Patterico's Pontifications

4/23/2010

Arizona Governor Signs Immigration Bill

Filed under: Immigration,Law,Obama — DRJ @ 2:37 pm



[Guest post by DRJ]

Governor Jan Brewer has signed Arizona’s controversial immigration bill:

“Gov. Jan Brewer ignored criticism from President Barack Obama on Friday and signed into law a bill supporters said would take handcuffs off police in dealing with illegal immigration in Arizona, the nation’s gateway for human and drug smugglers.

With hundreds of people surrounding the state Capitol, protesting that the bill would lead to civil rights abuses, Brewer said she wouldn’t tolerate racial profiling. She said critics were “overreacting.”

“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.
***
The bill, sent to the Republican governor by the GOP-led Legislature, would make it a crime under state law to be in the country illegally. It would also require local police officers to question people about their immigration status if there is reason to suspect they are illegal immigrants.”

Earlier today, President Obama referred the bill to the Department of Justice to examine its legality:

“That includes, for example, the recent efforts in Arizona, which threaten to undermine basic notions of fairness that we cherish as Americans, as well as the trust between police and their communities that is so crucial to keeping us safe,” Obama said.”

Obama has, of course, already made up his mind on this … just like he made up his mind that the police officers “acted stupidly” when they arrested Henry L. Gates, Jr.

— DRJ

301 Responses to “Arizona Governor Signs Immigration Bill”

  1. The AZ governor made it clear that she has asked the Obama administration for the last year to do something about the border. He has not responded to her.

    So if this is the only way to get the country’s and Obama’s attention too bad. Is Obama willing to go to every funeral for Americans murdered by illegal immigrants?

    MU789 (25b69d)

  2. Oh, the Humanity!
    All of those poor, down-trodden illegals will have to move to New Mexico, or Kalifornia.
    If it wasn’t snowing still in the Mid-West, I suspect that they would all go to the People’s Republic of Chicago.

    AD - RtR/OS! (9562e0)

  3. My favorite piece of wingnutness in the bill is any local xenophobe can sue any police agency if they feel they’re not being sufficiently mean to brown people. That should go over real well.

    imdw (603c39)

  4. my favorite part is towards the bottom of the can, when all that’s left is propellant. only then can i can really understand what i must do to help Barrack bring true socialism to America in our lifetime.

    im huffing wd-40 (fb8750)

  5. Way to go, Jan!

    La Raza stated the illegals would be leaving AZ in droves if this law passed, heading to other states. Nothing could make me happier. I might even offer a free ride to the state border.

    imdw – Will you take in a nice family, to provide medicare care, education and food. I would be happy to send them your way.

    PatAZ (9d1bb3)

  6. “That includes, for example, the recent efforts in Arizona, which threaten to undermine basic notions of fairness that we cherish as Americans”

    It’s like totally unfair to enforce this country’s laws before come up with an amnesty program because we’ll lose all those future Democrat voters. Duh!

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  7. imdw is probably an illegal alien their ownselves….

    sure as hell being that dumb ought to be illegal. 😀

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  8. My favorite part of the bill is the way its opponents are calling anyone that wants our immigration laws enforced xenophobes.

    MU789 (25b69d)

  9. I’m glad I’m not Mexican-American, and living in Arizona. Life will get very unpleasant there.

    Chris Hooten (0e1f31)

  10. You know, I’ve alway wondered why the undocumented aliens don’t just cross the border to Canada, where healthcare is “free” and drugs are legal. There’s only 30 million people living in a country that’s bigger than the United States.

    lee (cae7a3)

  11. imdw is probably an illegal alien their ownselves….

    Naw, he’s probably a limousine liberal—and one does not have to be wealthy to be guilty of that type of phoniness and mindset. IOW, he fancies himself as so wonderful and big-hearted about the type of illegal immigration pervasive throughout the US, or certainly in places like California and Arizona. But if he had to live in the middle of a community typical of that demographic, or send his kids to a school dominated by the socio-cultural quirks of that culture — in which academic underachievement is quite common, decade after decade — he’d cringe, wilt and blow away.

    Mark (411533)

  12. My father grew up speaking German as the oldest of 11 children born to German immigrants. Before and during WWII (when my father and two of his brothers were over in Europe fighting the German army), my grandparents and other German immigrant families were outspoken in denouncing the Bund and those they deemed traitors to our country. More than 11,000 German-Americans were put in internment camps, some of them because they were ratted out by people like my grandparents.

    But now, you never hear any legal Latino immigrants speaking out against illegals that feel it is their right to live an unfettered life here. How much easier would the situation be if legal immigrants were to fight for the rule of law of the country they took an oath of allegiance? If I’m not mistaken that oath includes a line about supporting and defending the laws of the United States.

    But when legal immigrants don’t care about our immigration laws any more than illegal immigrants, laws like the one in AZ are bound to be passed.

    MU789 (25b69d)

  13. Chris: that’s basically my problem with the bill: “if there is reason to suspect they are illegal immigrants.” This strikes me as being basically license to demand that anyone who looks hispanic show his papers everywhere he goes.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  14. Lee, I’m not sure what “legal drugs” have to do with illegal aliens, but almost all drugs, including illicit ones, are legal for personal use in Mexico now, so it really wouldn’t be an reason for them to travel to Canada.

    Chris Hooten (0e1f31)

  15. the trust between police and their communities

    Now, by “communities” he means ” communities of illegal aliens breaking the law in this country”, right?

    Implicit in this “communities” twaddle is the idea that illegals are not actually, what’s the word .. illegal.

    Subotai (a6d4f8)

  16. This strikes me as being basically license to demand that anyone who looks hispanic show his papers everywhere he goes

    Oh, no!

    And that is a bad thing, because …?

    Subotai (a6d4f8)

  17. I don’t like what I have read about certain portions of this bill, but the Federal government has been actively negligent in their failure to address the problems on the border. That States are doing something like this shows how bad the problem has become.

    JD (9f2abc)

  18. Subotai: because law-abiding people shouldn’t have to produce their papers to be allowed to go about their business … and because singling out one group of people for this kind of harassment, based on their skin color, isn’t equal protection.

    The fact that I’m immune to the demand that citizens prove their citizenship to any cop who wants them to (because I’m white, so I would neve rbe asked) doesn’t make it any less a police-state tactic.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  19. aphrael, how many non-English speaking legal residents do you know who hang out at the Home Depot looking for work?

    AD - RtR/OS! (9562e0)

  20. because law-abiding people shouldn’t have to produce their papers to be allowed to go about their business … and because singling out one group of people for this kind of harassment, based on their skin color, isn’t equal protection.

    I do not like this part at all, aphrael. Having said that, how would you suggest that States in the southwest address this huge and growing problem?

    JD (9f2abc)

  21. aphrael – and there are no white hispanic illegal immigrants ?

    Now who is being overtly the racist ?

    More importantly, just because *you* project upon *your* image of how *you* would act as a cop “singling out one group of people for this kind of harassment” doesn’t mean that good professional cops will exhibit that kind of behaviour …

    Alasdair (e7cb73)

  22. I’ll bet there are many people who not only look Hispanic but are Hispanic and here legally and don’t understand why they had to obey the law and others don’t. I’ll also bet that they will never get their opinion noticed.

    I have great sympathy for an (otherwise) honest and law abiding person who wishes to work their butt off in the US to have a better life than they did in Mexico.

    But it is absolutely assinine for American citizens, including those whose first language is Spanish, to live in fear of drug smugglers and human trafficers who should not even be in this country.

    The first responsibility for the President is the defense of the American people. If he will not allow resources to be deployed to protect people who live at or near the border he should be impeached for dereliction of duty. If individual border agents would be held accountable for letting armed gang members into the US at a checkpoint, then how much more the commanding officer for knowingly witholding the necessary resources to defend against them.

    If the law is used to bother every teenager getting off of a school bus then I’ll believe they are acting in bad faith. If it is used when someone is caught speeding north in a car crowded with people and cannot show a driver’s license, I’m sorry, but if the govt (Repubs and dems) was serious about defending the border so that anyone who did come through was not an armed criminal it would be much easier on those who are “hard-working, honest folk”.

    MD in Philly (59a3ad)

  23. because law-abiding people shouldn’t have to produce their papers to be allowed to go about their business

    Why not?

    because singling out one group of people for this kind of harassment, based on their skin color, isn’t equal protection.

    It certainly is equal protection. It’s not “equal protection”, the whacky legal doctrine dreamed up by liberals in the legal profession, but every citizen is entitled to the equal protection of the laws.

    I don’t find your moral injunctions very persuasive. Next thing, you’ll be arguing that it was illegal for the FBI to go after the mob, because that was picking on Italians. At least you will if you are consistent.

    If a certain pattern of illigal behavior is widespread among people of a certain specific ethnicnity, then the police attempting to prevent that illegal behavior had damn well better concentrate their efforts among people of that ethnicity. Failure to do so would be gross negligence on their part.

    Subotai (a6d4f8)

  24. My favorite piece of wingnutness in the bill is any local xenophobe can sue any police agency if they feel they’re not being sufficiently mean to brown people. That should go over real well.

    So derogatory, so narrow minded, so judgmental… just gotta be a prog.

    Dana (1e5ad4)

  25. My own noton of “fairness” and “equal protection of the laws” requires some guy names Jose Gomez who wandered across the border into America to receive at least the same punishment for a crime as would a native born American named John Smith.

    The fact that this is not the case at present, and the fact that Obama and aphrael are not displaying any moral outrage about this, tells me that they are not the sort of people I want giving me lectures about fairness.

    Subotai (a6d4f8)

  26. Producing Papers…
    IIRC, a case out of NV that went to SCOTUS has set the pattern for this, and the Nine Robed Wonders (or at least a majority of them) came down on the side of the cops, that when asked, you must produce identification, or face detention until you identity can be reasonably ascertained.
    So, word to the wise, next time some cop says “You got ID?”, don’t tell him to go …. a rolling donut.

    AD - RtR/OS! (9562e0)

  27. AD – I don’t know anyone who hangs out at the Home Depot looking for work.

    I’d have a lot less problem with this rule if there were guidelines other than “trust the police to be reasonable” for who can be stopped and interrogated when.

    Alasdair – that’s a neat trick.

    I’m speculating that I think that cops in Arizona will only stop hispanics under this law, and you conclude from that that (a) I’m being overtly racist, (b) that I think there are no white illegal immigrants, and (C) that I’m describing how I would enforce this policy if I were a police officer. Beautifully done. It’s a great job of assuming the worst about an individual based on limited evidence.

    I don’t have the faith that you do that “professional cops” won’t be racist; there’s far too much evidence that this simply isn’t true. Moreover, I think that if random white people were stopped and forced to show their papers, there would be a huge political outcry and the sherriff responsible would be ousted at the next election. But if random brown people are forced to show their papers, there won’t be.

    MD in philly:

    If the law is used to bother every teenager getting off of a school bus then I’ll believe they are acting in bad faith. If it is used when someone is caught speeding north in a car crowded with people and cannot show a driver’s license, I’m sorry, but if the govt (Repubs and dems) was serious about defending the border so that anyone who did come through was not an armed criminal it would be much easier on those who are “hard-working, honest folk”.

    I think where you and I disagree is in the assumption we make about how this law will be used. I think it will be used to harass hispanics. You think it’s more likely to be used to only go after bad people. Time will tell which of us is right.

    Subotai,

    Why not?

    Being forced to present your papers at the drop of a hat is one of the things we objected to when the Soviets did it, and when the Nazis did it as well.

    Citizens should be free to go about their business without harassment, without people demanding that they have the right to do whatever it is they are doing. That’s one of the fundamental rpecepts of a free society.

    Next thing, you’ll be arguing that it was illegal for the FBI to go after the mob, because that was picking on Italians. At least you will if you are consistent.

    I think that misunderstands my position.

    Had the FBI gone after all Italians, it would have been wrong. They didn’t do that.

    I suspect that the police in some parts of Arizona will use this as an excuse to go after all hispanics. And I object to that: the idea that the color of your skin is enough that any policeman is required by law to demand that you prove you have a right to be here is repugnant.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  28. “…Failure to do so would be gross negligence on their part.”

    Which is why a great many of us are disappointed in the proceedures used by the TSA.

    AD - RtR/OS! (9562e0)

  29. My own noton of “fairness” and “equal protection of the laws” requires some guy names Jose Gomez who wandered across the border into America to receive at least the same punishment for a crime as would a native born American named John Smith.

    My notion of fairness requires that when some guy named Jose Gomez is walking down the street, he’s treated the same as when some guy named John Smith is walking down the street.

    I have no problem at all with the idea that if Jose Gomez and John Smith commit the same crime they should get the same punishment.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  30. So, word to the wise, next time some cop says “You got ID?”, don’t tell him to go …. a rolling donut.

    Well, of course. Always be polite to police officers. Any other course of action is asking for trouble.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  31. Had the FBI gone after all Italians, it would have been wrong. They didn’t do that

    They did do that.

    And I object to that: the idea that the color of your skin is enough that any policeman is required by law to demand that you prove you have a right to be here is repugnant

    I object to your goofy emotionalism and insistence that people of a certain skin color be exempt from the law.

    You want to feel good about yourself? Donate to some charity. Don’t shaft my country just so you can stroke your ego.

    Subotai (a6d4f8)

  32. because law-abiding people shouldn’t have to produce their papers to be allowed to go about their business … and because singling out one group of people for this kind of harassment, based on their skin color, isn’t equal protection.

    I do not like this part at all, aphrael. Having said that, how would you suggest that States in the southwest address this huge and growing problem?

    I’m in Southern Cali. I’m also native born but have olive skin/dark eyes/hair. If Cali miraculously ends up with a governor & legislature that has the guts to take similar action, it would be possible probable that I would be approached to verify. I don’t believe I would have a problem with it though because I’ve got nothing to hide. It might be inconvenient, and it may be uncomfortable but I want equal protection and thus far the federal government has denied me this. So if the price for that equal protection might make me momentarily uncomfortable, that’s a price I’m more than willing to pay. What’s a shame, I s’pose, is that as a a legal citizen I might still have *continue* to pay the price for other’s illegality…just in a different way.

    Dana (1e5ad4)

  33. insistence that people of a certain skin color be exempt from the law.

    Please show me where I’ve done that.

    I am not asking that people of a certain skin color be exempt from the law.

    I am asking that law-abiding citizens of all skin colors be treated equally.

    I find it interesting that you think that treating people equally regardless of skin color will shaft ‘your’ country.

    I also find it disappointing that you don’t describe it as ‘our’ country.

    Because it *is* our country.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  34. Citizens should be free to go about their business without harassment, without people demanding that they have the right to do whatever it is they are doing. That’s one of the fundamental rpecepts of a free society.

    We’re not talking about citizens. I’d like to think you are intelligent enough to grasp that basic fact. We’e talking about NON-citizens. What do you think NON-citizens should be free to do?

    Subotai (a6d4f8)

  35. Subotai:

    my problem with the law is that it is almost certain to be enforced in such a way that law-abiding citizens will be harassed because the police think they look like non-law-abiding non-citizens.

    You think the price that citizens will be asked to pay is worth it. So does Dana.

    I don’t.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  36. Where do the children who are American citizens – whose parents are illegals fall – are we to force them – OUR citizens – to move back to drug infested vilolence filled countrys with thier parents?

    We as Americans are willing to send our children to certain hardship if not death?

    EricPWJohnson (1d0270)

  37. I think it is fair to ask why the cop is asking for the id before you produce it. “Because I said so” is not really a good answer, either.

    Chris Hooten (0e1f31)

  38. aphrael reminds me in this matter of many of those on the Left who, when discussing the carrying of arms, predict that if CCW’s are widely available, their will be gunfights at every instance of road-rage, and the streets of America will turn red with the blood of innocents.
    They’ve been wailing this refrain ever since Florida, in the mid-80’s, went to a Shall-Issue policy on CCW’s, and in everyone of the 35+ States that have adopted the policy since.
    No gun-fights, no rivers of blood, just more Leftist hyperbole and lies.

    AD - RtR/OS! (9562e0)

  39. I wonder how this falls in line with the SCOTUS’s Hiibel decision from a few years ago.

    Xmas (c0ad10)

  40. I am asking that law-abiding citizens of all skin colors be treated equally.

    And what do you think should be done with illegal aliens? You remember illegal aliens? The ones who are the focus of this law, in spite of your twisted fantasy about evil white men beating up poor colored people.

    I also find it disappointing that you don’t describe it as ‘our’ country.

    It’s not your country and you are not my countryman. If I had my way, people like you would be escorted to the nearest border. “White skin” and all.

    Subotai (a6d4f8)

  41. Comment by EricPWJohnson — 4/23/2010 @ 5:42 pm
    Didn’t you say your children are in Saudi?
    What do you have to worry about?
    No one ever stops travellers/shoppers/etc in the ME demanding ID, do they?

    AD - RtR/OS! (9562e0)

  42. aphrael, the point is: citizens should not have to pay the price but that is what we’ve been pressed against the wall and that’s where it stands. We’ve been paying the price all along for the lack of enforcement and now we have to pay for the actual enforcement. If it’s a choice of which we want to pay for I’m going with actual enforcement.

    The epic fail of the federal government has continued to penalize the citizenry. But at least with this, we reap some direct reward from it.

    Dana (1e5ad4)

  43. my problem with the law is that it is almost certain to be enforced in such a way that law-abiding citizens will be harassed because the police think they look like non-law-abiding non-citizens.

    That’s the definition of “law”, period.

    Here’s an idea. Instead of you flaunting your feelings, why don’t you suggest a practical way of getting rid of Americas illegal aliens, one which meets with your approval?

    Subotai (a6d4f8)

  44. You guys have a bad habit of saying things like, “so and so reminds me of some other person who says/believes/espouses such and such.” This falsely projects the second persons opinions onto the first person. How about just dealing with that first person’s actual espoused beliefs?

    Chris Hooten (0e1f31)

  45. Dana

    So we shred the constitution when faced with fiscal inconvienence?

    Cause its important financially?

    Or do we vote in a congress that finally ends entitlement programs that are breaking our backs?

    Maybe we can take this a step further and start sending away those people on social security?

    Afterall with a moving goalpost of who is or isnt a citizen – its just a few votes away now ist it?

    EricPWJohnson (1d0270)

  46. like AD-RtR/OS, #38, above.

    Chris Hooten (0e1f31)

  47. 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).

    Brewer said at today’s ceremony that she won’t tolerate racial profiling and issued an executive order authorizing the state police board to develop standards for “reasonable suspicion.”

    Article 8, Section F of the bill (on page 2) seems to say that cops can’t be prevented from checking your status, but that doesn’t mean “carry papers or go to jail.” It means they can run your name through a computer to confirm whether you’re here legally and no left-leaning municipal authority can stop them.

    Dana (1e5ad4)

  48. EPWJ, I must have missed where it has been legally declared unconstitutional.

    Dana (1e5ad4)

  49. I have a suggestion. Why don’t we just decide to treat Mexican illegal immigrants the way we would be treated if we snuk into Mexico, especially from the southern border.

    Do you have any idea how Mexico handles immigrants ?

    Mike K (2cf494)

  50. Yes, Mike, I do, and it isn’t pretty.
    But, turnabout would be fairplay.

    BTW, correct me if I’m wrong, but I seem to recall that LEGAL immigrants are required to have their INS card with them at all times (or at least a copy). Very few adults in this country can get by without some form of Gov’t ID in their day-to-day lives. I know when I go to Home Depot, and use a credit card, they ask for ID. But then, I’m inside spending money, not lurking at the entrance/exit of the lot, trying to latch onto casual labor.

    AD - RtR/OS! (9562e0)

  51. “So we shred the constitution when faced with fiscal inconvienence?”

    EricPW – Can’t we just enforce our laws and borders?

    Are red herrings in season?

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  52. my problem with the law is that it is almost certain to be enforced in such a way that law-abiding citizens will be harassed because the police think they look like non-law-abiding non-citizens.

    You think the price that citizens will be asked to pay is worth it. So does Dana.

    I don’t. — Comment by aphrael

    In the context of harsh reality, your sentiments likely are (or will be) a case of sniffing the flowers and doing a lot of navel gazing.

    Moreover, when I see the sentence below regarding young people “who neither study nor have jobs,” I think about statistics in this country that show a persistent — repeat:

    persistent

    — pattern of large numbers of students of Latino background always being academic laggards in school, be it K-through-12 or college.

    McClatchy News Service, April 20, 2010:

    Ciudad Juárez, the sprawling Mexican metropolis of 1.3 million people across the border from El Paso, Texas, is Murder City, probably the most dangerous city in the world outside a declared war zone.

    Already this year, 686 people have been murdered here. Residents hunker in trepidation. Most answer cellphone calls only from people they know to avoid random extortion attempts. Instead of going out on the town, they hold private parties — and only with close friends.

    Those residents who can afford to leave have left.

    “The exodus is dramatic,” said Gustavo de la Rosa, the local ombudsman for the Chihuahua State human rights commission. “There are at least 20,000 abandoned houses, and maybe up to 30,000.”

    Crime in Juárez also threatens to bleed across the border. Criminal gangs working for drug cartels already operate on both sides of the border, and in a sign of the growing risks, on March 13 gunmen killed three people linked to the U.S. consulate in Juárez. The sky-high murder rate is driven by two rival groups — the Juárez cartel and the Sinaloa cartel — and their battle for control of drug smuggling into the U.S.

    Murder is only one of Juárez’s problems. Ambitious cartel underlings have diversified into extortion, kidnapping, carjacking and robbery. When President Felipe Calderon sent 10,000 soldiers to Juárez in March 2008 to bolster security after a purge of corrupt police, the army largely ignored other crimes to focus on the cartels, and crime has taken off.

    “The perception of security — that ‘it won’t affect me’ — is less and less,” said Carlos Chavira Rodríguez, local head of the Mexican Employers Federation. “Everyone knows you might get robbed in the street or hit by a stray bullet.”

    Signs saying “For Rent” in Spanish and English dot shuttered restaurants, bars, hotels and other businesses. “Six thousand businesses have closed during the last nine months,” said Daniel Murguia Lardizabal, head of the local branch of the National Chamber of Commerce. “Downtown is dead.”

    The miserable employment situation has fueled the ranks of the gangs.

    “Juárez has 70,000 young people between the ages of 15 and 29 who neither study nor have jobs,” said Chavira, of the Mexican Employers Association. “These people are easy pickings for the gangs.”

    Those gangs are locked in a fight to the death that experts say threatens anyone who has the misfortune to be nearby.

    “To kill one person, they shoot hundreds of rounds and maybe hit the person with five,” said Enrique Torres, spokesman for the joint police-military command in the city. “We’ve arrested people who were paid only 300 pesos ($25) per killing.”

    Calderon’s decision to send in the army in 2007 has seemed only to make matters worse — the death toll of 1,623 in 2008 rose to 2,635 in 2009 — and many want the army gone.

    The city, meanwhile, tries to cope with the executions that average seven per day — so common that this reporter drove by one shortly after it happened. A body lay covered by a sheet on a sidewalk.

    On another day, after a hit squad in the Erendira district executed a man, a radio report said children in an adjacent park “kept on playing,” paying no heed to the slaying.

    Mark (411533)

  53. Daley

    Just to clear u things

    1. I am totally against any entitlements from subsidized insurance risk pools for idiots who cant drive to paying for baby sallies heart transplants – throw in Social Security, everything in that mix except the VA – leave that the hell alone

    2. I am totally against govt pensions for all – except for consulate workers, Federal law enforcement, intelligence agencies and the military

    3. It is totally impossible to enforce our borders – however – I also feel that not everyone has the sacred right to vote – I think everyone has a sacred duty to be a functioning citizen, working, paying taxes, obeying the law – and this is a very loose definition – I mean to eliminate chronic welfare reciints without children and illegals

    4. I AM TOTALLY against public education of any kind. It infringes on our rights of association

    EricPWJohnson (1d0270)

  54. Sounds like the comments here are in favor of this law, as is DRJ.

    So DRJ (and commenters), it’s now time to back up your people. The politicians who stuck out their necks ON YOUR BEHALF to get this law passed need to be PROTECTED and DEFENDED. For as we can see, they’re getting some blowback for this. Are you going to do the hard, dirty work to ensure those politicians who worked ON YOUR BEHALF survive this blowback?

    Or are YOU, DRJ, going to take the same route you took 18 months ago when it came to the initial rejection of TARP, and shirk your duty? And make no mistake, it is your moral duty to make sure these politicians are supported with your vote, your money, AND YOUR BULLY PULPIT THAT PATTERICO SO PROVIDED YOU.

    Which route will you take, DRJ?

    Brad S (cf15cd)

  55. Brad…DRJ doesn’t live in AZ, though she might be persuaded to contribute to certain candidates in that state, though I doubt John McCain is one of them, and I don’t want to speak for her.
    I would think that in TX races, the candidate’s position on border security is very important to many in the electorate.

    AD - RtR/OS! (9562e0)

  56. aphrael and EricPW – If you are at all serious about the enforcement of the laws this country has passed regarding immigration, rather than the continued undermining and lack of enforcement of them, I fail to see what is controversial or objectionable about this bill. It seems as if you are succumbing to the fear mongering and alarmism of the opponents of the without suggesting any workable alternatives.

    From the link:

    “The bill will take effect in late July or early August, and Brewer ordered the state’s law enforcement licensing agency to develop a training course on how to implement it without violating civil rights.

    “We must enforce the law evenly, and without regard to skin color, accent, or social status,” she said. “We must prove the alarmists and the cynics wrong.”” (Race,color and national origin may not be the only factors considered.)

    “The bill, sent to the Republican governor by the GOP-led Legislature, would make it a crime under state law to be in the country illegally.” (Isn’t it already?)

    “It would also require local police officers to question people about their immigration status if there is reason to suspect they are illegal immigrants.” (This is controversial why?)

    If there are constitutional issues, point them out.

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  57. Daley

    Oh come on now – are you telling us they passed this law to clam down on all those crazy canucks?

    In Arizona…

    It could be the Dutch – they are everywhere….

    And dont get me started about the swedes all those damn lutherans

    EricPWJohnson (1d0270)

  58. “IIRC, a case out of NV that went to SCOTUS has set the pattern for this, and the Nine Robed Wonders (or at least a majority of them) came down on the side of the cops, that when asked, you must produce identification, or face detention until you identity can be reasonably ascertained.”

    The rule is actually that you have to say your name. The court didn’t get to whether you have to produce documents. Note that identification is different than immigration status.

    imdw (e66d8d)

  59. This is a bully pulpit? I thought it was a blog.

    DRJ (09fa6c)

  60. I handled a few immigration cases a few years ago. I can’t figure out which annoyed me more, the astonishing sense of entitlement among illegal immigrants or the attitude of those who defend their illegal entry to this country.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  61. “Article 8, Section F of the bill (on page 2) seems to say that cops can’t be prevented from checking your status, but that doesn’t mean “carry papers or go to jail.” It means they can run your name through a computer to confirm whether you’re here legally and no left-leaning municipal authority can stop them.”

    What if “the computer” doesn’t “confirm” it?

    imdw (e66d8d)

  62. “Do you have any idea how Mexico handles immigrants ?”

    Like a despotic third world country?

    imdw (e66d8d)

  63. imdw:

    What if “the computer” doesn’t “confirm” it?

    Isn’t it similar to getting your name on TSA’s list? It happens and you try to fix it, but that doesn’t mean the program is bad.

    DRJ (09fa6c)

  64. I am trying to figure out which is more predictable – Brad S, EricPW, or iamadimwit being a douchenozzle.

    I am going to denounce and condemn all of you, just in case.

    JD (9f2abc)

  65. “Isn’t it similar to getting your name on TSA’s list? It happens and you try to fix it, but that doesn’t mean the program is bad.”

    The thing is, I’m not sure what the “computer” is, what it’s looking at, and whether it is matching you to some list of known residents or known non-residents or what. And what happens if it’s not confirmed? Are you arrested or not? Based on probable cause or ‘reasonable suspicion’ ?

    imdw (017d51)

  66. I am indifferent to the passage of this law.

    I feel very strongly about that.

    happyfeet (c8caab)

  67. And down the rabbit-hole we go with the dimwit.

    Racists.

    JD (9f2abc)

  68. “Here’s an idea. Instead of you flaunting your feelings, why don’t you suggest a practical way of getting rid of Americas illegal aliens, one which meets with your approval?”

    – Subotai

    Dissolve any business that gets caught hiring illegal workers.

    Bam – problem solved.

    Leviticus (30ac20)

  69. “It’s not your country and you are not my countryman. If I had my way, people like you would be escorted to the nearest border. “White skin” and all.”

    – Subotai

    You don’t know anything about aphrael, you faux-aggressive asshole. Just because defending your positions makes your brain hurt doesn’t mean that the person making you defend them should be deported.

    Leviticus (30ac20)

  70. This is a start. The states need to assert their jurisdiction in these matters and obviously not rely on the Feds for the solution. There will be a lot of illegals leaving AZ soon just as there have been a lot of illegals leaving Missouri the last couple of years.

    Two (maybe three) years ago MO passed a law that you had to prove citizenship or legal status to obtain a driver’s license….passport, birth certificate or valid green card. In order to obtain plates for your car you must provide proof of insurance, in order to obtain insurance you must have a driver’s license. Illegals started leaving MO in droves.

    More states can do the same.

    rls (e58293)

  71. Passage of laws like this are a direct result of the Federal government’s continual failure to actually enforce existing laws.

    Hard to tell whether that is a feature or a bug.

    JD (9f2abc)

  72. Comment by DRJ — 4/23/2010 @ 7:31 pm

    Thank you, DRJ, for confirming that you will shirk your duty to defend Sen. Russell Pearce and his colleagues.

    And JD, please feel free to condemn and denounce some more.

    Brad S (cf15cd)

  73. imdw:

    The thing is, I’m not sure what the “computer” is, what it’s looking at, and whether it is matching you to some list of known residents or known non-residents or what.

    One option is that anyone who can’t produce documentation will have their identity/fingerprints checked against ICE’s Secure Communities database. Many law enforcement agencies already use it.

    And what happens if it’s not confirmed? Are you arrested or not? Based on probable cause or ‘reasonable suspicion’ ?

    I suspect they would be detained until the database is checked or more ID is located.

    DRJ (09fa6c)

  74. There will be a lot of illegals leaving AZ soon just as there have been a lot of illegals leaving Missouri the last couple of years.

    Heading west to California – the land of opportunity, sanctuary cities, and no monitoring of company hires.

    Dana (1e5ad4)

  75. I denounce and condemn you, Brad, for once again, engaging in public douchenozzlery.

    Nobody has any “duty” to do as you wish. Nobody. And these duties that you imagine exist only in your imagination.

    JD (9f2abc)

  76. I’m going to have to agree with Leviticus on this one:

    Dissolve any business that gets caught hiring illegal workers.

    Bam – problem solved.

    Not because I’m anti-business or a lefty.

    Business exists to make a profit. By hiring illegal aliens, it maximizes profit, but also circumvents laws, already on the books, to control immigration.

    If we are really serious about immigration reform, then illegal aliens must be deported and the enablers of black-market labor must be punished.

    I don’t begrudge anyone coming to the United States for a better life. However, if it can’t be done according to that old, trite cliche that both sides toss around willy-nilly — THE RULE OF LAW — then we only have ourselves to blame.

    And if the federal government shirks its duties to protect the borders, I have no problem with a state trying to do so.

    Ag80 (f67beb)

  77. Comment by JD — 4/23/2010 @ 8:24 pm

    What is so hard about standing up for your boys and girls when they just did your bidding on this illegal immigration bill passed in AZ? If I was a AZ politician, and if I’m going stick my neck out and vote for something this controversial, I would think that I have some standing to ask my “supporters” to back me up on my vote.

    Or is that just my imagination?

    Brad S (cf15cd)

  78. Where do the children who are American citizens – whose parents are illegals fall – are we to force them – OUR citizens – to move back to drug infested vilolence filled countrys with thier parents?

    We as Americans are willing to send our children to certain hardship if not death?

    they are not OUR children, they belong to their parents, and denying them the right to be raised in the wondrous richness of their native culture instead of forcing our stultifying and inappropriate beliefs on them would be racist and narrow-minded.

    if they want to come back and be assimilated once they are eighteen, then can apply for entry at the local consulate under current law and be admitted after matching DNA and a retinal scan.

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  79. It is puzzling to me why we make different assumptions about various things. Aphrael, you assume that given the opportunity that law enforcement will harass Hispanics just because they can. I’m thinking that if the concerns are half as bad as they say they are, the typical officer has no interest in harassing a Hispanic because they are Hispanic.

    I think this is akin to the idea that prisons are filled with innocent people or people charged with marijuana possession or shoplifting a loaf of bread. With the number of people on the street on parole or released after a short sentence after multiple violent crimes because there isn’t enough space to keep them in jail, I find it real hard to believe there are that many people in jail who don’t deserve it in one way or another.

    The only person that my son has arrested for simple possession was a fellow who thought it was OK to light up a joint in a subway car just a few feet from a city cop in uniform. He didn’t want to be bothered arresting the guy, as he was on his way to start his shift where he had bigger fish to catch, but he thought there was no way he could let such a display of disregard of the law go unchallenged.

    I don’t know anyone who hangs out at the Home Depot looking for work. I don’t know them by name, but I see them every time I go there.

    MD in Philly (59a3ad)

  80. Comment by Leviticus — 4/23/2010 @ 7:56 pm

    AZ passed a law last year IIRC that penalizes employers who are found to have hired illegals.
    AZ employers are supposed to use eVerify for all employees.
    Those found to have hired illegals are fined quite substantially on the first offense,
    have their business license(s) suspended on the second offense,
    and are banned from licensure for some period of time (?5 years?) on subsequent offenses, with possible jail time
    (I doing this from memory, so if there are any AZ employers out there to fill in the details, please jump in).

    AD - RtR/OS! (9562e0)

  81. Dissolve any business that gets caught hiring illegal workers.

    Bam – problem solved.

    can we seize and sell the home and property of anyone employing housekeepers, maids, babysitters, gardeners, handymen, etc?

    that would certainly put a dent in the number of illegals in my AO.

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  82. The problem that aphrael describes is actually the issue I had with the Brady Handgun bill. The purpose of that bill was not to prevent felons from obtaining firearms or to punish them for obtaining/attempting to obtain firearms. The purpose of the bill, and the only real effect it could have, was to harass and annoy the law abiding gun owner.

    This bill on the other hand is meant to protect the lawful citizens and legal residents of this nation. It is interesting which the usual suspects bleat about.

    Have Blue (854a6e)

  83. Ag80, I don’t think anyone here disagrees that first and foremost the issue of severely penalizing businesses that hire illegals should be a given but unfortunately we haven’t seen that happen. It falls under the “Lack of Gumption” that afflicts most of Washington.

    Dana (1e5ad4)

  84. What is so hard about standing up for your boys and girls when they just did your bidding on this illegal immigration bill passed in AZ? If I was a AZ politician, and if I’m going stick my neck out and vote for something this controversial, I would think that I have some standing to ask my “supporters” to back me up on my vote.

    Or is that just my imagination?

    Yes, just your imagination. They did not do this for me. I am not a resident of that state, nor a proponent of their policy. They are not my boys and girls, and they did not do my bidding. I sympathize with their state due to the Federal government’s complete abdication of its job in enforcing existing law.

    You have fallen into a quite predictable pattern, Brad S.

    JD (9f2abc)

  85. Leviticus,

    I support punishing employers who hire illegals, and I’ve seen people put in jail (as well as put out of business) for hiring illegals. But it isn’t enough.

    I’m sure there are several reasons, including that there isn’t the will to stop illegal immigration in some communities; or there aren’t enough resources put into enforcement; or too many illegals who get false documentation, are hired part-time, or work for by fly-by-night employers who flee the jurisdiction before they can be found; or corrupt immigration or Border Patrol officials who take bribes in exchange for valid documentation.

    DRJ (09fa6c)

  86. ” I suspect they would be detained until the database is checked or more ID is located.”

    So someone gives their name…and then what? Their name is not in a database? ok? Their name is? not ok? Would this apply to white people too?

    imdw (651ba3)

  87. Why don’t you move to Arizona and find out, dimwit?

    JD (9f2abc)

  88. imdw:

    So someone gives their name…and then what? Their name is not in a database? ok? Their name is? not ok? Would this apply to white people too?

    As I understand Secure Communities and from what I’ve observed at my community’s Sheriff’s office, it’s based on fingerprints and it only takes a few minutes because it’s digitized.

    DRJ (09fa6c)

  89. I think it is kind of funny that people like WD40 are very interesting in the process and detail about how a freaking State law may be implemented, when they so breezily brushed those pesky little details aside during the health care debate.

    JD (9f2abc)

  90. “can we seize and sell the home and property of anyone employing housekeepers, maids, babysitters, gardeners, handymen, etc?”

    This has worked so well for the war on drugs…

    imdw (651ba3)

  91. interesting = interested

    JD (9f2abc)

  92. Dana:

    But that’s the problem, right?

    Ag80 (f67beb)

  93. The only reason they are here is for employment. If you go after the employers, and dry them up, they aren’t going to be coming over here to work. This thing is going to become a huge debacle. You must enforce laws against hiring illegal aliens. That is how you fix this problem. Leviticus is right. That would include ALL employers, including individuals hiring maids, landscapers, construction workers, or neurosurgeons(it could happen 🙂 ) that are illegal aliens.

    Chris Hooten (0e1f31)

  94. Yes, because there is no other reason why people would flee Mexico. None. But, as noted above, AZ already has some pretty punitive laws in place in regards to hiring illegals.

    JD (9f2abc)

  95. “Would this apply to white people too?”

    imdw – Don’t you know Democrats maintain separate databases for different color people? The required pandering is different.

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  96. The reaction of imdw and the left to this bill is like them hyperventilating and having a mass delusion about Sarah Palin outlawing abortion and executing gays.

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  97. imdw said:

    So someone gives their name…and then what? Their name is not in a database? ok? Their name is? not ok? Would this apply to white people too?

    Why wouldn’t it apply to white people, too?

    Seriously, why wouldn’t it apply to white people, too?

    And I will not tolerate anyone calling you a race-baiting sack of excrement. You are not a race-baiting sack of excrement: No matter what you’re mother says.

    Ag80 (f67beb)

  98. Ag80 – Didn’t you read the bill?! It says right in there that this bill only applies to brown people, because everyone knows all other races are always here legally.

    JD (9f2abc)

  99. You gotta figure though if Arizona had the sense God gave a grapenut America might not be in this pickle.

    McCain? Really, Arizona?

    Whatevs, losers.

    happyfeet (c8caab)

  100. That is a pretty damn good point, happyfeet.

    JD (9f2abc)

  101. #85, DRJ:

    You are right, the availability of false documentation is a huge issue, and has to be addressed. I would want this in addition to a huge crackdown on employers, though.

    Chris Hooten (0e1f31)

  102. Again, AZ has some of the more punitive laws against hiring illegals in the country. Someone was kind enough to broad brush their approach above. What more would you have them do, Chris?

    JD (9f2abc)

  103. They need to enforce them.

    Chris Hooten (0e1f31)

  104. Was the bill passed because of canadians tearing apart Phoenix after mild hockey outcomes or was it passed due to another reason?

    Also, how do people feel about the parents of fallen war heroes being deported for giving their childs life in the service of our country?

    Or the parents of those on active duty?

    Would we be as concerned if there were no entitlements?

    I also wondered what sense of entitlements SPQR’s clients were referring to?

    Was it the same as the elderly or the poor today?

    They sure feel entitled to my money and everyone elses here…

    EricPWJohnson (1d0270)

  105. How about the federal government enforce existing immigration laws? How do you know that AZ is not. The illegal population in AZ is largely driven by geography, no?

    JD (9f2abc)

  106. JD

    I have no problem at all with the government enforcing immigration laws or any laws it passess

    I am also for the Feds granting permission for states to enforce immigration laws in a deputized role as well

    What I am against is the stopping of people on the street and asking them for their papers to prove their heritage – while being of the nobilest of intentions – we must remember that Dems – corrut dems at that – occassionally get elected en mass in border states as well as anywhere

    EricPWJohnson (1d0270)

  107. I am totally against the forced deportation of American Children

    We are better than that

    EricPWJohnson (1d0270)

  108. Comment by EricPWJohnson — 4/23/2010 @ 9:56 pm

    Careful now. You’re dealing with people here who think all there is to an issue is polite discussion (if that’s the word that can be applied), pseudo-support, and disparagement of their own people when the blowback gets a little rough.

    There’s a word for the kind of behavior expressed by JD and DRJ; it’s not a kind word.

    Brad S (cf15cd)

  109. Arizona law provides for sanctions against employers who employ illegals. The law passed in 2007 and was effective for anyone hired on or after 1/1/2008, but I don’t think the law was enforced until late 2008 because it was challenged in court. The law, called the Legal Arizona Workers Act, lets people turn in violating employers and also lets employers avoid sanctions by voluntarily participating in the E-Verify program. Only 4 employers are participating so far, although the website says participating companies with home offices in other states would not be included on the list.

    DRJ (09fa6c)

  110. Show me the part of this bill that allows that, Eric.

    And pay your damn bets.

    What is that unkind word about me and DRJ, Brad?

    JD (9f2abc)

  111. Here’s a preliminary study on the impact of the Arizona employer sanctions law.

    DRJ (09fa6c)

  112. Brad

    DRJ has been nothing other than a fair,polite, intelligent debater of topics that she feels of interest.

    Do not include me in your remarks – thanks

    EricPWJohnson (1d0270)

  113. There’s a word for the kind of behavior conducted by Brad S; it’s not a kind word.

    He’s been called out on it before.

    That’s why he makes so few appearances here. That and because he’s got no game.

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  114. My fellow Californians, can you hear that sound? It’s a million little feet, all hightailing it out of Arizona and heading due west.

    Patricia (5f1523)

  115. Several years ago, the voters passed numerous laws in regards to illegal aliens. Our governor, Janet Napolitano was not happy and did her best to change what the voters decided. When she was unable to do that, she decided to share herself with the rest of the nation and now everyone’s happy.

    PatAZ (9d1bb3)

  116. Brad S:

    Anyone born in the United States is a citizen regardless of their parents’ origin. That is extremely clear.

    Perhaps you meant to post somewhere else and made a mistake.

    Ag80 (f67beb)

  117. Irresponsibility, JD. You express sympathy for certain political ideas that certain folks find rather distasteful, then you back away when the blowback gets rough. You disavow any idea that your advocacy for those same ideas requires you to go all out to help those who get those ideas passed into law.

    Words mean things, JD. Ideas mean things.

    Your irresponsibility, JD, should be an embarassment to the notion of being a conservative.

    Brad S (cf15cd)

  118. the finding of the report appears to be “we don’t know what effect the law has had”

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  119. Comment by Ag80 — 4/23/2010 @ 10:20 pm

    You must be mistaking me for someone who has major issues with the idea that kids born in the US are citizens, regardless of parent’s country of origin. Rest assured, I don’t have problems with this, and think AZ is about to perform a great social injustice if they fully enforce this law they just passed.

    Frankly, Sheriff Joe is too much of a media hound to make his deputies follow this law to the letter.

    Brad S (cf15cd)

  120. I think that’s true, red, but that’s all I could find.

    DRJ (09fa6c)

  121. @ Patricia,

    Absolutely! (see #74), And we don’t have a governor or legislature that would even dream about doing what it took to protect their state. Just wring their hands and moan about it being a federal problem.

    PatAZ, ah yes, and this is the same Janet Napolitano who now has the power to stop building the fence…and stop it, she did.

    Dana (1e5ad4)

  122. What advocacy are you referring to, you liar? This should be easy. I already deconstructed your multiple lies about these being my boys and girls doing my bidding. I have no responsibility to you, to the people of Arizona, or anyone else to go all out defending them just because you think they are on my team. The idea that I, or DRJ, need your approval as conservatives might be the most ridiculous idea I have heard today, which is no small feat, given the inanity spewed by Chris Hooten.

    JD (9f2abc)

  123. That was directed towards the lying douchenozzle, with sincere apologies to actual nozzles of douche, Brad S. Here is another hint, Brad S. I do not really care much for Team Republican right about now. I have no duty to do so, nor will I. So you can take your Team R cheerleading and shove it.

    JD (9f2abc)

  124. “You disavow any idea that your advocacy for those same ideas requires you to go all out to help those who get those ideas passed into law.”

    Brad S – Are you stating that if someone espouses a position on the internet they have an ironclad, hell or high water, drop everything, obligation to help get those ideas passed ideas into law?

    Did you just make that up or can you point to a rule book somewhere, cuz it’s pretty damn funny?

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  125. Was the bill passed because of canadians tearing apart Phoenix after mild hockey outcomes or was it passed due to another reason?

    When it comes to the topic of illegal immigration, is your question a parody of one of the most idiotic forms of moral equivalency that often comes forth from liberals? In this case, an attempt to create a lame equivalency between a society that’s full of poverty, corruption and crime — of never-ending dysfunction — and a society that’s generally always stable, both socially and economically?

    As for the current occupant of the Oval Office happily pushing through his ObamaCare legislation while having the nerve to lambast Arizona and its politicians for signing a bill on illegal immigration?! Truly a moment when President “Goddamn America” deserved no less than a “STFU!”

    Mark (411533)

  126. This is always instructive… what is the little president man’s radio station signaling here you think?

    But now, nearly a year and half after taking office, President Obama and Democratic leaders are scrambling to quell escalating anger within the Latino community over the lack of action.

    little man is “scrambling to quell,” is he?

    I just bet he is.

    happyfeet (c8caab)

  127. JD, I’ll take your last statement under advisement the next time you’re foolish enough to advocate for certain distasteful political positions. It’s nice to see that you take no responsibility for your debate points.

    Brad S (cf15cd)

  128. daleyrocks – in Brad S’s little fantasy world, if one says they are opposed to illegal immigration, they have a duty, a moral obligation to go all out in their support of any measure pushed by any legislative body or politician anywhere in the country, to support them, no matter what. If you do not, you are not a good conservative, and are irresponsible for expressing your opinion that you are against illegal immigration in the first place.

    It is a bizarre world, the one in which Brad S lives. Kind of like the fantasy world Hooten lives in, where you can borrow your way to a surplus.

    JD (9f2abc)

  129. Comment by daleyrocks — 4/23/2010 @ 10:34 pm

    Nice to know that you share the same notions of irresponsibilty that JD expresses. And BTW, if Arizona’s Legislature and Governor get an illegal immigration law passed that’s guaranteed to get blowback, and if you’ve advocated for that and similar positions in the past, it is very much incumbent upon you to support those people and help them withstand the storm.

    Brad S (cf15cd)

  130. Brad – I heard there was an illegal immigration policy being debated in Guam. You had better rush off, immediately, and offer up your life in support of the measure. It is what a good conservative would do, no? At the very least, you should shed all of your material possessions and donate all of your money to the cause.

    JD (9f2abc)

  131. Brad S – Please show all of us where daleyrocks, DRJ, and myself have advocated for the components of this legislation. Absent your ability to do that, one might think that you are engaged in some surreal public asspull.

    JD (9f2abc)

  132. I think Brad is defining “great social injustice” downwards, particularly in light of what’s following in the wake of our little country’s third worldy financial meltdown.

    It don’t get more justicey from here on out I don’t think. Not in Barack Obama’s America.

    happyfeet (c8caab)

  133. happy – Brad is a huge Team R cheerleader.

    JD (9f2abc)

  134. You must be mistaking me for someone who has major issues with the idea that kids born in the US are citizens, regardless of parent’s country of origin. Rest assured, I don’t have problems with this

    Meanwhile, I bet you’re one of those millions of people — of all political persuasions, but generally of somewhat higher socio-economic background — who will do back flips and contortionist routines to avoid sending their precious children to a school that’s made up predominantly of Latino children.

    There are a lot of people of the left (eg, Hi, all you folks throughout West LA and the SF Bay Area!) who are guilty of that very behavior, which is why when they try to sound so understanding, idealistic and big-hearted about illegal immigration truly reflect the essence — THE essence — of limousine liberalism.

    Mark (411533)

  135. Goodnight, folks. It has been … interesting. Between Chrissy Hooten and Brad S, I am having a difficult time deciding who will win the Mendoucheous Twatwaffle of the Day award.

    We may have co-recipients today. I will sleep on it, and see if either of them make a final push overnight to secure the win.

    JD (9f2abc)

  136. oh he was quoting… I didn’t get that

    Brad please to not be cheerleading for the Team R.

    Team R is going through… well maybe not gay… but it’s been experimenting let’s say.

    happyfeet (c8caab)

  137. Best pick up your game, Brad S. Crissy Hootenany is trying to steal your title.

    That is all.

    JD (9f2abc)

  138. JD, if being digusted at “conservative, not Republican” folks for getting all vulgar and hyperactive for passing “Driving While Hispanic” laws, then backing away when the backlash gets expectedly nasty makes me a Team R cheerleader, then I’ll get my pom-poms out, thankyouverymuch.

    Mark, just to let you know, I happen to be the only white male on a project team that is nearly all Latino. Between all my coworkers, those Latinos have 18 kids. If I had kids, I’d be more than happy to keep them in public or charter schools with Latino kids.

    Brad S (cf15cd)

  139. One safe place for illegals to work is for the government, no immigration checks or raids. If we are going to put companies out of business for employing illegals, what do we do about government agencies? I know of cases where they knew the peoples’ status and helped them avoid detection while helping them get legal status because they wanted their bilingual skills. I would think they should be more accountable than private businesses, not less.

    I am also unhappy when I see ever stiffer penalties for employers while the criminal aliens walk. I do not like these laws but the failure of the federal government has forced local governments to protect their citizens. This should not have been needed but clearly it is.

    Machinist (9780ec)

  140. If government at all levels fails to stop this tide of crime coming to our communities I suspect people will take it upon themselves. Will we then have the government siding with the criminals against American citizens? That’s an ugly vision of the future. I guess I’m glad I’m old.

    Machinist (9780ec)

  141. Brad S,

    I can’t tell which side of this issue you’re on but if you and others are concerned about racial profiling, consider that the Bush Administration’s ICE successfully delegated its immigration enforcement powers to 71 local law enforcement agencies throughout the nation under Section 287(g) without relying on racial profiling:

    * Racial profiling is simply not something that will be tolerated; and any indication of racial profiling will be treated with the utmost scrutiny and fully investigated. If any proof of racial profiling is uncovered, that specific officer or department could have their agreement rescinded.

    * In addition to the training these officers receive from their local departments, the 287(g) training includes coursework on multicultural communication and the avoidance of racial profiling.

    DRJ (09fa6c)

  142. If I had kids, I’d be more than happy to keep them in public or charter schools with Latino kids.

    Yea, a school that perhaps has no more than a modest percentage of Latino kids. But one that’s predominantly Latino, around, say, 80 to 90% Latino?

    Moreover, it’s easy to sound idealistic and warm and fuzzy when the concept you’re dealing with still is theoretical—since you say you don’t have any children.

    The following phenomenon is evident in spite of the fact that far more people in America today are liberal and accustomed to diversity, certainly compared with the way their counterparts were over 50 years ago. IOW, a greater percentage of Americans in 2010 are, in effect, guilty of limousine liberalism:

    The Civil Rights Project, UCLA, January 2009

    Schools in the United States are more segregated today than they have been in more than four decades. Millions of non-white students are locked into “dropout factory” high schools, where huge percentages do not graduate, and few are well prepared for college or a future in the US economy.

    According to a new Civil Rights report published at the University of California, Los Angeles, schools in the US are 44 percent non-white, and minorities are rapidly emerging as the majority of public school students in the US. Latinos and blacks, the two largest minority groups, attend schools more segregated today than during the civil rights movement forty years ago. In Latino and African American populations, two of every five students attend intensely segregated schools. For Latinos this increase in segregation reflects growing residential segregation.

    The Civil Rights Study shows that most severe segregation in public schools is in the Western states, including California — not in the South, as many people believe. Unequal education leads to diminished access to college and future jobs. Most non-white schools are segregated by poverty as well as race. Most of the nation’s dropouts occur in non-white public schools, leading to large numbers of virtually unemployable young people of color.

    Mark (411533)

  143. the problem with the schools is not the color of the students, but rather the culture they live in and the attitude and policies of the staff.

    one need look no further than the thread a few days back about Jaime Escalante, and how his program was first marginalized then destroyed by his fellow teachers.

    when studying, getting good grades, learning proper english and trying to better yourself gets you attacked for “being white” is it any wonder that the students don’t learn?

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  144. DRJ

    Does nayone know where “reliable” statistics reside about the number of Canadians living and working here

    My point is Canada’s border has been open for decades, there are 5 to 6 times less Canadians than there are mexicans but somewhere someone posted that about 2 to 4 % of all Americans are in fact Canadians or have defacto Canadian citizenship while being citizens of America at the same time..

    Given that the avg American/Canadian probably has a much higher education and is earning 3 to 4 times as much even though they are much less in number – their earning power is a much higher percentage of available income stolen from law abiding US citizens.

    I hope the norther border states enact the same restrictive legislation and curb – especially in the Milwalkee, Chicago, Minneapolis, Portland and Detroit areas where low cost illegal Canadian labor is taking jobs away from law abiding citizens.

    EricPWJohnson (1d0270)

  145. “Given that the avg American/Canadian probably has a much higher education and is earning 3 to 4 times as much even though they are much less in number – their earning power is a much higher percentage of available income stolen from law abiding US citizens.”

    EricPW – Are they the ones you see hanging around outside Home Depot or are they more likely to be working for an employer complying with our immigration laws?

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  146. “I happen to be the only white male on a project team that is nearly all Latino.”

    Oooooohhhhh!!! Gold multiculti star for you Brad S!

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  147. Brad S – What have you done to enforce our immigration laws lately?

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  148. Eric,

    I hope we enforce the northern border, too, because Canada has such lax asylum policies that it’s easier for terrorists to get into America. But I don’t think that’s your point. Instead, I think you feel it’s hypocritical to close the southern border but not the northern border. If so, I submit you’re equating two things that aren’t equal. The southern border and its flood of immigrants presents more danger to America.

    But if you still think they’re the same, do you also think it’s hypocritical to lock your car in a high crime urban area but not lock it at your neighborhood park? Or are they different risks that can be treated in different ways?

    DRJ (09fa6c)

  149. the problem with the schools is not the color of the students, but rather the culture they live in and the attitude and policies of the staff.

    That culture is infused with “progressive” ideology. If the color of people can be associated with their politics, then that color should be one of phony-baloney leftism. And left-leaning sentiment tends to either tolerate, rationalize away or even approve of the notion that to do well in school is a form of selling out, of acting “white.”

    Given that the avg American/Canadian probably has a much higher education and is earning 3 to 4 times as much even though they are much less in number

    And that’s a big reason why if you’re doing house hunting or looking for an apartment, you likely won’t be quite as skittish about ending up in a neighborhood dominated by the demographic you describe. To deny this is an illustration of the dishonest and two-faced nature of the philosophy that “we must wring our hands over the Canadian border as much as, if not more than, the Mexican border.”

    Mark (411533)

  150. rather than pull numbers out of thin air or my fourth point of contact, let me explain why i drive three more miles round trip to shop at Lowes these days instead of Home Depot.

    HD is located in Los Angeles: i have to fight my way past a crowd half blocking the driveway entrance to get in the lot, then fend off badgering offers of labor, make my purchases, then fight off people wanting to “help” load my items without being asked, who then expect payment for said “help”. if you tell them “no” they then talk smack about you in spanish, because you’re not supposed to understand, and, if your wife is with you, they will get really nasty. the parking lot is a pig sty, with food remnants, trash, empty liquor containers, unlicensed vendors, and, once, a minivan with a crowd of customers/spectators standing by the open side door with the proprietor, while his employee plied her trade in the back seat.

    Lowes, on the other hand has a lot where its harder to find parking, because they are busier, but there are no “day laborers”, no self appointed “helpers”, no trash, no prostitution, and better service inside the store.

    Burbank enforces laws about loitering, etc. Los Angeles refuses to. you do the math.

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  151. DRJ

    No, I think its a misguided attempt – in a jobs sense – to close the souther border vs the northern Border.

    Canandians have social security equalization

    That means we send billions of dollars to Canada for Canadian/American citizens who reside in their home country after decades of working in America under the guise of being an “American Citizen”

    So we are on the hook for an enormous sum of money thats not at least being recirculated into the American Economy because the affluent class of Canadians (some estimate over 50%) will have lived, worked, become citizens of America just to avoid the 48% Canadian Tax situation and the devalued Canadian Dollar (until recently)

    As far as crime goes thats another story – the last reports I saw was the Top crime groups in America were Non College no high school educated White Males 17.8%, Black Males 16.6% and Hispanic Males around 11%

    Blacks are US citizens and have an almost 50% higher crime rate than Hispanics who also point out that immigration related numbers are in that 11% – so that in reality a civil matter more than it is a criminal matter of the tradiontal kind

    EricPWJohnson (1d0270)

  152. Sorry about the typos DRj – I’m in the middle of Packing..

    EricPWJohnson (1d0270)

  153. and all the money that is sent south of the border instead of being spent here?

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  154. As far as crime goes thats another story – the last reports I saw was the Top crime groups in America were Non College no high school educated White Males 17.8%, Black Males 16.6% and Hispanic Males around 11%

    When observing the following figures, keep in mind that the percentage of Americans who are white is around 75%, and the percentage of Americans who are black or Latino is around 12% each. IOW, keep in mind the concept of “disproportinate share.”

    U.S. incarceration rates by race
    June 30, 2006

    Whites: 409 per 100,000
    Latinos: 1,038 per 100,000
    Blacks: 2,468 per 100,000

    U.S. incarceration rates by gender

    White males: 736 per 100,000
    Latino males: 1,862 per 100,000
    Black males: 4,789 per 100,000

    U.S. incarceration rates by age

    White males ages 25-29: 1,685 per 100,000.
    Latino males ages 25-29: 3,912 per 100,000.
    Black males ages 25-29: 11,695 per 100,000.

    Mark (411533)

  155. Mark

    Thaks for posting those stats – I’ve seen a LEO paper where those numbers were adjusted or equalized by educational (which directly relates to poverty levels) demographics as an overwhelming majority of whites are high school and/or college educated.

    The picture changes drastically for whites – low income whites are the dominate group – however the black crime rate has shot way up since the last time that report was revised and it looks like a huge drop in latino crime

    EricPWJohnson (1d0270)

  156. ” As I understand Secure Communities and from what I’ve observed at my community’s Sheriff’s office, it’s based on fingerprints and it only takes a few minutes because it’s digitized.”

    So you do need to arrest someone and take their fingerprints. So that’s one bit. But then it matches them against fingerprints of what? Previous detainees? Previous convicts? Previous deportees (which is not a criminal finding)? So how does the AZ law change this — are the cops now forced to arrest people and take their prints?

    “Why wouldn’t it apply to white people, too?”

    Under what scenarios are you imagining state and local cops detaining and fingerprinting folks and matching them against this database?

    imdw (017d51)

  157. Anyone born in the United States is a citizen regardless of their parents’ origin. That is extremely clear.

    Are children born to diplomatic personnel stationed in the US, either representing their country to the US or the UN, citizens of the US? I don’t believe they are.

    Are children born to US diplomats stationed outside the US citizens of the countries where they are born, in addition to being US citizens? I suspect the laws vary by country.

    Horatio (55069c)

  158. “Under what scenarios are you imagining state and local cops detaining and fingerprinting folks and matching them against this database?”

    imdw – You were the one who asked the original question. Surely you had a purpose for asking. Why don’t you answer why you asked if the rules would apply to white people?

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  159. “Why don’t you answer why you asked if the rules would apply to white people?”

    Let me clarify: I’m asking how this situation would occur with white people. Like under what sort of scenario would someone white end up in a situation where they are detained (based on what level of suspicion) until they fingerprinted and checked against an immigration database?

    imdw (017d51)

  160. im-dork, there was an excellent episode of “The Police Women of Maricopa County” that I recommend to you. An illegal alien was breaking the traffic laws. He tried the you are rouse-ing me meme on the cops he said because he is Mexican. The Deputies were both of Mexican heritage and identified themselves as such. The female deputy wanted to throw the book at the jerk. They should have.

    PCD (1d8b6d)

  161. Also, imd-dumbass, why are you so quick to defend and enable law breakers?? Maybe you ought to be searched along with your home an possessions for laws you routinely break.

    PCD (1d8b6d)

  162. “An illegal alien was breaking the traffic laws. He tried the you are rouse-ing me meme on the cops he said because he is Mexican. The Deputies were both of Mexican heritage and identified themselves as such. The female deputy wanted to throw the book at the jerk. They should have.”

    And now someone can come along and sue the police department where those deputies work if they think the deputies aren’t doing enough. That should be fun for those police departments.

    imdw (017d51)

  163. I would think that they (the cops) don’t need to arrest anyone to ask them to place their hand on a scanner so that the computer can compare their fingerprints with what is in the data base.

    Just like when you apply for a Security Clearance, you provide your fingerprints so they may be checked against the various data banks that they are going to run your name through.

    AD - RtR/OS! (9562e0)

  164. White people…
    I suppose NYPD cops in the Brighton Beach area of Long Island have this problem with the Russians all the time, then there are the Irish…

    AD - RtR/OS! (9562e0)

  165. I truly find it baffling that people can seriously assert that we don’t have the right to prevent people of other nationalities from coming here without permission. What kind of warped, self-destructive and self-hating, world view is necessary to see this nation as required to be the Home Depot parking lot of the world?

    SPQR (26be8b)

  166. You have to be a Leftist!

    AD - RtR/OS! (9562e0)

  167. “I would think that they (the cops) don’t need to arrest anyone to ask them to place their hand on a scanner so that the computer can compare their fingerprints with what is in the data base.”

    Is this a scanner carried by the cop or at the station? And the person can say no?

    imdw (cf562d)

  168. I love how dimmwit is concerned about how a State law will be implemented, while he cared not one little iota how the monstrosity of HCR was going to be funded, implemented, etc … None.

    JD (37e9a1)

  169. “I’m asking how this situation would occur with white people.”

    imdw – Is the purpose of the law unclear to you? Seriously?

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  170. “imdw – Is the purpose of the law unclear to you? Seriously?”

    The purpose is very clear.

    imdw (017d51)

  171. These passive-aggressive manipulations are rising to a high art form. Heh. Serious endurance there.

    Dana (1e5ad4)

  172. What do you believe the purpose to be, dimwit. Never mind, we already know what you think.

    JD (37e9a1)

  173. What kind of warped, self-destructive and self-hating, world view is necessary to see this nation as required to be the Home Depot parking lot of the world?

    I wasn’t under the impression that Home Depot was some kind of way – station for illegals.

    Comment by imadouchebag

    Dmac (21311c)

  174. “The purpose is very clear.”

    imdw – Good. Does the bill state that it excludes white people? No.

    Do we ever have illegal immigrants who are white people? Yes.

    Why all the stupid libtard questions except for performance art?

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  175. Why don’t you answer why you asked if the rules would apply to white people?

    Because I’m in the majority – and as we all know, the mob rules.

    Comment by imadouchebag

    Dmac (21311c)

  176. And wasn’t that a great sentence, by the way? Jeez.

    Eric Blair (f4bc41)

  177. imdw – Does the law apply to Jooooos?

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  178. “imdw – Does the law apply to Jooooos?”

    Depends where in AZ you are. In other news, they just canceled your truck’s license plate:

    http://thinkprogress.org/2010/04/23/virginia-nazi-plate/

    imdw (017d51)

  179. So…keep it up, imdw! Calling someone a Nazi might force you back into moderation.

    You might have to apologize again for being a little jerk.

    Eric Blair (f4bc41)

  180. Is this a scanner carried by the cop or at the station? And the person can say no?

    The modern police cruiser is computerized, with a real-time uplink to the station allowing instant access to vaious data banks, including – but not limited to – their State’s DoJ, the FBI, the INS, DHS, etc.

    As an example, the beat-cop doesn’t have to call in for “Wants & Warrants”, he just enters a name, and a DOB if he has it, into his cruiser keyboard, and the info is displayed on his dash-mounted monitor.

    There is no reason why they could not have a scanner screen in the vehicle also.

    My local PD is very proud that all of their cars have on-board video, with a link to the duty desk, allowing the OIC to actually “see” (and hear) what is happening out in the city on his watch – and I assume that it is all being recorded for use at a later time, if neccessary.

    AD - RtR/OS! (9562e0)

  181. Depends where in AZ you are. In other news, they just canceled your truck’s license plate:

    You have until the end of the day to apologize for that, or you go into moderation tomorrow.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  182. “You have until the end of the day to apologize for that, or you go into moderation tomorrow.”

    Sorry. Since daley hasn’t told me how they feel, the apology can’t more specifically address their feelings.

    imdw (f6a9f8)

  183. Hey, Patterico, is that the kind of apology you mentioned before from this jerk?

    People unclear on the concept, Exhibit A.

    And once again, the difference between a troll and a person with different beliefs is underscored.

    Up to you, Patterico….

    Eric Blair (0b61b2)

  184. I’ve seen a LEO paper where those numbers were adjusted or equalized by educational (which directly relates to poverty levels) demographics as an overwhelming majority of whites are high school and/or college educated.

    I don’t ever recall a time when statistics on felons and criminality didn’t reflect a disproportinate percentage falling into the category of so-called “people of color” — btw, a phrase that I consider nonsensical — referring to black and Latino.

    Beyond that, my greatest concern has always been statistics that indicate Latinos — both native-born and immigrant — consistently underperform academically in school. Underperform regardless of politics, regardless of policymaking, regardless of budgets, regardless of whose occupying the White House, etc, etc. And underperform indefinitely, decade after decade.

    Mark (411533)

  185. “Sorry. Since daley hasn’t told me how they feel, the apology can’t more specifically address their feelings.”

    imdw – Did you actually ask a relevant question somewhere?

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  186. Daley, this character is juvenile beyond words. My understanding of the apology to Patterico was that it was…um, not sincere.

    So, acting like a jerk, twice?

    I think that this just demonstrates what we all know: the guy is just an irritating little troll.

    Eric Blair (0b61b2)

  187. “imdw – Did you actually ask a relevant question somewhere?”

    Yeah what’s up with the JOOOS bit?

    imdw (017d51)

  188. Better apologize, imdw.

    You are such a subquality person. As your juvenile actions show.

    Go away. Or apologize to daleyrocks without the six year old antics.

    Eric Blair (36f0bf)

  189. “Sorry. Since daley hasn’t told me how they feel, the apology can’t more specifically address their feelings.”

    What does this mean?

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  190. ““imdw – Did you actually ask a relevant question somewhere?”

    Yeah what’s up with the JOOOS bit?”

    When did you ask me that question or the inintelligeable one in #182?

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  191. Right now. What’s up with the JOOOS bit?

    “What does this mean?”

    That I don’t know how my words make you feel.

    imdw (df0dab)

  192. This is only a guess [semi-sarc/], but I think that imdw equates the exclusion of undocumented aliens from the inner confines of our great nation with racism — because you know that all Mexicans are the same; never mind that there actually are different races in Mexico. Nine out of every 100 Mexicans are white.

    Icy Texan (e77df9)

  193. I’m more concerned that he is braying jackass. I think you give this snotty ignorant troll far too much credit.

    He didn’t apologize to daley, as Patterico asked. We’ll see what happens next. But I don’t think imdw posts to debate or discuss.

    Eric Blair (e8f8ac)

  194. “What does this mean?”

    “That I don’t know how my words make you feel.”

    imdw – Does not compute with the plural you used in your prior comment.

    “Sorry. Since daley hasn’t told me how they feel, the apology can’t more specifically address their feelings.”

    Try again.

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  195. Patterico laid out the rule, daley. We’ll see what Tiny Troll does.

    And I both admire and cannot forgive the milk snorting post, daley. CH cannot ever be taken seriously again. And I needed Boroxo to clean out my brain after reading it. Ewwww.

    Eric Blair (e8f8ac)

  196. The elephant in the room, is Krentz’s murder, and
    the escalating violence on the border, it takes ritual blindness not to see this as the catalyst

    ian cormac (d56635)

  197. “And I both admire and cannot forgive the milk snorting post, daley.”

    Eric – Heh. That was something special, wasn’t it. Scouring the internet so you don’t have to!

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  198. So what is the whole “JOOOS” thing about? Is it because stormfront is happy the republicans delivered this bill?

    imdw (6b4e5c)

  199. Apology time, nasty troll.

    Eric Blair (eddd97)

  200. #197 daleyrocks:

    Scouring the internet so you don’t have to!

    Leaving us to have to scour our minds and imagination instead.

    Thanks, pal!
    /

    EW1(SG) (edc268)

  201. That I don’t know how my words make you feel.

    I think I have made myself quite clear in the past: you are a lying, pretentious, anti-Semitic little git who doesn’t know shit from shinola and your constant intrusion here with obfuscation is worthless to all involved.

    Now, would you like me to type slower so you can understand?

    EW1(SG) (edc268)

  202. “anti-Semitic”

    Don’t you know. That’s over the top.

    imdw (1de172)

  203. That’s not the point, you silly little git. Patterico’s ruling. Follow it or leave—or get Patterico to say you are swell.

    Eric Blair (eddd97)

  204. “So what is the whole “JOOOS” thing about? Is it because stormfront is happy the republicans delivered this bill?”

    imdw – Keep going, cupcake. You asked if the bill applied to white people. I asked if it applied to Jooooos. Where is your problem?

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  205. It’s also clear that Toilet Film Troll is trying to get people angry enough to say bad things. Then he can claim equivalence. But dissing Patterico’s rule should be the point.

    And ask yourselves: why does imdw post here?

    Eric Blair (b64881)

  206. imdw – Tell us some more about those White House seders.

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  207. “imdw – Keep going, cupcake. You asked if the bill applied to white people. I asked if it applied to Jooooos. Where is your problem?”

    I’m not getting why the bizarre pejorative. That’s it.

    imdw (017d51)

  208. Um. Hey, imdw:

    Why won’t you answer the questions?

    1. Did you or did you not see Patterico’s rule to you?

    2. Why do you post here?

    I think we should all keep hammering this offensive little troll with this whenever he posts. He will either shape up and make decent comments, or leave.

    Eric Blair (f4bc41)

  209. And here is the link:

    https://patterico.com/2010/04/23/arizona-governor-signs-immigration-bill/#comment-653360

    Seems pretty straightforward to me.

    Eric Blair (f4bc41)

  210. “I’m not getting why the bizarre pejorative. That’s it.”

    Think harder if you are capable.

    Pejorative is not my intent.

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  211. Gosh, daley, it sure look like imdw read Patterico’s rule in the link above.

    So he is just dissing Patterico?

    Eric Blair (f4bc41)

  212. “Pejorative is not my intent.”

    Did you not know it was pejorative? Even so, why use a pejorative? Share your intent.

    imdw (e7f4ca)

  213. Imdw? Share YOUR intent.

    Are you not following Patterico’s rule?

    Why do you post here?

    Eric Blair (f4bc41)

  214. Eric,

    Just leave him alone – let him ramble on, he has his set of facts – nothings going to discredit them nor change his mind

    Me on the other hand..

    EricPWJohnson (277a19)

  215. Share your intent.

    You aren’t even smart enough to know when you’re being mocked, you disgusting little git.

    EW1(SG) (edc268)

  216. And I needed Boroxo to clean out my brain after reading it. Ewwww. – Comment by Eric Blair

    Eric, if you needed to clean out your brain after snorting milk, then you have a fistula through your cribiform plate. Perhaps Mike K. knows a good neurosurgeon.

    doesn’t know shit from shinola – Comment by EW1(SG)

    Actually, that can be more difficult than you would think. I saw “myth busters” polish make a ball of dried lion dung shine.

    MD in Philly (59a3ad)

  217. “Did you not know it was pejorative?”

    Really?

    Evidence please.

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  218. “You aren’t even smart enough to know when you’re being mocked, you disgusting little git.”

    It did occur to me that the bizarre inclusion of a pejorative was meant to insinuate that I was the anti-semite. Which is why I retorted with the even more bizarre situation of a confederate anti-muslim nazi truck. I can now see how much it would hurt someone’s feelings if their attempt to call somebody an anti-semite ended up getting them labelled… an anti-semite.

    imdw (b75942)

  219. Comment by EW1(SG) — 4/25/2010 @ 10:03 am

    Ya think?

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  220. #218 daleyrocks:

    Ya think?

    Ya gotta type slow for that one.

    EW1(SG) (edc268)

  221. I’m not quite sure what daley meant, but I know you called him a Nazi and I have seen no apology that I would term an actual apology.

    As soon as I get to a real computer it’s into moderation with you.

    Patterico (1c765a)

  222. “I’m not quite sure what daley meant, but I know you called him a Nazi and I have seen no apology that I would term an actual apology.”

    I immediately said: “sorry.” And I said I can be more specific when daley tells me how his feelings are hurt. But as you have noticed, we’re not quite sure what daley meant.

    imdw (8ed6c1)

  223. Patterico – imdw has got a nice stormfront meme going on a couple of threads today, the Tea Party and the Green Shephard. There has been a lot of hostility from imdw lately as you are aware.

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  224. Um. You don’t get it, do you? You think you are witty, and you are half correct.

    How the heck old are you? Not only are you not anywhere near as subtle as you think you are (which screams “college student” to me), you are now messing with someone who (i) is the host here, and (ii) deals with psychopaths every day.

    You really think you can play games?

    Go away, troll.

    Eric Blair (0b61b2)

  225. “I immediately said: “sorry.” And I said I can be more specific when daley tells me how his feelings are hurt.”

    LOL

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  226. This guy sounds like a six year old. Patterico never asked if daley’s feelings were hurt.

    He…told you to apologize. Funny how Toiletfilm Troll the Non apologist tries to rephrase the discussion to his own favor.

    Eric Blair (0b61b2)

  227. So is that how it was daley? You wanted to toss around a pejorative to bizarrely insinuate I was an anti-semite? And it hurt your feelings to be linked to a bizzare a nazi for that? Boy ain’t I sorry your feelings got hurt when you were trying to call me an anti-semite.

    imdw (c70387)

  228. I should have posted my comment here as well.

    Dana (1e5ad4)

  229. Let’s keep it back to what Patterico said, imdw. Your immaturity and attempts to victimize yourself do not impress.

    So you did ignore Patterico’s ruling?

    As for why you post here, it is because you are an irritating little dishonesty troll.

    Eric Blair (0b61b2)

  230. “Your immaturity and attempts to victimize yourself do not impress.”

    I don’t really have to attempt it Eric. The anti-semitic accusation directed at me is pretty standard fare. This time though it’s just got an extra bit of deliciousness because its on threads where stormfront is on one side, while the ADL is on my side. You can see why it got a retort. Though let’s hear it from daley why he likes to use pejoratives.

    imdw (c70387)

  231. #228 Dana:

    I should have posted my comment here as well.

    Dana, your post was right on point, but more effort than I have or would expend on that particular pointless being. To say that it’s a waste of oxygen would be an understatement: it’s also an extremely disagreeable individual whose life is nothing but scoring points based on its hatreds.

    EW1(SG) (edc268)

  232. #230: again, imdw, deal with the point. Patterico told you to do something. You won’t do it, and are playing games, trying to act the victim.

    I hope he bans your ass. Truly, you are an nasty piece of work.

    Eric Blair (0b61b2)

  233. Oh, and I love the concept that the ADL is on your side.

    Really? Such an important little troll.

    Again, I hope you get banned, so you can run off to your usual sites under your real name and whine about more poor treatment.

    How did that first apology to Patterico go, by the way? I notice you don’t respond to that very well. Now you have another.

    Eric Blair (0b61b2)

  234. Eric, maybe you don’t get this, but using pejorative terms about Jews and throwing around accusations of anti-semitism is a game. A pretty ugly game. I’m sorry if anyone got hurt because of something that I did.

    imdw (e66d8d)

  235. Hey, imdw, maybe you didn’t get two things:

    1. Timeframe review does not support your position (and before you even begin to discuss that, please deal with #2 first).

    2. Take it up with Patterico.

    I hope you are toast, and out of here. You are thoroughly repugnant.

    In fact, why not leave now? Oh, that’s right: you exist to irritate others.

    Eric Blair (0b61b2)

  236. And how did that first apology to Patterico go? You know, the one where you got nasty about his employment, and you were told to apologize?

    When you were asked about that before, you got pretty upset. Why is that?

    We all know the answer, tough guy.

    Eric Blair (0b61b2)

  237. “Oh, and I love the concept that the ADL is on your side.”

    I know. It really does make daley’s pejorative accusations that much more ridiculous. But is anyone here surprised that the ADL is opposed to this law?

    imdw (603c39)

  238. Oh, I’m sure that the ADL has many interesting positions, and surely you or I will agree with some of them. What is amusing to me is the concept that you think they are an ally (you might look into how the ADL feels about the Palestinian question, where you have made your feelings known).

    In any event, you are a nasty little troll, and I don’t think you have many friends.

    Speaking of which, how about those apologies? I’m growing increasingly interested in the first one, where you apologized to Patterico for bringing his job into things.

    Let’s discuss that in detail, imdw. I want to know all about your apologies.

    Eric Blair (0b61b2)

  239. Oh, and one more thing? Have fun in moderation. Again.

    And I hope you get banned.

    Miserable twisted little troll.

    Eric Blair (0b61b2)

  240. Who used a pejorative term about Jews? I thought this clown went into moderation.

    JD (08c94b)

  241. JD, this is just a nasty little piece of work. We should just call him Two Apology Troll. You can come up with your own acronym.

    Eric Blair (0b61b2)

  242. “What is amusing to me is the concept that you think they are an ally (you might look into how the ADL feels about the Palestinian question, where you have made your feelings known).”

    Or look at where they’ve been on the Armenian genocide, for example. It’s just too much, though, to be on the receiving end of anti-semitic slurs on a topic where the ADL has weighed in against the person slinging the pejoratives.

    imdw (e66d8d)

  243. “I immediately said: ‘sorry.'”

    Yeah, and did you think that sounded sincere, as phrased?

    I will deal separately with daley’s comment. No matter how that discussion comes out, it was wrong for you to call him a Nazi and I want you to apologize. Even if it was a tit for tat –and I don’t know that — it was not the sort of comment I want on my blog … in particular towards someone like daley, whose character I know, and who does not deserve that kind of pejorative.

    Patterico (1c765a)

  244. Meanwhile: daley: can you explain what you meant by the “Jooooooos” comment? I haven’t read the thread thoroughly and didn’t understand your point. You weren’t insinuating that imdw is anti-Semitic, were you?

    Patterico (1c765a)

  245. “Yeah, and did you think that sounded sincere, as phrased?”

    I did. I figured you got that the context was daley’s bizarre pejorative. If it’s not sincere enough, I will say: I’m sorry I called daley a nazi.

    imdw (834e12)

  246. Who used a pejorative?

    JD (08c94b)

  247. “Though let’s hear it from daley why he likes to use pejoratives.”

    imdw – I asked you to present evidence that the term I used was a pejorative. So far, crickets.

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  248. This is becoming a pattern. Offend. Kind of don’t apologize. Ultimately, apologize to the extent necessary to not be put in moderation or banned. Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

    JD (08c94b)

  249. Patterico – As I explained on the Green Shepherd thread, I was merely following imdw’s line of questioning here. imdw first asked if the new Arizona law applied to white people, distracting the thread. After tiring of the distraction, I decided to ask if it applied to Jooooos, knowing that many progressives hold Jooooos responsible various ills in the world, including 9/11. The use of the mispelling is pure mockery of those positions. Progressives claim their anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian positions are not anti-semitic, so who am I to quibble.

    If imdw cannot understand that its own moronic questions may lead to moronic questions in return without losing its shit, it is indeed a thin-skinned troll.

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  250. “imdw – I asked you to present evidence that the term I used was a pejorative. So far, crickets.”

    What do you think that term is used for? And what where you using it for?

    It’s used to signal anti-semiticism. It does that by mocking a pejorative pronunciation of “jews” such that an anti-semite would make. But maybe you don’t know this because you’re just copying something cool you found on the internet.

    imdw (5fc078)

  251. “But is anyone here surprised that the ADL is opposed to this law?”

    Led by a far-left ideologue like Abe Foxman, the surprise would be if they supported law enforcement.

    GeneralMalaise (c8f9a0)

  252. “There has been a lot of hostility from imdw lately as you are aware.”

    Putz on the run…

    GeneralMalaise (c8f9a0)

  253. #244 Patterico:

    You weren’t insinuating that imdw is anti-Semitic, were you?

    Patterico, I am not daleyrocks, and you weren’t addressing me; but I’ll come right out and tell you that I am not insinuating imdw is anti-Semitic, I am stating that I believe he clearly is.

    And as much as my life involves Jews and Judaism, I find his presence here and his frequent slurs against conservative Jews and non-Jews alike extremely distasteful~so much so that I am frequently intemperate in my remarks directed at him.

    EW1(SG) (edc268)

  254. “It’s used to signal anti-semiticism.”

    imdw – Let’s go back to your racist comments first, mkay.

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  255. It’s used to signal anti-semiticism. It does that by mocking a pejorative pronunciation of “jews” such that an anti-semite would make. But maybe you don’t know this because you’re just copying something cool you found on the internet

    Now it is just trying to make stuff up. daley did a quite nice job of explaining this in his comment.

    JD (08c94b)

  256. EW1(SG)- I really, really do enjoy progressive anti-Israel goys such as imdw proclaim they are not anti-semitic. Plus they usually have friends who have friends who are Jewish.

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  257. My best friend is Jewish and I live in a predominantly Jewish neighborhood, and they were all impressed about the White House Seder. And Rev Hatey Wright.

    JD (08c94b)

  258. “Patterico, I am not daleyrocks, and you weren’t addressing me; but I’ll come right out and tell you that I am not insinuating imdw is anti-Semitic, I am stating that I believe he clearly is.”

    Now this is just because I take delight in the Jews for Palin site coming out near the time that Palin declares we are a “christian nation.”

    “, I decided to ask if it applied to Jooooos, knowing that many progressives hold Jooooos responsible various ills in the world, including 9/11. The use of the mispelling is pure mockery of those positions. Progressives claim their anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian positions are not anti-semitic, so who am I to quibble.”

    That’s pretty much what I thought. That’s why I linked to that bizarre nazi truck.

    imdw (2b691a)

  259. So it is objectively not sorry, daleyrocks. It meant to call you a Nazi. Intended to.

    JD (08c94b)

  260. Just ignore the ninnies like imdw who cast out bait just to see who will rise to it.

    Being ignored is the one thing they cannot take… it stems from their unhappy childhood.

    GeneralMalaise (c8f9a0)

  261. “That’s pretty much what I thought. That’s why I linked to that bizarre nazi truck.”

    Sort of in keeping with your insinuations that people on this site and conservatives are racist, correct?

    Why did you ask if the new law applied to white people? What was your thinking there?

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  262. Eventually, all the trolls self-destruct;
    they just can’t help it, since they are, in their own minds, so superior to the rest of us, that they stand above the standards that everyone else observes.

    AD - RtR/OS! (fb87e7)

  263. imdw:

    Your first comment out of the gate was an implication that supporters of this law are motivated by animus towards “brown people.”

    Self-defense is not available to the aggressor.

    Patterico (1c765a)

  264. Comment by GeneralMalaise — 4/25/2010 @ 12:46 pm

    …which they have yet to leave!

    AD - RtR/OS! (fb87e7)

  265. “Why did you ask if the new law applied to white people? What was your thinking there?”

    Because I’m wondering what scenario would lead to white people ending up in a situation where the AZ police think there is a “reasonable suspicion” they are here illegally.

    I think this is a very important question, because I think the disparate impact of the law will have a impact in how it survives a 14th amendment challenge.

    “Your first comment out of the gate was an implication that supporters of this law are motivated by animus towards “brown people.””

    When really it just enables people with that animus to harass the cops for being insufficiently mean. I’m talking about Sec 2, article 8 G of the law.

    imdw (22078e)

  266. Does it’s “apology” still seem sincere?

    JD (08c94b)

  267. “…which they have yet to leave!”

    D’OH!… point taken, AD.

    GeneralMalaise (c8f9a0)

  268. imdw,

    The reason Patterico is my favorite site is because it’s the best comment site on the internet. So just shut your hole except for a straightforward apology or else get what’s coming to you.

    And I have met Daleyrocks personally and if you called him a Nazi when I was around you would be crying to your mommy to wipe your bloody nose.

    nk (db4a41)

  269. Comment by imdw — 4/25/2010 @ 1:06 pm

    Translation: I was throwing mud!

    AD - RtR/OS! (fb87e7)

  270. BTW,

    I do think that the Arizona law is unconstitutional (I don’t need identification papers, I know who I am) and it’s too bad that the thread got too dirtied up for that discussion.

    nk (db4a41)

  271. When really it just enables people with that animus to harass the cops for being insufficiently mean. I’m talking about Sec 2, article 8 G of the law.

    That’s the section that allows citizens to sue police agencies that implement sanctuary policies.

    Progressives seem to love accusing conservatives of harboring racist sentiment. It seems to give progressives a feeling of moral superiority.

    Your comments on this thread, beginning with the first one you left, seem to reflect this attitude. You seem stubbornly blind to the argument that citizens might choose to fight illegal immigration for reasons other than hatred of “brown people.”

    And in ignoring this argument, and implicitly declaring yourself superior as the non-racist among the racists, you pretty much reap what you sow.

    I try to protect people on this site who hold leftist beliefs and express them in a respectful way. But accusing people of racism or other “isms” baselessly is not respectful — as you appear to have discovered when daleyrocks turned the tables on you.

    Take a lesson from aphrael up the thread. He has similar concerns but managed to express them in a non-offensive manner.

    Or don’t — but don’t whine to me when you get a harsh reaction. And don’t call my valued commenters Nazis.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  272. “You seem stubbornly blind to the argument that citizens might choose to fight illegal immigration for reasons other than hatred of “brown people.””

    I’m not blind to that. There’s lots of ways to fight illegal immigration — like making it legal, for example.

    On this law I just have one favorite piece: the one that most enables the haters. Although now i’m wavering, and wondering if the provisions in section 6 B are the ones that most enable the haters. That one allows people to harass businesses, their employees, and county attorneys.

    imdw (9ddb8a)

  273. “as you appear to have discovered when daleyrocks turned the tables on you.”

    Oh that attitude he expressed has been expressed before. Like I said, its part of the game.

    imdw (9ddb8a)

  274. Just ban the a_____e, Patterico.

    nk (db4a41)

  275. imdw:

    On this law I just have one favorite piece: the one that most enables the haters.

    This website is not about haters, so imdw is in moderation and I’ll release his comments if and when I have time.

    DRJ (09fa6c)

  276. I do think that the Arizona law is unconstitutional (I don’t need identification papers, I know who I am) and it’s too bad that the thread got too dirtied up for that discussion.

    nk,

    I don’t know. My reading of the law is that there has to be reasonable suspicion that you’re an illegal immigrant before the issue of “papers” even arises.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  277. “Game” indeed. It’s Patterico’s blog. His choice with regard to how to handle this nasty person.

    And that piece of toilet film imdw has accomplished his goals: irritating people and muddying things.

    Eric Blair (54c62f)

  278. I’m not blind to that. There’s lots of ways to fight illegal immigration — like making it legal, for example.

    What I’m blind to, imdw, is just how you contribute in a positive manner to the discussions on this blog.

    Well, it looks like you have been moderated, and I see no reason to second-guess that decision.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  279. So, getting back to a real topic, I have to admit that I am nonplussed about “showing papers.” I mean, I have to show a license to drive a car (on demand). I can’t cash a check without ID. Check out a book from a library. Rent a car. And I was once told that—thought there is some controversy about this—that some citizens must carry ID in some areas?

    I have libertarian leanings, but I am not a lawyer—I’m just a geneticist and college professor. So I am sympathetic to the idea that no one should have to carry ID. But we seem to have to do so for all kinds of purposes in everyday life.

    By the way, nk, your comments about daleyrocks impressed the heck out of me. Nice to see folks standing up for one another.

    Eric Blair (0b61b2)

  280. I dont know pat some people were somewhat nasty to Aphrael – accusing him of things he wasnt advocating

    Some were also starting on DRJ and nk as well

    it seems to be festering a ring of hostility

    Me I get what I deserve but I dont think the others do

    EricPWJohnson (277a19)

  281. “I don’t know. My reading of the law is that there has to be reasonable suspicion that you’re an illegal immigrant before the issue of “papers” even arises.”

    Some will be safer than others, depending on how AZ cops form “reasonable suspicion” to ask for papers, and “probable cause” to arrest.

    [Released from filter — DRJ]

    imdw (c5488f)

  282. I need to think about it, too, Patterico. I do formulate good argument but it takes me about three days. 😉

    nk (db4a41)

  283. We had a lot of racial profiling cases in South and West Texas in the 1980s-1990s filed in state and federal court. They involved claims of civil rights violations based on racial profiling by Texas DPS officers and local police and sheriffs in stopping suspected drug smugglers traveling on the highways. If those cases apply (and I don’t see why they wouldn’t), then it seems to me that profiling would be an enforcement matter and not grounds for a constitutional objection. However, I have a harder time deciding whether Arizona can rebut a claim that immigration is a federal and not a state matter.

    DRJ (09fa6c)

  284. That’s true, DRJ. It’s in the original Constitution that the states have no power over immigration.

    nk (db4a41)

  285. DRJ

    Its astonishingly bad law which BTW Arizona has a storied history of. From bizarre DUI laws , fetal tissue research to their past forays into intrusion into federal jurisdictions.

    Its going to get thrown out as they intended but it will get the Feds to act – it did force their hand.

    And I am worried that any strong measures to enforce the mass migration is going to challenge generations of all Americans to prove their heritage

    In Texas there was nullification talk about the 14th and even last session Perry used a rare move to stop a bill by someone to end the anchor baby problem in Texas.

    EricPWJohnson (277a19)

  286. But … hasn’t Arizona claimed that the reason for the law is to reduce crime and isn’t that a valid state function? And hasn’t the federal government essentially turned over immigration deportation to local law enforcement agencies through the 287(g) program and other programs?

    DRJ (09fa6c)

  287. I think I’ve asked before, and don’t recall seeing a response, so I’ll ask again:

    Aren’t LEGAL immigrants required to keep in their possession proof of their immigration status, just as foreign tourists are required to have their passports handy?

    So, if we can require tourists to provide some form of ID, and also LEGAL immigrants, what is the heartburn about asking someone who doesn’t appear to be a U.S.Citizen for identification?

    Just when are we supposed to hand over the sovereignity of this country to some foreign group(s)?

    Well, guess what, there are millions of us who say:
    No F…ing Way!

    AD - RtR/OS! (fb87e7)

  288. Eric,

    If things keep going the way they are, I suspect we Texans won’t be talking about the constitutionality of federal vs state immigration enforcement. We’ll just put more state troopers on the border.

    DRJ (09fa6c)

  289. AZ is not usurping the Fed prerogitive to determine immigration status.
    They are saying that they will ask people to show that they have a legal right to be in AZ/USA by showing documents issued by State and/or Federal governments.

    It is no different than stopping a vehicle and asking for a DL…
    No DL, No Insurance, you can be detained (particularly if you have imbibed) in some states…plus have your car impounded.

    AD - RtR/OS! (fb87e7)

  290. Also

    Looking briefly at the numbers per capita AZ has the most federal enforcements assets available to them and they have less of an immigration problem than all other border states as well as several interior states

    Their claims seem to be outdone by statistics – as a percentage of population even Missouri has an equally bad problem as Az

    EricPWJohnson (277a19)

  291. Except, some of the weenies at the Dept of Interior have forbidden the Border Patrol from inserting themselves into “ecologically sensitive” areas along the border that are under the supervision of BoI, who themselves will not disturb the cactus and lizards.
    Guess where the smugglers go?

    AD - RtR/OS! (fb87e7)

  292. Hey, AD, I’ve got it! World Wildlife Fund will then do enforcement, protecting the cactus and lizards.

    Or maybe we need genetically modified cacti to protect the borders. Of course, I have seen that movie, and it doesn’t end well.

    Eric Blair (0b61b2)

  293. Perhaps they could sow the border with land mines that don’t explode, but spray out itching powder.
    Then you just arrest anyone scratching themselves, unless they’re in a baseball uniform.

    AD - RtR/OS! (fb87e7)

  294. http://www.ssa.gov/international/Agreement_Pamphlets/canada.html

    anyone besides me see wholes in this you could drive a truck through?

    EricPWJohnson (277a19)

  295. ___________________________________

    I’m going to re-post the following because it is a paradigm of what ultimately is at the core of the topic of immigration and, in turn, demographics. It says a lot more about social-political liberalism because larger percentages of people throughout the country truly have attitudes that are more accepting of and comfortable with racial-ethnic diversity. IOW, we’re a million miles away from the hyper-conformist first half of the 20th century, when “Leave It To Beaver” wasn’t a humorous anachronism and the controversy of JFK being a Catholic (a Catholic!) aroused controversy. Yet an increasingly liberal mindset — certainly in uber-blue states like California — has not changed the patterns described below.

    A lot of us now are, in effect, guilty of limousine liberalism—and one does not have to be wealthy to display that type of two-faced behavior. So we can talk a good game until we’re blue in the face, but then we find ourselves packing our suitcases, hiring the moving van, and voting with our feet.

    The Civil Rights Project, UCLA, January 2009

    Schools in the United States are more segregated today than they have been in more than four decades. Millions of non-white students are locked into “dropout factory” high schools, where huge percentages do not graduate, and few are well prepared for college or a future in the US economy.

    According to a new Civil Rights report published at the University of California, Los Angeles, schools in the US are 44 percent non-white, and minorities are rapidly emerging as the majority of public school students in the US. Latinos and blacks, the two largest minority groups, attend schools more segregated today than during the civil rights movement forty years ago. In Latino and African American populations, two of every five students attend intensely segregated schools. For Latinos this increase in segregation reflects growing residential segregation.

    The Civil Rights Study shows that most severe segregation in public schools is in the Western states, including California — not in the South, as many people believe. Unequal education leads to diminished access to college and future jobs. Most non-white schools are segregated by poverty as well as race. Most of the nation’s dropouts occur in non-white public schools, leading to large numbers of virtually unemployable young people of color.

    Mark (411533)

  296. Years ago, as a resident alien in the United Kingdom, we were required to carry a sort of ‘green card’ (it was really green) with us “at all times” to verify being in the UK legally. It was an official document issued by the British government to resident aliens that had to be updated and reissued every 36 months. It contained personal information, a recent photo, fingerprints, medical data and so on– similar to a passport (diplomatic or otherwise) and less of a hassle to carry around all the time than a passport as well. Anecdotally speaking, it looked like something right out of the film, ‘The Great Escape’ and the phrase, ‘papers, please’ was a routine joke among the younger set in the American community. It simply indicated that we were in the country legally, properly vaccinated and so on and unless otherwise noted, determined whether or not we could apply for jobs unless the proper work permits were issued; the point being selected jobs went to UK residents before resident aliens. But we were required to be able to present this document to authorities on demand. This writer was asked three times in five years to produce this document on demand by authorities- twice in the UK and once entering the Soviet Union (where the document was withheld by Soviet authorities for six days along with our passports, we were told, to verify visa information.) The incidents were no big deal and quite an education on how other nations view the basic freedom of movement American citizens take for granted. And how quickly it can be restricted. On the surface, at least to us, these were not racially motivated but more a matter of bureaucratic legalities and basic identification for entry into government facilities or for matters of currency exchange and so on. As an Anglo-featured individual with a distinctly non-British accent, the surface questions used in all three incidents appeared to simply want to verify whether our nationalities were Canadian or American. But they stay with you. A friend had his papers challenged and a more thorough investigation ordered in front of us. One of those ’empty your pockets’ searches. We suspected it was because his hair was long. But all these years later, the event remains a vivid memory.

    DCSCA (9d1bb3)

  297. Of course. What would this thread be without the appearance of IMP?

    EW1(SG) (edc268)

  298. hair transplants are overly expensive but i can say that the results are great:”-

    Tub Chair ` (afe260)

  299. i think it is expensive to get a hair transplant but the procedure is well worth it *~’

    Mary Griffin (404be5)

  300. An impressive share, I simply given this onto a colleague who was doing a little bit similar analysis on this. He in fact purchased me breakfast because I discovered it for him.. smile.

    landscaping lancaster (71ee86)

  301. My favorite piece of wingnutness in the bill is any local xenophobe can sue any police agency if they feel they’re not being sufficiently mean to brown people. That should go over real well.

    So what?

    Would you rather surrender the country to illegal aliens?

    I’m glad I’m not Mexican-American, and living in Arizona. Life will get very unpleasant there.

    That is a small price to pay for the safety and security of state and nation.

    Michael Ejercito (64388b)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1847 secs.