Arizona's anti-imigration law...

[KingofBrown]

I hope you like this color, Cowboy.

Here’s a summary moreluck so you can get back to track. If you want.

My color is the French Ultramarine Blue.

I guess I'm gonna have to start calling you Chubby Checker.
[FONT=&quot]You can call me whatever you want, Texan. I’ll still call you Cowboy. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]That is the definition I have been using from the beginning so don't start trying to take credit for "teaching"' me.lol[/FONT]
When you added the line “living in the United States) made the definition of Race incorrect. A person’s race/ethnicity does not change with where they live.-The Cowboy. But…I was incorrect in saying you had added the "in the USA" my apologies for that. I misread the quote from your post, my concentration was broken up. But that doesn't change what it says. The definition is quite clear that race and ethnicity are pretty much the same thing. and that was my point.-The CowboySorry, not racist. Nationalist, yes...racist nope.
There are many Americans that are of Mexican decent, if these people are discriminated against for the reason of that ancestry then that is racism. Discrimination against illegals from Mexico is not racism.-The Cowboy If you can’t follow the logic in the quote above, you need more help than you can find on here.-The Cowboy Read that sentence again, it is NOT racism, it IS nationalism- The Cowboy But…[FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]I did miss word my statement“Discrimination against illegals from Mexico is not racism”. To coincide with my thoughts, I should have typed, “the law is not racism against illegals from Mexico”. My apologies for the miss wording.- [FONT=&quot]The Cowboy [/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
BTW, most if our posts are the same old thing, just me trying to find the words that will click with the tone of understanding.- The Cowboy.
I know I’m not perfect in my writing, Cowboy, but with all of this absurdity you wrote and tried to explain (Which I think something absurd has no clarification), and these assertions from yourself of your misswordings, you think you are the right one to criticize me… wow. But, I’m glad that you now understand how absurd the sentence Discrimination against illegals from Mexico is not racism is. And that Illegal Mexicans have also the rights against Discrimination (Racism), because although their national origin is Mexico, they also have a race, and thus could also be discriminated for racism. Now, it doesn’t matter if my explanation made you think different, or if it came to you by accidental enlightenment. The point is that you’re out of that mud, now.

The really long posts with the various colors....I get mixed up as to who's who, so I find myself just skipping them.

 

[UPS Lifer]

OK, is this a pro or con rally

It is a pro rally - However I heard on the news that only 800 showed up. WELL, it was 107 degrees out there. I know I certainly wouldn't be out there in that heat!

I think maybe KOB was out there though and I am real worried he may have gotten heat stroke.

 

[Babagounj]

Pakistani citizen caught crossing border into Arizona

Posted - 6/3/2010 at 4:21PM

TUCSON - U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials confirm with News4, a Pakistani citizen crossed the border illegally from Mexico into Arizona on May 20th.

 

[UPS Lifer]

We need to share these folks with all the bleeding hearts out there.

From the L A. Times
1 40% of all workers in L. A. County ( L. A. County has 10.2 million people) are working for cash and not paying taxes.
This is because they are predominantly illegal immigrants working without a green card.
2. 95% of warrants for murder in Los Angeles are for illegal aliens.
3. 75% of people on the most wanted list in Los Angeles are illegal aliens.
4. Over 2/3 of all births in Los Angeles County are to illegal alien Mexicans on Medi-Cal, whose births were paid for by taxpayers.
5. Nearly 35% of all inmates in California detention centers are Mexican nationals here illegally.
6. Over 300,000 illegal aliens in Los Angeles County are living in garages.
7... The FBI reports half of all gang members in Los Angeles are most likely illegal aliens from south of the border.
8 Nearly 60% of all occupants of HUD properties are illegal.
9. 21 radio stations in L. A. Are Spanish speaking.
10. In L.. A. County 5.1 million people speak English, 3.9 million speak Spanish.. (There are 10.2 million people in L. A. County .)

(All 10 of the above facts were published in the Los Angeles Times)

Less than 2% of illegal aliens are picking our crops, but29% are on welfare. Over 70% of the United States ' annual population growth(and over 90% of California , Florida , and New York ) results from immigration. 29% of inmates in federal prisons are illegal aliens .

 

[KingofBrown]

Oh how kind. But, don’t worry too much for me Lifer. I’m here all healthy drinking a very cold beer and in fresh air. I still don’t have vacation time at work. I wonder if you’re the one who attended, because of what I know, the rally was in support of the law. And actually you now might want to change that number of 800 to 20,000. Man, are you guys OK? Hahahahahahahahaha! Now, I wonder who the one who suffered the heat stroke is. Where are you getting your news? Lifer HRQ News? LOL

It is a pro rally - However I heard on the news that only 800 showed up. WELL, it was 107 degrees out there. I know I certainly wouldn't be out there in that heat!

I think maybe KOB was out there though and I am real worried he may have gotten heat stroke.

 

[trplnkl]

I hope you like this color, Cowboy.

YADDA YADDA YADDA
Now, it doesn’t matter if my explanation made you think different, or if it came to you by accidental enlightenment. The point is that you’re out of that mud, now.

Chubby, it's nice to see you can read when you want to. I see no reason for this post, but if it made you feel better...
My position on SB1070 has not changed since my first post, just some of my terminology.

 

[bbsam]

It is a pro rally - However I heard on the news that only 800 showed up. WELL, it was 107 degrees out there. I know I certainly wouldn't be out there in that heat!

I think maybe KOB was out there though and I am real worried he may have gotten heat stroke.

It's Arizona in June. What did they think the temperature was going to be? I bet the illegals would have shown up for a rally.

 

[KingofBrown]

LOL. I know you will never change your position on SB1070, you're very closed-minded. But, I don't care.
I was not doing it for me, Cowboy. I was just giving a summary so you think twice before criticizing other people's writing. Come on.

Chubby, it's nice to see you can read when you want to. I see no reason for this post, but if it made you feel better...
My position on SB1070 has not changed since my first post, just some of my terminology.

 

[KingofBrown]

[FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]It is obvious that you have not read the law, oh you know who wrote it, yada yada yadda....but you haven't read all of the law nor followed the links contained in the foot notes to the US Code that the law supports. [/FONT][/FONT]Oh, yes I have read it all, and the House Bill, too. And even many issues that have something to do with it. But you, you don’t get out of the same outworn statements: “Have you read the law?”
[FONT=&quot]The boycott are political moves by LA, this did not come about because of a law that does not have to effect one person living in LA. [/FONT]The boycotting in history never comes because of straightforward and proper laws or actions.[FONT=&quot] Az is willing to take the chances in what revenue they might lose, that is their choice. [/FONT]Of course, but I don’t think tax dollars should be used in experimenting in thoughtless and polemical laws.
[FONT=&quot]… of separation of powers(that may not be the exact term but you know what I mean being the Constitutional expert that you think you are). [/FONT]It seems like an affirmation, thank you, but as I’ve said before, I still have much more to learn.[FONT=&quot] The Supremacy Clause could well be used. However that is not carved in stone yet. People much smarter than you and I will make the decision. [/FONT]More scholarly and prepared on this topic, of course; smarter than me, that’s not a certainty; smarter than you, I take it for granted. How a low self esteem you have, Cowboy.
Look this was our President…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whhbPVrb5KM&feature=related
That’s the most neutral video I could find. And it even has a second part.


[FONT=&quot]Naww, next time I go out of the country I will call you or Klein to check where to get a free meal. [/FONT]
If you ever call me for something like that, Cowboy, I’m gonna’ send you $20 Cash so you can have your meal. And if Klein wants to send you $21 you’ll have 40 bucks, Texan. You’d be able to buy a good meal with that, or maybe two if you’re not that picky.

 

[trplnkl]

[FONT=&quot]Oh, yes I have read it all, and the House Bill, too. And even many issues that have something to do with it. But you, you don’t get out of the same outworn statements: “Have you read the law?”[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The reason for my insistence in asking you that question is based on the fact that your statements of widespread profiling , is unfounded on any aspect of the law. Thus your replies suggest that you have not actually read and/or understand the law. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The boycotting in history never comes because of straightforward and proper laws or actions.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Hmmm, most modern day boycotts have come about because of a group of people not liking a given situation. A very large number of them are nothing but politically motivated extremists stomping their feet in a temper tantrum.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Of course, but I don’t think tax dollars should be used in experimenting in thoughtless and polemical laws.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]And I don’t think tax dollars should be used (in the billions) to support people who are not supposed to be in this country to begin with.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]It seems like an affirmation, thank you, but as I’ve said before, I still have much more to learn.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]you need get someone to explain to you what facetious means.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]More scholarly and prepared on this topic, of course; smarter than me, that’s not a certainty; smarter than you, I take it for granted. How a low self esteem you have, Cowboy.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] LOL, it’s nice that you have such confidence in yourself, however misplaced.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I have never said I was a scholar or an expert on anything, I’ve also never meet anyone that did not have room to improve themselves. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Look this was our President…[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whhbP...eature=related[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]That’s the most neutral video I could find. And it even has a second part.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]LOL, your stripes are showing there Lefty. When you show yourself to be a better President, I may listen to you.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]And you call me political. What a laugh.[/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]If you ever call me for something like that, Cowboy, I’m gonna’ send you $20 Cash so you can have your meal. And if Klein wants to send you $21 you’ll have 40 bucks, Texan. You’d be able to buy a good meal with that, or maybe two if you’re not that picky.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Tell ya what, I’ll start up a collection to buy you a sense of humor.[/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT]

 

[tonyexpress]

It will be interesting to see the rally today at the state capital in Phoenix. It is going to be around 110 degrees ! They are expecting 15,000. I don't know with the heat!

Our ABC station had an interview with the organizer. He is from Pennsylvania and in his early twenties! There is all kind of red tape and vendor permits as well as porta potties. You could see this guy was frazzled. My hat is off to him.

OK, is this a pro or con rally

I would think a 20 something yr old from the East Coast would consider this law to be racial profiling so this would be a con rallly.

As previously posted below is was a pro rally!

Those who oppose SB1070 in Arizona have had their say. With sporadic outbursts of violence, shouting and civil disobedience, they have made their intentions clear - that enforcement of the law is not a top priority for them.

The rally is called Phoenix Rising for a reason. On this day Americans will come together and watch as the Phoenix rises from the ashes of non-enforcement of our immigration laws that has gone on for decades. They will stand for the rule of law and in support of Arizona and its new law SB1070. They will call for a groundswell of other states to take on the duty our federal government has failed to uphold.

The federal government has been shirking its duty for far too long as Americans have carried the burden of their lack of action. All the while Americans have been demanding that our laws be enforced - and we have been ignored.

Time for some real change instead of hopeless talk!

Results were:

Thousands rally in favor of Arizona immigration law

PHOENIX - On Saturday, nearly 2,000 people gathered from around the country at the Arizona State Capitol in support of Arizona's new immigration law.
"It's a grassroots effort that really took off," Daniel Smeriglio, one of the people behind the march said Friday.

I think a Mexican American woman (1:00 min into the video) said it best...

"As an American of Mexican descent I feel I have to support my country which is, AMERICA!"

 

[wkmac]

"I'll be right back, watch my plate!"

LMFAO!!!!!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbMk2_6-Rhg&feature=related

 

[KingofBrown]

[FONT=&quot]Here's a jaw dropper, anyone can sue for anything, doesn't mean they will win the suite.[/FONT]
I believe that’s how the Sheriff thinks, too. But, you have to take care of the resources, Cowboy. They cost lots and lots of millions, even with the compensations. By the way, how much has the deductible raised up, last time I saw it, it was at 5 million precious dollars. Oh, but you'll say that illegals cost lots of money. LOL.
[FONT=&quot]I can't say for where you live, be here that is reality not "romanticism".[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Of all the reports I have read about the "Sheriff", it's about 50/50. He's either a great American patriot or slimy bigot racist.Unless you have had an actual encounter with him, all you know is what you read.[/FONT]
It depends on who encounters him, Cowboy.
[FONT=&quot]Sorry but that's just a question, of course they have been violated both officially and legally. [/FONT]
It’s the ideal question to the ideal person, Texan. I wasn’t expecting you to answer like that. But, it’s interesting you recognize individual rights have been violated in the search of illegals in AZ. So, I don’t have much to say about this. Have they been violated legally? How come? It’s not July 29 yet.
[FONT=&quot]However not by SB1070.[/FONT]
DUH! Of course not. If I’m not wrong SB1070 will be in effect on July 29, 2010. Oh, but I think they’ve already been using SB1070. 0_0, even without HB2162. May be that was your point, I don’t know.
[FONT=&quot]Well pardner, the law suits that you mentioned earlier may well be pushed to the SCotUS, and then we will see.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Not exactly my point, but yea I think it may help. At least now there is verbiage that speaks against profiling. [/FONT]
See, Cowboy? I even give you ideas, so you can have arguments.
Because without the law, that’s what they’ve been doing. But I still wonder if you’re that naïve to believe that his law will stop them now from doing such things… Oh, yes you are. [FONT=&quot]The law doesn’t make it legal to target certain people. Actually with the wording as it is,[/FONT] You mean with the modifications of HB2162.[FONT=&quot] actual profiling would give the subject something to fight the allegations. [/FONT]I also believe, that with the wording as it is now, it will give the people something to fight for profiling. Just with that “Reasonable Suspicion”, just with that they have something to defend with.

 

[KingofBrown]

[FONT=&quot]Of course, but I don’t think tax dollars should be used in experimenting in thoughtless and polemical laws.
[FONT=&quot]And I don’t think tax dollars should be used (in the billions) to support people who are not supposed to be in this country to begin with. Sources, please. Wait, wait, Cowboy. I think you're getting your sources from a "hate group." Or maybe from the "Joe Legal" "Joey Illegal" story? LOL.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]It seems like an affirmation, thank you, but as I’ve said before, I still have much more to learn.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]you need get someone to explain to you what facetious means. Cowboy, you promised me you were going to stop making these “facetious” comments… Oh wait, may be you can’t when you’re defending such a law. LOL.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]More scholarly and prepared on this topic, of course; smarter than me, that’s not a certainty; smarter than you, I take it for granted. How a low self esteem you have, Cowboy.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]LOL, it’s nice that you have such confidence in yourself, however misplaced.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I have never said I was a scholar or an expert on anything.[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]Neither have I, Texan. If you can’t follow the logic in the quote above, you need more help than you can find on here. LOL.[FONT=&quot] [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Look this was our President…[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whhbP...eature=related[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]That’s the most neutral video I could find. And it even has a second part.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]LOL, your stripes are showing there Lefty. When you show yourself to be a better President, I may listen to you.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]And you call me political. What a laugh.[/FONT]
Man, it was to give you an example of some of the top guys. I just wanted to get your slow self-esteem a little higher. Now, if I place a video of Mr. Bush Jr. That does mean I’m a Democrat? LOL. You need help, Cowboy. You’re too submerged into your political affiliations. LOL. You really need help. LOL.
[/FONT]

 

[trplnkl]

[FONT=&quot]I believe that’s how the Sheriff thinks, too. But, you have to take care of the resources, Cowboy. They cost lots and lots of millions, even with the compensations. By the way, how much has the deductible raised up, last time I saw it, it was at 5 million precious dollars. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]What are you talking about? What compensation, what deductions? [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Oh, but you'll say that illegals cost lots of money. LOL.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]As they do cost lots and lots of money.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]It depends on who encounters him, Cowboy.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Uh DUH! That would account if the differing opinions..[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]It’s the ideal question to the ideal person, Texan. I wasn’t expecting you to answer like that. But, it’s interesting you recognize individual rights have been violated in the search of illegals in AZ. So, I don’t have much to say about this. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Not so fast, Chubby Checker, that’s not what I said or meant. I was referring to the Bill of Rights in general not relating to SB1070. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Have they been violated legally? [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Again, referring to the Bill of Rights in general and not SB1070.There have been many bills voted and signed into law by many states and the feds that violated the Constitution. I consider these legal violations until ruled on by the SCotUS.[/FONT][FONT=&quot] How come?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Because there has been no official ruling. There are also laws that (IMO) violate the Constitution that have been ruled OK by the highest court. Those I consider both officially and legally violations. [/FONT]



[FONT=&quot]DUH! Of course not. If I’m not wrong SB1070 will be in effect on July 29, 2010. Oh, but I think they’ve already been using SB1070. 0_0, even without HB2162. May be that was your point, I don’t know.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]See, Cowboy? I even give you ideas, so you can have arguments. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Because without the law, that’s what they’ve been doing. But I still wonder if you’re that naïve to believe that his law will stop them now from doing such things… Oh, yes you are.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]You THINK they have already been using SB1070? Do you have personal experience or are you just making stuff up again?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]You mean with the modifications of HB2162.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Keep twistin, twistin ,twistin the night away Chubby.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]I also believe, that with the wording as it is now, it will give the people something to fight for profiling. Just with that “Reasonable Suspicion”, just with that they have something to defend with.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]That’s a possibility, but that’s just your opinion.[/FONT]

 

[UPS Lifer]

Oh how kind. But, don’t worry too much for me Lifer. I’m here all healthy drinking a very cold beer and in fresh air.... LOL

Well now it makes a lot of sense to me.... it's a beeeeerrrrr stroke!

 

[KingofBrown]

The stupidity of this sentence reflects how irrational you are. If you think you can get a stroke by drinking a beer, you’re such a brainless person. I don’t care if you like it or not, but if you think that drinking beer is just to get drunk, it’s because you don’t know how to really taste a beer. Hope a German gets the chance to read the stupidity of your sentence.

Well now it makes a lot of sense to me.... it's a beeeeerrrrr stroke!

 

[KingofBrown]

[FONT=&quot]A violation of local, county, state or federal law. A range from jaywalking to murder should cover it pretty well.[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]Explain this to me Cowboy, because you’re such a great scholar, and because I find it a very broad sentence. Allows a law enforcement officer, without a warrant, to arrest a person if the officer has probable cause to believe that the person has committed any public offense that makes the person removable from the U.S. Because for me, Cowboy, I think they’re giving way too much power to the police. I think that the officer, if heTHE OFFICER has “probable cause” that if a person enters the country illegally (which is a public offense, if I’m not wrong), has a very wide road to arrest a person who he THE OFFICER suspects is an illegal, and thus he can search him/her how heTHE OFFICER pleases without a warrant. I even find it that broad, that the officer might be able to get into his/her (the supposed illegal’s) house without a warrant. I wonder how the probable cause will be determined by the officer. It’s still very broad for me. “Reasonable Suspicion,” “Probable Cause,” “Public Offense” are very broad terms, Cowboy. How will the officer determine of such a public offense? Because the person didn’t show an ID? Because the person’s accent? HOW!? Oh no, that’s not how it is, the Cowboy’s gonna’ talk. By the way, that was an added clause. LOL And I have another doubt are these officers receiving any special training, Cowboy? Oh... And don't say it's already a Federal Law, please.

But I love this part: A peace officer may, without a warrant, may arrest a person if he the officer has probable cause to believe 2. A misdemeanor has been committed in his the officer's presence and probable cause to believe the person to be arrested has committed the offense.
. This is sexist, Cowboy. Even in that they failed to maintain a discreet writing. LOL, even my writing is more decent. LOL. LOL. Hahahahahaha! I wonder why one of the outworn statements is: “Have you read the law?” They should change it to “Please don’t read the law."


[FONT=&quot]They only people who believe SB1070 opens for more profiling haven't read the law. [/FONT]
I have read it, Cowboy, so that’s like a stupid sentence.

 

[KingofBrown]

[FONT=&quot]What are you talking about? What compensation, what deductions? [/FONT]Whaaaaaaaaat!? You don’t know what I’m talking about? If you haven’t heard the amount of $41 million and the amount of $5 million in deductibles…LMAO. Get in the topic, Cowboy.
[FONT=&quot].[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Uh DUH! That would account if the differing opinions..[/FONT]
You don’t get the point, and you never will.

[FONT=&quot]Not so fast, Chubby Checker, that’s not what I said or meant. I was referring to the Bill of Rights in general not relating to SB1070. [/FONT]You need to get your nose into the topic, Cowboy. Read the following from our previous posts regarding this you just mentioned. I have always been refering to SB1070. I don’t know why you get too much out of the topic.
I don't believe our Bill of Rights will be officially violated by the application of SB1070.Have they been violated before, I mean not officially or legally? We will see.I hope we won’t.
Sorry but that's just a question, of course they have been violated both officially and legally.
It’s the ideal question to the ideal person, Texan. I wasn’t expecting you to answer like that. But, it’s interesting you recognize individual rights have been violated in the search of illegals in AZ. So, I don’t have much to say about this. Have they been violated legally? How come? It’s not July 29 yet.
However not by SB1070.
DUH! Of course not. If I’m not wrong SB1070 will be in effect on July 29, 2010. Oh, but I think they’ve already been using SB1070. 0_0, even without HB2162. May be that was your point, I don’t know.
[FONT=&quot]Or may be your concentration was broken up, again. And please don’t say I’m the one not following the logic.[/FONT]

So I believe all this “supposedly scholarly blah blah blah” in the bottom has nothing to do regarding what we’ve been talking about:
[FONT=&quot]Again, referring to the Bill of Rights in general and not SB1070.There have been many bills voted and signed into law by many states and the feds that violated the Constitution. I consider these legal violations until ruled on by the SCotUS.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Because there has been no official ruling. There are also laws that (IMO) violate the Constitution that have been ruled OK by the highest court. Those I consider both officially and legally violations. [/FONT]
Everyone knows that, Cowboy “Kow it All.” It’s one of the first things we learn in our Elementary History classes.


[FONT=&quot]You THINK they have already been using SB1070? Do you have personal experience or are you just making stuff up again?[/FONT]
Man, haven’t you watched the news?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33GCPQEeu8Y
Just jump to 1:30, because the rest of it could be disgusting for you (Or may be all of it may be disgusting for you, I don’t know). Hey, I think he even showed an ID, ooooooooh SB1070 would have protected him. Yeah right. LOL.
Here’s another one. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NneBLeZPaow&feature=related
“Uh, no English?” LOL Reasonable Suspicion for me.
And now we have SB1070. So individual rights will be violated, but this time, “Legally.”

[FONT=&quot]You mean with the modifications of HB2162.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Keep twistin, twistin ,twistin the night away Chubby. [/FONT]Uh?

[FONT=&quot]That’s a possibility, but that’s just your opinion.[/FONT]
Ouh, you recognized “Reasonable Suspcion” can be a possibility for an allegation against profiling. Interesting. If it’s a possibility, than it’s just my opinion? LOL.

 

[trplnkl]