while other states say that the CLEO "SHALL" issue such a permit.
What's the difference? There are some counties and municipalities where it's LEGAL to have a concealed-carry permit, but no one has such a permit, because the CLEO *MAY* issue such a permit, but the law doesn't say he *SHALL* issue same. In other words, it's left completely to the CLEO's discretion, and if he happens to think that no private citizen is qualified to carry a concealed weapon, no matter what the law, the qualifications, and the training say, he simply won't sign off on ANY permits. It's also not discrimination, because he's not singling out any specific person or group; he just refuses to sign ANYONE's paperwork.
And that if the difference between "SHALL" and "MAY". One says you CAN do something, and the other says you MUST do it.
Again, I don't expect Rappy to admit he's wrong; he never has before; why break a perfect streak of being wrong and refusing to admit it?
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Oh, I think he understands. But he's here to piss people off, and stubborn misunderstanding works better for that.
Originally posted by Niki2:
Try, Crappy, try to understand.
When do we get that "ignore" feature on fff 2.0? It's the only cure for Rappy.
-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by mal4prez:Quote:Oh, I think he understands. But he's here to piss people off, and stubborn misunderstanding works better for that.
Originally posted by Niki2:
Try, Crappy, try to understand.
When do we get that "ignore" feature on fff 2.0? It's the only cure for Rappy.
More and more, I think he's just here to make us laugh. His latest schtick is WAY beyond hilarious, and there's nobody on the planet who is actually stupid enough to believe any of it!
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
ANY "lawful contact", an attempt "SHALL BE MADE", etc. This is legalese for saying that police MUST hassle anyone they suspect of being illegal. Not "MAY be made", but "SHALL be made". There's a difference, not that I expect you'll be able to figure it out.
As usual, you're lying, making shit up where you really have no idea what you're talking about. You really should stop; you're embarrassing yourself. Not that this is a new condition for you...
Doesn't say or mean anything of the sort. You're the one lying here, making shit up about what the law says when it plainly states nothing remotely what you claim it does.
" That's legalese for saying cops can come into your house, make a sandwich and take as many cheeze its as they like "
You're such a dumb ass. Because YOU blatantly misinterpret what something says doesn't make your case. Not by a long shot.
I think it's time you take your own advice, man up, admit you're wrong, you screwed up, you apologize deeply, and move on.
You really are embarrassing yourself.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
I think it's time you take your own advice, man up, admit you're wrong, you screwed up, you apologize deeply, and move on.
You really are embarrassing yourself.
Responding to anything you post is a colossal waste of time. I am embarrassing myself, sinking to your childish level.
Must do better.
Bones: "Don't 'rawr' her!"
Booth: "What? she'rawred' me first."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
I think it's time you take your own advice, man up, admit you're wrong, you screwed up, you apologize deeply, and move on.
You really are embarrassing yourself.
Responding to anything you post is a colossal waste of time. I am embarrassing myself, sinking to your childish level.
Must do better.
And yet, here you are, still hanging on my every word. Sucks to be you, doesn't it?
Go ahead, run away, child. Run and hide under your bed from the "national crisis"!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
So, Niki. As I remember, when you first came here you said you'd been chased off other sites because of your views. Insulted, ganged up on, etc.
You happier here where you're one of the bullies instead of the bullied?
BTW, here's the text of the Arizona law.
http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070s.pdf
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Is somebody being "bullied"?
I've seen Rappy ridiculed and mocked for posting demonstrably false, intentionally idiotic things here and claiming them as "fact", but I haven't really seen the bullying you seem to be claiming is happening.
Although I have definitely seen instances where several right-wingers ganged up on one or two people here (whether said righties are actually different people, or just an army of sockpuppets, remains to be seen) in an effort to beat them down. Oddly enough, you were conspicuous in your absence in those threads, not voicing any of your - ahem - "non-partisan" concern over bullying in such instances.
You're not biased by any chance, are you? Maybe just a li'l bit?
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:You may be right, Frem. But I think it's definitely something to rise up against, given it's unequivocally racial profiling and "papers, please" and would affect not only the police department's ability to go after REAL criminals, but surely require the expense of hiring additional cops, and the ways it could be abused by racist policemen is beyond MY imagination!
Just to have proposed it shows how insane Arizona is--added to their legislation that any candidate for Prez. has to show a birth certificate! We'll have to shove them down the map with Texas if they decide to secede, eh?
Of course, "Non-Maverick" McCain is right in there pushing it, yazzah... But then, who takes HIM seriously these days, either?
70% of Arizona Voters Favor New State Measure
Cracking Down On Illegal Immigration
The Arizona legislature has now passed the toughest measure against illegal immigration in the country, authorizing local police
to stop and check the immigration status of anyone they suspect of being in the country illegally.
A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey finds that 70% of
likely voters in Arizona approve of the legislation, while just 23% oppose it.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections2/ele
ction_2010/election_2010_senate_elections/arizona/70_of_arizona_voters_favor_new_state_measure_cracking_down_on_illegal_immigration
By all means, rise up. Show your 23 %. Stand and be counted.
Bones: "Don't 'rawr' her!"
Booth: "What? she'rawred' me first."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Oh, Geezer, you no not of what you speak! At that other board, I wasn't just bullied; there's a clique of people over there, hard right wing, one unbelievably religious. I got along as well with most everyone else there (except they got on my case for worsening the situation by replying in kind to the clique). Literally everything personal I ever told about myself was used against me, in some pretty cruel ways.
They never gave up; they went after me with both bores and never let go. I have deleted what I had saved, after I left, but I found one doc I had kept, to remind me never to go back. Want a small sample?Quote:
That's only a taste, it got a lot worse. That person dogged my every post from then on and got even nastier. Eventually they convinced even the people I had believed were friends, and despite efforts to talk to some of them in e-mail, I was cut off. With no support whatsoever, the clique got serious about going after me.
You want to know what real waste is? People who are so freakin' insane they are a waste of skin, air...space. Go back to the Mother Ship. I don't know how you got out of your straight jacket but I sure as heck wish the guys in the white coats would hurry up and take you back to the padded cell you obviously escaped from. You are a sexually confused, drug addled, liberal who thinks wearing your old 'love beads' makes you a flower child who spreads peace, love and harmony...yet you love stirring up as much trouble as you can with your insane blather that makes no sense to anyone but yourself. You wanna throw down the guantlet with me? Alright freakshow, it's ON!
One of them went so far as to look up my information, go to the website I run, which is a support site so we talk about our lives and what bothers us, and quote one of my complaints about what was happening. I had to close the site to the public.
They then had a fake person come in who said they'd known me for years and I was always a horrible person. I knew it wasn't true, so I traced them back to the website they "said" they came from, and found the name they had used (one of the people who runs the site), contacted that person and they'd never heard of this person, didn't know me and were concerned that their name was being used.
I even screen-shot copied the fake person's registration, showing they'd registered just two days before, and the e-mail from the ACTUAL person on the site. They claimed it was all fraudulent and the attacks got worse. I even had Choey, who fell in love with Firefly and is on the site I run, go there and try to tell them she'd known me ten years and what they were saying was wrong. They called her a sockpuppet.
Others had told me that their version of RWE is dangerous, the clique "owns" it, and anyone who disagrees needs to either shut up or not go there. It got to the point where I gave up, deleted my account and looked for another website. Someone had suggested I try here, and I did.
I told some of what had happened to me when I first arrived--I think Mike will remember, maybe others. They followed me here. They said vicious things about me, supposedly "warning" the members about the insane woman. Have I ever seemed insane to you?
Gawd bless everyone here at the time; they told the intruders that they'd rather make up their own minds about me from my own words and to please leave them alone. I've been grateful ever since, and held the members of this board in high esteem for the way they reacted, which has proven ever since to be a reflection of those here.
Eventually they left here; at the time I promised not to talk about them or what had happened there, and I haven't told any of the specifics to this day. Even now, I'm withholding a lot. There are at least a couple of people here who are also there, and they've been kind enough to leave me alone or be civil and not carry over the situation; they were as it turns out the nicest people there, whom I admired, and one of them had tried repeatedly to lessen the h
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
However, upon thinking about it a bit: Thank you, Geezer, for pulling me up short. I will try to go back to reading and responding to posts for what they say, rather than carrying forward my previous opinions (too much). Just said I'll TRY, remember!
"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Pfffth, strikes me as a rather interesting amount of pissin and moanin from folks who are all too happy to act in such a fashion, but don't seem to have the belly for it when the boomerang comes back - kinda like Rush and his whole "druggies should be locked up" bit when it was found he was knockin back Oxy, neh ?
So if the conservative-authoritarian types didn't wanna catch a verbal beatdown, perhaps they shouldn't have been so quick to hand one out when their collective had a lock on the media and government ?
Just sayin...
Besides, as an Anarchist, if imma puttin my boot to someones ass, it's cause *I* mean to do it, and what other folk do is up to them - not to mention my reasons are often very different from the assumptions applied, which continue to get applied despite every effort to explain what they are, since those are often summarily dismissed by folk who cannot wrap their mind around the fact that some folk do things for reasons other than appeasing some social or political faction.
Not to mention some folk seem to have a serious lack of understanding about cause and effect around here, you do or say nasty things to folk, sooner or later that's gonna come back on ya, action and reaction, baby - on every scale from foreign policy all the way down to parent-child, it's the very nature of social interaction of any species bright enough to realize cause and effect.
So really, I see the current batch of whining in the same light as someone who spent several years kicking a dog being outraged that said mutt went and had the audacity to bite them, as it this were not the inevitable result ?
And therefore, you won't be finding much sympathy from THIS corner of the verse, thankee muchly.
-F
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Its pretty simple, folks.
Arizona had some of the highest murder rates, drug problems, gang problems, kidnappings ect. Like it or not, it could (almost exclusivly) be traced to the illegals.
So, whats the response?
1. Lock and load (Arizona, in accordance with the Constitution, no longer makes you register for CC)
2. If you are commiting a crime, you can have your citizenship status checked.
They did that (the citizenship check) in a few counties in VA, I believe. Granted, all the illegals just moved to another county, but it helped end the rise in crime that had been happening.
Im curious as to what will happen. I've read reports that crime/kidnapping has already dropped by 5%.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Wulfboy, for all your talk of "independence", every time you open your mouth, you show yourself to be nothing but the same old right-wing authoritarian.
And of course, you've completely missed the bigger implications here. One more constitutional check on unbridled government power has just fallen away, but you're fine with that as long as it's only Mexicans they target. Which it may be, today. Tomorrow it will be you.
I can only imagine your outrage if this had been Obama's idea...
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Here's a real quick f'rinstance, Wulfie, which I'm sure you haven't thought about:
Let's say this law is allowed to stand, isn't challenged in the courts at all, or is challenged and upheld. Police now have not only the RIGHT, but the DUTY to check the paperwork of everyone they even think MIGHT be "committing a crime", WITHOUT ANY NEED FOR PROBABLY CAUSE, without any need for a warrant.
Oh, did you forget already that you're now required to carry health insurance coverage?
Can I see your papers, please?
As I pointed out, you don't mind when it's "Mexicans" being targeted for systematic hassling and shakedowns. You wouldn't tolerate it if it were you being hassled, though. You'd grab your gun, or so you claim.
But when it's your turn, it'll be far too late...
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Didn't say I was for (or against) this. Just curious.
Is anyone tracking this? The drop in crime vs the evacuation of illegals?
Can it even BE tracked?
What if it works? What if it doesn't?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Didn't say I was for (or against) this. Just curious.
Is anyone tracking this? The drop in crime vs the evacuation of illegals?
Can it even BE tracked?
What if it works? What if it doesn't?
What if I show you stats that prove that crime on the streets goes to zero if you imprison the entire population? Would you be for that? I mean, if it works, is that your standard for supporting it? Not whether it's constitutional, not whether it's right or wrong, but just whether it "works"?
Again, I'd like to know where the outrage and hand-wringing are from the Tea Party people over this. I thought y'all were for SMALLER government, LESS intrusion. I guess you're only for less intrusion into the lives of white people...
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Also, I think people in New Mexico, Cali, Colorado, Nevada and Utah should prepare themselves for an upswing in crime rates as this law is enforced.
Its just my opinion of course, but just as Houston and Texas (in general) dealt with a similar rise after Katrina, these states should prepare for the same.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You paperz pleeezee!
Sounds like the fuckin KGB to me, and it's bullshit, racist bullshit, and not only that - don't be more of an idiot than you can help Wulfie, sure, they might START with a segment of the population that folks ain't so quick to defend, cause most folk don't *really* believe in human rights being universal, only about their own...
But you of all people should know damn well just how fast shit like this will wind up expanded to include everyone - why give Authoritarian fuckheads that first inch when you *know* they're gonna try to grab a mile out of it, especially when the prime mover is a fucking nutter like Arapio ?
http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2010/04/borders-are-closing-in.ht
ml
Dude, why not go the other way, streamline the process, hand em a W-2 and an ID card at the line, Welcome to America! - and then let those fucking rabid IRS bastards do something other than nitpick honest americans while sucking corporate cock, neh ?
Literary recommendation for you, specifically Wulf, and you will actually like the book a hell of a lot cause it has a lot of themes which are near and dear to your heart...
1632 by Eric Flint.
I suggest you pick up a copy, but you can read it for free while you look, via the Baen Free Library.
http://www.webscription.net/10.1125/Baen/0671578499/0671578499.htm
Read the discussion in Chapter Seven between Simpson and Stearns over what I guess we'd call "immigration policy", and you will understand more of what America really stands for.
I figure, if they're gonna come here, live here, work here, or even loot and pillage (and like there are not plenty of americans who do this, and the worst of em wear suits and ties!) fuck it, we *make* them Americans - whether they like it, or not.
Welcome to America, Jose, now you're as fucked as the rest of us!
-Frem
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
You paperz pleeezee!
Sounds like the fuckin KGB to me, and it's bullshit, racist bullshit, and not only that - don't be more of an idiot than you can help Wulfie, sure, they might START with a segment of the population that folks ain't so quick to defend, cause most folk don't *really* believe in human rights being universal, only about their own...
But you of all people should know damn well just how fast shit like this will wind up expanded to include everyone - why give Authoritarian fuckheads that first inch when you *know* they're gonna try to grab a mile out of it, especially when the prime mover is a fucking nutter like Arapio ?
Bingo. 'Course, as I've pointed out, Wulfie doesn't seem to mind cops or feds hassling people - he just doesn't want them hassling HIM. As long as it's only the Mexicans, or only the blacks, or only the Jews, or only the "undesirables", he doesn't have a problem with that AT ALL.
Round 'em all up and deport 'em all, that's Wulfie's motto. And it doesn't just extend to "Mexicans", but to liberals, "hippies", blacks, and anyone else he disapproves of.
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Kwick, thats just silly.
I have not said that here. Just posing questions. I've already stated Im neither for or against this. Just curious.
Really its up to the citizens (legal ones) in Arizona on what they want to do.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Your solutions, Wulf, are irrelevant:
1) If Arizona already allows CC, then “lock and load” already EXISTS. If you’re saying it should be OPEN carry, you’re just asking for the criminals to up the violence.
2) If you’re caught committing a crime in Arizona, the law ALREADY mandates that your immigration status be checked. Been that way for years. This is different; this is checking status of people just walking down the street or driving by.
As to Quote:
How can that have anything to do with anything? The law was passed TWO DAYS AGO...they certainly can’t know crime has dropped in that time!
I've read reports that crime/kidnapping has already dropped by 5%
This law won't have much effect on the actual criminals involved, I'll bet. The law already WAS that anyone pulled over for something or caught in a criminal act would be checked for ICE status. This takes it further, makes it up to the police who they check. So you don't think most actual criminals will find ways NOT to be checked (unless pulled over or caught in the act)?
We won't suffer for it in other states any more than we do now. That I can guarantee. What I'm pretty sure of is that at least some non-Latino criminals are going to head FOR Arizona, because the police aren't going to be able to keep up their "quota" of checking people and fight crime with equal effectiveness at the same time. That's a real shame.
Naah, Mike, I don’t think it’ll spread to other populations. White Americans would raise an incredible ruckus if THEIR papers were required, they’d scream to the rafters and politicians would LISTEN to them. It’s safe to do with Hispanics because of existing racism and anti-immigrant feelings, so they can get away with it.
Nonetheless, lawsuits are already in the works, so Arizona’s gonna have its courts busy and court costs, along with costs for increased police staffing (despite almost all towns being in the red already) go up. It’s the ‘Murkian way!
Silly man, Mike; why would you think the Tea Party would mind this? It has nothing to do with THEM, after all, and no doubt appeals to the racists and anti-immigrants among them.
"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"Nonetheless, lawsuits are already in the works, so Arizona’s gonna have its courts busy and court costs, along with costs for increased police staffing (despite almost all towns being in the red already) go up. It’s the ‘Murkian way!"
Well, thats why Arizona ALSO passed the law which allows a citizen to carry without a permit.
People can AND WILL, polic themselves.
Like I said, this is going to be interesting.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Kwick, thats just silly.
I have not said that here. Just posing questions. I've already stated Im neither for or against this. Just curious.
Really its up to the citizens (legal ones) in Arizona on what they want to do.
So you'd just toss the U.S. Constitution aside? Leave it completely up to the states? No federal laws at all?
There goes that pesky 2nd Amendment, eh?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Oh, that's real encouraging! How long do you suppose until vigilanties with guns start stopping people to check their "papers"? Shall we wait for the first person who dies as a result?
Interesting? No. Sad, and scary for Arizona residents, citizen or not? Yes.
"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Then why have it at all, Wulf ?
Just a waste of time, money and resources - why not depend on, and trust, the american people with their own lifes instead of interfering ?
Just a thought for you.
-F
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
1) If Arizona already allows CC, then “lock and load” already EXISTS. If you’re saying it should be OPEN carry, you’re just asking for the criminals to up the violence.
2) If you’re caught committing a crime in Arizona, the law ALREADY mandates that your immigration status be checked. Been that way for years. This is different; this is checking status of people just walking down the street or driving by.
I'll note for the record that if I'm a cop in Arizona right now, anyone openly carrying a weapon has just provided me "reasonable suspicion" that they're up to something illegal, so I'm completely within the law to stop them and hassle them. Thanks for giving me that power, citizens! :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Actually, the real question is when does the Arizona militia start moving...
To secure its borders, and to end federalist government intrusion.
Like I said, this is going to be interesting.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Naah, Mike, I don’t think it’ll spread to other populations. White Americans would raise an incredible ruckus if THEIR papers were required, they’d scream to the rafters and politicians would LISTEN to them. It’s safe to do with Hispanics because of existing racism and anti-immigrant feelings, so they can get away with it.
No offense, Niki, but you're being naive. If this is upheld or allowed to stand unchallenged, it becomes a legal precedent. This nation is governed by legal precedent for the vast majority of its laws and regulations. Allowing this opens the door for others to follow. And then one day, you actually DO get some little burg somewhere - maybe a majority black or majority Hispanic town - where they decide that checking the legal status of white folk in the town is a perfectly legal and normal thing to do. Baltimore? Detroit? Los Angeles? If it has legal standing for one group, you can bet your ass it will be applied to another group.
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
We'll have to agree to disagree on that one, Mike; I don't see it happening.
On the other hand, anyone interested in who's behind this law, who wrote it and who backed it? I'm sure none of our RWAs are, but for anyone interested in the FACTS of who's behind it:
Quote:
"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Niki,
To prove your "point" and to bring "facts" to play... you post something said by Rachel Maddow?
Really?
Come on, really?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:'
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Niki,
To prove your "point" and to bring "facts" to play... you post something said by Rachel Maddow?
Really?
Come on, really?
Wulfie - do you have anything that refutes the report by Maddow? Anything with, y'know, FACTS behind it?
Really?
Come on, really?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yeah, I knew that was coming, and that you’d dismiss it because it was Maddow. So I've taken the time to get the facts from OTHER sources...not that it will make any difference. The material is easy to find on the internet; what I'm posting represents a small sampling--you could find more if you were willing to look, or to learn:Quote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/20/us/20immig.html
The state senator who wrote the law, Russell Pearce, had long been considered a politically incorrect embarrassment by more moderate members of his party — often to the delight of his supporters. There was the time in 2007 when he appeared in a widely circulated photograph with a man who was a featured speaker at a neo-Nazi conference. (Mr. Pearce said later he did not know of the man’s affiliation with the group.)
In 2006, he came under fire for speaking admirably of a 1950s federal deportation program called Operation Wetback, and for sending an e-mail message to supporters that included an attachment — inadvertently, he said — from a white supremacist group.
But Mr. Pearce, 62, cannot be dismissed as just the party’s right-wing fringe. As chairman of the Senate’s appropriation committee, he controls whose bills are financed, and he has shown an uncanny knack to capitalize on this border state’s immigration anxiety.
While surveys show immigration is less of a hot-button issue than it was a few years ago, Republican conservatives still care about the issue. In a New York Times/CBS News poll released last week, 82 percent of self-identified Tea Party supporters said illegal immigration was a “very serious” problem.
More than a few Democrats took notice that Mr. Pearce, whose district is in Mesa, a Phoenix suburb, managed to win unanimous support for the bill from House Republicans, even from some moderates who had voiced misgivings about it.
One of those moderates, State Representative Bill Konopnicki, Republican of Yuma, said planned amendments to address legal and other concerns never materialized. In the end, he said, “everybody was afraid to vote no on immigration.”
“We are going to look like Alabama in the ’60s,” said Mr. Konopnicki, who is facing a tough election and did not believe voting no would change the outcome.. Quote:
http://www.azcentral.com/community/mesa/articles/1010pearce-ON.html?&w
A week after Rep. Russell Pearce drew fire for immigration remarks many called racially insensitive, the Mesa Republican sent an e-mail to supporters in which he copied an article from a white separatist group and a link to that group's Web site.
The article from the National Alliance's Web site was pasted on the bottom of an e-mail Pearce sent to supporters slamming The Arizona Republic for its articles about his comments on the radio last month about a 1950s federal deportation program called "Operation Wetback."
Titled "Who Rules America? The Alien Grip on Our News and Entertainment Media Must Be Broken," the article criticized the media for promoting multiculturalism and racial equality, for portraying "any racially conscious White Person" as a bigot and for presenting the Jewish Holocaust as fact.
The media presents a "single view of the world - a world in which every voice proclaims the equality of the races, the inerrant nature of the Jewish 'Holocaust' tale, the wickedness of attempting to halt the flood of non-White aliens pouring across our borders, the danger of permitting citizens to keep and bear arms, the moral equivalence of all sexual orientations, and the desirability of a 'pluralistic,' cosmopolitan society rather than a homogeneous, White one," the article says.
Pearce said he sent the e-mail and the article to a few dozen supporters in his Mesa legislative district. The subject line of the e-mail implored supporters to put out yard signs and get people they know out to vote.
ired Quote:
Russell Pearce is in full-on denial mode in the face of the latest Nathan Sproul flier linking him to Mesa neo-Nazi J.T. Ready. In Satu
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Not really, Niki.
Just saying.
Rap could post stuff from Fox, and you would say the same thing.
Just pointing out the.... hypocrisy?
Blatant bias?
Hell, I dont know.
At this point I refuse to believe anything unless I see it for my own self.
So, whatever.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Wulf, "bias" is one thing, "lying" is another. FauxNews lies, so I can never trust anything I get from them. BUT, if I heard something that caught my attention, just as with MSNBC and others I would research it and find out the facts. Unquestionably some of what FoxNoise brings up from time to time is worth looking into, and if it's important to me, I do. Usually I get those things from other sources, tho', since I can't bear to watch the bullshit on ClusterFox, given they have no problem with lying and fraud.
But if they did come up with something that didn't make the news or internet, absolutely, yes, I would search it out myself and have an opinion about it if I found it to be accurate. I don't believe it's hypocrisy or blatant bias; I've read a LOT of the cites put up here--I dismiss things from the more obviously biased cites, which are usually pretty easy to tell by the articles on the cite and/or the name, but that's not all of them. Things posted from what aren't obviously cites with an agenda, I read and take at face value unless I want to pursue it further.
The difference is that Rachel Maddow has a "thing" about facts. Numerous times people she's done stories about have come at her that she should have checked her facts better and try to portray her as inaccurate; she actually gets a kick out of that, you can tell. She then sends her researchers deeper until they get to the bottom, then presents what they found. She's always right; if you work at it, you can almost always find the facts on things people haven't tried TOO hard to hide. She has also apologized for any mistakes, like using the wrong puppet face in a finger-puppet illustration of something that happened in Congress. She never misses an opportunity to correct or apologize for anything she might have gotten wrong.
Yes, she comes from a liberal bias, and I happen to share her point of view. But the one thing I always know about Maddow is that she will present researched FACTS, she will never deliberately lie to her audience.
Her "mission", if you will, is to make the things happening in politics easier to understand (with the emphasis of course on liberal issues), to weed out the truth and try to present it in such a way as to make it understandable to her audience, and to go behind the scenes to see who's ACTUALLY funding/pushing/backing stuff we see and hear. I take nobody completely at their word, and do my own research to verify things, but I trust Maddow more than ANY other single newscaster out there, and on unimportant things, I tend to take her word for it.
The only ground I will give is that her choice of issues leaves out things which could equally be exposed about the left. There's nobody out there who does that; the instant someone shows up who does, I'd watch them just as much as I watch Maddow. I pay little attention to Olbermann Matthews and definitely Schulz (!), but Maddow I pay attention to.
"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Not really, Niki.
Just saying.
Rap could post stuff from Fox, and you would say the same thing.
Just pointing out the.... hypocrisy?
Blatant bias?
Hell, I dont know.
At this point I refuse to believe anything unless I see it for my own self.
So, whatever.
So, following the Fox comparison for a bit...
Can you post any factual evidence that Rachel Maddow has fabricated facts in her coverage of stories? 'Cause Fox has done that, and been exposed for it, time and time again.
And remember, Dan Rather got shitcanned for doing something similar (allegedly).
As for seeing for yourself, have YOU actually seen with your own eyes the alleged decrease in crime in Arizona? If I have never seen a murder with my own eyes, does that mean Austin hasn't had any murders in the last 20 years?
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Arizona's GOP governor says VP Harris, a daughter of immigrants, is the 'worst possible choice' to oversee the border situation
...
Mayor of Arizona border town says he is declaring ‘state of emergency’ over illegal immigration
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/arizona-
state-of-emergency-mayor-immigration-b1821843.html
Arizona rancher on Biden's immigration policies: 'We got spoiled with Donald Trump'
https://news.yahoo.com/arizona-rancher-bidens-immigration-policies-124
530444.html
Congress Debates Next Move On Immigration Reform
https://azdailysun.com/news/national/congress-debates-next-move-on-imm
igration-reform/video_57f4ce09-ec84-5e52-83e9-bbcb9a9cc98e.html
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Fascists gonna fash. ^
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by reaverfan:
Fascists gonna fash. ^
Lets see reaver, who else aside from jayneztown is anti immigration? Oh yeah, signym. You can't miss the connection.
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Migrants Cross Border as Arizona Governor Gives Press Conference on Immigration Crisis
https://www.nationalreview.com/news/migrants-cross-border-as-arizona-g
overnor-gives-press-conference-on-bidens-failure-to-control-immigration/
Thousands of illegals rush border in Yuma, Ariz.
https://rumble.com/vqlbco-thousands-of-illegals-rush-border-in-yuma-ar
iz..html
'Mr. President, do something, do anything': Ducey slams Biden admin for escalating border crisis in Yuma
https://www.12news.com/article/news/local/arizona/arizona-gov-doug-duc
ey-yuma-border-crisis/75-0ec3b24c-11bb-43c7-acd8-255b9e17df93
Thousands of immigrants seeking asylum at the Yuma border
https://www.abc15.com/news/region-central-southern-az/thousands-of-imm
igrants-seeking-asylum-at-the-yuma-border
.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Ted doesn't say a word to me now that his Antifa idiot bully isn't here anymore.
--------------------------------------------------
Vaccinated People: "You need to get muh vaccination shots that don't work because I got muh vaccination shots that don't work and I'm afraid of people that didn't get muh vaccination shots that don't work because muh vaccination shots that don't work don't work."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME