Dang...no love for me in persuading you to change your mind? :lol: :cry:

 

I struggled on whether or not to include you RM. I knew you would respond quicker if I left you out.

 

RTS seems to be as conservative as they come. I love the way Clyde makes us think. Formerkywrestler struck a nerve. I've already told you that I loved you, so I assumed you knew.:thumb:

 

For the record, I didn't really change my mind, I just understand the oppositions concerns better now. IMO your concerns are warranted but I'm not sure there is a definitive right or wrong on this one.

I struggled on whether or not to include you RM. I knew you would respond quicker if I left you out.

 

RTS seems to be as conservative as they come. I love the way Clyde makes us think. Formerkywrestler struck a nerve. I've already told you that I loved you, so I assumed you knew.:thumb:

 

For the record, I didn't really change my mind, I just understand the oppositions concerns better now. IMO your concerns are warranted but I'm not sure there is a definitive right or wrong on this one.

 

Pardon the pun, but....at least you aren't being pig-headed, and are open to considering what we're concerned about.

I struggled on whether or not to include you RM. I knew you would respond quicker if I left you out.

 

RTS seems to be as conservative as they come. I love the way Clyde makes us think. Formerkywrestler struck a nerve. I've already told you that I loved you, so I assumed you knew.:thumb:

 

For the record, I didn't really change my mind, I just understand the oppositions concerns better now. IMO your concerns are warranted but I'm not sure there is a definitive right or wrong on this one.

My specialty.

 

In all seriousness...I have to take my hat off on you for being quite open-minded.

"THEY CAME FIRST for the Communists,

and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

 

THEN THEY CAME for the Jews,

and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

 

THEN THEY CAME for the trade unionists,

and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

 

THEN THEY CAME for me

and by that time no one was left to speak up."

 

While I by no means am equating the Arizona law with Germany in the late 1930s, this did pop into my head nonetheless.

"THEY CAME FIRST for the Communists,

and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

 

THEN THEY CAME for the Jews,

and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

 

THEN THEY CAME for the trade unionists,

and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

 

THEN THEY CAME for me

and by that time no one was left to speak up."

 

While I by no means am equating the Arizona law with Germany in the late 1930s, this did pop into my head nonetheless.

 

 

Not sure why as it has nothing to do with the situation.

Not sure why as it has nothing to do with the situation.

I can see his line of thinking.

I'm shocked, I actually agree with President Obama here....Not sure what good this law does. :idunno:

Hold on to your hats folks! I’m a conservative that might just be having a change of heart. Don’t get excited, I’m not going to admit to being a hypocrite, nor am I going to say the law is a direct infringement on the civil rights of Hispanics.

 

After going back over the thread, I paid close attention to posts by Clyde, RTS, ladiesballcoach and formerkywrestler. I also revisited the wording of the law. I even talked to my Minister, (Baptist if anyone is curious) who is the most conservative person I know for help.

 

Even though the law states that [“ANY PERSON WHO IS ARRESTED SHALL HAVE THE PERSON’S IMMIGRATION STATUS DETERMINED BEFORE THE PERSON IS RELEASED.”] And that [“A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE MAY NOT SOLELY 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.”] I can see where legal citizens arrested for a much lesser charge could possibly be wrongfully held for hours or days while their legal status is being verified because of the law.

 

The very nature of the situation in Arizona (no matter what kind of law they try to come up with) makes almost anything they do look discriminatory. Let’s face it, the problem is illegal immigrants and an overwhelming majority of them are Hispanic and Arizona needs to do something about it. How in the world can they solve the problem without targeting them?

 

Clyde just may be right…Why do they need another law? Why do they need another law that could IMO adversely affect legal citizens? I’m sure there are plenty of laws (state & federal) in place that would help the problem if enforced. After all, I am a conservative, and we conservatives do hate laws passed on a whim. I’m not 100% sure yet, but this just might be one of those “whim” laws. As far as this conservative sees it, I see it as TOUCHY at the very least.

So you think continue doing nothing is the answer? Sorry, that doesn't cut it. The fact that the Feds won't do anything is exactly why this law was passed.

Ask yourself why Obama is making such an issue of Arizona passing a law thats really the same law as the as the Federal law. The answer is politics. Voters, plain and simple. That's not leading, that's doing the same thing thats been done. Nothing.

I'm shocked, I actually agree with President Obama here....Not sure what good this law does. :idunno:

 

#1 I think it pushes the Federal Government to possibly actually do something. I could see Arizona having a huge problem with something like 8% of the population being illegal aliens and seeing the federal government twiddle their thumbs on the issue by simply arguing with each other about what to do from DC.

 

All the while the Arizona personnel on the front lines dealing with it feeling like they are getting ZERO support or help from the federal government.

 

I could see Arizona saying, already then, we will try and handle it ourselves as a state in a manner we could.

I have never watched Keith Olberman much but I believe he does a Worse Person in the World segment.

 

I guess presently, it has to be an Arizona police officer.

 

Even Obama speaking out of having any faith in an Arizona police officer. He said a Hispanic parent won't be able to take their family out for ice cream without being harassed.

 

Isn't it nice if you are an Arizona police officer to be called out by the President that you are going to harass people and no confidence in your ability to do your job in an appropriate manner.

 

Welcome to the education field where all the problems in education according to politicians all of us horrible teachers who are just there because tenure protects us. It is all our fault, we don't care about the kids and don't want to change anything.

I have never watched Keith Olberman much but I believe he does a Worse Person in the World segment.

 

I guess presently, it has to be an Arizona police officer.

 

Even Obama speaking out of having any faith in an Arizona police officer. He said a Hispanic parent won't be able to take their family out for ice cream without being harassed.

 

Isn't it nice if you are an Arizona police officer to be called out by the President that you are going to harass people and no confidence in your ability to do your job in an appropriate manner.

 

Welcome to the education field where all the problems in education according to politicians all of us horrible teachers who are just there because tenure protects us. It is all our fault, we don't care about the kids and don't want to change anything.

 

I was with you until the last paragraph. You really don't need to keep playing the poor teacher card. Do you?

I was with you until the last paragraph. You really don't need to keep playing the poor teacher card. Do you?

 

Every time that education is discussed it is the lack of ability and commitment from teachers that is the fault. The message is that we care more about keeping our jobs than helping kids. THat is why we take tens of thousands of dollars in pay cuts to be a teacher and not work in the business/research world.

 

The Arizona police officers have joined us in the mindset of society that they are incapable of doing their job correctly and have even been called out by the President in that regard.

 

Explaining my post but let's drop it there and not threadjack the rest of this good discussion on Arizona.

I have never watched Keith Olberman much but I believe he does a Worse Person in the World segment.

 

I guess presently, it has to be an Arizona police officer.

 

...

 

I would hope that the person in this video is lead on Keiths list...

 

 

"We will not stop! We will take up our shovels and pickaxes that we break your land and do your landscaping and clean your toilets and our plungers and we...we will use them against you! Believe that!"

Can we get rid of the following arguments so that we can have an actual debate?

 

1. We have to show ID to fly.

2. We have to show ID when we get pulled over.

3. We have a problem with illegal immigration.

4. The Feds aren't doing anything.

 

 

I think I speak for many who are concerned about this new law when I say that if a person breaks the law and then is found to be illegal they need to go. The only good that can come of this is it forcing Congress to address the issue.

 

You can't use the "we have an illegal immigration" argument to support the law. Its the classic "the end justifies the means" flawed argument.

 

You can't say "we have to show an ID to fly" because that's a safety issue AND its a choice we make. Walking down the street isn't the same.

 

The real debate should center around WHAT actions should be required for a Latino to be allowed to be questioned.

I heard an constitutional scholar say that the issue of the state not being allowed to have their own immigration rule is NOT as clear cut as some have indicated. However, he says the "reasonable suspicion" aspect of the wording is going to get the bill killed.