AZ governor Brewer's popularity grows

[DamnYankee]

Just show you how many idiots there are in this country.

You're afraid of strong women along with your fear of personal responsibility?

 

[christiefan915]

I fucking wonder how many of us right-wingers would get away with posting nothing but BLOGS as our sources of information? I think we should just start doing that... no matter what the issue, no matter if there is legitimate sources to back it up... just let's throw up some right-wing BLOG post and pretend we've refuted their stupidity from now on... let's see how long that flies with them!

Um, I don't post ONLY blogs as a source of info. Furthermore, this Wall Street Journal blog (and the WSJ is not exactly a bastion of liberal opinion) quotes the opinions of two law professors; what do you find specifically wrong about this statement?

...Manheim said. “States have no power to pass immigration laws because it’s an attribute of foreign affairs. Just as states can’t have their own foreign policies or enter into treaties, they can’t have their own immigration laws either.”

Give us your informed legal opinion, Dix.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
"We" meaning you're an Arizona resident? If so, then maybe you can enlighten us all as to how a ban on produce to Arizona would be negligible....or a similar situation with the tourist trade.

If not, then stop exaggerating your actual worth in a discussion. Carry on.

Are you suggesting that AZ gets most of it's produce and tourists from CA and/or NM.

Nope, I'm ASKING YOU TO VALIDATE / QUANTIFY YOUR STATEMENT. Freedumb, stop being an intellectual wussy ... Freedumb needs to answer a question instead or responding with another one.

With the voiced support from other States, we'll do just fine.
How is SF going to do with 25% less power??

Voiced support is one thing...actual boycott of goods and services is another...as you aptly demonstrate with your question about 25% less power.

So again, ARE YOU SAYING YOU ARE A RESIDENT OF ARIZONA? If so, then maybe you can enlighten us all as to how a ban on produce to Arizona would be negligible....or a similar situation with the tourist trade.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Dixie
You want to know why there is such a stink about this? It's not because the AZ law is any different than Federal law, or that it allows any more authority to AZ law enforcement, or that it violates any Constitutional right.... It's really simple... the difference in the AZ law and the Federal law is, Arizona WILL enforce their law, the Feds won't! That's IT! That's the ONLY reason you are hearing all this hullabaloo over the AZ law!

Time will tell.

By now you may have heard about a controversial immigration law passed in Arizona that makes it a crime under state law to be in the country illegally.

The law grants police the power to stop and verify the immigration status of anyone they suspect of being illegal. The measure was criticized Friday by President Barack Obama, who asked the Justice Department to research the law.

It sounded to the Law Blog like we were heading toward a big federalism showdown. So we turned to Karl Manheim of Loyola Law School in Los Angeles and Erwin Chemerinsky of UC Irvine Law to pregame it for us. Their response: the law is DOA.

The Arizona law appears to be “facially unconstitutional,” Manheim said. “States have no power to pass immigration laws because it’s an attribute of foreign affairs. Just as states can’t have their own foreign policies or enter into treaties, they can’t have their own immigration laws either.”

States have long attempted to regulate immigration and in some instances the federal government successfully challenged state laws in court, including in the 1800s, Manheim said.

But federal governments often stay out of the fight. In 1994, for example, California voters passed a law designed to deny social services to undocumented aliens. The law was challenged by private litigants and struck down by a federal court.

Manheim said the Obama Administration, which is in the midst of trying to pass a federal immigration reform law, would likely rely on private litigants to challenge the controversial Arizona law. Challenging the law directly “might create a political conflict” for the administration, he said.

If private litigants sue Arizona over the new law, the Justice Department also could file a so-called friend-of-the-court brief in support of the challenge, he said.

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2010/04/23/law-profs-on-arizona-immigration-bill-its-unconstitutional/

Thing is, I'll bet you dollars to donuts that NONE of our resident neocon parrots are directly affected by illegal immigrants. Also, none of them have to worry about carrying their birth certificate around with them.

The little dummies wail all the paranoid and bogus teabagging mantras about Obama instituting a fascist (or communist, take your pick) gov't, yet they bend over backwards to excuse the blatant excesses of the Arizona law.

I wonder what they have to say about the recent "improvements" to the educational system there?

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Voiced support is one thing...actual boycott of goods and services is another...as you aptly demonstrate with your question about 25% less power.

So again, ARE YOU SAYING YOU ARE A RESIDENT OF ARIZONA? If so, then maybe you can enlighten us all as to how a ban on produce to Arizona would be negligible....or a similar situation with the tourist trade.

We'll buy elsewhere; now would you care to explain how LA is going to handle a 25% reduction in power??

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Thing is, I'll bet you dollars to donuts that NONE of our resident neocon parrots are directly affected by illegal immigrants. Also, none of them have to worry about carrying their birth certificate around with them.

The little dummies wail all the paranoid and bogus teabagging mantras about Obama instituting a fascist (or communist, take your pick) gov't, yet they bend over backwards to excuse the blatant excesses of the Arizona law.

I wonder what they have to say about the recent "improvements" to the educational system there?

Where did you get the dumbass idea that ANYONE in AZ has to carry their birth certificate with them??

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Voiced support is one thing...actual boycott of goods and services is another...as you aptly demonstrate with your question about 25% less power.

So again, ARE YOU SAYING YOU ARE A RESIDENT OF ARIZONA? If so, then maybe you can enlighten us all as to how a ban on produce to Arizona would be negligible....or a similar situation with the tourist trade.

We'll buy elsewhere; now would you care to explain how LA is going to handle a 25% reduction in power??

Note that Freedumb REFUSES to answer a simple question as to whether he's an actual resident of Arizona.

Also note that Freedom does not think through his answer. The whole point of a boycott is to force the target to "buy elsewhere"....because that act will be MORE expensive, more logistically difficult and MAY NOT SUPPLY THE SAME PRODUCE. As things are financially screwed up all over the country, such an action could cause further damage throughout the Arizona infrastructure. The tourist trade would have even more detrimental and immediate damage.

Los Angeles will not have to worry about Arizonza cutting 25% of their power, as Arizona can NOT afford the loss of revenue....but California sure as hell can sell it's produce elsewhere and still make a profit.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Thing is, I'll bet you dollars to donuts that NONE of our resident neocon parrots are directly affected by illegal immigrants. Also, none of them have to worry about carrying their birth certificate around with them.

The little dummies wail all the paranoid and bogus teabagging mantras about Obama instituting a fascist (or communist, take your pick) gov't, yet they bend over backwards to excuse the blatant excesses of the Arizona law.

I wonder what they have to say about the recent "improvements" to the educational system there?

Where did you get the dumbass idea that ANYONE in AZ has to carry their birth certificate with them??

Oh, from NEW LAW that put the birth certificate as one of the items that the cop can ask for when stoping a person based on their personal reasonable cause for suspicion. It was posted on the threads....didn't you read it?

Get your ass in gear and know WTF you're babbling about, Freedom.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Note that Freedumb REFUSES to answer a simple question as to whether he's an actual resident of Arizona.

Also note that Freedom does not think through his answer. The whole point of a boycott is to force the target to "buy elsewhere"....because that act will be MORE expensive, more logistically difficult and MAY NOT SUPPLY THE SAME PRODUCE. As things are financially screwed up all over the country, such an action could cause further damage throughout the Arizona infrastructure. The tourist trade would have even more detrimental and immediate damage.

Los Angeles will not have to worry about Arizonza cutting 25% of their power, as Arizona can NOT afford the loss of revenue....but California sure as hell can sell it's produce elsewhere and still make a profit.

Are you seriously suggesting that AZ would NOT be able to sell that power to other States and thereby negotiating a lower price for that produce that you're hung up on??

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Oh, from NEW LAW that put the birth certificate as one of the items that the cop can ask for when stoping a person based on their personal reasonable cause for suspicion. It was posted on the threads....didn't you read it?

Get your ass in gear and know WTF you're babbling about, Freedom.

It is now obvious that you have no clue what you're talkikng about and are only regurgitating data that the anti-SB1070 people have put out.

You haven't even READ THE BILL, have you!!

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Note that Freedumb REFUSES to answer a simple question as to whether he's an actual resident of Arizona.

Also note that Freedom does not think through his answer. The whole point of a boycott is to force the target to "buy elsewhere"....because that act will be MORE expensive, more logistically difficult and MAY NOT SUPPLY THE SAME PRODUCE. As things are financially screwed up all over the country, such an action could cause further damage throughout the Arizona infrastructure. The tourist trade would have even more detrimental and immediate damage.

Los Angeles will not have to worry about Arizonza cutting 25% of their power, as Arizona can NOT afford the loss of revenue....but California sure as hell can sell it's produce elsewhere and still make a profit.

Are you seriously suggesting that AZ would NOT be able to sell that power to other States and thereby negotiating a lower price for that produce that you're hung up on??

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

Only a fool would think that Arizona would be able to maintain the same profit margin and supply demand if California AND OTHER STATES started a produce boycott on them. When there is less, the price goes up...the interim of change alone would hit the Arizona citizens hard in the wallet. Imports cost...the further away the desired product the higher the price.

Same with power.....paying to set up and maintain new utilities or adapt standing systems, etc. COSTS that neither Arizona or California can afford to risk taking.

But then again, we'll never know if Freedumb is a resident of either state...such is Freedom's intellectual cowardice.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Only a fool would think that Arizona would be able to maintain the same profit margin and supply demand if California AND OTHER STATES started a produce boycott on them. When there is less, the price goes up...the interim of change alone would hit the Arizona citizens hard in the wallet. Imports cost...the further away the desired product the higher the price.

Same with power.....paying to set up and maintain new utilities or adapt standing systems, etc. COSTS that neither Arizona or California can afford to risk taking.

But then again, we'll never know if Freedumb is a resident of either state...such is Freedom's intellectual cowardice.

OH-so now you want to toss in "Other States"!!

HA HA HA HA HA
Which States would those be and how many??
HA HA HA HA HA HA

It also appears that you think that AZ's power grid only connects to CA and is isolated from the rest of the US!!
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

By the way, have you heard that there are now 11 States that are considering following AZ's lead in all of this??

If you would bother to look at the top right corner, of my posts, you would see that it says I'm in AZ.
You're a dumbass.
HA HA HA HA HA HA

 

[PostmodernProphet]

By the way, have you heard that there are now 11 States that are considering following AZ's lead in all of this??

which leads me to ask, wtf is wrong with the other 38?.......

 

[USFREEDOM911]

which leads me to ask, wtf is wrong with the other 38?.......

OH, the majority of them will come around and see the sense in this.
People are finally seeing through the lies told by the haters of SB-1070 (which in April was amended to now be HB-2162)

HB-2162

They procalim it to racist and yet they can't point out where racism is mentioned, except in their hatred.
The procalim that illegals now have to carry their birth certificate and yet they can't point out where this says so.

The haters just hoped that they could convince enough voters of their lies, to be able to raise a groundswell against the bill; but they hadn't counted on one little thing and that was that the people they hoped to convince can read, unlike Pelosi and others.

 

[Thorn]

OH, the majority of them will come around and see the sense in this.
People are finally seeing through the lies told by the haters of SB-1070 (which in April was amended to now be HB-2162)

HB-2162

They procalim it to racist and yet they can't point out where racism is mentioned, except in their hatred.
The procalim that illegals now have to carry their birth certificate and yet they can't point out where this says so.

The haters just hoped that they could convince enough voters of their lies, to be able to raise a groundswell against the bill; but they hadn't counted on one little thing and that was that the people they hoped to convince can read, unlike Pelosi and others.

I have to carry my Green Card with me at all times; that was one of the instructions in the literature that accompanied it. Prior to that I had to carry my work permit documentation (I forget the number : I-9?) at all times. I don't know about a birth certificate, but presumably a driver's licence should suffice. If that's too easy to counterfeit, there must be another way.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

I have to carry my Green Card with me at all times; that was one of the instructions in the literature that accompanied it. Prior to that I had to carry my work permit documentation (I forget the number : I-9?) at all times. I don't know about a birth certificate, but presumably a driver's licence should suffice. If that's too easy to counterfeit, there must be another way.

Read the bill and you will discover that there is no mention of ANYONE having to carry their Birth Certificate with them; IN CASE a Police Officer wants to see it.

This was sissies last whine, just before I bitch slapped him and he left with his tail tucked between his legs.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Oh, from NEW LAW that put the birth certificate as one of the items that the cop can ask for when stoping a person based on their personal reasonable cause for suspicion. It was posted on the threads....didn't you read it?

Get your ass in gear and know WTF you're babbling about, Freedom.

It is now obvious that you have no clue what you're talkikng about and are only regurgitating data that the anti-SB1070 people have put out.

You haven't even READ THE BILL, have you!!

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

Once again, you have earned the nickname "Freedumb"

From
Senate bill 1070


For any lawful stop, detention or arrest made by a law enforcement
official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other politi-
cal subdivision of this state in the enforcement of any other law or ordi-
nance of a county, city or town of this state where reasonable suspicion
exists that the person is an alien and is unlawfully present in the Unit-
ed States, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to de-
termine the immigration status of the person. The person’s immigration
status shall be verified with the federal government pursuant to Unit-
ed States Code Section 1373(c). A law enforcement official or agency
of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this
state may not consider race, color or national origin in implementing the
requirements of this subsection except to the extent permitted by the
United States or Arizona Constitution. A person is presumed to not be
an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States if the person pro-
vides to the law enforcement officer or agency any of the following:


A person is presumed to not be
an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States if the person pro-
vides to the law enforcement officer or agency any of the following:
1. A valid Arizona driver license.
2. A valid Arizona nonoperating identification license.
3. A valid tribal enrollment card or other form of tribal identification.
4. If the entity requires proof of legal presence in the United States
before issuance, any valid United States federal, state or local govern-
ment issued identification.

 

[Taichiliberal]

OH-so now you want to toss in "Other States"!!

No, the press reported on this...you're probably too busy with the faux hysterics to notice. Here, FYI of one example

http://www.boston.com/news/local/ma...05/06/council_calls_for_a_boycott_of_arizona/



HA HA HA HA HA
Which States would those be and how many??
HA HA HA HA HA HA

See above, and then there's this http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20003803-503544.html?tag=contentMain;contentBody

It also appears that you think that AZ's power grid only connects to CA and is isolated from the rest of the US!!
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

I didn't say that, YOU did.....apparently your delusional state has you thinking that previous post just disappear and you can just fabricate any lie you want. CUT & PASTE WHERE I SAID WHAT YOU CLAIM OR CONTINUE YOUR BLUFFS AND LIES.

By the way, have you heard that there are now 11 States that are considering following AZ's lead in all of this??

Yep, it's seems there are a lot of considerations of both sides of the fence....and then you have to take into account if this thing will actually go into affect and what the federal legal response to it's constitutionality will be.

If you would bother to look at the top right corner, of my posts, you would see that it says I'm in AZ.
You're a dumbass.
HA HA HA HA HA HA

It took you what, several posts to own up to this? And now having done this, you display an appalling lack of understanding of commerce and knowledge of current events on this subject. Laugh, clown, laugh.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Once again, you have earned the nickname "Freedumb"

From
Senate bill 1070


For any lawful stop, detention or arrest made by a law enforcement
official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other politi-
cal subdivision of this state in the enforcement of any other law or ordi-
nance of a county, city or town of this state where reasonable suspicion
exists that the person is an alien and is unlawfully present in the Unit-
ed States, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to de-
termine the immigration status of the person. The person’s immigration
status shall be verified with the federal government pursuant to Unit-
ed States Code Section 1373(c). A law enforcement official or agency
of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this
state may not consider race, color or national origin in implementing the
requirements of this subsection except to the extent permitted by the
United States or Arizona Constitution. A person is presumed to not be
an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States if the person pro-
vides to the law enforcement officer or agency any of the following:


A person is presumed to not be
an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States if the person pro-
vides to the law enforcement officer or agency any of the following:
1. A valid Arizona driver license.
2. A valid Arizona nonoperating identification license.
3. A valid tribal enrollment card or other form of tribal identification.
4. If the entity requires proof of legal presence in the United States
before issuance, any valid United States federal, state or local govern-
ment issued identification.

You're still an idiot sissie; becauase nowhere does anything support your assertion that people have to carry their Birth Certificates.

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

Birth Certificates aren't even MENTIONED; you dillhole.

HA HA HA HA HA HA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

[USFREEDOM911]

It took you what, several posts to own up to this? And now having done this, you display an appalling lack of understanding of commerce and knowledge of current events on this subject. Laugh, clown, laugh.

And this proves how stupid you truly are.
Well, that and delusional.

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HAHA