| Pages:
1
..
12
13
14
15
16
..
60 |
DENNIS
Platinum Nomad
Posts: 29510
Registered: 9-2-2006
Location: Punta Banda
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Mexicorn
Viva la Raza ...............$%^&* |
These are two things I'd hoped not to see here. La Raza is a huge part of the problem on our streets. They're driven by their "Reconquista" ideals.
Pure Bulllchiit.
The other is...well...unspeakable. 
REMEMBER THE ALAMO
|
|
|
capt. mike
Elite Nomad
Posts: 8085
Registered: 11-26-2002
Location: Bat Cave
Member Is Offline
Mood: Sling time!
|
|
"1.) I never called you a White Anglo Saxon Prodestent.
2.) If you were down and out with nothing from another country with just the clothes on your back would you be willing to work for food or would you
just barge into a local home and demand a meal and the remote control for the T.V.? "
hey Mexi-creamed-corn...  
i never said you did. that was for Diane T. who clearly needs to up her meds...
you don't get it - it isn't about charity - it's about laws and respecting them.
you and others who think like you are what we living in sanity call anarchists.
but i do have a sense of altruism so i'll give you a break...besides i find it so sad what happens when cousins marry so it is not all your fault.
formerly Ordained in Rev. Ewing\'s Church by Mail - busted on tax fraud.......
Now joined L. Ron Hoover\'s church of Appliantology
\"Remember there is a big difference between kneeling down and bending over....\"
www.facebook.com/michael.l.goering |
|
|
DENNIS
Platinum Nomad
Posts: 29510
Registered: 9-2-2006
Location: Punta Banda
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by capt. mike
i find it so sad what happens when cousins marry so it is not all your fault. |
I think it did wonders for Jerry:
http://www.nndb.com/people/867/000023798/
|
|
|
elgatoloco
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4332
Registered: 11-19-2002
Location: Yes
Member Is Offline
|
|
http://politifact.com/subjects/immigration/
MAGA
Making Attorneys Get Attorneys
|
|
|
mtgoat666
Select Nomad
Posts: 18385
Registered: 9-16-2006
Location: San Diego
Member Is Offline
Mood: Hot n spicy
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by capt. mike
you don't get it - it isn't about charity - it's about laws and respecting them.
|
capt. cracker:
just because you put racial profiling into your new law does not mean moral people should respect an unjust law.
many unjust laws have been repealed in the US, and the new AZ racial profiling law will be repealed too.
|
|
|
Barry A.
Select Nomad
Posts: 10007
Registered: 11-30-2003
Location: Redding, Northern CA
Member Is Offline
Mood: optimistic
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Mexicorn
| Quote: | Originally posted by Barry A.
| Quote: | Originally posted by Mexicorn
| Quote: | Originally posted by Barry A.
Sure, Mexicorn, but I just believe that this YouTube guy is wrong in his assessment.
Barry |
Barry I've seen you time and time again try to defend this racist law and I know deep down on some sort of a level you know it's wrong too.
Stay strong my Brother and Viva la Raza! |
What I truly believe in is the "rule of law" as the basic cornerstone of this Nation, and any other Nation that hopes to survive and prosper.
(Laws like the Jim Crow laws? They were once Laws would you have been so adament to protect those laws?)
IT'S NOT ABOUT 'PROTECTING LAWS'-----IT'S ABOUT OBEYING LAWS----------BAD LAW?--CHANGE IT!
I see this new law as a terribly frustrated attempt to get the attention of the Fed. legislature, hoping that it will finally DO SOMETHING about the
out-of-control situation with our southern border. It is one of the most basic jobs of a Countries Govt. to protect and defend their National
borders------both north and south--------period!
"Terribly frustrated attempt to get the fed and Legisture hoping it will finaly do something."
(Why now Why not 4 years ago re speaking to the fact that the race baiters were not at it then so why not now?)
I HAVE BEEN A STRONG-BORDER GUY FOR SOME 55 YEARS, AND OBNOXIOUSLY LOUD ABOUT IT.
All other arguments are secondary to that, in my opinion. Our southern border is pure chaos, and if should not be that way, and the horrible
consequences of this border chaos are obvious, to me.
(Maybe if us Americans didnt have such a strong appetite for illegal drugs and cheap labor this Chaos as you call it would not be such an issue)
APPLES AND ORANGES-----FIX ONE PROBLEM AT A TIME, BUT FIX IT!!!
I truly fail to understand why this concept is so threatening to ANYBODY, including those that wish to enter this Country, or any other
Country-------I just take border-protection as a "given", by ANY Country. My emotions and emphathy for illegals already here in this Country take a
backseat to the primary problem-------porous and chaotic borders-------fix that problem, and fix it well, and THEN we will work out what to do with
the millions of illegals already here----they are 2 separate problems.
That's it, in a nutshell!!!
(Fix The Problem- sounds to me your just upset about healthcare and figured you'd puch the race card issue)
HOW DID HEALTH CARE GET INTO THIS MIX?? WHAT RACE CARD?? THIS IS NOT ABOUT RACE-----IT'S ABOUT ENFORCEMENT OF THE LAW.
(Thats it in a tear gas shell being into a crowd of demonstrating Latinos!?
WHAT'S THIS??? I KNOW NOTHING ABOUT TEAR GAS IN CROWDS OF DEMONSTRATING LATINOS (????)
Barry |
|
|
|
|
rts551
Elite Nomad
Posts: 6699
Registered: 9-5-2003
Member Is Offline
|
|
You guys and your "ENFORCING THE LAW"
You break laws all the time.. no more speeding Mr righteous Barry.
No more fudging on taxes....
And you Mike. Bet you support those cameras, don't you?
I love how people pick and choose the laws they choose to want to enforce.
This one will be settled in court at great expense to the people of Arizona
|
|
|
mtgoat666
Select Nomad
Posts: 18385
Registered: 9-16-2006
Location: San Diego
Member Is Offline
Mood: Hot n spicy
|
|
| Quote: | IT'S NOT ABOUT 'PROTECTING LAWS'-----IT'S ABOUT OBEYING LAWS----------BAD LAW?--CHANGE IT!
|
barry,
so you would take the easy route and enforce jim crow laws, because "it's the law, until it's changed."
you are so wrong in every way.
you are a white man defending a law written by white men, a law intended to violate human rights of non-white people
[Edited on 4-29-2010 by mtgoat666]
|
|
|
Bajaboy
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4375
Registered: 10-9-2003
Location: Bahia Asuncion, BCS, Mexico
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | | Quote: | Originally posted by mtgoat666
IT'S NOT ABOUT 'PROTECTING LAWS'-----IT'S ABOUT OBEYING LAWS----------BAD LAW?--CHANGE IT!
|
barry,
so you would take the easy route and enforce jim crow laws, because "it's the law, until it's changed."
you are so wrong in every way.
you are a white man defending a law written by white men, a law intended to violate human rights of non-white people
[Edited on 4-29-2010 by mtgoat666] |
I think he is saying that current immigration law is not being enforced. Is current federal immigration law similar to jim crow laws?
|
|
|
Barry A.
Select Nomad
Posts: 10007
Registered: 11-30-2003
Location: Redding, Northern CA
Member Is Offline
Mood: optimistic
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by rts551
You guys and your "ENFORCING THE LAW"
You break laws all the time.. no more speeding Mr righteous Barry.
No more fudging on taxes....
And you Mike. Bet you support those cameras, don't you?
I love how people pick and choose the laws they choose to want to enforce.
This one will be settled in court at great expense to the people of Arizona |
I never intentionally "speed" to the point of breaking the law, nor do I knowingly cheat on my taxes (it is hard to cheat when a CPA does them ). I do occasionally get caught by traffic cops, but believe me I do not intend
to, nor did I intend to break the law.
If I happen to break the law, and get caught, I expect to, and do, pay the penalty------period!!!! Don't you???
I am not "Mike" but I think the "cameras" are GREAT, and they work GREAT!!! and we need more of them.
Cops are often given the discretion of enforcing the laws, or not, based on circumstances they witness------but that happens less and less these days
as they now more and more get in trouble for not practicing RIGID enforcement----taking discretion out of their hands-------I think that is a mistake,
and a shame, but admit that it eliminates the possible corruption that can ensue with "discretion" being practiced.
----but having said all that, I don't quite see what those issues have to do with the subject at hand???
Barry
|
|
|
Cypress
Elite Nomad
Posts: 7641
Registered: 3-12-2006
Location: on the bayou
Member Is Offline
Mood: undecided
|
|
Is a country that lacks the will or the ability to protect it's borders really a country. Is a nation that cannot enforce it's laws a nation? What has
happened to the USA, when those in power, elected by the people, choose to enforce only the easy laws?
|
|
|
JESSE
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3370
Registered: 11-5-2002
Member Is Offline
|
|
This pretty much sums up my feelings about this law
Why conservatives should oppose Arizona's immigration law
A healthy debate rages on the right about the details and dangers of Arizona’s new immigration law. Serious conservative writers such as Byron York of
the Washington Examiner argue that the burdens of the law on citizens and legal immigrants are minimal. “Can anyone argue that being asked to produce
a driver’s license, if one is in some sort of encounter with police in which police are acting lawfully (that is also specified by the new law) is
overly burdensome?”
York and others attempt to defend the Arizona law by asserting is it essentially meaningless. Who could object to being asked for a driver’s license
when caught for speeding? But the question naturally arises: Why would one need an immigration law -- considered groundbreaking by its
supporters and detractors -- to allow policemen the right to check the driver’s licenses of speeders?
The law itself is murky, but it certainly broader than this. For any “lawful contact” made by law enforcement officials “where a reasonable suspicion
exists that a person is an alien... a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person.”
The phrase “lawful contact” is not much of a qualification. Just about any contact of a policeman with a citizen short of a shakedown is
lawful.
The phrase “reasonable suspicion” is also broadly drafted. The law prevents police from checking immigration status “solely” because of race or
ethnicity. But “reasonable suspicion” is purposely undefined in the law. In fact, Arizona’s governor, members of its legislature and local
police officials have refused to publicly offer their standards for such suspicions, because those standards would almost certainly smack of racial
profiling. Their silence is a kind of confession.
So the law paints a vast, gray area, leaving police tremendous discretion in its application. It could mean a Phoenix policeman asking for a driver’s
license during a routine traffic stop. As far as I can tell, it could also mean a small-town Arizona sheriff, untrained as an Immigration and Customs
Enforcement agent, deciding that he doesn’t like the look of a packed van containing a family of fourth-generation Americans of Hispanic origin
passing his speed trap. The law’s broad discretion leaves broad leeway for abuse. And that potential for abuse is increased because
authorities are not only permitted to act on a “reasonable suspicion” but required to act -- note the “shall” in the law. Another portion of
the law allows for suits against local authorities if citizens do not believe the law is being enforced vigorously enough.
On these issues, conservatives are having a reasonable debate. Some believe, given the severe provocation of illegal immigration, that police must be
trusted to reasonably enforce a vague law. Others, myself included, think it is disturbing to create a suspect class, based in part on
ethnicity,which is required to prove its innocence on the basis of unspecified suspicions.
But York goes on to slip the surly bonds of sense and argue that the demand by police to provide identification is inherently unobjectionable in every
circumstance because it is unexceptional in some circumstances. “When we board an airplane, we are asked to produce a government-issued photo ID,
usually a driver’s license. When we make some credit- or debit-card purchases in department stores, we are asked to produce a driver’s license.” And
so on.
It hardly requires argument that the context for such demands makes a large difference. By way of analogy, an entrance exam for college entry is
expected. An entry exam at a polling place in unconstitutional. In the same way, being asked to prove your identity for security reasons to board a
plane or employ credit is not the same as being asked to prove your identity to a police officer because of a vague stereotype. I am more than happy
to provide my identification to an officer who clocks me speeding. I would be less cooperative if I were stopped because conservative, overweight,
white men were declared by implication to be a criminally suspect class by the state of Virginia.
The failure to comprehend such a basic distinction reveals a fundamental lack of empathy. When millions of American citizens of
Hispanic origin are told they will not be “solely” targeted based on their ethnicity in Arizona, they understandably hear they will be partially
targeted on the basis of their ethnicity. And it is not particularly reassuring to minorities in America when informed that the police will largely
police themselves -- applying a vague law with wide discretion. If conservatives and Republicans cannot even understand such concerns, they will not
deserve Hispanic support.
By Michael Gerson
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2010/04/why_co... 1
[Edited on 4-29-2010 by JESSE]
|
|
|
Barry A.
Select Nomad
Posts: 10007
Registered: 11-30-2003
Location: Redding, Northern CA
Member Is Offline
Mood: optimistic
|
|
Jesse-------all those "if, and's and but's" are the reason that we never get anywhere on "immigration reform"------it is a VERY complex issue when you
take all the arguements into consideration. I am a simple guy, and I like simple solutions, and understand them and am willing to take the "if,
and's, and but's" in stride-----for simplicities sake!!! I see no other viable way-----just do it!
I feel the same way about the tax code-----when the govmint says that I have made a mistake on my tax reports, I simply pay what they ask
for------it's way to complex to fight them, and frankly I don't have the time. No big deal. Same with traffic tickets. But I remain skeptical and
keep an eye on them so they don't get carried away. I am a stong FLAT TAX guy as I want things SIMPLE.
There ARE simple solutions, but there are ALWAYS unintended consequences--------so be it--------the border status quo is unacceptable to me, and to a
great many other's, I suspect. there will NEVER be a law that is fair to EVERYBODY, and does not to some degree put harships on some. I accept that.
Barry
|
|
|
JESSE
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3370
Registered: 11-5-2002
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Barry A.
Jesse-------all those "if, and's and but's" are the reason that we never get anywhere on "immigration reform"------it is a VERY complex issue when you
take all the arguements into consideration. I am a simple guy, and I like simple solutions, and understand them and am willing to take the "if,
and's, and but's" in stride-----for simplicities sake!!! I see no other viable way-----just do it!
I feel the same way about the tax code-----when the govmint says that I have made a mistake on my tax reports, I simply pay what they ask
for------it's way to complex to fight them, and frankly I don't have the time. No big deal. Same with traffic tickets. But I remain skeptical and
keep an eye on them so they don't get carried away. I am a stong FLAT TAX guy as I want things SIMPLE.
There ARE simple solutions, but there are ALWAYS unintended consequences--------so be it--------the border status quo is unacceptable to me, and to a
great many other's, I suspect. there will NEVER be a law that is fair to EVERYBODY, and does not to some degree put harships on some. I accept that.
Barry |
All i read from many of you guys is:
We have a big problem with immigration, and we don't care about the rights of people of hispanic heritage as long as its solved.
Thats disgusting to me, i am so ashamed of some nomads.
|
|
|
capt. mike
Elite Nomad
Posts: 8085
Registered: 11-26-2002
Location: Bat Cave
Member Is Offline
Mood: Sling time!
|
|
"And you Mike. Bet you support those cameras, don't you?"
huh?? i dunno...which ones?? speed cams? i don't speed. i set my cruise on 60 on the city freeways cause i don't want a ticket, i don't like getting
pulled over, and i get way better gas mileage at 60 than 70.
so - i am not worried about photo radar if that's what you refer to.
if i want to go fast....i fly, literally. no speed cams where i go at 10,000 ft.
well.....at least not yet.
formerly Ordained in Rev. Ewing\'s Church by Mail - busted on tax fraud.......
Now joined L. Ron Hoover\'s church of Appliantology
\"Remember there is a big difference between kneeling down and bending over....\"
www.facebook.com/michael.l.goering |
|
|
irenemm
Senior Nomad
Posts: 623
Registered: 7-16-2009
Location: vicente guerrero, baja
Member Is Offline
Mood: relaxed
|
|
My 17 year old granddaughter born in Ensenada and has lived her whole life in Vicente Guerrero sums it up for me. She does have a green card.
If you did not do anything wrong what is the problem. If they ask me for papers and I have them what is the problem. If I don't have them then I guess
I am breaking the law. You pay the price for breaking the law
I like her thinking
Just 17
|
|
|
Barry A.
Select Nomad
Posts: 10007
Registered: 11-30-2003
Location: Redding, Northern CA
Member Is Offline
Mood: optimistic
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by JESSE
| Quote: | Originally posted by Barry A.
Jesse-------all those "if, and's and but's" are the reason that we never get anywhere on "immigration reform"------it is a VERY complex issue when you
take all the arguements into consideration. I am a simple guy, and I like simple solutions, and understand them and am willing to take the "if,
and's, and but's" in stride-----for simplicities sake!!! I see no other viable way-----just do it!
I feel the same way about the tax code-----when the govmint says that I have made a mistake on my tax reports, I simply pay what they ask
for------it's way to complex to fight them, and frankly I don't have the time. No big deal. Same with traffic tickets. But I remain skeptical and
keep an eye on them so they don't get carried away. I am a stong FLAT TAX guy as I want things SIMPLE.
There ARE simple solutions, but there are ALWAYS unintended consequences--------so be it--------the border status quo is unacceptable to me, and to a
great many other's, I suspect. there will NEVER be a law that is fair to EVERYBODY, and does not to some degree put harships on some. I accept that.
Barry |
All i read from many of you guys is:
We have a big problem with immigration, and we don't care about the rights of people of hispanic heritage as long as its solved.
Thats disgusting to me, i am so ashamed of some nomads. |
So be it, Jesse. But in my mind it has NOTHING to do with hispanics, other than there are more of them here illegally than any other Group of folks.
Illegals came in with their eyes wide open, or should have. There are consequences for each and every one of our actions--------just the way it is.
Nuff said. Barry
|
|
|
Lobsterman
Super Nomad
Posts: 1696
Registered: 10-7-2008
Member Is Offline
|
|
I agree with the Captain on this one. Living in San Diego I do not appreciate people in our country illegally walking around my neighborhood, hanging
out on corners, sleeping in canyons in deplorable conditions, using up our valuable resources, taking jobs my kids could do, clogging up our medical
facilities, etc. The State of California is running multi-billion $ deficients and can no longer afford these "good samaritan" costs.
I would prefer that all illegals leave our country and come back when they are invited under a legal process. The new Arizona Immigration Law may have
a few problems in it according to some but let it take effect and legally let the people fine tune it so no ones legal rights are violated. I can not
believe 70% of the voters in the State of Arizona are racist as some of you infer. That's a very demeaning caricature of the people in the State of
Arizona by whose saying it and could be interpreted by many including me to be a racist comment in itself.
I'm of the opinion that the State of Arizona is "mad as hell and is not going to take it anymore."
Dennis
|
|
|
Cypress
Elite Nomad
Posts: 7641
Registered: 3-12-2006
Location: on the bayou
Member Is Offline
Mood: undecided
|
|
Lobsterman, Glad to have you aboard. 
|
|
|
Bajahowodd
Elite Nomad
Posts: 9274
Registered: 12-15-2008
Location: Disneyland Adjacent and anywhere in Baja
Member Is Offline
|
|
So. You Want Immigration Reform?
From LA Times today. The author is an assistant professor at Stanford, which is not exactly a liberal- leaning institution. I thought this article
might provoke additional thought inasmuch as the Arizona law just passed is as much of a message to Washington to get moving on immigration reform as
anything.
Legalization must be part of immigration reform
A path to citizenship for those already here illegally is crucial.
Tomás R. Jiménez
April 29, 2010
Opponents of comprehensive immigration reform argue that legalization rewards bad behavior. They contend that illegal immigration is a crime that
merits punishment and expulsion, not amnesty. The logic is that if we respond with tough enforcement, illegal immigrants will finally get that they
aren't welcome here and go back to their home countries. This kind of reasoning is what's behind laws like the one recently passed in Arizona, which
requires law enforcement personnel to determine whenever possible the immigration status of suspected illegal immigrants.
But immigrants aren't going home. We know this from experience. Despite high-profile raids, beefed-up border enforcement and the worst economy since
the Depression, the size of the illegal immigrant population has declined by only a small fraction. At this pace, the time it would take to realize
the pipe dream of removing illegal immigrants through forced and voluntary deportations could be measured in light-years.
Given that immigrants are here to stay, it is in everyone's interest for them to assimilate — to learn English, embrace U.S. social and civic customs
and become part of the economic fabric. And if that is the goal, we need to have immigration reform that goes beyond fences, high-tech surveillance,
more Border Patrol officers and a guest worker program. We need a path to legalization for those who have built lives here.
Why? Because illegal status inhibits not only the assimilation of those who are here illegally but of future generations who are U.S.-born citizens.
Research has consistently found that illegal immigrants and their descendants have a much tougher time gaining a social and economic foothold.
On the other hand, we know that legalization has a positive effect on assimilation. The legalization program contained in the last major immigration
overhaul, the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act, facilitated the assimilation of millions of immigrants and their children. A 2007 Merage
Foundation report written by UC Irvine sociologists shows that the children of formerly illegal immigrants who obtain green cards face a brighter
future and stand to contribute much more than those whose parents remain undocumented.
According to the study, U.S.-born Mexican Americans whose fathers came illegally but later obtained legal permanent residency were 25% less likely to
drop out of high school, 70% more likely to graduate from college, 13% more likely to prefer English at home, and their earnings were 30% higher than
those whose fathers were illegal at the time of the survey.
Part of what holds the children of illegal immigrants back is that they can never quite look forward. Parents cannot fully participate in their
children's lives in ways that help them realize their full potential. As children enter adulthood, many have to take care of the financial needs of
their immigrant parents, whose illegal status makes them extremely vulnerable to the vagaries of the job market, the healthcare system and housing.
The situation is worse for those who were brought as young children to the United States without documentation. They suffer from the double penalty of
their parents' and their own illegality.
As Congress drags its feet on immigration reform, illegal immigrants continue to put down roots and the ranks of children who suffer the penalties of
their parents illegal status swells. According to a recent Pew Hispanic Center report, almost half of all illegal immigrant households are couples
with children, and the overwhelming majority of the children — 73% — are U.S. citizens. The number of U.S.-born children with at least one illegal
immigrant parent grew to 4 million in 2008 from 2.7 million in 2003, a 48% increase. Another 1.5 million children with at least one illegal immigrant
parent are themselves illegal.
Withholding legalization imposes slow social and economic death on illegal immigrants and their children. Failure to implement comprehensive
immigration reform leaves thousands of people who consider the United States their home in the shadows. It also deprives us of the opportunity to
develop a better-trained workforce and to realize all the benefits, both social and economic, that a fully assimilated immigrant population can
contribute. Legalization is the most crucial component of what Americans need and what they deserve: comprehensive immigration reform.
Tomás R. Jiménez is an assistant professor of sociology at Stanford University and an Irvine Fellow at the New America Foundation. He is the author of
"Replenished Ethnicity: Mexican Americans, Immigration, and Identity."
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
..
12
13
14
15
16
..
60 |
![[*]](images/xmbforum/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
