What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Arizona passes nation's toughest immigration law (1 Viewer)

I understand that if you believe in free markets then you must include the free movement of labor to and from jobs. And I understand the economic benefits of finding labor willing to do jobs when other interferences in the market have shrunk those willing to perform the jobs at the price level offered. I don't think that any of the closed border advocates are going to deny that illegal immigrants expand the nations GDP by some amount, but that instead they are arguing that the costs of this economic growth is more than offset in other areas. Again, I'm sure that you'll and those mentioned above agree that there are some offsetting costs to open borders (real or quasi), but in net the benefits outweigh these costs. What I'm saying is that I just don't know where to go to find the information so I can decide for myself the real gross costs and the real gross benefits so I can figure out a real net.Also, even if I could find such numbers that I trusted on the national level that still doesn't mean that the same conclusion can be reached on a local level. It might very well be the case, and I lean this way that overall our current level of policies and enforcement (or lack of enforcement) is really benefiting our nation as a whole, but at greater costs for the people in Arizona than we should expect them to pay. And I also think having laws that aren't being enforced eventually has its own cost that we should try to avoid. So if you are reading this and am not sure where I stand on immigration then you understand my position of :thumbup: .
The Cato Institute and the Reason Foundation are good places to start for studies that support this argument.
 
Yankee, I do not believe you a racist. I do not believe that most people in favor of this law are racists. Where I take issue with you is this: you seem to believe there is a way to enforce this law (and for that matter, other anti-illegal restrictions) without racism occuring. I say it can't be done. Since the law has passed, we will see who is right. I will take no pleasure at "winning" this disagreement; frankly, I hope you will turn out to be right. But I strongly doubt it.
That really is a crappy worldview you have. Yet more reason why the word racism and the charge have absolutely no meaning to me and as a result the opinions expressed by those who further use them become all the more uselss to me as well.
 
..F.A. Hayek, Ludwig Mises, and Milton Friedman among others have all written extensively about this subject.
Oh, and that looks like a tiny piece of the list of economist that have wrote extensively about the subject of replacing need based welfare with a guaranteed income for every citizen. While it won't solve all of the immigration problems, it would greatly increase the number of Americans willing to do low paying jobs as well as greatly reduce the costs of keeping illegal immigrants off the "welfare" rolls - though I'm not going to pretend that it would eliminate it.
 
Drug Kingpin: You need to gather a team and kidnap Inigo Montoya and his family.Subordinate: We can't, Arizona is getting totally badass on illegal immigrants.Drug Kingpin: Crap. OK, let's go bowling instead.
More like, COP: Those guys look shady as hell, kind of like those guys that gunned down that family last weekCOPII: I wish we had the latitude to check them out real quickCOPI: Yeah, oh well, let's go get some coffee
:lmao: :lmao: :lmao: I can't imagine how horrible it must be for you to have to spend every waking minute with yourself.
 
This thread has already gotten to the point that I am starting to wonder if the law isn't a net good simply because of the statements you have made here, with a liberal assist from the usual suspects. If all of you are this much against it, there is probably some good in it.And that is after I actually read the thing and dissected it and initiall came to the conclusion that it's a bad idea. Not for any useless politically rhetorical flash of useless language and empty personal attacks, but because of on the ground legal and executive power practice.
So you're allowing Tim's arguments to change your mind on a position that you reached through research and substantive reflection?
I wouldn't go that far. I didn't dive into the Arizona code and statutes at all. I'm not so sure this law is a great idea, and I articulated why early on. But I don't see the nazi level stuff coming out of it either.
 
We shouldn't be mad at Arizona for doing this - we should be throwing every federal official under the bus they drove there to ignore this issue unless it buys them votes. There has been a lack of leadership from all wings of the political parties on this issue for far too long, and as you know from your Civil War thread, when the central government doesn't step in and do its job, the states will react. They don't do it that much anymore, but they still have the potential.
I give this part of your argument some credence. But on the other hand, I don't really blame Congress either. Look what happened when they did try to solve the problem 3 years ago- reasonable politicians looked realistically at this problem, and came up with the only solution that makes any sense: a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants. It was supported by President Bush, Senator McCain, Senator Graham, and nearly all of the Democrats. It surely would have been supported by Ronald Reagan, had he been alive. It was supported by The Wall Street Journal, the Weekly Standard, the Cato Institute.And what happened? The nativists rose up and shouted to the rooftops: AMNESTY! They besieged Republican congressmen in a wave of xenophobia. And the bill was defeated. So what is Congress supposed to do? They know that building a wall, or chasing these people out, or penalizing employers would be terrible for our economy. So they do nothing. Who can blame them?
 
I lived in Tucson much of my life, and can personally state from experience that the Sonorans would come to Tucson as well for their shopping needs, particularly at the Tucson Mall and Costco (of which the location in the eastern part of town is one of the largest earners in the entire company). Those who choose to shop in Tucson likely aren't as wealthy as the shoppers in the posh Scottsdale malls, but they would carry massive rolls of rubber-banded cash with them regardless.

The impact on Arizona's economy from this legislation would be bad enough if it wasn't just one of their largest trading partners in Mexico warning against travel there, but it looks as though California and DC are getting in on the boycott act as well.
Well, you may have lived in Tuscon, but obviously LHUCKs is a TRUE Arizonan, and you're nothing more than a carpetbagger. You can't possibly know what is good for Arizona.
IMHO, the economic impact is being overemphasized. Retail sales are not even close to a significant source of revenue for our state.Classic mistake of overemphasizing a personal anecdote.
You're talking about tourism too, amigo
the vast majority of our tourists are wealthy Midwesterners and East Coast people looking for golf, good looking women and nice weather....which we will always have....they like it so much they move here...by the millions. They also move here because it's clean and safe...this law is trying to protect that.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Z Machine said:
Shirtless said:
Last time my mom and I had dinner the couple next to us asked us if we could please speak in English. When we continued speaking in our native language, we were asked to please go back to our own country. I bet that couple supports this bill, and I know they don't support it because of "respect for the law."
If you weren't trying to have a conversation with them (I'm assuming you weren't), then that behavior is disgusting.Those are the people that should be deexported.
really, because that jibber jabber will give anybody a headache.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There is a reason why 70% of the state agrees with the law and it's not because we're a racist state. If you were to take out the Mexican Americans, whom IMHO do not have an objective opinion(just like Timschochet and Israel/Iran)....the approval rate is more like 90%.
If you took out blacks, what do you think the approval rate for Jim Crow laws were in Alabama?
 
Drug Kingpin: You need to gather a team and kidnap Inigo Montoya and his family.

Subordinate: We can't, Arizona is getting totally badass on illegal immigrants.

Drug Kingpin: Crap. OK, let's go bowling instead.
More like,

COP: Those guys look shady as hell, kind of like those guys that gunned down that family last week

COPII: I wish we had the latitude to check them out real quick

COPI: Yeah, oh well, let's go get some coffee
You seem to be forgetting that cops don't want to be the ones to deal with the immigration issue. Well, except for crazy uncle Joe Arpaio
 
There is a reason why 70% of the state agrees with the law and it's not because we're a racist state. If you were to take out the Mexican Americans, whom IMHO do not have an objective opinion(just like Timschochet and Israel/Iran)....the approval rate is more like 90%.
So you're discounting the opinion of the segment of the population that is likely to be most negatively affected by the law?
 
The sheriff has basically zero credibility. You already know that, but choose to disregard it because his comments serve your purpose.
Yet he gets re-elected, term after term by people who live in Arizona and understand its problems...we all must be racists for that to happen.
I never said that or implied it. I grew up in Wisconsin. My home city has a council member who has been re-elected for 30+ years. The guy is a nutjob (example: he once got arrested stealing hot dogs at the grocery store, hiding them in his jacket) and is an embarrassment to the community. But he keeps getting elected. People sometimes have weird reasons for voting for folks.

Anyway, you cleverly deflected from it, but deep down you know that the sheriff has zero credibility on stuff like this.

 
I lived in Tucson much of my life, and can personally state from experience that the Sonorans would come to Tucson as well for their shopping needs, particularly at the Tucson Mall and Costco (of which the location in the eastern part of town is one of the largest earners in the entire company). Those who choose to shop in Tucson likely aren't as wealthy as the shoppers in the posh Scottsdale malls, but they would carry massive rolls of rubber-banded cash with them regardless.

The impact on Arizona's economy from this legislation would be bad enough if it wasn't just one of their largest trading partners in Mexico warning against travel there, but it looks as though California and DC are getting in on the boycott act as well.
Well, you may have lived in Tuscon, but obviously LHUCKs is a TRUE Arizonan, and you're nothing more than a carpetbagger. You can't possibly know what is good for Arizona.
IMHO, the economic impact is being overemphasized. Retail sales are not even close to a significant source of revenue for our state.Classic mistake of overemphasizing a personal anecdote.
You're talking about tourism too, amigo
the vast majority of our tourists are wealthy Midwesterners and East Coast people looking for golf, good looking women and nice weather....which we will always have....they like it so much they move here...by the millions. They also move here because it's clean and safe...this law is trying to protect that.
Snowbirds are seasonal visitors also, but they don't drop nearly as much cash on a per capita basis as, say, the visitors to the Gem Show or a Convention in Scottsdale. Luby's and golf cart sales in Green Valley will only get you so far. As for the law, you've an interesting (and provably false) reading of it.

P.S. Most of the good looking women in AZ are tourists or college kids from California.

 
There is a reason why 70% of the state agrees with the law and it's not because we're a racist state. If you were to take out the Mexican Americans, whom IMHO do not have an objective opinion(just like Timschochet and Israel/Iran)....the approval rate is more like 90%.
So you're discounting the opinion of the segment of the population that is likely to be most negatively affected by the law?
Isn't that SOP for the WFIP?
 
We shouldn't be mad at Arizona for doing this - we should be throwing every federal official under the bus they drove there to ignore this issue unless it buys them votes. There has been a lack of leadership from all wings of the political parties on this issue for far too long, and as you know from your Civil War thread, when the central government doesn't step in and do its job, the states will react. They don't do it that much anymore, but they still have the potential.
I give this part of your argument some credence. But on the other hand, I don't really blame Congress either. Look what happened when they did try to solve the problem 3 years ago- reasonable politicians looked realistically at this problem, and came up with the only solution that makes any sense: a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants. It was supported by President Bush, Senator McCain, Senator Graham, and nearly all of the Democrats. It surely would have been supported by Ronald Reagan, had he been alive. It was supported by The Wall Street Journal, the Weekly Standard, the Cato Institute.And what happened? The nativists rose up and shouted to the rooftops: AMNESTY! They besieged Republican congressmen in a wave of xenophobia. And the bill was defeated. So what is Congress supposed to do? They know that building a wall, or chasing these people out, or penalizing employers would be terrible for our economy. So they do nothing. Who can blame them?
First off, I expect my representatives to do what's good for the country regardless of public opinion (I know, this is very naive of me).More importantly, the fact was that bill wasn't a good one. If you're going to continue to have immigration policies restricting entry in any way (i.e. anything other than wide open borders), you must prove you can enforce those policies before rewarding (in any way) those who have broken those policies in the past. Otherwise, the reward just encourages further lawbreaking in the hopes of receiving a similar reward in the future.

In order for any immigration policy to work, you must do one of the following:

* Open the borders completely

* Seal it tight, then, and only then, deal with the existing illegals already here in some way (amnesty, guest worker, deportation, doesn't matter)

But, the combination of:

1) continuing to have restrictions

2) not enforcing the restrictions you have

3) rewarding those already here illegally

inevitably only pushes the problem further down the road by encouraging more of the problem. It's the only possible outcome, and therefore, bad policy.

 
Bloomberg's main thrust was that this is a racist law supported by people who don't think rationally - i.e. like him. If you are all for rhetorical puffery then yes, Bloomberg has a point - the ignorant and those who like to cry racism when the wind blows a black mans hat off, will still do so with this new law, and some sheep will follow (see, this thread). However, if you actually read the law, something I'm guessing Mike didn't do because if he did his first point makes no sense, and then connect it to current Arizona law as well current federal law, this does not become the harbinger of the new Facist American regime that some here are making it out to be.It's arguments like Bloomberg's, and frankly yours, that make people shy away from your stance and get more militant in opposition to you. IF you support this bill in any way, or even support the idea of it, you are labeled a hate mongering ignorant racist that wants all brown people arrested or even better, shot in the street and left there to rot. The reaction to such attacks is defensive, and the stronger the attack the more defensive the person gets. This thread has already gotten to the point that I am starting to wonder if the law isn't a net good simply because of the statements you have made here, with a liberal assist from the usual suspects. If all of you are this much against it, there is probably some good in it.And that is after I actually read the thing and dissected it and initiall came to the conclusion that it's a bad idea. Not for any useless politically rhetorical flash of useless language and empty personal attacks, but because of on the ground legal and executive power practice. But you guys have to fall right back into the racism game. It's repulsive. To add to it you actually have the audacity to post something along the lines that if Arizona wanted to do something about crime they should ignore illegals and focus on citizens. That kind of comment is so off the wall bat**** crazy that I'm a loss as to how to respond, whether it was entirely meant or sarcastic - because there are actually people in this thread that agree with the sentiment.The illegal immigration in this country is a mess. It has led to - with an able assist from a ton of other laws and policies - a de facto border war going on right now in the Southwest. Instead of the typical liberal talking points that treat every attempt at a rational conversation as child's rambling, the adults in this country need to quiet people like you down and actually deal with the issue. In other words, you hurt your own cause by being such an overbearing atack dog without any form of common sense or actual facts rooted in the law you are discussing to back you up. Is it possible this law leads to unintended results? Sure. That is why people like me scream every November that elections in every form matter. The people you put in charge that write the policy, train the cops, and so on matter. And even if you are active every way possible you can't stop every possible bad actor from doing something bad. This is why there are so many different levels of government in this nation - to temper those problems with other actors in an effort to ensure that liberty and freedom win out above all. That there is a pause. That there is cooperation among the governments. And in that is the true problem in all of this because our national government has failed to do its duty here. And so the states are picking up the slack. We shouldn't be mad at Arizona for doing this - we should be throwing every federal official under the bus they drove there to ignore this issue unless it buys them votes. There has been a lack of leadership from all wings of the political parties on this issue for far too long, and as you know from your Civil War thread, when the central government doesn't step in and do its job, the states will react. They don't do it that much anymore, but they still have the potential.It's also possible that this law is actually administered rationally, decently, and fairly, and that no mom is pulled away from her child on the street corner, thrown into a Crown Victoria trunk driven and then dumped over the border without so much as a warning. Or maybe, just maybe, the fedeeral government actually begins to do its constitutional duty (I know, I know, you don't need to laugh it is possible) and protect the borders of this nation and proscribe and execute sound and effective immigration policy.
You're upset by the over the top rhetoric from liberals, so your answer is to craft a 6 paragraph post full of right wing talking points and over the top rhetoric?
 
Instead of the typical liberal talking points that treat every attempt at a rational conversation as child's rambling, the adults in this country need to quiet people like you down and actually deal with the issue. In other words, you hurt your own cause by being such an overbearing atack dog without any form of common sense or actual facts rooted in the law you are discussing to back you up.
Thats some good preaching right there.
 
More like, COP: Those guys look shady as hell, kind of like those guys that gunned down that family last weekCOPII: I wish we had the latitude to check them out real quickCOPI: Yeah, oh well, let's go get some coffee
Talk about taking a #### on the 4th amendment. "Those guys look shady" - really?
 
Instead of the typical liberal talking points that treat every attempt at a rational conversation as child's rambling, the adults in this country need to quiet people like you down and actually deal with the issue. In other words, you hurt your own cause by being such an overbearing atack dog without any form of common sense or actual facts rooted in the law you are discussing to back you up.
Thats some good preaching right there.
It's as if he was Speaking in Tongues.
 
More like, COP: Those guys look shady as hell, kind of like those guys that gunned down that family last weekCOPII: I wish we had the latitude to check them out real quickCOPI: Yeah, oh well, let's go get some coffee
Talk about taking a #### on the 4th amendment. "Those guys look shady" - really?
C'mon tgunz, what would somebody from San Diego know about the types of problems facing AZ?
 
More like, COP: Those guys look shady as hell, kind of like those guys that gunned down that family last weekCOPII: I wish we had the latitude to check them out real quickCOPI: Yeah, oh well, let's go get some coffee
Talk about taking a #### on the 4th amendment. "Those guys look shady" - really?
C'mon tgunz, what would somebody from San Diego know about the types of problems facing AZ?
:shrug:
 
Drug Kingpin: You need to gather a team and kidnap Inigo Montoya and his family.Subordinate: We can't, Arizona is getting totally badass on illegal immigrants.Drug Kingpin: Crap. OK, let's go bowling instead.
More like, COP: Those guys look shady as hell, kind of like those guys that gunned down that family last weekCOPII: I wish we had the latitude to check them out real quickCOPI: Yeah, oh well, let's go get some coffee
Oh come on, go ahead and replace "those guys" with an ethnic slur...that's the only thing missing.
 
Sheriff Dupnik not duped.

The sheriff acknowledged that this course of action could get him hauled into court. SB 1070 allows citizens to sue any law enforcement official who doesn't comply with the law. But Dupnik told Nunez that SB 1070 would force his deputies to adopt racial profiling as an enforcement tactic, which Dupnik says could also get him sued. "So we're kind of in a damned if we do, damned if we don't situation. It's just a stupid law."

Dupnik had harsh words for anyone who thinks SB 1070 will not lead to racial profiling. "If I tell my people to go out and look for A, B, and C, they're going to do it. They'll find some flimsy excuse like a tail light that's not working as a basis for a stop, which is a bunch of baloney."
Pima County, it should be said, has always been guilty of being the sane area of this state.
 
I lived in Tucson much of my life, and can personally state from experience that the Sonorans would come to Tucson as well for their shopping needs, particularly at the Tucson Mall and Costco (of which the location in the eastern part of town is one of the largest earners in the entire company). Those who choose to shop in Tucson likely aren't as wealthy as the shoppers in the posh Scottsdale malls, but they would carry massive rolls of rubber-banded cash with them regardless.

The impact on Arizona's economy from this legislation would be bad enough if it wasn't just one of their largest trading partners in Mexico warning against travel there, but it looks as though California and DC are getting in on the boycott act as well.
Well, you may have lived in Tuscon, but obviously LHUCKs is a TRUE Arizonan, and you're nothing more than a carpetbagger. You can't possibly know what is good for Arizona.
IMHO, the economic impact is being overemphasized. Retail sales are not even close to a significant source of revenue for our state.Classic mistake of overemphasizing a personal anecdote.
You're talking about tourism too, amigo
the vast majority of our tourists are wealthy Midwesterners and East Coast

people looking for golf, good looking women and nice weather....which we will always have....they like it so much they move here...by the millions. They also move here because it's clean and safe...this law is trying to protect that.
Maybe in the Scottsdale area. But I would definitely bet that the most tourist dollars involve the Grand Canyon. And, if my experience in several National Parks last year (Not GC though) was any indication, at least a third of the tourists were foreign travelers
 
I love all the people not from AZ pretending to know AZ's problems...when links are provided to articles, they shut up real quick. Or when the Sheriff makes a statement, it's automatically disregarded.

We're not talking about racism in the South in the 1950s...we're talking about significant crime issues and budgetary issues that this state can no longer endure if it's going to be what it has been in the past...a state where people want to live and visit.

If you tie our hands, this state will be turned into Detroit, but with drug cartels....all the money will leave and all the good families/Americans will leave...AZ turns into a third world country of sorts.

Nice job ACLU...all of this because you don't trust our police who have historically been very good, we aren't LA here...our cops don't beat people. They do a pretty damn good job IMHO.

There is a reason why 70% of the state agrees with the law and it's not because we're a racist state. If you were to take out the Mexican Americans, whom IMHO do not have an objective opinion(just like Timschochet and Israel/Iran)....the approval rate is more like 90%.

Arizonans see what's happening to their state...and the rest of the country is going to ruin it for us.
My how times have changed. 3 years ago you and bagger argued that the economy in PHX was so strong that you were immune to housing bubbles and economic downturns. 36 months later you're worried that PHX is turning into Detroit.
 
Jesus, what a horribly dangerous precedent.
Agreed. It sickens me to be a citizen of this country when people actually think there's nothing wrong with this.
Does it equally sicken you to be a citizen of a country that refuses to enforce its border laws effectively? I'll take my call off-air.
Some men are rapists. Should we as a country require all men to give DNA samples to prove that they're not a rapist?
 
Jesus, what a horribly dangerous precedent.
Agreed. It sickens me to be a citizen of this country when people actually think there's nothing wrong with this.
Does it equally sicken you to be a citizen of a country that refuses to enforce its border laws effectively? I'll take my call off-air.
Remind me to punch you in the sack when we get to Vegas.
Ok, Tanner alias!
 
Jesus, what a horribly dangerous precedent.
Agreed. It sickens me to be a citizen of this country when people actually think there's nothing wrong with this.
Does it equally sicken you to be a citizen of a country that refuses to enforce its border laws effectively? I'll take my call off-air.
Some men are rapists. Should we as a country require all men to give DNA samples to prove that they're not a rapist?
Nice straw man.
 
Drug Kingpin: You need to gather a team and kidnap Inigo Montoya and his family.Subordinate: We can't, Arizona is getting totally badass on illegal immigrants.Drug Kingpin: Crap. OK, let's go bowling instead.
More like, COP: Those guys look shady as hell, kind of like those guys that gunned down that family last weekCOPII: I wish we had the latitude to check them out real quickCOPI: Yeah, oh well, let's go get some coffee
:lmao: :lmao: :lmao: I can't imagine how horrible it must be for you to have to spend every waking minute with yourself.
:D :lmao: :D
 
Youi're right that you are not 50s racists- but I should point out that the bolded argument was always made by 50s racists...
:shrug:The differences here are profound, but I'd expect somebody of your caliber to fail to see the VAST differences.
:excited:
Unless you change your tone and start behaving like an adult, I'm really not interested in continuing this discussion with you.
It's nice that we have him around to teach the rest of us about proper behavior.
 
KnowledgeReignsSupreme said:
When did LHUCKS turn into a bitter, protectionist xenophobe?
When he realized that segment of the population would actually listen to him. Now all the ignorant bigots slap it high even though they don't get the turtlenecks in 90 degree weather and dating other men.
 
I'm trying to decide which state was the most embarrassing this week. Was it Arizona, for passing this law? Oklahoma, for their anti-abortion laws? Or Alabama, for supporting a gubnatorial candidate who demands that you speak English or get the Hell out?

Hard to decide.

 
I'm trying to decide which state was the most embarrassing this week. Was it Arizona, for passing this law? Oklahoma, for their anti-abortion laws? Or Alabama, for supporting a gubnatorial candidate who demands that you speak English or get the Hell out?Hard to decide.
This seems like a topic for another thread.
 
won't survive challenge and thus give rise to the cry of liberal, activist courts. political whores (i mean local elected officials who knew this would happen) can say ' we tried but the courts overruled. politicos get re-elected. courts catch ####... law takes a hit (and not from a bong). more people hold up signs with words spelled wrong...

i can't wait for jesus hernandez to become president of the usa. never thought i'd see a black man become president (i'm old enough to remember the "white's only', 'black only' signs and never understood the hate - in 1996 a white life guard at lake lanier islands allowed a black man to drown and said 'they don't pay me to save those people' - look it up.). i voted for obama and would vote for anyone - including a left handed, one eyed, muslim gay - if they were the best candidate.

america is a wonderful place. we are full of righteous hate and love, disdain and acceptance, inclusion, exclusion, stupidity, ignorance, intellect, compassion and insensitivity (did i say stupidity). yet most everyone in the world would die to be here. we provide a chance - no promise, but a chance - to be better - to do better. when we lose 'that', we lose what makes us great. a bunch of stupid and/or old, stuck-up white people are just going to have to get the sand out of their ######s and stop making pearls.

from a old-style repub, gun owning, cwp carrying (including the wife), stupid hating, willing ignorant educator, tea bag loathing, haven't voted for a repub since 2000 individual.

last frivolous purchase was a glock 17 (wanted a .45 but the wife can't handle this - no way with a .45). next a saiga - clip fed semi-auto 12 guage - zombies cringe in fear... the people of color don't scare me - it is the stupid, white pieces of #### who didn't take advantage of their opportunity that worry me... and so you don't think i only dislike white people (of which i am one), white people have no monopoly on stupidity or lack of maximizing opportunity.

ymmv...

 
won't survive challenge and thus give rise to the cry of liberal, activist courts. political whores (i mean local elected officials who knew this would happen) can say ' we tried but the courts overruled. politicos get re-elected. courts catch ####... law takes a hit (and not from a bong). more people hold up signs with words spelled wrong...i can't wait for jesus hernandez to become president of the usa. never thought i'd see a black man become president (i'm old enough to remember the "white's only', 'black only' signs and never understood the hate - in 1996 a white life guard at lake lanier islands allowed a black man to drown and said 'they don't pay me to save those people' - look it up.). i voted for obama and would vote for anyone - including a left handed, one eyed, muslim gay - if they were the best candidate.america is a wonderful place. we are full of righteous hate and love, disdain and acceptance, inclusion, exclusion, stupidity, ignorance, intellect, compassion and insensitivity (did i say stupidity). yet most everyone in the world would die to be here. we provide a chance - no promise, but a chance - to be better - to do better. when we lose 'that', we lose what makes us great. a bunch of stupid and/or old, stuck-up white people are just going to have to get the sand out of their ######s and stop making pearls.from a old-style repub, gun owning, cwp carrying (including the wife), stupid hating, willing ignorant educator, tea bag loathing, haven't voted for a repub since 2000 individual.last frivolous purchase was a glock 17 (wanted a .45 but the wife can't handle this - no way with a .45). next a saiga - clip fed semi-auto 12 guage - zombies cringe in fear... the people of color don't scare me - it is the stupid, white pieces of #### who didn't take advantage of their opportunity that worry me... and so you don't think i only dislike white people (of which i am one), white people have no monopoly on stupidity or lack of maximizing opportunity. ymmv...
Is this from the new Gil Scott-Heron album, as reinvisioned by Tom Tancredo and set to lyrics by Rush Limbaugh sung by... you?
 
Sarah Palin came out in favor of the Arizona bill, no big surprise there. Karl Rove has come out very much against it; no big surprise there, for anyone who has studied his views on this issue and his concerns about Latino voting.

But one of the most interesting views comes from the official biographer of Barry Goldwater, Arizona's most famous political son. According to this guy, the long time Senator who was a great believer in individual rights and libertarian values would have been disgusted by this law and ashamed of his home state.

 
Sarah Palin came out in favor of the Arizona bill, no big surprise there. Karl Rove has come out very much against it; no big surprise there, for anyone who has studied his views on this issue and his concerns about Latino voting.But one of the most interesting views comes from the official biographer of Barry Goldwater, Arizona's most famous political son. According to this guy, the long time Senator who was a great believer in individual rights and libertarian values would have been disgusted by this law and ashamed of his home state.
Not gonna argue anything you mentioned here but could we give Mo Udall some propers as being in contention for the most famous political son of Arizona?
 
won't survive challenge and thus give rise to the cry of liberal, activist courts. political whores (i mean local elected officials who knew this would happen) can say ' we tried but the courts overruled. politicos get re-elected. courts catch ####... law takes a hit (and not from a bong). more people hold up signs with words spelled wrong...i can't wait for jesus hernandez to become president of the usa. never thought i'd see a black man become president (i'm old enough to remember the "white's only', 'black only' signs and never understood the hate - in 1996 a white life guard at lake lanier islands allowed a black man to drown and said 'they don't pay me to save those people' - look it up.). i voted for obama and would vote for anyone - including a left handed, one eyed, muslim gay - if they were the best candidate.america is a wonderful place. we are full of righteous hate and love, disdain and acceptance, inclusion, exclusion, stupidity, ignorance, intellect, compassion and insensitivity (did i say stupidity). yet most everyone in the world would die to be here. we provide a chance - no promise, but a chance - to be better - to do better. when we lose 'that', we lose what makes us great. a bunch of stupid and/or old, stuck-up white people are just going to have to get the sand out of their ######s and stop making pearls.from a old-style repub, gun owning, cwp carrying (including the wife), stupid hating, willing ignorant educator, tea bag loathing, haven't voted for a repub since 2000 individual.last frivolous purchase was a glock 17 (wanted a .45 but the wife can't handle this - no way with a .45). next a saiga - clip fed semi-auto 12 guage - zombies cringe in fear... the people of color don't scare me - it is the stupid, white pieces of #### who didn't take advantage of their opportunity that worry me... and so you don't think i only dislike white people (of which i am one), white people have no monopoly on stupidity or lack of maximizing opportunity. ymmv...
Is this from the new Gil Scott-Heron album, as reinvisioned by Tom Tancredo and set to lyrics by Rush Limbaugh sung by... you?
you obviously have not read this post or any of my other posts (and by 'read' i mean understood). neither tancredo or limbaugh would be welcome in my home. you are most likely in the same category... i'm still trying to decide if your post is based on stupidity, ignorance or lack of reading comprehension. education is this day and age is so 'hit and miss' so i'll give you the benefit of the doubt. additional posts will provide clarity...
 
il·le·gal

ADJECTIVE:

Prohibited by law.

Prohibited by official rules: an illegal pass in football.

Unacceptable to or not performable by a computer: an illegal operation.

NOUN:

An illegal immigrant.

I would assume this means they shouldn't be here and we should get them out.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top