• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Arpaio Faces a New Sheriff in Town

mike2810 said:
Are you a lawyer?
Click to expand...

Not yet, but I'm in law school. :)

mike2810 said:
If so, it explains how you answer and the questions you pose. MCSO is being sued. Does that mean they are guilty, just because DOJ filed the suit? Seems to me they deserve their day in court. Innocent till proven guilty in a court of law.
Click to expand...

No, not just because the DOJ filed suit. The DOJ isn't just a litigant. It is the top law enforcement agency in the country. It conducted an exhaustive two year long review of the situation. They watched thousands of hours of footage from those cameras in police cruisers, poured over hundreds of thousands of booking slips and statistics and paperwork, interviewed hundreds or even thousands of people, secured affidavits not just from victims of racial profiling and bystanders, but also from police officers in Arpaio's force describing how they were instructed to operate. They released all the findings in a huge report.

And they clearly aren't on some mission to get Apraio. They offered him a very reasonable settlement where he would just have to clean up his act going forward and they would not prosecute him for any of the things he has done so far. All he had to agree to was to permit a DOJ monitor to track his progress. But he refused. That's why it is going to court.

mike2810 said:
No. LE without resonalble suspiction should not haul in everyone for a blood test for drunk driving. I also think that is an apple/orange example.
Click to expand...

Why is it an apple/orange example? Isn't that exactly what Arpaio is doing to Hispanic US citizens? Just being Hispanic obviously isn't enough to form a reasonable suspicion that they are here illegally, right? Like 90% of Hispanics in Arizona are here legally, but those in Maricopa county are being regularly rounded up and locked up for 1-3 days because they are Hispanic.
 
teamosil said:
Well, I don't know what to tell you buddy. You're just flat out wrong. That isn't what the constitution says and that isn't what the courts have ever said. That isn't some debatable point. Nobody that knows anything about the law would disagree with what I am explaining to you whether they are conservative or liberal or anything else.
Click to expand...

Mmmmno, if you don't want to create anarchy and chaos you should probably drop that line of thinking.


US Constitution is for US Citizens on US soil.
 
teamosil said:
You understand that most Hispanic people in the US are citizens, right?
Click to expand...

Not sure, 20 million illegal estimate is a big number, there would have to be 21 million legal Hispanics for that to be true; most = simple majority = +51%
 
Matt Foley said:
yeah......... except your mistaken to think it doesn't do collateral damage.
Click to expand...

Well, more accurately I should say that the collateral damage it does would be mitigated by creating a proper guest worker program like I discussed.

Matt Foley said:
Mmmmno, if you don't want to create anarchy and chaos you should probably drop that line of thinking.

US Constitution is for US Citizens on US soil.
Click to expand...

Anarchy and chaos? What the hell are you talking about? That's how we've always done it.

That isn't what the constitution says. It isn't what the courts say the constitution says. It isn't how we've ever operated as a country... The constitution spells out clearly what rights are given to citizens, what rights are given to everybody, and what limits are on government regardless of who it is acting against. Just asserting that you don't believe it doesn't change that in any way.

Matt Foley said:
Not sure, 20 million illegal estimate is a big number, there would have to be 21 million legal Hispanics for that to be true; most = simple majority = +51%
Click to expand...

It's actually under 11 million undocumented immigrants- Illegal immigrant numbers plunge - Los Angeles Times

If all undocumented immigrants were counted in the census, that would be about 20%. But more likely most undocumented immigrants did not respond to the census, so it'd be more like 16% or so.
 
teamosil said:
Well, more accurately I should say that the collateral damage it does would be mitigated by creating a proper guest worker program like I discussed.
Click to expand...

Now the lefties are on board with "guest workers". Oh goody, why not just drop the pretense and just bring slavery back.

You know "guest workers" is worse than Amnesty. What's worse?

1) Amnesty for 10-20 million illegals
2) 50 million guest workers

"50 million so high." Before the Civil War, there were an equal amount of slaves to freemen in most Southern States.

The constitution spells out clearly what rights are given to citizens, what rights are given to everybody
Click to expand...

Rights given to everybody? Is it the Constitution of the United States, or is it the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights?



It's actually under 11 million undocumented immigrants- Illegal immigrant numbers plunge - Los Angeles Times

If all undocumented immigrants were counted in the census, that would be about 20%. But more likely most undocumented immigrants did not respond to the census, so it'd be more like 16% or so.
Click to expand...

Your guess is as good as anyone else's.
 
Matt Foley said:
Now the lefties are on board with "guest workers". Oh goody, why not just drop the pretense and just bring slavery back.

You know "guest workers" is worse than Amnesty. What's worse?

1) Amnesty for 10-20 million illegals
2) 50 million guest workers

"50 million so high." Before the Civil War, there were an equal amount of slaves to freemen in most Southern States.
Click to expand...

Well, we have three options- status quo, guest worker program, economic collapse. Which do you prefer?

Matt Foley said:
Rights given to everybody? Is it the Constitution of the United States, or is it the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights?
Click to expand...

I don't get why you are struggling with this so much. For example, the right to due process of law is granted to all people. That just makes sense, doesn't it? How would we even know if somebody was a citizen or not without due process? Why would we want the government just acting at random with regards to anybody, regardless of whether they were citizens or not? We wouldn't of course. So, they gave that right to all people.

Seriously man, this isn't some controversial thing, it is just something you were not previously aware of. There isn't like some ongoing debate about it or something. It is a totally settled and universally agreed on interpretation.

Matt Foley said:
Your guess is as good as anyone else's.
Click to expand...

Guess? That's the number from DHS. They don't guess lol, they study it.
 
teamosil said:
Well, we have three options- status quo, guest worker program, economic collapse. Which do you prefer?
Click to expand...

That's what the pro-slavery guys said before the Civil War, "Oh we need the slaves, our economy would be destroyed without the cheap foreign labor, woe is me."

bottom one: Examples of 19th Century Pro-Slavery Arguments at the Lyceum

Why are you making the exact same pro-slavery arguments in 2012? Hey the 18th century called, they want their talking points back.
 
We were promised that the Simpson Mazzoli Immigration Bill in the 1980s would solve the illegal immigration problem if only we would give amnesty to illegal aliens. We were promised that the border would be secured. We were lied to.

Having been lied to once we will never believe mere words ever again on this subject. Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice shame on me. There won't be a second time.

You ladies and gentlemen on the left have nothing to offer us. Quid pro quo? There can't be a quid without a quo.
 
Last edited:
Matt Foley said:
That's what the pro-slavery guys said before the Civil War, "Oh we need the slaves, our economy would be destroyed without the cheap foreign labor, woe is me."

bottom one: Examples of 19th Century Pro-Slavery Arguments at the Lyceum

Why are you making the exact same pro-slavery arguments in 2012? Hey the 18th century called, they want their talking points back.
Click to expand...

Ugh... I know I'll regret asking, but fine... Tell me how you think a guest worker program is like slavery...
 
Albert Di Salvo said:
We were promised that the Simpson Mazzoli Immigration Bill in the 1980s would solve the illegal immigration problem if only we would give amnesty to illegal aliens. We were promised that the border would be secured. We were lied to.

Having been lied to once we will never believe mere words ever again on this subject. Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice shame on me. There won't be a second time.

You ladies and gentlemen on the left have nothing to offer us. Quid pro quo? There can't be a quid without a quo.
Click to expand...

Lied to? What does the border being secured mean to you? You can just say it isn't "secure" no matter what anybody does unless you define a very clear line.
 
teamosil said:
Lied to? What does the border being secured mean to you? You can just say it isn't "secure" no matter what anybody does unless you define a very clear line.
Click to expand...

What is a promise made without any intention of performing it? You know the answer. That's a form of actionable fraud.

What is a secure border? A secure border is one that can't be violated by twenty million people without so much as a by your leave.

There are tens of millions of people like me who believe we have been lied to and we're really pissed off to the point where we won't compromise over any thing. That is a very real problem for any one who seeks amnesty.

Opinion is informed by experience. Our experience tells us we have been lied to. We will only become more and more........unhappy with the passage of time. And we are going to be around for decades yet.
 
teamosil said:
Ugh... I know I'll regret asking, but fine... Tell me how you think a guest worker program is like slavery...
Click to expand...

Uh, they're not allowed to raise families while here, can't bring their families here, they earn crap wages, don't have any residency rights.

Why do you think there's a distinction between "guest worker" and a normal citizen? Paperwork? You guys aren't as "enlightened" as you think you are.

The greatest profit making is in human cattle; guest workers, slaves, free trade, doesn't matter.
 
Last edited:
Matt Foley said:
Uh, they're not allowed to raise families while here, can't bring their families here, they earn crap wages, don't have any residency rights.

Why do you think there's a distinction between "guest worker" and a normal citizen? Paperwork? You guys aren't as "enlightened" as you think you are.

The greatest profit making is in human cattle; guest workers, slaves, free trade, doesn't matter.
Click to expand...

Ok. So calling it "slavery" was just you being ridiculous, right? What you really mean is just that being a guest worker wouldn't be as good as being a citizen. That's right of course. But it would certainly be better than being undocumented, so plenty of people would still opt to do it, so I don't see the problem. Nobody is forcing anybody to do anything.
 
Sheriff Joe is John Brown the Abolitionist, right before the Civil War. His children were killed by US soldiers led by 'Colonel' Robert E Lee, and at his hanging he was guarded by 'Major' Stonewall Jackson. The whole country was against him just like the whole damned country is against Joe.
 
teamosil said:
Ok. So calling it "slavery" was just you being ridiculous, right? What you really mean is just that being a guest worker wouldn't be as good as being a citizen. That's right of course. But it would certainly be better than being undocumented, so plenty of people would still opt to do it, so I don't see the problem. Nobody is forcing anybody to do anything.
Click to expand...

Oh so you the "Lean: Liberal" think slavery-light is better than slavery-classic, gotcha.
 
Matt Foley said:
Sheriff Joe is John Brown the Abolitionist, right before the Civil War. His children were killed by US soldiers led by 'Colonel' Robert E Lee, and at his hanging he was guarded by 'Major' Stonewall Jackson. The whole country was against him just like the whole damned country is against Joe.
Click to expand...

That may be the sickest thing I've ever heard anybody say... To compare a racist cop that is attacking people on the basis of their ethnic background to an abolitionist? You are out of control. You need to do sit down and do some serious soul searching because this is just despicable.

Matt Foley said:
Oh so you the "Lean: Liberal" think slavery-light is better than slavery-classic, gotcha.
Click to expand...

A guest worker program has nothing whatsoever to do with slavery. There is no connection. Zero. You're just saying things at random. Slavery means you don't have a choice and you don't get paid. How did you think that was like a guest worker program? You're just talking crazy.
 
teamosil said:
That may be the sickest thing I've ever heard anybody say... To compare a racist cop that is attacking people on the basis of their ethnic background to an abolitionist? You are out of control. You need to do sit down and do some serious soul searching because this is just despicable.
Click to expand...

Yes being pro-slavery-light is despicable.

You know not a single slave joined in John Brown's little revolt. How many hispanics are sticking up for Sheriff Joe's little revolt? Probably none. wow. amazing stuff huh.


A guest worker program has nothing whatsoever to do with slavery. There is no connection. Zero.
Click to expand...

Cheap foreign labor, profit.

eating-money.jpg





You're just saying things at random. Slavery means you don't have a choice and you don't get paid. How did you think that was like a guest worker program? You're just talking crazy.
Click to expand...

I know, I know, you're like, "I'm a Liberal, I'm enlightened, I'm against slavery." But you aren't.
 
Matt Foley said:
Yes being pro-slavery-light is despicable.

You know not a single slave joined in John Brown's little revolt. How many hispanics are sticking up for Sheriff Joe's little revolt? Probably none. wow. amazing stuff huh.

Cheap foreign labor, profit.

I know, I know, you're like, "I'm a Liberal, I'm enlightened, I'm against slavery." But you aren't.
Click to expand...

Well, obviously at this point you're just blurting out random words. If you think you can come up with an actual argument give it a shot. Otherwise, you've clearly had some kind of mental breakdown and probably best to just let sleeping dogs lie I guess...
 
teamosil said:
Well, obviously at this point you're just blurting out random words. If you think you can come up with an actual argument give it a shot. Otherwise, you've clearly had some kind of mental breakdown and probably best to just let sleeping dogs lie I guess...
Click to expand...

Nobody stuck up for John Brown either, but when the Civil War rolled around and people awoke from their civic slumber, suddenly he was a big hero (well to the Northern states, the South hated him).
 
Matt Foley said:
Sheriff Joe is John Brown the Abolitionist, right before the Civil War. His children were killed by US soldiers led by 'Colonel' Robert E Lee, and at his hanging he was guarded by 'Major' Stonewall Jackson. The whole country was against him just like the whole damned country is against Joe.
Click to expand...


As with many of the posts here - this one is filled with nonsense. The "children" killed were adult males, two of them. They died after being shot by local towns people who had surrounded the armory. This happened the day before the Marines led by Colonel (no scare quotes) Robert E Lee. Lee as was Jackson was a graduate of the United States Military Academy at West Point.

For some reason, the "whole country" had provided funding to Brown and other abolitionists for several years in their efforts to stop slavery.



today - I would guess that a majority of Americans could not identify Sheriff Arpaio if asked. The fanatics who idolise the sheriff are not normal, IMO
 
Somerville said:
As with many of the posts here - this one is filled with nonsense. The "children" killed were adult males, two of them. They died after being shot by local towns people who had surrounded the armory. This happened the day before the Marines led by Colonel (no scare quotes) Robert E Lee. Lee as was Jackson was a graduate of the United States Military Academy at West Point.

For some reason, the "whole country" had provided funding to Brown and other abolitionists for several years in their efforts to stop slavery.



today - I would guess that a majority of Americans could not identify Sheriff Arpaio if asked. The fanatics who idolise the sheriff are not normal, IMO
Click to expand...

See, even the lean: socialists are against the working Americans, they are pro-slavery-light too.
 
Matt Foley said:
See, even the lean: socialists are against the working Americans, they are pro-slavery-light too.
Click to expand...


Ever the denial. Statements were posted, I posted refutations which others can check to see if I'm right or not. The reply has nothing to do with what I posted - how strange.
 
winston53660 said:
A few days after the “Toughest Sheriff in America” oversaw his 60th Latino-harassing raid in the Phoenix area, the Obama administration’s top civil-rights lawyer flew to Phoenix and slappedSheriff Joe Arpaio and his office with a monumental civil-rights tort alleging rampant constitutional abuses, including widespread racial profiling of Latinos. The suit also claims the sheriff violated the civil rights of his critics by “illegal retaliation” that included baseless lawsuits and meritless administrative actions.



Arpaio Faces a New Sheriff in Town - Yahoo! News
Click to expand...

Time to flush this racist turd down the toilet. I can't believe someone in that community hasn't taken him out already. He's a bastard tyrant and deserves to die in jail for all his abuses of power.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom