Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KingofBrown" data-source="post: 752028" data-attributes="member: 28771">hmmm, no I would not say that. Neither you nor I know if it is opinion or fact. Fitton may well have more than enough evidence to show that Evans is Pro-illegal immigration or not. The only fact is, you don’t know, yet you feel justified in calling Fitton an agitator.The difference in guess is when I do it, I say so. When you do it, you try to pass it off as fact. LOL.LOL. Cowboy, if I would had seen any evidence from Mr. Fitton then that’d be antoher story. But, if he just calls Evans an open-borders guy that’s just an opinion from him, not a fact. You can’t just deal with that. I said his statements are to agitate people and I cited his own wordsIn the end, this fight comes down to those who want our laws against illegal immigration enforced and those who don't,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.Mr. Fitton says that if you’re just against SB1070, you don’t want Immigration Laws to be enforced, which I think is a ridiculous statement. His words are like the propaganda you guys listen about illegal immigrants, and that’s why you can’t debate in a reasonable way.Even though I don’t put a lot of stock into polls, I must say that the reason for posting them (by anyone) is not to validate SB 1070 but to show that it has much support by the people answering the poll._________________________________So, what? A poll doesn’t have any strength to debate on a law, but if you or anyone are gonna’ keep posting them I suggest to post the complete poll, so we can see the truth of how people supposedly think.I never said I had debated on ALL the aspects of the law, I try to stay on topic for each part you jump to.Don’t know where you come up with that claim? I’ve debated you on the law and your ridiculous claims, you just don’t agree with me. BTW, nice try on the “desperate” twist. LolLOL. On the other hand, it seems you don’t have any argument, now. You can’t even debate about the aspects of a law you favor. It seems that you’re the one getting desperate.I have no idea what you are talking about. You’re losing it fellow, maybe you need to retranslate this one???It seems you woudn’t have any strategy, or can’t see beyond your nose. These guys want to fight SB1070 to beat it from its roots, and if they can, they’ll prevent it from spreading to other states. Is so logical, that there’s no argument to that, as you want to make it, but it seems you can’t understand it.What language? If English is your only language, then I think you’re not that good at it. Or you want to ignore the parts you can’t debate on, may be? I’ve seen many grammatical and spelling errors that obstruct the idea of your sentences, but I don’t feel the need to pull them off for you, since I can use common sense to understand the idea you try to state. And I don’t feel like pointing your grammatical or spelling errors since they don’t have anything to do with the debate of the law. But, I guess one of the only few arguments left for you is my writing of the language. If you still don’t understand the sentences above, I would suggest you to follow the logic of the past posts from where those sentences come from.Oh please, this was a little play on words. The point was, you had (1st) said you didn’t like(discredited) polls, then you (2nd) said“I’m sure that if they poll, 99% of people…yadda yadda yadda” (credited) I’ve always been saying I don’t like polls to validate a law, is that 99% I mentioned to validate one? No, so you’re “creditted” statements are ridiculous, then you restated(3rd) you didn’t like (discredited) polls. The play on words goes back a few years ago when politicians would, basically, say, “ I was for that before I was against it”. It was meant to be funny.Well, then I guess… LOL.[/FONT]It seems you can’t see the logic of polls and can’t compare the difference of the ones I mentioned.If that is what you see, your perception is flawed and if anyone needs a life preserver it is you. My point was, the problem with polls is that the outcome is often distorted because of who administers, who takes and where the poll is taken. It’s pretty simple really. The same question to be polled can have different results if asked on (say) Fox News or the Huffington Post. This isn’t anything I have learned from you, but have deducted by experience and common sense.Cool. Then I wonder why you give so much credit to polls. And why is it the number one tool for politicians and people who support this law? I advice you to use that common sense you claim you have.There ya go again, trying to take credit for my education, LOL, I’ve known the political slant on this long before you came to this thread. And don’t be so naive, most of the debate on the immigration issue is pure political. The politically polar arguments are based on various factors, one is party affiliation oriented.Cool. Now, you should agree that Brewer didn’t even read the law before she signed it. And here it comes one of the questions I made from my first posts. Who the heck with an IQ of 20 signs that? And the answer I guess is- Brewer the politician; not the protect our borders Wonder Woman.</blockquote>

Verification