Wingnuts fail again.
in [Toyota]
|
Prev: {BS} Here's a "Personal Comment" that won't get displayed!
Next: Douchebag "john" posts recall alerts, obtains attention he missed out on as child.
From: Hachiroku ハチロク on 29 Jul 2010 16:03 On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 14:49:33 -0500, pandora wrote: > On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 22:47:15 -0400, Hachiroku ハチロク wrote: > >> On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 19:03:11 -0700, larry moe 'n curly wrote: >> >> >>> >>> Hachiroku ハチロク wrote: >>>> >>>> On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 17:54:19 -0700, larry moe 'n curly wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 16:12:40 -0700, Aratzio wrote: >>>>> >>>>> > SB1070 gutted on constitutional grounds. >>>> >>>> Bullshit. Derailed by Vox Populus. Nothing to do with "constitutional >>>> grounds". >>>> >>>> > You'd have a point if most Arizonans were against SB1070, but in >>>> > reality about 60% of the people here are in favor of it, according >>>> > to this July 25 poll: >>>> > >>>> > www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2010/07/25/20100725immigration-poll- > demographic.html >>>> >>>> Then they are just ignoring the voice of the people. >>> >>> But you said the court overturned the law because it HAD heeded the >>> voice of the people -- "derailed by vox populus". You need to keep >>> better track of your lies, Mr. convicted con artist. >> >> >> It heeded the voice of the media, not the people. > > Back pedaler. Hehehehehehehe. "The people" have no say in this administration, as has been demonstrated time and time again. The Media controls the voice of the people. If you don't see that, you should open your eyes. Being a Liberal, you can't. You can only do what you're programmed to do. Perhaps one of these days you'll start thinking for yourself. But I doubt it.
From: Hachiroku ハチロク on 29 Jul 2010 16:04 On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 22:50:09 -0400, Hachiroku ハチロク wrote: > On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 18:36:44 -0700, Aratzio wrote: > >> 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? > > Yup. Plenty. I also know a bit about Immigration law, too. > > If you're here illegally, you've comitted a crime. If you've committed a > crime, you are subject to inquisition by Law Enforcement. > > Let's say you're a drug dealer, and are breaking a Federal law. You get > stopped by an AZ State patrolman. Is he going to say, "Aw, shucks, you > broke a Federal law. I'll have to let you go and hope the Feds catch you." > > Really, are you that stupid? Apparently so: Three Chandler police officers were shot last night, one fatally, during an undercover drug bust, which, as described by police, sounds like a scene out of Miami Vice.
From: Hachiroku ハチロク on 29 Jul 2010 16:22 On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 11:01:25 +0000, Jeff The Drunk wrote: > On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 16:12:40 -0700, Aratzio wrote: > >> SB1070 gutted on constitutional grounds. > > So a temporary hold on some aspects of SB1070 constitutes > being "gutted"? In what universe? There is an easy way around this: ANY person arrested may be required to provide proof of citizenship or legal residence. The easy way around all this is to just arrest everyone who runs afoul of any law ("You spit on the sidewalk. You're coming with me.") It will put a hell of a load on the legal system, but this way cannot be removed by a Liberal thinking judge anywhere.
From: CharlesGrozny on 29 Jul 2010 17:36 "Hachiroku ハチロク" <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote in message news:H6l4o.37748$lS1.24264(a)newsfe12.iad... > On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 14:36:28 -0500, pandora wrote: > >>> <YAWN> Here we go with the straw man of "infringing on the rights of US >>> citizens." The law wasn't written about US citizens or Legal Aliens. Why >>> did you have a Green Card? You have to produce it if asked for it. There >>> is nothing illegal or unconstitutional about that. >> >> I'm not a citizen. And yes, the law, as written, would do exactly that. > > How so? If you have a Green Card, you have to produce it to any LEA asking > to see it. You know that. You could just be walking down the street, and > if a cop comes up to you and asks you for ID, are you going to refuse? > > > Ahh for the old days, when aliens had to register by Jan 31st of each year. Charles Grozny
From: CharlesGrozny on 29 Jul 2010 17:37
"Hachiroku ハチロク" <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote in message news:l8l4o.37749$lS1.27601(a)newsfe12.iad... > On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 14:49:33 -0500, pandora wrote: > >> On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 22:47:15 -0400, Hachiroku ハチロク wrote: >> >>> On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 19:03:11 -0700, larry moe 'n curly wrote: >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Hachiroku ハチロク wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 17:54:19 -0700, larry moe 'n curly wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 16:12:40 -0700, Aratzio wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> > SB1070 gutted on constitutional grounds. >>>>> >>>>> Bullshit. Derailed by Vox Populus. Nothing to do with "constitutional >>>>> grounds". >>>>> >>>>> > You'd have a point if most Arizonans were against SB1070, but in >>>>> > reality about 60% of the people here are in favor of it, according >>>>> > to this July 25 poll: >>>>> > >>>>> > www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2010/07/25/20100725immigration-poll- >> demographic.html >>>>> >>>>> Then they are just ignoring the voice of the people. >>>> >>>> But you said the court overturned the law because it HAD heeded the >>>> voice of the people -- "derailed by vox populus". You need to keep >>>> better track of your lies, Mr. convicted con artist. >>> >>> >>> It heeded the voice of the media, not the people. >> >> Back pedaler. Hehehehehehehe. > > > "The people" have no say in this administration, as has been demonstrated > time and time again. The Media controls the voice of the people. If you > don't see that, you should open your eyes. > > Being a Liberal, you can't. You can only do what you're programmed to do. > > Perhaps one of these days you'll start thinking for yourself. > > But I doubt it. > > The more I see this administration, the more I wonder if this is what Dietrich Bonhoffer must have felt like watching Hitler destroy Germany. Charles Grozny |