• 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!

Package Sent to Arpaio Could Have Injured, Killed.....

If you are referring to Arpaio's investigation into Obama's birth certificate, it was the taxpayers that asked him to mount the investigation. I would hope they got their money's worth, but whether they did or not, it was their money...their choice. Who am I...or you...to judge them for how they spend their money?

"Hope they got their money's worth?" What exactly would they find that would get them their money's worth out of investigating Obama's birth certificate? Don't be dumb, the whole birther issue is a joke and anything to do with it on the part of the sheriff is a waste of taxpayer dollars. And even if taxpayers asked him to do this, which I seriously doubt they did in any significant number, a pubic official should have the good sense to know what is a waste of time and money. Just because some taxpayers asked for it, again even if they did, doesn't make it legitimate or any less stupid.
 
"Hope they got their money's worth?" What exactly would they find that would get them their money's worth out of investigating Obama's birth certificate? Don't be dumb, the whole birther issue is a joke and anything to do with it on the part of the sheriff is a waste of taxpayer dollars. And even if taxpayers asked him to do this, which I seriously doubt they did in any significant number, a pubic official should have the good sense to know what is a waste of time and money. Just because some taxpayers asked for it, again even if they did, doesn't make it legitimate or any less stupid.

Look...I have no interest in Obama's birth certificate, so all of your blather about it is of no consequence to me. However, the highlighted statement from you spurred me to search for information about it...and guess what I found?

"First of all, about 300 people signed petitions," Arpaio said of the investigation into Obama's birth certificate. "I am the chief law enforcement officer, they asked me to look at that situation. I don't dump everything in the wastebasket. So I have my 'Cold Case Posse' which I've had for five years. It's free; it doesn't cost a penny to the taxpayers. Made up of ex-cops and some lawyers, so let them look at it."
Joe Arpaio, Arizona Sheriff, Accused Of Racism, Defends 'Birther' Posse

It appears your complaints about the whole thing are uninformed and irrelevant. Furthermore, what you find legitimate, illegitimate, stupid or not stupid has no bearing on what at least 300 of his constituents find worthy of their concern.

In any event, do you contend that Arpaio's actions in regard to Obama's birth certificate is justification for someone to attempt to blow him up? If not, then why are you even going on about this whole thing?
 
Last edited:
Been in AZ for almost 25 years. Bet you thinks it amazing he keeps getting relected. Must be doing something right.:lol:
Congress has a 10%+/- approval rating and a 90%+/- re-election rate. The electorate has a poor record in choosing people. I fail to see any significance to your point.
 
I don't condone assassination attempts like this, but I would not have shed a tear had it been successful, either.
 
Look...I have no interest in Obama's birth certificate, so all of your blather about it is of no consequence to me. However, the highlighted statement from you spurred me to search for information about it...and guess what I found?



It appears your complaints about the whole thing are uninformed and irrelevant. Furthermore, what you find legitimate, illegitimate, stupid or not stupid has no bearing on what at least 300 of his constituents find worthy of their concern.

In any event, do you contend that Arpaio's actions in regard to Obama's birth certificate is justification for someone to attempt to blow him up? If not, then why are you even going on about this whole thing?

SO all it takes is 300 people asking him to do something, and like a good little puppet, he does what he's told

Disingenous posts are disingenous
 
In a county the size of his, it's not hard to find 300 sycophants willing to be tools for an egomaniac's posturing.
 
SO all it takes is 300 people asking him to do something, and like a good little puppet, he does what he's told

Disingenous posts are disingenous

Hmmm...

So what limit would YOU place on a request from his citizens? How many of his constituents need to ask something from him in order for him not to be considered a puppet by you?
 
Hmmm...

So what limit would YOU place on a request from his citizens? How many of his constituents need to ask something from him in order for him not to be considered a puppet by you?

One of the limits would be sanity, a quality he obviously lacks
 
One of the limits would be sanity, a quality he obviously lacks

sigh...

Are you having trouble sticking to a point?

Or...is the point you are trying to get across that you just don't like the guy? If so, you could just say so.
 
Look...I have no interest in Obama's birth certificate, so all of your blather about it is of no consequence to me. However, the highlighted statement from you spurred me to search for information about it...and guess what I found?



It appears your complaints about the whole thing are uninformed and irrelevant. Furthermore, what you find legitimate, illegitimate, stupid or not stupid has no bearing on what at least 300 of his constituents find worthy of their concern.

In any event, do you contend that Arpaio's actions in regard to Obama's birth certificate is justification for someone to attempt to blow him up? If not, then why are you even going on about this whole thing?

Do you know how many people are in Maricopa County? About 4 million, 300 people signing a petition for something as asinine and stupid as Obama birth certificate should mean less than nothing. 300 out of 4 million is not a significant number, its .0075% of his constituents. He's not answering the call of his constituents he's looking for media attention which is exactly what he was doing when he faked that assassination attempt on his life.

And no I don't contend that Arpiao's "investigation" of Obama's birth certificate justify someone blowing him up I've never said anything about an attempt to kill him being justified, stop trying to distract from the ridiculous position you're attempting to defend.

Answer me straight, do you think investigating Obama's birth certificate is a good use of the sheriff's time and taxpayer dollars? Do you think that's what good law enforcement is?
 
Answer me straight, do you think investigating Obama's birth certificate is a good use of the sheriff's time and taxpayer dollars? Do you think that's what good law enforcement is?

I already answered your question in post #50.

I guess a better question that YOU can answer is...what does your question have to do with the thread topic?


btw, just because you see fit to keep talking about "taxpayer dollars" when there were no taxpayer dollars involved in this investigation doesn't make that phrase any more relevant.
 
Last edited:
I already answered your question in post #50.

No you refused to answer the question in post 50, because "Who are you to judge them for how they spend their money." That's odd because you've taken opinions on the running of his office already, but for some reason you can't have an opinion on this issue?

For example you have an opinion on how many constituents should sign a petition before the sheriff addresses it, which is apparently 300. You also have an opinion that a county sheriff should investigate something entirely out of his jurisdiction and completely beyond his ability to solve and is brainless conspiracy theory, simply because 300 people signed a petition, instead of for example just ignoring the petition and its request for being stupid. You took an opinion there.

If you can have an opinion on whether or not a sheriff should answer a petition of 300 names out of 4 million to investigate a stupid conspiracy theory, why no on whether or not its a good idea to investigate it, whether its worth tax payer dollars? Its really almost the exact same question anyway so I expect your honest opinion is that he should be investigating the birth certificate, that you think its a good use of public money, but the ridiculousness of that position is keeping you from saying it. I mean what difference is there in "Should you do something" and "is it a good idea to do something," its really the same question, I mean how could you say you should do something but its not a good idea to do it?

So since you've already said he should have investigated it because 300 people signed a petition, is there anyway you could say "but its not a good idea to"
 
No you refused to answer the question in post 50, because "Who are you to judge them for how they spend their money." That's odd because you've taken opinions on the running of his office already, but for some reason you can't have an opinion on this issue?

For example you have an opinion on how many constituents should sign a petition before the sheriff addresses it, which is apparently 300. You also have an opinion that a county sheriff should investigate something entirely out of his jurisdiction and completely beyond his ability to solve and is brainless conspiracy theory, simply because 300 people signed a petition, instead of for example just ignoring the petition and its request for being stupid. You took an opinion there.

If you can have an opinion on whether or not a sheriff should answer a petition of 300 names out of 4 million to investigate a stupid conspiracy theory, why no on whether or not its a good idea to investigate it, whether its worth tax payer dollars? Its really almost the exact same question anyway so I expect your honest opinion is that he should be investigating the birth certificate, that you think its a good use of public money, but the ridiculousness of that position is keeping you from saying it. I mean what difference is there in "Should you do something" and "is it a good idea to do something," its really the same question, I mean how could you say you should do something but its not a good idea to do it?

So since you've already said he should have investigated it because 300 people signed a petition, is there anyway you could say "but its not a good idea to"

I have to wonder at your comprehension skills.

I haven't stated any of the opinions that you have assigned to me. Not one.

1. I have never stated that a Sheriff should follow the wishes of 300 constituents.
2. I have never stated that a Sheriff should investigate anything, whether it is in or out of his jurisdiction.

What I have stated is:

1. Arpaio said he started the investigation in response to about 300 people of his county signing a petition.
2. I have no interest in the Obama birth certificate controversy.
3. I don't think it is my place...or your place...to judge that which concerns the citizens of that county.

btw, I notice that you have avoided MY question to you. Why is that?
 
I have to wonder at your comprehension skills.

I haven't stated any of the opinions that you have assigned to me. Not one.

1. I have never stated that a Sheriff should follow the wishes of 300 constituents.
2. I have never stated that a Sheriff should investigate anything, whether it is in or out of his jurisdiction.

What I have stated is:

1. Arpaio said he started the investigation in response to about 300 people of his county signing a petition.
2. I have no interest in the Obama birth certificate controversy.
3. I don't think it is my place...or your place...to judge that which concerns the citizens of that county.

btw, I notice that you have avoided MY question to you. Why is that?

What question? I clearly said that nothing justifies murdering someone.

Anyway if you don't really have an opinion on anything, why are you making such a fuss? What do you have an opinion on?
 
What question? I clearly said that nothing justifies murdering someone.

Anyway if you don't really have an opinion on anything, why are you making such a fuss? What do you have an opinion on?

In post #62, I posed this question:

I guess a better question that YOU can answer is...what does your question have to do with the thread topic?

Anyway, I'm not making a fuss about anything...you are. I simply answered the question that you posed to Kal'Stang in post #49.
 
In post #62, I posed this question:

Anyway, I'm not making a fuss about anything...you are. I simply answered the question that you posed to Kal'Stang in post #49.

Alright if you don't want to have an opinion that's fine its your choice, luckily most other people can find the confidence to take a stance against taxpayer investigations of silly conspiracy theory, even in a jurisdiction they aren't part of, but if you feel that would be going out a limb for you or violating some principle you have I understand
 
I don't condone assassination attempts like this, but I would not have shed a tear had it been successful, either.

I would have. For humanity at least.
 
Alright if you don't want to have an opinion that's fine its your choice, luckily most other people can find the confidence to take a stance against taxpayer investigations of silly conspiracy theory, even in a jurisdiction they aren't part of, but if you feel that would be going out a limb for you or violating some principle you have I understand

LOL!!!

You are funny. But you are not funny enough for me to be bothered by your post.

So...are you going to answer my question...or not?
 
LOL!!!

You are funny. But you are not funny enough for me to be bothered by your post.

So...are you going to answer my question...or not?

What question? This is the second time I've asked you what question and now the third time I've asked nothing would justify murdering the sheriff.
 
No, seriously, this mother****er would have been executed at the Nuremburg trials
Really?

You equate his actions with war crimes?

Sanity check please...
 
What question? This is the second time I've asked you what question and now the third time I've asked nothing would justify murdering the sheriff.

Good lord!!

Dude, I've posted the question to you twice and I've referenced the original post in which I posed the question to you. Do you mean to tell me you haven't seen it?

btw, my question has nothing to do with justifying the murder of any Sheriff. Now, I did ask you about that and you answered it. No, the question I'm talking about has not been answered by you yet.


You know what? Forget about the question, okay? I don't even care if you answer it or not. In fact, I don't care about anything you've posted in this thread since it's all been off-topic anyway.

So long and have a good day.
 
No one knows anything, it's all speculation at this point. However, that scenario can not be ruled out.
Inside job?

Found by a USPS employee as in being sent through the USPS...

inside job is a stretch.
 
Yes, I am making that comparison. You should dig into the man's history a bit rather than making a kneejerk defense of him.

Joe Arpaio took an oath to enforce the laws of the state of Arizona and also to defend and uphold the U.S. Constitution which means also enforcing the federal laws that the current Executive branch of the Federal Government refuses to do.

You Deuce should be directing your hatred at President Obama, Attorney General Eric Holder and Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano. These three individuals have openly refused to uphold and defend our Constitution and enforce our nation's laws.
.
Sheriff Joe Arpiao must be doing more than upholding the oath he took since he is only the chief law enforcement officer of Maricopa County, Arizona he is still has a national approval rating higher than any other law enforcement officer in history.

Arpaio enforces the law. He is not a reactive law enforcement officer but a proactive law enforcement officer. He doesn't have his deputies sitting in their patrol cars only responding to crimes after they have already happened, his deputies are not liberal / progressive law enforcement officers but proactive, what use to be known as "peace officers", preventing crimes before the happens.

Take a look at the city of Phonix that has a progressive Chief of Police, high crime. Look at the unincorporated areas of Phoenix and Maricopa County where the Arpaio's Sheriff's Department is responsible for. Except for the illegal alien communities, the citizens feel safe, lower crime rates than in Phoenix city limits.

The Mexican drug cartels have put an award out for the assassination of Joe Arpaio and criminal illegal aliens waiting for the Democrat's amnesty also have put out a contrat of Sheriff Joe. The open borders pro illegal alien community have been attacking America's toughest County Sheriff for over a decade and Joe Arpaio is on Obama's hit list.

The only people and other rodents who despise Joe Arpaio are illegal aliens, the Mexican drug cartels, criminals, rapist, pedophiles, thieves, drunkards, drug dealers, President Obama and socialist.

>" You probably know him as “America’s Toughest Sheriff,” a name given to him years ago by the media. It’s a name he certainly has earned as head of the nation’s third largest Sheriff’s Office which employs over 3400 people. But even before he became Sheriff in 1993, Joe Arpaio was one tough lawman. After serving in the U.S. Army from 1950 to 1953, and as a Washington, D.C., and Las Vegas, NV, police officer for almost five years, Arpaio went on to build a federal law enforcement career and a reputation for fighting crime and drug trafficking around the world.

He began his career as a federal narcotics agent, establishing a stellar record in infiltrating drug organizations from Turkey to the Middle East to Mexico, Central, and South America to cities around the U.S. His expertise and success led him to top management positions around the world with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). He concluded his remarkable federal career as head of the DEA for Arizona.

In 1992, Arpaio successfully campaigned to become the Sheriff of Maricopa County. Since then he has been reelected to an unprecedented five 4-year terms. During his tenure as Sheriff of Maricopa County, Arpaio has consistently earned high public approval ratings.

With over five decades experience in law enforcement, Arpaio knows what the public wants, “The public is my boss,” he says, “so I serve the public.” He has served them well..."< About:Sheriff Joseph M. Arpaio
 
Back
Top Bottom