From: larry moe 'n curly on

Hachiroku ハチロク wrote:
>
> The ACLU does not protect the Consitution. It only protects what Liberals
> want protected.

Then explain why the ACLU has defended free speech rights of Nazis and
Klansmen and the Second Amendment, the latter something usually of
more concern among conservatives than liberals (despite socialist US
Senator Bernie Sanders' high NRA approval rating).

From: Dewey, Remum & Howe on
"larry moe 'n curly" <larrymoencurly(a)my-deja.com> wrote in
news:bc9f631e-5d82-4c8d-9b8f-b1101228708c(a)m35g2000prn.googlegroups.com:

>
> Hachiroku ハチロク wrote:
>>
>> The ACLU does not protect the Consitution. It only protects what
>> Liberals want protected.
>
> Then explain why the ACLU has defended free speech rights of Nazis and
> Klansmen and the Second Amendment, the latter something usually of
> more concern among conservatives than liberals (despite socialist US
> Senator Bernie Sanders' high NRA approval rating).

The ACLU wants publicity. It's that simple. Try going to them with
something that won't hit the press and you'll see.

--
Cujo - The Official Overseer of Kooks and Trolls in dfw.*,
alt.paranormal, alt.astrology and alt.astrology.metapsych. Supreme Holy
Overlord of alt.fucknozzles. Winner of the 8/2000, 2/2003 & 4/2007 HL&S
award. July 2005 Hammer of Thor. Winning Trainer - Barbara Woodhouse
Memorial Dog Whistle - 12/2005 & 4/2008. COOSN-266-06-01895.
"I won long ago. They just don't realize its over." - Ed wins another
important court decision in the Court of Kookiness and Delusion.
From: Aratzio on
On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 20:13:21 -0400, in the land of alt.aratzio,
Hachiroku ???? <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> got double secret probation for
writing:

>What would she have to say about US Immigration laws, then?

That they are constitutional since the Federal Government by the
Constitution is tasked with Foreign Policy. Care to guess what
Immigration policy is considered a part of?

Really, do you know anything about the constitution?
From: Aratzio on
On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 21:03:14 -0400, in the land of alt.aratzio,
Hachiroku ???? <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> got double secret probation for
writing:

>On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 19:14:47 -0500, pandora wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 16:12:40 -0700, Aratzio wrote:
>>
>>> SB1070 gutted on constitutional grounds.
>>
>> Yippee!
>
>Seriously, are you an idiot? I mean, really, legally, an idiot?
>
>Why are you cheering this? Are you an illegal alien?
>Did you come here legally? If so, why are you cheering a decision that
>allows millions of people who didn't endure what you did to remain in the
>US? No Green Card, no Immigration, nothing. They just crossed the border,
>which by *Federal* law, is illegal.
>
>Seriously, you really must have been legally declared an idiot at some
>point in time. It appears only an idiot would cheer illegal activity.
>
>Can you go back to Canada as soon as possible?
>
>
>
Poor stupid wingnut, hates the Constitution because it protects the
brown citizens too.

From: Aratzio on
On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 01:09:30 +0000 (UTC), in the land of
alt.autos.toyota, "Dewey, Remum & Howe" <cujo(a)insurgent.org> got
double secret probation for writing:

>"larry moe 'n curly" <larrymoencurly(a)my-deja.com> wrote in
>news:bc9f631e-5d82-4c8d-9b8f-b1101228708c(a)m35g2000prn.googlegroups.com:
>
>>
>> Hachiroku ハチロク wrote:
>>>
>>> The ACLU does not protect the Consitution. It only protects what
>>> Liberals want protected.
>>
>> Then explain why the ACLU has defended free speech rights of Nazis and
>> Klansmen and the Second Amendment, the latter something usually of
>> more concern among conservatives than liberals (despite socialist US
>> Senator Bernie Sanders' high NRA approval rating).
>
>The ACLU wants publicity. It's that simple. Try going to them with
>something that won't hit the press and you'll see.

The ALCU was not involved. This was the Justice Department.