Arizona's anti-imigration law...

[dilligaf]

Caught ya! "Limit", "comments", and "syllables" all have more than one syllable. So what is the secret to pique dill's interest?

That is for you to figure out.

 

[Babagounj]

CNSNews.com asked Kennedy (D-R.I.), a member of the House Oversight and Government Reform subcommittee on national security and foreign affairs, for his thoughts on the criticisms Calderon made of the Arizona law while in Washington, D.C. last week.
“Well, he’s right on,” Kennedy told CNSNews.com. “I mean, it violates the spirit of our own Constitution.
“So, you know, we had a tragic history in this country,” said Kennedy. “The most shameful parts of our history were when we had our slave trade, when we, when we, the Trail of Tears–what we did to our Native Americans. And, you know, the proudest moments in our history are when we had the Civil Rights Act, when we moved forward on integration and expanding the opportunities for all of our citizens.
“So, this idea of, you know, racial profiling, takes us backwards and really goes to the worst character of our nation and it’s, it’s demeaning to our country that we would move in that direction,” said Kennedy. ”It’s beneath us as a people.”




note: Kennedy is NOT running for his seat.
and his statements must make RI very proud that he isn't.

 

[Lue C Fur]

Car Crash Involving Mass. Lawmaker, Suspected Illegal Immigrant Heats Up Debate

According to the report, the suspect "just laughed, slurring that he was going to go back to 'my country' Mexico. 'Nothing is going to happen to me, man.'

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...ker-suspected-illegal-immigrant-heats-debate/

 

[trplnkl]

See Below

No, not that. Thanks for confirming me that you’re more into the political fight than on SB1070 (With HB2162 of course). So you say that every law is a political fight between Republicans and Democrats? That’s why you can’t see beyond your nose of what could be fine or what’s wrong with SB1070. You approve SB1070 not because of what it says nor what it implies, you approve it because it’s a law passed by your political party. You’re wrong in believing that any law is a political fight. Political parties might use laws to gain votes, but that doesn’t mean that laws are for political prizes. Don’t use laws for obtaining legislative or executive power and then you will be able to see, without being a partisan, what’s wrong or what’s right with a law, and won’t care if Democrats or Republicans proposed it, that way you will judge it better. Thus we’ll have laws that are not biased, laws with the principles of the Constitution and laws that will be enforced to people that are not only Republicans or Democrats, but also to people that are affiliated with other political beliefs. Now, here comes one of my little made up conversations: “It comes to my mind Thomas Jefferson and James Madison fighting for power and putting the Constitution at the stake because of a political fight, would you believe that? Hell no. And I don’t kind myself for saying this.” Search for political, and you’ll see it concerns more with party politics than anything beyond that, so don’t mix things up. You’re Grandson is still 14, he’s still very young, you can still teach him the difference between political issues and laws, so he doesn’t commit the same mistakes of his Grandpa, or even his Father if that‘s what you taught to your Son.’ I hope I have made it clear this third time.
About the pointing fingers, I said that I perceived it’s toward the current administration, because that’s what “I read in many of these posts, if not all of them.” Sure, there might be fingers pointing on past administrations, but there are also posts, in favor of the law, praising for Mr. Bush, and other republicans. And there are many other posts as examples, and thus that’s why I perceive you’re more after the current Federal Administration than to resolve any issue. But, I don’t care if you hate our current Federal Administration, I’m just emphasizing that you’re more at hunting Federals than to debate on SB1070, and consequently you give the impression you don’t even know what the law says.
Now, I’m glad I’m taking you a little bit out of your bubble. Now you say there’s not a Federal Law as SB1070. Now, you’re getting out of your swamp. I said to “moreluck” to give me a link of the current Federal Law he/she proclaimed to be in existence for decades as SB1070. The law has been in existence for decades as a Federal law.......no one questioned the constitutionality 'til AZ did something to remedy their problem. Are you clapping for Calderone too !!- Moreluck. And then, you stepped out for him/her saying: There is indeed a federal law...http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/...5----000-.html…- trplnkl. Ouh, you still added “Indeed.” But now, I see you agree with me, that there’s no such Federal Law, GOOD. So no DUH! Because that’s not what you and “moreluck” said, you guys were repeating Mrs. Brewer and Mr. Arpaio’s words. “There’s a Federal Law already.” At least you should repeat Mr. McClintok’s words, that says that “SB1070 reinforces Federal Law,” not that there’s a Federal Law already. Mr. McClintok sound smarter than the other two.. I’m also glad that you recognize that all people have individual rights, something you did not on past posts. Discrimination against illegals from Mexico is not racism.- trplnkl. Oh and BTW..illegal immigrants are NOT American citizens.- trplnkl. Emphasizing on this specific post, that by not being American Citizens, they don’t have Individual rights? And there are other posts like that. But, lets not go that far. lawyers saw that there were gaps in protection of legal citizens from profiling and possible investigation with out probable cause or suspicions. HB2162 filled those gaps. - trplnkl. I never said you quoted the law, I said you even made it look worse in your statement. And don’t foolish yourself in saying the law doesn’t allow profiling. You contradict yourself too much. I’m glad you changing your mind for better. Weren’t you the one that came up with the word “wet guys.” You hid it, thinking you were going to get away with that. Was that a subliminal message? Hehehehehe. I wonder who the hypocrite is. I’m glad you come from something such as “wetguys,” to Mexicans, then to Hispanics, and now that illegals are not only from Hispanic ancestry. Good, illegals come from any country. It’s something I already know. But, you shouldn’t be telling me, you should tell the people that put the pictures and jokes that targets mostly Mexican people. Now that I’ve made you understand that, you should make your guys understand it, too. I see you’ve been full of prejudice towards one group of people, and thus you will just ignore the racism of the law. If you even think SB1070 without HB2162 is fine, then there’s no need in wasting words on you, you will be limited just to your thoughts or what you hear from Mr. Arpaio and company. Now, you want me to debate on how to stop illegal immigration, good, I’m against it. If you want to debate about that, then open another thread, this is about SB1070 Anti-Immigration Law. Not about Anti-Illegal Immigration. It’s good you point things up to stop illegal immigration, but don’t touch my Bill of Rights. I’m sure there are better ways to resolve illegal immigration without putting Civil Rights on the line; it’s just not worth it.
Thanks for wishing me luck, but I don’t need it. Where have you offended my Constitution? Here, They did not say the AZ was exactly identical, what was said is the AZ mirrors the Fed Law, not the same thing. If fact the AZ law has the anti-profiling language and the fed law does not. trplnkl. You think our Constitution doesn’t prevent racial profiling? Well, guess what? History has proved it does. Now, don’t say our Constitution is not Federal, and that you were citing that specific one on your link. The Federal Government won’t write the same think written on the Constitution word by word on this law. Why? Because the Constitution already applies on it. They don’t need to say “may not solely consider race, color or national origin in implementing the requirements of this subsection except to the extent permitted by the United States Constitution.” Like SB1070. Now, if it was to be written something like that maybe the law would have never been passed. Imagine if the Federal Government was subject to write the Bill of Rights on every law they passed, then we would have such a waste of paper, and ecologists would get mixed into politics. Now, you see where you have insulted my Constitution?
You sound like my supervisor when I show him the Contract. “Oh, no. That’s not what it implies.” But, he never tells me how it doesn’t, with a good explanation; without all that babble gabble. I’ve read all of the law, but why should I post all of it. If it started stupid, it’ll end stupid. And the one misreading between the lines, it’s you, in my posts. Anyway, you’re free to cite the parts you want of the law. You have freedom of expression.
I have these made up conversations… Well, at least I make a joke of a comical law. I don’t need two voices: Arpaio’s and Brewer’s for repeating the same two to three statements you people just hear and put on the table: “Have you read the law?” “Man, but there’s already a Federal Law like this one.” And I don’t remember the other ones, you should know them better.
Now, don’t ask me “Are you clapping for Calderon, too.” Or don‘t say something like, “Brewer and Arpaio are getting elected again.” I, still, don’t want to make this debate political. But, I still ask: Who the heck with an IQ of 20 signs this stupidity?
Wish you moreluck. Wish you, moreluck and the others could read my posts with integrity. And just because you don’t agree with them, say they’re full of gibberish; but, instead for you to explain to me why’s gibberish what I write.


See below

OH you really got me, didn't ya?

It's clear that you are posting out of emotions and fail to know or understand anything that does not fit into you ideals. Trying to discuss this with you in a logical and informed manner is futile and you have gotten boring with your sisyphean diatribe.

Do you know what the US Code is?

 

[wkmac]

Higher Immigration, Lower Crime

 

[moreluck]

Sisyphean

1. Incessant or incessantly recurring, but futile. Sisyphean labors
2. Relating to Sisyphus.

So is Sisyphus a cousin of Sylvester of Puddy Tat fame ??

 

[diesel96]

I know your ego (there you go talking about Obama again) may be hurt by what I'm about to say so I want you to know that this isn't meant as a malicious comment...But I don't live my life around the PC waiting to respond to your posts. You following my Lue ?
If i was following you i would be attached to Obamas leg so im not going there...you keep enjoying it though im sure he likes it.
My Right Wing friends, with all this focus on Klein bashing, (he likes it) Mexican bashing, (here comes the liberal mantra) Obama, Pelosi, Gore, Frank and the ACLU bashing, (well the do all suck dont they) I have been spending less time on this site. So your embarassed of what your Messiah has done...i understand...it will be over in a few years and you can come out from under the rock) Why am I not surprised the moral Conservative compass shines so bright, it mostly appeals to the White. (Here it comes...) Lets rehash the focus of attention here, lets keep the heels of your moral, patriotic, good Christian, corperate boot on the throats of Hispanics (lations), Blacks, Women, conservationists, gays, Civil rights Attny's, (and the it is...yes its the Liberal Manta...the race card...(and yes, even Canadians) (just Klein...cause he likes it) wonder why they run (not walk) away from the GOP recruitor. Then when you finally do find a Conservative minority, you hook a leash on them and show them off like a new puppy...so taboo
Who doesnt like a puppy...look at your new puppy named Barry... he needs to be potty trained...its over a year and he is still pooping all over the constution and the American people and Pissing all the money away.

As to your post. You offered no evidence that the Arizona law is softer than federal law.
Admit it...your reading comprehension skills are lacking.
Now the difference between the AZ law and the federal law is, the AZ law is a softer version of the same thing? AGAIN, WHY IS THE AZ LAW NECESSARY THEN?
Federal govt is not doing their job...DUH!!!
It should be beyond obvious to you already that if AZ just nerfs the AZ law and does what they intend to do in the first place, this partisan game of nothing more than blame and ugly rhetoric wouldn't even be happening in the first place. Draconian? No, try realistic, effective, and solution-oriented.
I guess your right...the majority of Americans are wrong...oh i forgotyour still under a rock...sorry.

On the factual side the part that bothers me the most about the Arizona law is the 'lawful contact' portion. (Remember...Federal law requires no reason to ask for proof...ooops...i forgot...the rock....)That's a lot of latitude to give the police for asking you to provide proof of citizenship. (dont want to offend and terrorists or lawbreakers...ooops...sorry...the rock again) I look at laws on how I would want them applied to me. I would imagine (maybe thats the problem...you IMAGINE to much...there is a reality ya know...take a look around...its not all Obama and Pelosi pixie dust and fariys) that most conservatives would agree with me that I don't feel like I should have to offer proof of citizenship if I am a victim of a crime.

And if there is no profiling going on then the police have to apply the same standards to everyone. That means everyone they have a 'lawful contact' with should be asked for proof of citizenship. This effectively means that the police can ask you for your papers at any time. Just like the Feds can do without any suspicion...ooops...i forgot again...the rock is heavy)

Your little juvenile interjected reponses are a complete cop out...You add nothing to this subject. How about projecting any added value content pertaining to the subject at hand from a clean slate. If you think this pisses off Liberals, your misguided. It just goes to show, your contributions are irrelevant.....

 

[diesel96]

Read the law and the US Code....links provided earlier in this thread. The AZ is not softer, the AZ law is more restrictive than the fed law. The fed law does not require previous legal contact.

It should be beyond obvious to you already that if AZ just nerfs (not in the dictionary, don't know what you are trying so inaptly to say)the AZ law and does what they intend to do in the first place, this partisan game of nothing more than blame and ugly rhetoric wouldn't even be happening in the first place. Draconian? No, try realistic, effective, and solution-oriented.
The AZ is indeed realistic, should be effective and is solution oriented.
On the factual side the part that bothers me the most about the Arizona law is the 'lawful contact' portion. That's a lot of latitude to give the police for asking you to provide proof of citizenship. I look at laws on how I would want them applied to me. I would imagine that most conservatives would agree with me that I don't feel like I should have to offer proof of citizenship if I am a victim of a crime.
First of all, you still haven't read the law or you have failed reading comprehension ...again. If a person in legal contact with LEO has a legal ID from the list, they will never be asked for further ID or proof of status. Pretty simple, NO?

I can't speak for anyone else's experience, but when my pickup was broken into and I called the police I was asked for my ID(required for filing a report), I showed them my driver's license. If I had not had the DL, I guess they would have asked for a different form of ID, that might include some sort of citizenship proof if others were not available. I didn't mind, would you have?

And if there is no profiling going on then the police have to apply the same standards to everyone. That means everyone they have a 'lawful contact' with should be asked for proof of citizenship.
Again, read the law before you go making assumptions, if the have legal contact with a Lilly white , blue eyed, blond haired individual with no ID, they will more than likely be asked for proof of ID including status.This effectively means that the police can ask you for your papers at any time. Under the US Code for immigration, this is already the situation. Previous legal contact is not required.

You really think everybody is that naive to believe this fallacy in the Southwest....Not to be spiteful, But I would crack up, if you, Dill, or UPslifer gets hauled to jail one day for leaving your ID at home at some point in AZ when coming in contact with Law Enforcement. But I know that will never happen, because I assume all three of you are lilly white and would never be forced to prove your citizenship....So why is it ok, for someone who may look Spanish/Mexican/central-south American be subject to gestapo-like treatment and not the lilly whites....
You know, I'd have alot more respect for your side, if you just be honest, and say racial profiling is effective, and ran on that platform instead of beating around the bush and making up crafty worded legislation.....


Yeah, well providing women and blacks equal rights were not popular as well. Look h

I know your ego may be hurt by what I'm about to say so I want you to know that this isn't meant as a malicious comment...But I don't live my life around the PC waiting to respond to your posts. You following my Lue ?
No reply needed.
My Right Wing friends, with all this focus on Klein bashing, Mexican bashing, Obama, Pelosi, Gore, Frank and the ACLU bashing, I have been spending less time on this site. Why am I not surprised the moral Conservative compass shines so bright, it mostly appeals to the White. Lets rehash the focus of attention here, lets keep the heels of your moral, patriotic, good Christian, corperate boot on the throats of Hispanics (lations), Blacks, Women, conservationists, gays, Civil rights Attny's, (and yes, even Canadians) wonder why they run (not walk) away from the GOP recruitor. Then when you finally do find a Conservative minority, you hook a leash on them and show them off like a new puppy...so taboo
Your hate for everything not liberal is showing and you are claiming some sort of superior moral compass for the left? HAHAHA
The more you type, the more I clearly see that you are not misguided but have no direction at all.

As to your post. You offered no evidence that the Arizona law is softer than federal law.
Now the difference between the AZ law and the federal law is, the AZ law is a softer version of the same thing? AGAIN, WHY IS THE AZ LAW NECESSARY THEN?
ow out of touch America looked back then. I wonder if it wasn't fought by Progression, and we left it up the knucle-dragging Mccarthy-like goons, would women still be in the kitchen bare foot and pregnaut and would blacks still be segregrated....

I beg to differ,(example) the Constitution would not have been amended in favor of civil rights if it was not "popular" enough. The majority of the opposition to civil rights laws were regional.



Sure, close a bunch of military bases overseas, and relocate some of our personal on the border. Leaglize, regulate, tax pot and maybe even cocaine eventually. Arrest business owners with jailtime if they knowingly hire illegals. Reduce gun running by appling tougher regulations and stiffer background checks at Gun Shows. If a Business/Corperation unpatriotically decides to snub American workers and send jobs and services across the pond, at least send them south of the border....just a few suggestions.....what do you suggest Tie, 1940's version of a Japanese round up ??? Are you sure Reagan is a bigger hero to you than McCarthy ???
You've GOT to be kidding, you want to legalize a highly addictive and destructive drug as cocaine? Really?
Some of the ideas you mentioned are not all that bad. I would go for stricter controls on business owners that hire illegals. (BTW AZ has recently enacted such a law) I haven't been to a gun show lately (have you?)but the last one I did attend I had to show an ID and fill out papers to purchase a shotgun.
I can't speak for Tie, but I didn't see anything in any of his posts to warrant you're asinine take on what he might suggest.

So you didn't mind a dumb sober Texan, and a trigger happy VP sending our youth into a meatgrinder in a Desert full of imaginary WMD's ??....
Maybe it's time for a "pothead" for President, couldn't be worse than having GOP's at the helm l
Because I fully support you're right to your opinion, I reserve the same right for myself.
INHO, people like you are a large part of the problem in the USA, are you sure you are an American? You sure seem to be more than willing to give the country to anyone that wants it.

Hey Tex, Isn't your state the one that wants to secede from the Nation ? Like Conservative people from your state have a leg to stand on questioning other peoples love of America. Not only supporting idiotic leadership like GW, Jan Brewer, your current Gov. and poorly thought out legislation from purely emotional perspective, but now Conservative people of Texas are trying to rewrite history in our childrens texts books. I now see why you question everyone's reading comprehension that doesn't equate to your own fallable standards. God bless Texas and all those who oppose Right Wing extremist from that state.
Ex. given...
I beg to differ,(example) the Constitution would not have been amended in favor of civil rights if it was not "popular" enough. The majority of the opposition to civil rights laws were regional.

Here ya go...rewriting history....Civil/Equal rights clearly violated our Constitution. The Legislation governing bodies clearly knew if this went thru to the US Judicial system they would lose hands down....Hence, the historical resistance and struggle that followed....Just like Gay equal rights. Although deemed unpopular this will eventually pass thru Civil courts with flying colors. Voting on Civil matters such as this thru popular election blocks in the form of amendments is futile.These Civil matters such as the Az bill/ Gay rights are cut and dry, and will eventually not be judged as a popularity contest, but will ultimately have to pass the litmus test on that piece of paper called The Constitution......

 

[trplnkl]

Sisyphean

1. Incessant or incessantly recurring, but futile. Sisyphean labors
2. Relating to Sisyphus.

So is Sisyphus a cousin of Sylvester of Puddy Tat fame ??

Prolly

 

[Babagounj]

CAL. PENAL CODE § 834b: California Code — Section 834b
(a) Every law enforcement agency in California shall fully cooperate with the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service regarding any person who is arrested if he or she is suspected of being present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws.
(b) With respect to any such person who is arrested, and suspected of being present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws, every law enforcement agency shall do the following:
(1) Attempt to verify the legal status of such person as a citizen of the United States, an alien lawfully admitted as a permanent resident, an alien lawfully admitted for a temporary period of time or as an alien who is present in the United States in violation of immigration laws. The verification process may include, but shall not be limited to, questioning the person regarding his or her date and place of birth, and entry into the United States, and demanding documentation to indicate his or her legal status.
(2) Notify the person of his or her apparent status as an alien who is present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws and inform him or her that, apart from any criminal justice proceedings, he or she must either obtain legal status or leave the United States.
(3) Notify the Attorney General of California and the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service of the apparent illegal status and provide any additional information that may be requested by any other public entity.
(c) Any legislative, administrative, or other action by a city, county, or other legally authorized local governmental entity with jurisdictional boundaries, or by a law enforcement agency, to prevent or limit the cooperation required by subdivision (a) is expressly prohibited.
​

 

[Babagounj]

Border Patrol weekend incidents
Reporter: Brian Pryor
The U.S. Border Patrol issued a press release Monday afternoon outlining a rundown of incidents that occurred over the weekend.
In Douglas, agents arrested 24 illegal aliens found in a stash house after a concerned citizen called them.
At the Naco station, after checking an illegal aliens fingerprints agents discovered that the alien had been convicted of felony child abuse and domestic battery, he was held for prosecution.
At the Ajo station agents arrested an illegal alien wanted for homicide. His warrant was discovered after agents checked the aliens fingerprints.
In Casa Grande agents arrested an illegal alien who admitted to being part of the Sureno 13 gang. Fingerprint checks indicated that he had a conviction of felony possession of a controlled substance. The alien was held for prosecution.
Also in Casa Grande agents discovered the bodies of 2 deceased males in the west desert area, the scene was turned over to the Tohono O’odham Police Department.
In Sonoita, agents found the decomposed remains of an individual southwest of Hereford Arizona, less than 2 miles north of the US/Mexico border. Agents secured the scene and turned it over to the Cochise County Sheriff’s Office.

 

[Babagounj]

Road Rage: Hackers Say 'No Latinos' on Highway Sign

Techies alter sign on Palmetto

By BRIAN HAMACHER and CAROLYN RYAN

Updated 10:14 AM EDT, Tue, May 25, 2010

NBCMiami.com



Electronic road sign hackers generally like to warn motorists of zombie and raptor attacks, but in South Florida, the signs are apparently being used to fuel the immigration debate.
A highway sign flashing "NO LATINOS NO TACOS" greeted drivers on the Palmetto Expressway in Northwest Miami-Dade, after hackers managed to alter it early Tuesday morning.
The sign was in the northbound side of the 826, right near the Northwest 25th street exit.

 

[moreluck]

The prez. wants a pathway for the 12 million illegals to become citizens........

Here's your path.....exit the country and get back in line and follow the proper procedure to citizenship !!!

 

[trplnkl]

You really think everybody is that naive to believe this fallacy in the Southwest....Not to be spiteful, But I would crack up, if you, Dill, or UPslifer gets hauled to jail one day for leaving your ID at home at some point in AZ when coming in contact with Law Enforcement. But I know that will never happen, because I assume all three of you are lilly white and would never be forced to prove your citizenship....So why is it ok, for someone who may look Spanish/Mexican/central-south American be subject to gestapo-like treatment and not the lilly whites....
You know, I'd have alot more respect for your side, if you just be honest, and say racial profiling is effective, and ran on that platform instead of beating around the bush and making up crafty worded legislation.....

Why would you assume that a lilly white someone would not be investigated further if they had no ID when being stopped for, let's say, running a red light? The AZ law does not mention race or skin color as reasonable suspicion, so if I were pulled over for running that light and I had no ID, I would expect the officer to do whatever had to be done to prove I was who I said I was. If it came to light during that investigation that I was in the country illegally I would expect to be deported. It's so simple, even you should be able ot understand it. Illegals (whether they are from Mexico or Canada or England) will not have a driver's license or a government photo ID of any kind, so if none of the listed documents can't be produced they will assume the person is here illegally.
Why can't you understand that ALL ILLEGALS ARE NOT HISPANICS or Hispanic looking, and certainly not all of them are Mexican ?

OH and BTW, I don't think anyone is naive (well maybe KingofBrown, but that's another story), but I also do not think everyone that wants to curtail illegal immigration are racists either.
I don't understand where you get some of your off the wall stereotyping.
Would you care to support you claims of "gestapo-like" treatment?

Yeah, well providing women and blacks equal rights were not popular as well. Look h


Hey Tex, Isn't your state the one that wants to secede from the Nation ? HAHAHA, you are a fool if you actually believe that most Texans would support secession. That would be like me saying all Floridians weren't smart enough to use the voting machines.
Like Conservative people from your state have a leg to stand on questioning other peoples love of America.
You clearly have no idea what you are talking about, you are just showing your uber-liberal non-thought out diarrhea of the mouth.

Not only supporting idiotic leadership like GW, Jan Brewer, your current Gov. and poorly thought out legislation from purely emotional perspective,
Yep, I did support GW on many issues, given the same circumstances on the same issues I would still support him. I also disagreed with GW of many issues as well. I do support Jan Brewer on the new AZ law, because I feel it is a good starting place for fair and real action against illegal immigration. I'm not real fond of Gov Rick Perry. The law that you are so opposed to is far from being emotional perspective and I dare you to show where it is. In fact your opposition to this law seems much more emotionally charged and based on anything but fact, than the law or my defense of it. but now Conservative people of Texas are trying to rewrite history in our childrens texts books. I voted against Bob Craig (one of the members of the text book committee)for our local school board every time he ran for re-election. I don't like the "balance" of thought going on there either. I don't know a lot about what they are adding or removing but I figure you know even less than I do about this issue. Just another emotional, conservative hater response to something you know very little about.
I now see why you question everyone's reading comprehension that doesn't equate to your own fallable standards.
Oh Nay nay, I question your reading comprehension because you say you read something and you responses clearly indicate you did not understand what you read. It's either the lack of reading skill or your choice to be obtuse. God bless Texas and all those who oppose Right Wing extremist from that state.
Ex. given...
I beg to differ,(example) the Constitution would not have been amended in favor of civil rights if it was not "popular" enough. The majority of the opposition to civil rights laws were regional.

Here ya go...rewriting history....Civil/Equal rights clearly violated our Constitution. The Legislation governing bodies clearly knew if this went thru to the US Judicial system they would lose hands down....Hence, the historical resistance and struggle that followed..
OK, since you are the Constitution guru here, please show me where Civil/Equal rights clearly violated our Constitution? By the statement, "Legislation governing bodies clearly knew if this went....", which governing bodies are you talking about and when?

..Just like Gay equal rights. Although deemed unpopular this will eventually pass thru Civil courts with flying colors. Voting on Civil matters such as this thru popular election blocks in the form of amendments is futile.
Sorry, I am having trouble deciding what you are talking about here. "popular election blocks in the form of amendments is futile"?? HUH?
These Civil matters such as the Az bill/ Gay rights are cut and dry, and will eventually not be judged as a popularity contest, but will ultimately have to pass the litmus test on that piece of paper called The Constitution......
When and IF the AZ law ever makes it to the SCotUS, we will see if it passes the litmus test as constitutional .
If it is ruled unconstitutional I will say I was wrong, if it is ruled constitutional will you say you were wrong?

 

[moreluck]

There's nothing worse than a (insert race) with a chip on his/her shoulder !!

 

[trplnkl]

Road Rage: Hackers Say 'No Latinos' on Highway Sign

Techies alter sign on Palmetto

By BRIAN HAMACHER and CAROLYN RYAN

Updated 10:14 AM EDT, Tue, May 25, 2010

NBCMiami.com



Electronic road sign hackers generally like to warn motorists of zombie and raptor attacks, but in South Florida, the signs are apparently being used to fuel the immigration debate.
A highway sign flashing "NO LATINOS NO TACOS" greeted drivers on the Palmetto Expressway in Northwest Miami-Dade, after hackers managed to alter it early Tuesday morning.
The sign was in the northbound side of the 826, right near the Northwest 25th street exit.

fixed it for ya

 

[trplnkl]

There's nothing worse than a (insert race) with a chip on his/her shoulder !!

LMAO...yea, tis true....LMAO
Although I didn't know "Idiot" was a race.

 

[trplnkl]

Your little juvenile interjected reponses are a complete cop out...You add nothing to this subject. How about projecting any added value content pertaining to the subject at hand from a clean slate. If you think this pisses off Liberals, your misguided. It just goes to show, your contributions are irrelevant.....

Why bother? you won't read them anyway, or you'll interject you own flavor of irrelevancy.

and yea, I think it does piss you off...just a leetle.

 

[Lue C Fur]

Your little juvenile interjected reponses are a complete cop out...You add nothing to this subject. (Just admit it Deez, your reading comprehension skills are awful) How about projecting any added value content pertaining to the subject at hand from a clean slate. (Again...reading comprehension Deez) If you think this pisses off Liberals, your misguided. (by your response it shows its working...please dont stop and dont forget to repeat the Liberal Mantra...) It just goes to show, your contributions are irrelevant.. (comming from you thats really funny...your only contributions have been the Liberal Mantra....and Obama leg humping)[/B]

 

[Lue C Fur]

You really think everybody is that naive to believe this fallacy in the Southwest....Not to be spiteful, But I would crack up, if you, Dill, or UPslifer gets hauled to jail one day for leaving your ID at home at some point in AZ when coming in contact with Law Enforcement. But I know that will never happen, because I assume all three of you are lilly white (hey look everyone...Deez repeating the Liberal Mantra...if you dont agree then project racism and Bigotry) and would never be forced to prove your citizenship....So why is it ok, for someone who may look Spanish/Mexican/central-south American be subject to gestapo-like treatment and not the lilly whites (Liberal Mantra)....
You know, I'd have alot more respect for your side, if you just be honest, and say racial profiling is effective, (Liberal Mantra) and ran on that platform instead of beating around the bush and making up crafty worded legislation..... .[/B]