How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 Still think the Republican led AZ legisl   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  ]
 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Still think the Republican led AZ legislature isn't racist?

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


300 posted 07-06-2010 02:49 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

I think you and Bob have misunderstood me, Jen. I'm not painting all Hispanics with the illegal alien felony brush. I was speaking only of those convicted of felonies.

It would be a shame for some families to have to be split up or return to a life of almost certain poverty. The choice is still theirs. They can go or stay. The person who committed the crime is the one responsible for any potential split-up, if it came to that. If a person wants to engage in criminal activity, and gets caught, he pays the price. The family usually suffers as well. It is a shame.

I think you'd have to give them the birth certificates, but I'm not in favor of granting automatic citizenship, Jen, unless one of their parents' is already a citizen. I don't know of any other country that grants citizenship just because you happen to be born there. I could be wrong but I think it is usually dependent upon the citizenship status of your parent/parents.

I don't have a problem with legal immigration. Do the paperwork and wait in line like everyone else. I don't see any reason to give the border jumpers preferential treatment.
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


301 posted 07-06-2010 03:34 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


quote:
Well that's good news, they aren't being deported afterall? They can stay here then?


Nope.

They have to leave once their tourist visa runs out, if they don’t they then become illegal immigrants and can be arrested and deported.

.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


302 posted 07-06-2010 03:49 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.

"So if the law is changed . . ."


" if "


.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


303 posted 07-06-2010 06:44 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Thanks for the links, Bob. They were very interesting. As far as tying the democratic party to the bashing of Irish, Germans, and immigrants in general, I fund them lacking, all except for the last one.

I'm still not sure of the point. You make a shadowy reference to the democratic party of 90 years ago being the same as today. I don;t understand why. Americans killed the Indians and took their lands. White Americans conducted slavery and racial segregation. Does that apply to you, Bob? How many Indians have you killed lately? How many blacks have you told not to use the "white" water fountain? Sins of the fathers? To go a century back to try to prove a point about people today just doesn't make it for me.

What do you think about Truman deporting over two million illegal aliens to free up jobs for Americans after WW2? Do we go back into history to pick apart Democratic actions and then lay them at the feet of the current leaders? Doesn't seem that reasonable to me....
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


304 posted 07-06-2010 07:13 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

"People are not, really, illegals.  People are people who commit illegal acts."

ok

Murderers are not really murderers. Murderers are people who murder.

Apples are not really apples.
Rocks are not really rocks.
1 + 1 is not really 2.

Hitler was not really a killer. Hitler was a person who caused people to be killed.

Bob, you have a future in the teaching profession. Those same things are being taught in our educational system of today.
JenniferMaxwell
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 09-14-2006
Posts 2275


305 posted 07-06-2010 08:18 PM       View Profile for JenniferMaxwell   Email JenniferMaxwell   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for JenniferMaxwell

“What do you think about Truman deporting over two million illegal aliens to free up jobs for Americans after WW2? “ - Balladeer

The Truth-O-Meter says:

“On President Truman: Our experts were unaware of any evidence to back up the assertion that Truman deported over 2 million illegal immigrants after World War II in order to create jobs.

From 1946 to 1952 -- from the end of the war until the end of Truman's presidency -- the U.S. government recorded the entry of less than 1.5 million legal immigrants, many of them persons of European origin fleeing the war or the Holocaust. Experts we spoke to said that it wasn't credible that an even larger number of people could have been deported during that period.”
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/jun/10/chain-email/chain-e-mail-says-three-presidents-deported-total-/


“Americans killed the Indians and took their lands. White Americans conducted slavery and racial segregation.”

Now that’s really nasty. And, of course, they also killed Mexicans and took their land. Wouldn’t those acts be considered felonies? Bad karma for sure!

Can’t find the link now but there was a news blip where an American of Hispanic decent was detained. She was at work, told the arresting officers she had her papers with her but they wouldn’t let her get them. They handcuffed, arrested and detained her. Poor young mother was terrified. There was story a while back where another American who presented his official ID was also detained until his wife brought in his birth certificate.

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


306 posted 07-06-2010 08:49 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

The presence of these illegal workers has a seriously depressing effect on wages and working conditions in farm areas throughout the southwest. The standards of living and job opportunities of American farm workers are under constant downward pressure. Thousands of our own citizens, particularly those of Latin descent, are displaced from employment or forced to work under substandard conditions because of the competition of these illegal immigrants.

Everyone suffers from the presence of these illegal immigrants in the community. They themselves are hurt, first of all. Our own workers--as well as the legal contract workers from Mexico-are hurt by the lowering of working and living standards. And the farmers are hurt, too. Instead of a well trained, reliable supply of workers, they are increasingly dependent on a rapidly-shifting, ill-trained domestic labor force, supplemented legally or illegally from foreign sources. They face a crisis in their labor supply at every season. They are forced, year after year, to makeshift last minute measures to save their crops.

On August 16 the President approved H.J. Res. 311, making interim appropriations to the Department of Labor to begin the task of bringing Mexican farm workers into the United States under the terms of Public Law 78. For the statement by the President upon signing the bill see Item 192.

On March 20, 1952, the President approved S. 1851, an act giving immigration officers additional authority to prevent Mexican farm workers from entering or remaining in the United States illegally (Public Law 283, 82d Cong.; 66 Stat. 26).
http://www.trumanlibrary.org/publicpapers/index.php?pid=368&st=&st1
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


307 posted 07-06-2010 09:00 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

Thanks for the info, Michael. I knew I had learned that before about Truman. It's such a constant ongoing battle to reclaim the history that the Progressives attempt to rewrite.
JenniferMaxwell
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 09-14-2006
Posts 2275


308 posted 07-06-2010 09:02 PM       View Profile for JenniferMaxwell   Email JenniferMaxwell   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for JenniferMaxwell

And the part about the 2 million deportations is where?
JenniferMaxwell
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 09-14-2006
Posts 2275


309 posted 07-06-2010 09:33 PM       View Profile for JenniferMaxwell   Email JenniferMaxwell   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for JenniferMaxwell

I've looked twice and can't find it, the part about the 2 million deportations.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


310 posted 07-06-2010 09:41 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Jenn is right. I can't find anywhere actual proof of the figure 2 million. Truman, however, recognize the dangers of having the illegals here, DID pass laws to eject illegals and give the authorities extended powers to stop them from coming in.
JenniferMaxwell
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 09-14-2006
Posts 2275


311 posted 07-06-2010 10:12 PM       View Profile for JenniferMaxwell   Email JenniferMaxwell   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for JenniferMaxwell

"It's such a constant ongoing battle to reclaim the history that the Progressives attempt to rewrite." - Denise

Seems in this case Progressives had nothing to do with rewriting history.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


312 posted 07-07-2010 12:19 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

You are right, Denise.
JenniferMaxwell
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 09-14-2006
Posts 2275


313 posted 07-07-2010 12:29 AM       View Profile for JenniferMaxwell   Email JenniferMaxwell   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for JenniferMaxwell

So are you saying you just made up that part about the 2 million deportations, Balladeer?
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


314 posted 07-07-2010 04:55 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


“The really crucial point, which this Act scarcely faces, is the steady stream of illegal immigrants from Mexico . . . who cross the Rio Grande or the western stretches of our long border, in search of employment. These people are coming into our country in phenomenal numbers--and at an increasing rate. Last year 500,000 illegal immigrants were apprehended and returned to Mexico. In 1949, less than 300,000 were returned.”

Harry S Truman
July 13, 1951


http://www.trumanlibrary.org/publicpapers/index.php?pid=368&st=&st1


Given 500,000 in a single year and that he was in for two terms it’s not hard to
believe two million.

Maybe Mike's brain did the math . . .

.

[This message has been edited by Huan Yi (07-07-2010 05:40 PM).]

Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


315 posted 07-08-2010 05:11 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K


quote:
  Mike proffers a number of quotes from Bob:  

[“]It is fairly clear, however, that the right wing of that time, was creating a lot of anti-German feeling ("The Huns"), some of it severe enough to cause many Germans in English-Speaking countries to change their last names.[“]

"I have a number of World War I posters that are fairly graphic, and many things and people of German heritage were widely unpopular, much of it stirred up by accounts in the yellow press, almost all of it right wing." (Show me some of those right wing accounts in the yellow press, please)

"  Anti-Irish sentiment has been right wing as well in this country for a hundred and fifty years.  In Boston, which is the area I am most personally familiar with, the anti-Irish sentiment was very much attached to the anti-immigration sentiment which threatened the grip that the upper classes had on the local power structure from mid-19th century on, and that power structure was predominantly Republican. "  (prove it)
http://journalstar.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_5a674bee-80bb-11df-9069-001cc4c03286.html    

http://isanet.ccit.arizona.edu/noarchive/robertwells.html

http://www.questia.com/googleScholar.qst;jsessionid=M1DTVnHgB34H9dljNktVl1tbKrrLZLPtrG1Zy6bKqq35xRRFGQps!547733517!427202863?docId=5000302480
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A06E6DD1E3FF930A35756C0A9609C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2

http://web.viu.ca/davies/H324War/Prager.lynching.1918.htm

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3945/is_200301/ai_n9170046/pg_3/?tag=content;col1

http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/1

[quote]

Thanks for the links, Bob. They were very interesting. As far as tying the democratic party to the bashing of Irish, Germans, and immigrants in general, I fund them lacking, all except for the last one.

I'm still not sure of the point. You make a shadowy reference to the democratic party of 90 years ago being the same as today. I don;t understand why. Americans killed the Indians and took their lands. White Americans conducted slavery and racial segregation. Does that apply to you, Bob? How many Indians have you killed lately? How many blacks have you told not to use the "white" water fountain? Sins of the fathers? To go a century back to try to prove a point about people today just doesn't make it for me.

What do you think about Truman deporting over two million illegal aliens to free up jobs for Americans after WW2? Do we go back into history to pick apart Democratic actions and then lay them at the feet of the current leaders? Doesn't seem that reasonable to me....




     At no point did I say that The Democratic Party was responsible for the bashing of “Irish, Germans, and immigrants in general.”  I did lay the responsibility for that behavior at the feet of the various nativist folks, mostly right wing folks, whom I traced back to the “Know Nothings.”  These were anti-Catholic, anti-semite, anti-immigrant and often anti-black folks who were at their peak just prior to the civil war, and who helped elect Millard Fillmore.

     The politics at the time were somewhat different than now, so there is no one-to one translation of the parties of that time to the parties of today.  But it is clear that the Know-nothings were Nativists in the same way that today’s Republicans tend to be nativists; and that the “Know-nothings” were anti-immigrant in the same way that today’s Republicans are often anti-immigrant.  Indeed, “Nativist” and “anti-immigrant” can be thought of as synonyms, for all practical purposes.

     This statement of your in particular puzzles me, Mike.

quote:

I'm still not sure of the point. You make a shadowy reference to the democratic party of 90 years ago being the same as today. I don;t understand why. Americans killed the Indians and took their lands. White Americans conducted slavery and racial segregation. Does that apply to you, Bob?



     You asked me to respond to a number of questions you had.  At your request, right?

     I went to a fair amount of trouble to dig up some answers to answer questions that you had, and now you say that you’ve got no idea why I’m replying?

     I’m replying because you specifically asked for a reply to these specific questions, not because I simply felt it was a wonderful way to spend an afternoon when I could have been writing poetry.  

     My reference to the Democratic party was to the fact not that it was the same as it is today, but that it was different.  In case you missed what I was saying, I also said the same about the Republican Party in some ways.  I won’t say you got my statements a hundred percent wrong, but close.

     What was my point?

     Well, what’s the name of the thread, Mike?

     It’s about the Racism of the Arizona State Law and the people who voted it into effect.  It’s about the history of this sort of thing as it applies to our country, and it’s about the importance of not forgetting that history.  If we forget it, we increase of odds of repeating the more ugly parts of it.  If we remember, we can learn from it, and hopefully build more useful laws, laws the build upon the best of what we’ve learned and avoid the mistakes we’ve made.

     The point is that the Republicans and their ideological ancestors have used immigrants and immigration as a way to rally feeling against outsiders for at least a hundred and fifty years.  Who the immigrants may be changes from time to time, but the tactic remains.  It consistently uses fear of outsiders to divide the voters against each other.  The tactic does not shy from racism when it seems that racism will work.

     Democrats have also used racist tactics as well, and paid heavily for trying to put them aside in the mid to late sixties.  For the most part, I think they’ve succeeded.

     No, I haven’t bought any slaves or killed any Native Americans, but it’s an excellent idea that I re4member that it’s possible that perfectly well meaning people can do so.  You don’t have to be a monster, you know; all you have to do is keep your mouth shut when other people are calling for enslaving people or stringing them up without trial or any of the rest of these things, and you’re off to the races again.

     You might check out the articles about the hanging and attempted hanging during the first world war I included with the information I added when I saw your request for information about the stuff that happened to German Americans during the first world war.

     Nor am I interested in talking about Truman at this point.  How about we actually get what we’re talking about here straightened away first before we talk about something that’s off the subject?  

     The lawsuit is underway now, as I understand it, and that would be closer to the subject than Truman.  
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


316 posted 07-08-2010 05:32 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



quote:



Murderers are not really murderers. Murderers are people who murder.

Apples are not really apples.
Rocks are not really rocks.
1 + 1 is not really 2.

Hitler was not really a killer. Hitler was a person who caused people to be killed.

Bob, you have a future in the teaching profession. Those same things are being taught in our educational system of today.




     Ever exceeded a speed limit, Mike?

     By your reasoning, that makes you an illegal.

     You don't draw a distinction between kind of illegals, you'll notice.  You don't even make a point of requiring a conviction to earn the status — not that I've seen.  Of course, if you can point out someplace you've made that distinction in print, I'll consider it, but if you have you certainly haven't made a point of continuining to insist on it.

     You too are an illegal.

     We deport illegals, don't we, according to your logic.

     Of course now you'll probably want to start talking about all those troublesome details that you omit when you're talking about people you despise.  You'll probably say that you haven't been convicted of anything, but I haven't seen you insist on that.  Or that you haven't had a trial that said you were an illegal, but then most of them don't either.  Or that if you've broken a law, it's not that law, it's only spitting on the sidewalk, and nobody's ever caught you for it.

     But then you don't insist that any of them be caught breaking a law before you start talking about them as if they had, and as if they'd been convicted.

     By you're own logic, you should be shipped overseas without a trial.

     Fortunately for you, people don't run things your way yet.  Unfortunately, it appears that they will.  

    I disagree with you about my future in the teaching profession.  Clearly, I haven't been able to teach you anything.  I may simply not have anything you wish to learn.  I'll have to pay closer attention to what I can learn from you, though I'd rather a more equal exchange.

    
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


317 posted 07-08-2010 11:24 AM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.
“Well whaddya know? It turns out that Rhode Island has long been carrying out the procedures at issue in the Arizona immigration statute: As a matter of routine, RI state police check immigration status at traffic stops whenever there is reasonable suspicion to do so, and they report all illegals to the feds for deportation. Besides the usual profiling blather, critics have trotted out the now familiar saw that such procedures hamstring police because they make immigrants afraid to cooperate. But it turns out that it’s the Rhode Island police who insist on enforcing the law. As Cornell law prof William Jacobson details at Legal Insurrection, Colonel Brendan P. Doherty, the state police commander, “refuses to hide from the issue,” explaining, ”I would feel that I’m derelict in my duties to look the other way.”

If, as President Obama and Attorney General Holder claim, there is a federal preemption issue, why hasn’t the administration sued Rhode Island already? After all, Rhode Island is actually enforcing these procedures, while the Arizona law hasn’t even gone into effect yet.

Could it be because — as we’ve discussed here before — the Supreme Court in Muehler v. Mena has already held that police do not need any reason (not probable cause, not reasonable suspicion) to ask a person about his immigration status?

Could it be that just this past February, in Estrada v. Rhode Island, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit upheld the Rhode Island procedures, reasoning that, in Muehler v. Mena, the Supreme Court “held that a police officer does not need independent reasonable suspicion to question an individual about her immigration status…”?”


http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NjkzMmNjMjIxMjIxYWNmODA0OGI3ZTU5MmIyZGUyMjg=

.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


318 posted 07-08-2010 11:53 AM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

And speaking of the preemption issue, why aren't all the Sanctuary Cities being sued for willfully refusing to cooperate with federal law enforcement authorities? It seems to me that they are the ones who are in violation by having policies/laws opposed to federal law on the issue.
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


319 posted 07-08-2010 02:29 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


quote:
the Supreme Court in Muehler v. Mena has already held that police do not need any reason (not probable cause, not reasonable suspicion) to ask a person about his immigration status


Muehler v. Mena proved that you can’t sue the police for asking questions Huan, it didn’t however affect your right not to answer them and it definitely didn’t give the police the right to detain you until you answered them – which is the main flaw with the Arizona law.

.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


320 posted 07-08-2010 03:32 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.

"it didn’t however affect your right not to answer them and it definitely didn’t give the police the right to detain you until you answered them "

So in Rhode Island they're letting them go
which avoided that coming up in court?


One thing I keep remembering is the argument that illegal immigrants were taking
jobs citizens didn’t want to do.   With unemployment now at about 10%, (and higher when
you take into account those who have just stopped looking),  is that still true?  And
with five job seekers for every job opening, how are illegal immigrants getting by?


.
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


321 posted 07-08-2010 04:27 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


quote:
So in Rhode Island they're letting them go
which avoided that coming up in court?


The case was brought by a citizen who was handcuffed and asked whether she was in the country legally during a warranted search. She sued saying that both these acts breached her constitutional rights. The court, quite correctly, found that her rights had not been breached, that the police did have a legitimate reason to use handcuffs and were within their rights to ask questions.

Her right not to answer the questions wasn’t at issue in the case, though ironically her right not to answer is the primary reason why her suit failed in the first place – her right to remain silent is in effect an automatic protection against her constitutional rights being infringed.

If they'd have detained her, solely for not answering the question, she'd have won the case quicker than you could say 'unconstitutional'

.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


322 posted 07-08-2010 04:41 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


So what happens now in Rhode Island
when someone refuses to answer the
question?

"solely" probably doesn't happen often then . . .


.


"I do not believe that most Americans share the view that controlling the border -- whether along the Mexican border or at JFK airport or at crossings from Canada -- is inherently racist; so too, it is not racist to enforce the immigration laws against people who violate the border controls.

Rather, the issue is sovereignty. Is the United States, like every other country in the world, entitled to control its borders, to determine who can enter and under what terms, and to enforce the laws which protect this sovereignty.”


http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2010/04/just-say-it-all-immigration-laws-are.html


.
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


323 posted 07-08-2010 05:04 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch

quote:
So what happens now in Rhode Island
when someone refuses to answer the
question?


Simple -  they get released.

quote:
"solely" probably doesn't happen often then . . .


It probably doesn’t happen at all in Rhode Island, nor should it because it’s unconstitutional but the Arizona law is written in such a way to almost guarantee that it’ll happen, which is why the implementation of the law in Rhode Island and the Oklahoma law are constitutional and the Arizona law isn’t.

The Arizona law insists that police officers obtain documentary evidence of citizenship if they are suspicious of a person’s status whom they stop during the normal course of their work. It doesn’t say that they must check the status of everyone they arrest for other reasons like the Oklahoma law, it doesn’t allow the right to silence afforded by the Rhode Island police application. It says that documentary evidence must be obtained or the police authority will be prosecuted.

.
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


324 posted 07-08-2010 05:19 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


quote:
it is not racist to enforce the immigration laws against people who violate the border controls.


That misses the point entirely – nobody is trying to protect the constitutional rights of illegal immigrants, illegal immigrants don’t have any.

The Arizona law impinges on the constitutional rights of US citizens.

.
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> Still think the Republican led AZ legisl   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors