RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law

RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Mercnbeth -> RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law (4/22/2010 4:28:15 PM)
quote: Merc, explain one more time why Obama won't go after Goldman? Why are you being a coward and attempting to hijack this fine thread when I've posted a distinct one specifically on this issue? GOLDMAN SACHS quote: Thank God you have beth, any other woman with the capability to think would be embarrassed that they paired up with such a nitwit. Lets review - DG " If you haven't read it out of some conservative rag it has never come out of your mouth." Response: Is this because I champion and support all those great 'conservative' ideas such as legalizing drugs, eliminating any government sanctioned contractual union such as man/wife exclusivity for marriage, getting our troops out of Iraq, and Afghanistan, and any foreign occupation? Or perhaps it is my conservative approach regarding religion, believing they all share a common pragmatic realty to believing in Santa Clause or the Easter Bunny, that confuses you? Maybe it's my conservative approach in supporting the elimination of all Corporate welfare programs, or the prosecution of any corporation or individual employing workers who are in the country illegally? (Had to include that to make this about the OP and not entirely about me!) No DG response.... DG: You listed you have sickle cell on an health insurance application and got approved? Response: You must be college educated - I said I was tested No DG response.... Illustrating again.... Their positions, policies, and philosophy don't stand up when reflected back at them. Ergo - they don't, and can't, speak to the facts and discuss them and result to attacking anyone bold enough to reflect their own words back to illustrate their ignorance and hypocrisy. ...they don't apologize for their ignorance - they shout out displaying it louder, on a new tangent. Good thing you know shit.

Louve00 -> RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law (4/22/2010 4:39:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: yummee quote: ORIGINAL: Louve00 The bulk of us do not carry around our birth certificates, nor are we required to carry around our SS cards. The people of color (particularly of brown color, in this instance) to show proof they are Americans just because they're walking around in Arizona, to me, is unconstitutional. There are better ways of doing it than taking a step backwards. IMO. B is a Canadian citizen and a resident alien (legal resident of the US although foreign citizen). He is required to carry his green card with him and produce it on demand. He is very white, reddish blonde with blue eyes, and has been required to provide this green card many times since we've been together (since 2003). We are in Washington State (for about another week) and it's certainly not because he's brown or Mexican that he is required to produce this green card. Why do you assume that if someone is required to produce papers, its because they are "brown?" People produce documentation here (WA) all the time because we are a border state. How is Arizona different? Arizona borders Mexico. Mexicans are brown. It's all about the location, in this instance, that makes me reference the brown color.

yummee -> RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law (4/22/2010 4:51:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Louve00 quote: ORIGINAL: yummee quote: ORIGINAL: Louve00 The bulk of us do not carry around our birth certificates, nor are we required to carry around our SS cards. The people of color (particularly of brown color, in this instance) to show proof they are Americans just because they're walking around in Arizona, to me, is unconstitutional. There are better ways of doing it than taking a step backwards. IMO. B is a Canadian citizen and a resident alien (legal resident of the US although foreign citizen). He is required to carry his green card with him and produce it on demand. He is very white, reddish blonde with blue eyes, and has been required to provide this green card many times since we've been together (since 2003). We are in Washington State (for about another week) and it's certainly not because he's brown or Mexican that he is required to produce this green card. Why do you assume that if someone is required to produce papers, its because they are "brown?" People produce documentation here (WA) all the time because we are a border state. How is Arizona different? Arizona borders Mexico. Mexicans are brown. It's all about the location, in this instance, that makes me reference the brown color. I guess I am not understanding. Here, in WA, a border state, checks are random. White people, brown people, yellow people and red people are required to show papers. It was my understanding that the Arizona legislation would require PEOPLE to provide proof of residence just like is done here in this border state (where there is no uproar over, btw), not that it requires BROWN PEOPLE to show proof of residence. As far as I am concerned, if its OK on the US-Canadian border, why would it suddenly not be OK on the US-Mexican border?

thompsonx -> RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law (4/22/2010 4:57:15 PM)
He is very white, reddish blonde with blue eyes, and has been required to provide this green card many times since we've been together What were the circumstances where he was required to show his green card?

thompsonx -> RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law (4/22/2010 4:59:26 PM)
I guess I am not understanding. Here, in WA, a border state, checks are random. Random as in they stop your car and ask all of the occupants to provide ID?

Sanity -> RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law (4/22/2010 5:01:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Illustrating again.... Their positions, policies, and philosophy don't stand up when reflected back at them. Ergo - they don't, and can't, speak to the facts and discuss them and result to attacking anyone bold enough to reflect their own words back to illustrate their ignorance and hypocrisy. ...they don't apologize for their ignorance - they shout out displaying it louder, on a new tangent. Good thing you know shit. Time after time, post after post, day after day, week after week. I don't always agree with you Merc but thats hitting the nail on the head. [sm=applause.gif]

domiguy -> RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law (4/22/2010 5:10:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: Merc, explain one more time why Obama won't go after Goldman? Why are you being a coward and attempting to hijack this fine thread when I've posted a distinct one specifically on this issue? GOLDMAN SACHS Douchebag, there is nothing in that whole thread you started that would explain why Obama would now be going after Goldman? It shows you are a complete moron. You are a simpleton. beth sure is lucky

Mercnbeth -> RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law (4/22/2010 5:20:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: domiguy quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: Merc, explain one more time why Obama won't go after Goldman? Why are you being a coward and attempting to hijack this fine thread when I've posted a distinct one specifically on this issue? GOLDMAN SACHS Douchebag, there is nothing in that whole thread you started that would explain why Obama would now be going after Goldman? Hey coward - why again here? You use rhetoric without substance so I understand why you think the Obama Administration rhetoric serves as substance; while at the same time he entertains the CEO in the White House. Pretending to be black isn't working for you, but when it comes to being unable to discuss a topic intelligently - you have me convinced. Douche-bag? Expanding your clean up from colon to vagina? I don't think that will help you get a woman you'd still have to recognize what orifice it is used when you see it, and I doubt you remember the last one you've seen first hand - your mother's at birth.

xbrand -> RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law (4/23/2010 8:40:02 AM)
Nipping too much at the Jack I see. Obama states the AZ law is misguided and illegal. And the constitionality of the AZ law will be fought in the courtroom. And where the hell did you get all that garbage to spouted? Nipping too much at the Jack.

thompsonx -> RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law (4/23/2010 8:48:28 AM)
quote: Time after time, post after post, day after day, week after week. I don't always agree with you Merc but thats hitting the nail on the head. Is it your position that you would rather spend taxpayers money to arrest those who commit federal misdomeanors rather than those who commit federal felonies?

RacerJim -> RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law (4/23/2010 8:49:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: xbrand Nipping too much at the Jack I see. Obama states the AZ law is misguided and illegal. And the constitionality of the AZ law will be fought in the courtroom. And where the hell did you get all that garbage to spouted? Nipping too much at the Jack. Obama is lying to you, again. It is Obama's "Obamacare" that is misguided and illegal, and not wanted by at least 65% of "We the people..." And the constitutionality of "Obamacare" is already being fought in the courtrooms of several States. The one spouting all the garbage is you.

thompsonx -> RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law (4/23/2010 8:52:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx My apologies for creating conditions which generated responses from individuals where that blanket assumption could be made. Apology accepted [sm=LMAO.gif] You know - it is truly a shame you have no idea how funny your comment is in the context of the post it is quoted. Thanks! LOL! Is it your position that you would rather spend taxpayers money to arrest those who commit federal misdomeanors rather than those who commit federal felonies?

xbrand -> RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law (4/23/2010 9:33:16 AM)
Really, and what has Obamacare got to do with the topic of this thread. You certainly have missed a great opportunity to not demonstrate your stupiity. You too, have been hitting the Jack......extensively.

Louve00 -> RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law (4/23/2010 9:34:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: yummee I guess I am not understanding. Here, in WA, a border state, checks are random. White people, brown people, yellow people and red people are required to show papers. It was my understanding that the Arizona legislation would require PEOPLE to provide proof of residence just like is done here in this border state (where there is no uproar over, btw), not that it requires BROWN PEOPLE to show proof of residence. As far as I am concerned, if its OK on the US-Canadian border, why would it suddenly not be OK on the US-Mexican border? For one thing this is about illegal immigration. Canadians aren't looking to cross the borders illegally. They aren't bringing drugs and crime across the border illegally, and they aren't looking for jobs illegally, either. While there is already a national immigration law in place that Arizona has already been enforcing (and catching illegals on a daily basis, they took it a whole step further by instituting this new law. The problem is its not going to stop illegal immigration (and again, this is a problem in AZ and the southern bordering states, not so much in WA or any other states bordering Canada). If the current laws haven't, neither will this. What this new law in Arizona does is legalize racial profiling, because the goal of this law is targetted at finding Mexican people who are here illegally.

xbrand -> RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law (4/23/2010 9:42:22 AM)
Mercnbeth, Have you noticed that these 'its' on this network are incapable, cannot, offer logic and reason, in rebuttal, but only offer insults and the hi-jacking of a thread, to divert the topic at hand. I'm with you guy.

xbrand -> RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law (4/23/2010 9:51:20 AM)
yes indeed. Canadians are not going to travel to Mexico to cross the borders illegally. What this law does is expands the powers of the police to detain anyone without the probably cause thingie. Chances are, the police will only profile, detain, question those who are of Mexican descent, caucasians, most likely don't have to concern themselves, Chinese, Arabs, or any brown, black, yellow race is who this is largely effecting. The AZ police now have free reign to do as they please. Which they did anyways.

slvemike4u -> RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law (4/23/2010 9:57:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: xbrand Nipping too much at the Jack I see. Obama states the AZ law is misguided and illegal. And the constitionality of the AZ law will be fought in the courtroom. And where the hell did you get all that garbage to spouted? Nipping too much at the Jack. If this is actually a reply to me please quote the post of mine you are responding to.I am the one who started this thread and I have consistantly stated that this law is a)unconstitutional and b)unconsionable...and c)there is no such fucking thing as "nipping too much at the Jack"...for one thing I don't nip...I am a fully formed adult...I sip...liberally sip(sometimes I have been known to gulp)....I never "nip". I think there is some confusion evident here....whether due to alcohol consumption or not...you are jumping on the wrong poster.

Mercnbeth -> RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law (4/23/2010 10:12:32 AM)
quote: What this new law in Arizona does is legalize racial profiling, Louve, Where is the language in AZ Bill #SB1070 supporting this assessment? The link will take you to the document. The "Intent" section: Section 1. IntentThe legislature finds that there is a compelling interest in the cooperative enforcement of federal immigration laws throughout all of Arizona. The legislature declares that the intent of this act is to make attrition through enforcement the public policy of all state and local government agencies in Arizona. The provisions of this act are intended to work together to discourage and deter the unlawful entry and presence of aliens and economic activity by persons unlawfully present in the United States. I only read through the entire Bill once so far, but I couldn't find any specificity on skin color. The language allows the documentation question to be asked of anyone. More telling regarding the issue is this quote, coming from an "immigration advocate"; Joe Rubio, lead organizer for Valley Interfaith Project, a Phoenix-based advocacy group, calling it "an economic train wreck." He added that "Arizona's economic recovery will lag way behind the country's if we keep chasing away our workforce. Where do the legislators think business will find workers?" His quote points to the larger issue. Requiring people to have a legal status to work is already a law on the books. Why should "business" have any difficulty finding workers? The difficulty would be in finding illegal workers who can be exploited by businesses based on their illegal status. Based upon Mr. Rubio's comments the Bill will reduce businesses ability to pay below minimum wage and get away with it. It will also help Arizona reduce unemployment, currently reported at 9.4%. The proper response and question to ask Mr. Rubio would be, with the official employment rate so high, why does he think requiring all hires and workers to be in the county legally will be an "economic train wreck" and cause Arizona to lag? If anything enforcement through this bill will enhance the employment opportunities in Arizona. It seems that Mr. Rubio, as others do commonly, accepts and patronizes 'Corporate' interests and welfare as long as the result serves his personal agenda. Mr. Rubio has his advocacy group to funnel donations. Politicians, from both parties as represented by the McCain, currently flip flopping back as now on the 'anti-amnesty' side he formerly backed in consideration of the current plurality wind, benefit even more. Politicians get votes from the affected constituency. They also get money in PAC campaign contributions from the Corporations to maintain their cheap labor force. The 'race card' is a smoke screen distraction.

popeye1250 -> RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law (4/23/2010 10:25:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx I guess I am not understanding. Here, in WA, a border state, checks are random. Random as in they stop your car and ask all of the occupants to provide ID? Thompson, I lived in a border state for ten years, New Hampshire. The Border Patrol set up random checks on rt 93 far from the border, I think it was the Boston Globe or the Manchester Union Leader that had an article about it back in 95-97'. They interviewed people who were stopped and they had no problems with it. They said the officers were polite and proffessional as are most LEOS. They'd pull over every tenth vehicle or whatever. They're doing what we're paying them to do.

slvemike4u -> RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law (4/23/2010 10:26:56 AM)
The profiling Merc is in the implementation of this law....in order for it to be effective it has to be applied in an effective manner...and intelligent people know how that is done.....by profiling.And that my friend is un-Constitutional.....Tell you ,I will bet you a week at your place in Italy this law either never goes into effect or if it by chance actually does leads to immediate lawsuits....huge damage payouts and a quick repeal. If I'm wrong I have no freakin clue what a fair value compensation do you would be...but the point is moot...I probably couldn't afford to pay it anyway.[:)]

Page: << < prev 9 10 [11] 12 13 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625