• 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!

Court denies request for expedited hearing on Arizona immigration law

I've no desire to "help" Mexico.

If Mexico doesn't have anything to sell I want to buy, they can starve.

So long as they starve at home.

That's the problem -- they won't, so we can't just close one eye and look the other way until they sneak across, and then act all indignant.

Their problem is their corrupt government.

Their answer to their problem is to run away and corrupt my government.

They haven't corrupted our government. You can thank the money in the politics for that.
 
They're still invaders, and people who support the invasion are supporting their exploitation by criminal elements in this country, they're supporting the corruption of the American political process as left-wing politicians pander to these invaders and take money from the criminal employers, and they're contributing to the job loss of millions of Americans.

But they feel really really good about themselve because they just know that their feelings are the only guide anyone should have to their actions. Logic, reason, and loyalty to the nation of their birth, and thereby their fellow citizens, doesn't mean **** to them. So long as they feel good it's okay.

Wow, you threw around so many wild accusations that had absolutely NOTHING to do with what I said that I think you made me dizzy. :lol:
 
Any judge faced with this argument would go, "Oh, really? So what have you been doing about this "emergency" for the last few decades? Why did you only just now pass this law? Yeah, sorry, your inability to do your job is not an argument for rushing me when I go to do mine. See your lazy ass in a few months, next case."


Robert Krentz was murdered in March.

It's an emergency.
 
That's the problem -- they won't, so we can't just close one eye and look the other way until they sneak across, and then act all indignant.

No.

We put lethal ordnance on the border, under the control of the United States Army, not the weekend warriors (aka National Guard) or the cops. Rocks are deadly weapons, enemies assualting citizens with rocks should be fired upon.

We keep our eyes open and fine and imprison employers of invaders.

You can pretend you haven't read my posts, that's not my problem.

What happens in Mexico isn't my problem so long as what happens in Mexico STAYS in Mexico.

It's that simple. The borders closed, the enemies within adressed and jailed and deported as appropriate.

Life isn't complicated unless someone it lying.

They haven't corrupted our government. You can thank the money in the politics for that.

Yes, I don't waste a whole lot of time arguing semantics. I'll let you figure it out.
 
I realize that under the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo, the United States is permitted to fortify the southern border with Mexico as it sees fit without being required to gather the consent of any other nation. As a sovereign nation, the United States of course already had this freedom, but Mexico specifically agreed to that provision of the treaty. Thus, the United States can, and should, use wide-area dispersal from aircraft to place anti-personnel landmines along the southern border to deter invasion from the hostile nation state to the south.

There's nothing the United States is required to do to help Mexico improve it's economy.

The government of the United States is obligated, morally and legally, to defend the people of the United States and the nations borders.

That's the first priority of the United States government.

Hmm...that's the only priority of the United States government.

Rescuing Mexico or mexicans does not seem to be in the Constitution at all.

Protecting Americans.

That's the ticket.

Can't much argue with you. If a man only cares about himself, there is no point explaining to him why he should care about others.
 
How is Arizona checking to see if you are here legally and have any warrants out for your arrest after you have been pulled over for some traffic offense a violation of your rights?
See the Fourth Amendment.
 
No.

We put lethal ordnance on the border, under the control of the United States Army, not the weekend warriors (aka National Guard) or the cops. Rocks are deadly weapons, enemies assualting citizens with rocks should be fired upon.

We keep our eyes open and fine and imprison employers of invaders.

You can pretend you haven't read my posts, that's not my problem.

What happens in Mexico isn't my problem so long as what happens in Mexico STAYS in Mexico.

It's that simple. The borders closed, the enemies within adressed and jailed and deported as appropriate.

Life isn't complicated unless someone it lying.

Why on Earth do you want the military involved in a law enforcement matter?
 
See the Fourth Amendment.

So when the police pull you over for some traffic violation it is a violation of the 4th if they check to see if you have any warrants, here legally or if you have insurance and vehicle registration?
 
what does it matter, the law will be declared unconstitutional.

Hey, if the 9th curcuit rules against this law, I have a great feeling about this law's chances in the Supreme Court given the record of the 9th circuit. Totally not surprised the 9th circuit court of appeals is delaying this ... they will hold this on as long as possible...
 
Can't much argue with you. If a man only cares about himself, there is no point explaining to him why he should care about others.

But I do care about others.

I don't care about Mexico.

Their country, their problem.

My oath of enlistment didn't include protecting Mexico, only the United States and the Constituiton.

Since Mexico and it's agent invaders in the United States are an enemy, my only concern about them is excising the tumor in the least harmful, to the US, way possible.
 
Blah blah blah. Save it for the dogwhistle crowd. I see it for what it is, just another reason to hassle brown people. Being white, I hear the underlying message, just like the bigots. I simply reject it because it's morally bankrupt. I couldn't care less who does or doesn't agree with me.

What, it is morally bankrupt to control the borders and get people who are not legally in the country out of the country?!?!?
 
Why on Earth do you want the military involved in a law enforcement matter?

Protection of the United States is a Constitutional, national defense matter, not a police matter.

You can find the Constitution on line if you haven seen it in a decade or two.
 
And bigots regularly try to use stealth-speak to hide their bigotry. It seems to really rag them off when "one of their own race" cuts thru it and calls it what it is. Bigotry, couched in less obvious terms, but bigotry just the same.

What is bigoted about a law that targets ANYONE who may be in the country illegally?
 
If I am a bigot because I want to enforce the laws of the United States of America, then I gladly claim the title. This law has nothing to do with bigotry and everything to do with law enforcement.

So you are just a stickler for the Feds enforcing their laws.... So I should have no problem finding posts expressing your outrage about lax enforcement of mining safety that contributed to two substantial mining disasters in West Virginia this decade, or your condemnation of the MMS for rubber stamping the environmental impact / safety considerations of deepwater drilling in the gulf. Perhaps you went on a rant about the poor enforcement of the I-9 laws that work to provide safe haven for employers of illegals. Certainly you are outraged that the Bush administration cut back on the number of IRS auditors.....

Somehow I think this is much less about outrage about government enforcing its laws and much more about the alien nature of the illegal....unless of course you have some links to your other expressions of contempt for lax government administration of its laws.
 
That's not the judge's problem. That's the state's problem for not doing this for the last 30 years so that the challenges could be out of the way by now.




Hello?

Read your own posts much?

YOU WROTE:

So what have you been doing about this "emergency" for the last few decades? Why did you only just now pass this law?

The reason the law was only "just now" (to use your EXACT words) was the murder of Robert Krentz.

That makes the issue a new emergency.

People are being murdered.

How about if you address that in your spiels about how wonderful the invaders are?
 
sb1070 is unfair because only hispanics will be affected by it. The law will not be applied to african-americans or caucasians equally.

So, the only illegal immigrants in Arizona are Hispanics? Do you really believe that??? Apparently, there are quite a lot of Asian illegals there as well, and what is to say that there may not be some non-Hispanic white illegals from places like Russia or Ukraine there as well... Once again, the left playing the race card.
 
How do I know it will be applied only to hispanics? Common Sense. I dont dispute that many illegals in Arizona come from mexico, but that has nothing to do with me. Most serial killers in the USA are white. How about the next time there is a serial killer in Arizona, we make every white person give a DNA sample. Not the same thing?
Of course not, because its not happening to you. There are all kinds of legal stops. Technically I could get pulled over for going 4 miles over the speed limit. The white guy will get a ticket, I will get a ticket AND have to have my immigration status verified.

Why not deal with this through Congress. A well crafted immigration bill can be as effective as a 50 foot fence. However, when an immigration bill is introduced in congress, the republicans always say no.

Not if you have a valid AZ driver's license...
 
I fully understand this emotionally charged issue, and WHY it is so emotionally charged. I lived in Arizona for several years. I saw the issues..Hell, I live in Pennsylvania, and I see illegals working here as well. I will say, however, not a single one of them is working a job that anyone but my 15 year old son would consider doing. That being said, I have to say something else. My husband and I both served in the Air Force for several years. During that time, I served with many americans of Hispanic descent. One of them, in particular, lives in Arizona now. He is not first generation..he is not even second generation. He is a third generation American Hispanic who has served his country, and now lives in Arizona. Now...Say this friend of mine is walking down the street, and is asked to show his documentaion? Were I him, and this were to happen, I would be absolutely and utterly offended and upset about it just on principle. Now, lets go further, and say he is out without his wallet. Now, they are going to haul him into the police station and make him sit around for several hours while thye dig him out of the database. Not only is it an incredible waste of the officers' time. It is an incredible waste of HIS time, and while I am not a fan of litigiousness, it is also a case for a sweet little lawsuit.

How about, instead of knee jerk legislation, we sit down and do something that will actually work, and not put undue burden on our police, undue burden on the many legal hispanics in this country, and even more undue burden on our taxpayers?
Because deny it as many try to, this IS a kneejerk piece of legislation. Its a "we're not gonna take it anymore" type of law, that will, in the long run (and even the short run apparently) be way more complex, confusing, and troublesome than not having the law in the first place. I am a firm believer that instead of arguing incessantly, people should make a decision and give it a go to see what happens. But there also needs to be SOME real thought made on it beforehand. And I don't see that thought put into this law.

According to this law, this simply is not allowed... READ a little... or are you only reading Dem talking points?
 
What, it is morally bankrupt to control the borders and get people who are not legally in the country out of the country?!?!?

Exactly how do you purport to do that latter? There are an estimated 15 million people that are not here legally. How do you propose to deal with that? Once again, the Conservs have such a simplistic / unrealistic handle on the problems affecting this country. I am not sure what is worse: when the party just says no without offering alternatives or when the party actually opens its mouth and you realize how ridiculous their alternatives actually are.
 
See the Fourth Amendment.

Okay.

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Since it's not unreasonable to ask the operator of a motor vehicle for his license (he's required by law to have on in his possession while operating a motor vehicle), his insurance (he's required by law to have proof of that in the vehicle), his failure to provide either is reasonable grounds to investigate him further.

You probably shouldn't be asking Americans to look at their Constitution if you wish to win arguments with them.
 
That's weird.

My wife is not a US citizen. She's French. If she went through Arizona, she'd affected by this law to.

What kind of racist is it that says only hispanics will be affected?

Is she legal? Then she wouldn't be affected. My wife is Asian and when we are in the States together, she is there legally. All NON-CITIZENS in the U.S. (as in many other countries, including the one I live in) are REQUIRED to keep their documents on their person at all times (though I am sure there can be reasonable exceptions). So, if you are a legal alien, you have nothing to worry about if you are following the law and are keeping your papers on your person as you are legally required to do under FEDERAL law.
 
Wow.

The old out-of-state license gag.

Too bad not every state has their licenses computerized and accessible by every law enforcement agency in the country.

Oh.

Wait.

Every state does have it's license data-base on line.

The cop in Syracuse didn't have a problem with my California license. Not at all.
Amazing thing, these computers.

And if a state doesn't require proof-of-citizenship prior to issuing a license, well, that would be known to Arizona, and I'm sure some process has been worked out for people from those foolish states.

Same for me several years ago when I was stopped for speeding in Virginia. They had no problem finding my GA records on computers nor did they have any problems confirming my then-fiancee's car registration (also in GA).
 
So, the only illegal immigrants in Arizona are Hispanics? Do you really believe that??? Apparently, there are quite a lot of Asian illegals there as well, and what is to say that there may not be some non-Hispanic white illegals from places like Russia or Ukraine there as well... Once again, the left playing the race card.

Man, I'm NOT against all aspects of sb1070, but that's just silly. This is not "the left playing the race card", that race card got dealt on the damned flop. Yes, there are Asian and even white illegals as well, but to suggest that this bill was not created because of and is not aimed towards Hispanic illegals is just ridiculous. For Pete's sake, not even the bill's proponents are trying to hide behind the mythical non-hispanic illegals.
 
Back
Top Bottom