“Soft despotism is a term coined by Alexis de Tocqueville describing the state into which a country overrun by "a network of small complicated rules" might degrade. Soft despotism is different from despotism (also called 'hard despotism') in the sense that it is not obvious to the people."
Friday, May 21, 2010
How Many Americans Can be Anti-American?
If this does not make your blood boil, then we have a tribal problem.
I think the RNC should make a video identifying every Democratic congressman rising to his feet and cheering Calderon's insult to the US. It should come in handy come November. There has to be a significant American majority that has had enough of this indignity and outrage.
Posted by Deuce ☂ at 5/21/2010 04:13:00 PM
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
You can understand why an American with Hispanic heritage might feel they'd be treated differently in Arizona, no?ReplyDelete
Ahh, so what you are saying is AZ should shitcan the law because it is offensive to a few Mexican Americans?ReplyDelete
This law will do precisely what it is intended to do. AZ should be cheering. I hope the othe border states follow suit.
The government of Mexico issued a travel warning for Mexican nationals visiting AZ? That's laughable.
Ash, not ahhReplyDelete
No. Not if they are 1) Legal, and 2) Law-abiding.ReplyDelete
I can figure no way that the drug cartels can operate the way they do without the help of Calderone, and the rest of the Government. It just doesn't make sense, otherwise. The Government has an Army, for God's sake.ReplyDelete
Guarantee that the Hispanics will be singled out, to be stopped for minor infractions, in the first place, ash.ReplyDelete
It is one of the Maricopa County Sheriff Departments tactical trademarks.
Now they do not ever stop me, but then again I do not fit the profile of a possible illegal alien.
The Americans I know that are of Mexican heritage, they provide a lot of anecdotal stories. Similar, they say, to "Driving While Black" in other parts of the country.
Whether or not SB1070 will be an effective deterrent to illegal migration remains to be seen, that it has already failed to promote tourism, which is a major economic driver in our State, a fact of the matter.
Other than providing 'new' campaign rhetoric for Senator McCain, there is little practicality to SB1070.
That it allows citizens to bring suit against law enforcement, for not enforcing SB1070 to a citizens' satisfaction, a recipe for clogging the Courts.
As to "anti-American", how many Americans voted for Mr Obama, in '08?
52% of the voters.
How anti-American were they?
Besides the drug business, there is a tremendous amount of cash being sent back to Mexico from the states in the form of money orders from the illegals who are getting paid cash and sending it home, tax free. It's more than you would think.ReplyDelete
You cannot get to tellers at the banks on Friday here in Texas because of this.
This comment has been removed by the author.ReplyDelete
The Army of Mexico, rufus, is deployed against the Cartels.ReplyDelete
They are losing.
Their best US trained operatives, deserted and formed Los Zetas.
Calderon and the rest of the establishment is in a whirled of hurt, down there.
In most of the out areas they do not control the ground that they are not standing upon.
It is just a matter of time before their military is as corrupted as their local police.
Silver or lead.
Most choose silver.
the problem is, Gag and Rufus, not all Americans are treated equally. A white guy like rat need not worry about being thrown in jail for not carrying papers demonstrating his legal status in America but a Hispanic American seems prone to that risk.ReplyDelete
Here, gag, the legal residents also are making huge remittances to Mexico.ReplyDelete
The number of young adults, brought here as babes in arms or when very young, raised and educated here, is staggering, too.
Our entire society is intertwined, with some of the undocumented being here for decades, now.
Everybody keeps saying, "Papers."ReplyDelete
The law states, "show a drivers license, or any other state/federal ID, and the cops can't go any further."
And, the cops can't ask for that unless you're "under suspicion" of committing a crime.
That's pretty benign, buckaroos.
No where on earth are all treated equally. Not even in your Edenistic Canada, Ash.ReplyDelete
Profiling is an effective way to police. It always has been. It is taught in the training schools and will continue to be.
I will bet that this is nothing different or new for the police in AZ. They are probably sorry it finally went public in the form of a law.
Arizona needs to pass a marijuana law just like California's.ReplyDelete
If every state passed such a law 90% of those assholes would be out of business, tomorrow.
You can't "give pot away" in California, now.
SB1070 is a piece of political theater that had unforeseen consequences.ReplyDelete
No one here, at least in the Legislature, thought it be above the fold, nationally.
That ICE guy gave the game away, anyhow. What few Az does pick up on this law the Feds aren't going to deport, anyway.ReplyDelete
It's all "electioneering."
Do I hear an "echo?"ReplyDelete
I wish the Elephant Bar were shut down now. All its become is a site where morons like Ruf and Dr spout off. Its disgusting. Shut the fucker down.ReplyDelete
The jail at Rykers doesn't even bother calling ICE, anymore. ICE won't come pick the illegals up. Rikers just turns'em loose.ReplyDelete
We keep drawing you back, boobie.ReplyDelete
"The Equal Protection Clause, part of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, provides that "no state shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws"."
Shut it down, rattie, it ain't worth it. Its all name calling, and bs.ReplyDelete
It is not mine, to shut, boobie.ReplyDelete
I'll keep you entertained, as long as you decide to stay or whit and Deuce keep it up.
I mean, really, I've never been banned, as you have.
So which of us has been the source of rancor and obscenity?
BS and name calling, none other but yourself, boobie.
Certainly not me.
I.C.E. Director Merton says I.C.E. won't be deporting immigrants caught under the Arizona law.ReplyDelete
Sen. Sessions says, "What the F...? If one of our chief law inforcement officers refuses to enforce the law, maybe he should get another job."
I couldn't find a video of either guys comments yet.
Interesting Standard that the Federals maintain, aye?ReplyDelete
Immigration is a Federal concern, that they do not pursue it, but look to extend their authority in other venues, a cause for real concern.
A concern that I have been expressing, for years. Both here and at the BC. That the problem has been compounded, by years of Federal inaction, undeniable.
That we, as a society and government, allowed this situation to manifest itself, also undeniable.
We need to regularize the undocumented, not put them on a "Path to Citizenship".
That citizenship is even mentioned, as part of the "package", an indicator that it is a fight that is being looked for, by both sides of the debate, not a real solution to the problems met by the people on the ground.
Ummm, Ash (I can see you biting your bottom lip, kinda Clintonesque)ReplyDelete
What's your point? The illegals roaming the streets of AZ are being protected by the general laws of the land and by the police hired to protect and serve, whose salaries are covered by taxpayers. So guess what the illegals are getting protected free since they don't pay taxes. Bite on that.
Two things I just can't get around are the legal and the fairness issues associated with the immigration debate.ReplyDelete
If they are breaking the law they should be arrested and jailed or deported. No moral relativism. No squeemishness.
If the Feds or Al Raza or the neo-liberals don't like it then demand that the law be changed. I might not like what a new immigration law would look like but I would be willing to live with it. If you don't have the balls to change the current law, dont bother me.
That's what we ave elections for. That Lou Dobbs video Sam put up showing proposed terms of an immigration law made me want to puke. However, if it's the law, it's the law.
With regard to the fairness issue, I don't see how you can just ignore the people that are in this country legally trying to get US citizenship. Or for that matter those who have applied to get into this country legally.
As far as I'm concerned, any path to citizenship for the current illegals has to start with passage of the new law and state that as of the effective date of the new law they get in line behind those currently here legally and also those on a list to come here as of the same date.
But they do pay taxes, gag.ReplyDelete
We can use the Farmers Market as an example. The Market employs 1,500 people in all their stores.
A Federal audit found that 300 of them were in the country illegally.
All of the 300 had been E-Verified.
All were having FICA and Income taxes withheld, then paid into the Federal treasury. Obviously they will not be filing a 1040 return or claiming those FICA benefits, as things stand now.
Those collected taxes, one of the primary drivers for the Federal position being what it is, I do believe.
gag, this particular concern is not with the rights of the illegals but rather the rights of legal Americans - in particular those of Hispanic origin.ReplyDelete
Mr McCain demanded the Law be changed, Mr Bush also.ReplyDelete
Mr Obama, as well.
Yet the status que remains constant. Steady as she goes.
The Gray Market Economy flourishes and the sub-caste of residents still reside here.
Given the numbers provided by various sources, the migration rate has dropped some 20 to 25%, what with the recession.
That would be some 3,000 crossing per day now, down from the peak of 4,000 a couple of years ago.
A million a year, give or take.
I agree, the Law should be changed, because the Federals they are enforcing the current version, now, as they always have.
That is the Federal Standard, referencing the current situation. It is untenable.
Regularize those living here, now. Document them, 'legalize' them, but that does not have to include a path to citizenship, nor does it have to be 'free'.
At the same time changing the permitted immigration numbers to reflect the reality of all those coming here. The market certainly indicates there is a demand, based upon the size of the supply.
It may not need be a million per year, but it should be more reflective of the markets' demand.
There is a middle ground that could solve the challenges of the status que, just that none of the Federals want to go there.
Ash, what about those Legal residents, Hispanic, and non-Hispanic who are seeing their "earning power" demolished by "illegals" working for slave wages?ReplyDelete
If that Governor really, really, really wanted any more than some political talking points she could go down there, jump on a D10 Cat, and start leveling land (donated) for the beginning of a fence (bought, and paid for by Arizona, and Volunteer labor.)ReplyDelete
To "Round 'em up" and deport 'em, Quirk, would also require a "new" law, from what I've read of the current Federal statutes and their interpretations.ReplyDelete
That type of proposal would be no more successful, in the Congress, than Comprehensive Reform was.
Hard to find a middle ground while the staus que worsens, with an ever increasing sense of spreading anarchy and cultural alienation.
Ash, I challenge you to show me where the Arizona law is different from the existing federal law other than it will be enforced whereas the federal law is not being enforced.ReplyDelete
Arizona took the federal regulations pretty much word for word and then merely called violations of that law a misdemeanor at the state level.
It's not a matter of the "rights of legal Americans", it's a matter of actually enforcing existing laws. The fact that a lot of people are happy not to have the laws enforced and now have a stick up their ass because there is the possibility they will be enforced doesn't bother me a whole lot.
"To "Round 'em up" and deport 'em, Quirk, would also require a "new" law, from what I've read of the current Federal statutes and their interpretations."ReplyDelete
You could be right rat. That was more or less my gut reaction to illegals. Not because they are Mexican but because they are illegal.
But that's the point, Quirk.ReplyDelete
The illegals, for the most part, will not be arrested.
All of those 300 illegals employed at the Ranch Markets had documents. They all E-Verified.
They all would have passed the officers examination, with the documentation they possessed to get the job.
The legislation has no real value, except for it being a "feel good" moment for Mr Pearce and supplied as political fodder to Mr McCain.
That's 20% of their work force that paid FICA taxes with no expectation, by the Federal accountants, that benefits would ever be paid.ReplyDelete
If nation wide 5% to 8% or the US workforce fits that description, which would seem reasonable from an estimated population of 20 million illegals, then the amount of money being collected is considerable.
It is my understanding, Quirk, that only about half of the undocumented are Mexican.ReplyDelete
Lots of Chinese?
Hispanics other than Mexican?
Asians other than Chinese?
I met some undocumented Serbians, they were workin' in a small, entrepreneurial pizza store.
Seemed like a whole clan of 'em, but which were legal and which not, hard to tell.
Quirk, isn't the part about locking them up if they don't have documents on them a new bit?ReplyDelete
It should be obvious by now that the powers that be of every political party and both countries do not want to really do anything about the migrant labor force. As it is, the Feds pretty much allow business to get away with ignoring the law. Mexico needs the remittances in order to keep a lid on things and the US needs the cheap labor. Controlling the border would do away with the cheap labor as every documented worker would have to be paid the prevailing wage.ReplyDelete
The reason for Mexico being so adamant about essentially maintaining the status quo may be more cultural than economic. I've written here before that migrating to the US for work is seen as a rite of passage for the Hispanics.
I also believe that there is still a taste of bitterness left over from the loss of the southwest, Texas and Colorado. This resentment leads the culture to feel as though it is their "right" to cross the border at will as a sort of reparation for the Gringos theft of their lands.
If anyone is stopped and questioned, it must be for reason. Woe unto that poor unfortunate, citizen or alien, who has no documentation. You're likely to get a free ride to the local calaboose. It's been that way here for as long as I can remember. I myself, as a youth, ran afoul of the law in this very manner while riding the freights and hitchhiking on a very memorable trek around the great southland. That was many moons ago.ReplyDelete
Think this through, Ash. A guy is "suspected of committing a crime." Said suspect has NO ID. No Drivers License, No State ID, No Federal ID.ReplyDelete
Before, or After the "Law."
Do you think he's going to get a ride down to the "station house?"
I'm telling you; the more I think about this "law," the less I think anything has changed.
I'm having a hard time coming up with a scenario where the suspect would have "walked" in the first instance, and been taken into custody in the second.
Think of it this way Rufus:ReplyDelete
a guy is walking to the corner store and a Cop goes "Hey buddy show me your documents". He doesn't have them so he ends up in jail until someone can come down and produce them.
The full 17 page text of Arizona SB 1070.ReplyDelete
Sure, it's a tough law. But the border states have a tough problem. This bill will allow Arizona to do what the Feds refuse to do.ReplyDelete
Even if the bill is watered down, the controversy will highlight the plight of the border states and the willful negligence of the US Government.
The bill makes it difficult on the illegal subculture.ReplyDelete
If seizure of cash and property is constitutional (and the Supremes have ruled that it is) I don't see anything unconstitutional in this bill.
I'm not a lawyer but I slept in a Holiday Inn last night.
If you're stopped for having a tail light out and the Officer finds you with $5000 (or less) in cash, that law enforcement agency can take your money and your car.ReplyDelete
That's a hell of a note but the Supremes have ruled that it is constitutional under the Federal RICO laws.
Now, see, Ash; that is just silly.ReplyDelete
We read the law the First freakin' night at the Bar. We're not sleazy-assed politicians.
The law, Absolutely, precludes that happening. The "Suspect" has to, Legitimately, be a "Suspect in a Crime" before the Cop can ask for ID.
If the Suspect has a legal ID the Cop has to Drop that end of the investigation, and proceed with the Original suspected crime.
We expect "More" from our Token Liberal, Ash. Get with it.
Even whit seems to miss the impotance of the Farmers Market episode.ReplyDelete
Those folk were not employed at "Slave Wages", no indeed. They were paid the prevailing wage for legal, documented workers.
The Farmers Market had 20% of its' workforce found to be illegal, after they'd E-Verified.
The business was in full compliance with the Law.
Granted that there is a low level of undocumented worker, one that has no documentation of any type, I've never met one.
If they are in migrant farm camps or the like, SB1020 would not be applicable, those folk aren't walkin' the streets, or driving cars.
a guy is walking to the corner store and a Cop goes "Hey buddy show me your documents".ReplyDelete
That was the Obumble's example. It's obvious he hadn't read the bill either because there's nothing in it that empowers the Law to do that. The bill clearly defines the circumstances under which an Officer may ask for documentation. Granted, their hands will loosened, but there must be cause for suspicious immigration status before a person can be questioned about it.
They all E-Verified.ReplyDelete
They all would have passed the officers examination, with the documentation they possessed to get the job.
The legislation has no real value, except for it being a "feel good" moment for Mr Pearce and supplied as political fodder to Mr McCain.
I disagree. Your example shows how easy it is to double-check the E Verification. It's a minor hoop to jump through. E Verify isn't the final word, especially since it's common knowledge that any illegal who wants to work down at the Farmers' Market can easily get E-Verified.
As the Sheriff of Pinal County said the other day, the process for traffic stops remain the same. License, Registration, Proof of Insurance.ReplyDelete
Same for everyone that is stopped.
Now the idea that officer Bill will be harassing folks, on a misdemeanor bust, not really reasonable. The police have plenty of opportunity to stop and question folks, now.
The up shot of the legislation is more tents on the jail grounds.
The Federals can not quickly deport these folk with their permission. The appeals process, prior to a disputed deportation can be time extensive. The new arrivals do not always know, but if the detainee does not agree to be deported, the Federals will release them, pending a preliminary hearing.
The policemen certainly know it.
The old timers, amongst the undocumented know it, too.
The illegals were caught in a Federal audit, where the auditors had access to the Federal data base.ReplyDelete
Ranch Markets cannot access that Federal data base, nor should they be able to.
It was just weeks ago, whit, that you were opposed to increasing the size of the IRS by a few thousand new revenue agents. Now you are here, advocating a Federal audit of every employer in the country.
Interesting perspective on Federal intrusiveness, that you have.
That's true but SB 1070 provides stiffer penalties including jail costs and at least $500 for a first time offense and double that for subsequent offenses. First time is a misdemeanor; a felony if you're caught with drugs and or weapons.ReplyDelete
Also, the Bill cracks down on those who employ illegals.
Ranch Markets cannot access that Federal data base, nor should they be able to.ReplyDelete
I beg your pardon, who do you think does the E-Verifying?
The employer does. The employee provides a Social Security number which the Employer checks against the SS Administration database.
That's why it's a scam by the Feds. The illegals buy legitimate SS numbers from rings. The system is as porous as the border.
A ring of 14 people was busted here recently.
How many small business men or private employers could stand a Federal audit.ReplyDelete
Certainly not many of those nominated for Federal positions, over the years.
Taxes not paid, documents not in order, for maids, house keepers and nannies to the Eastern elites.
Mostly this affliction seems to dominate amongst the Democrats. I recall an incident recounted here, not long ago. Though the particulars escape me, at the moment. But the nominee had not filed the proper papers, did not even have them in the file.
Wonder, does Deuce have the proper employment documentation, for his housekeeper? Lots of forms to file for every one employed.
One of the primary reasons I got out of the employer business. Wouldn't be a tax collector, for the Federals.
We'll have to have ICE audit Deuce? Seems an extremist solution, employment audits across the American landscape.
Social Security and Homeland Security administer the program. The employer initiates the verification procedure.ReplyDelete
Read all about it here
Now you are here, advocating a Federal audit of every employer in the country.ReplyDelete
Interesting perspective on Federal intrusiveness, that you have.
I don't believe I did that...trying to push buttons are we?
I agree that E-Verify can be scammed, but, as you say it is a Federal scam. Not one by the employer.ReplyDelete
Not that can be proved.
Not here in Arizona, under the new or the old employer sanctions legislation.
No successful prosecutions and one Letter of Settlement, in all of employer sanction cases in AZ, for three years of effort.
It is eyewash, theater.
A piece of feel good legislation that blew up in their face.
That's the reason for the Amendments being added to a flawed piece of legislation, after the caca it the rotating blades.
Damage control on the "unintended consequences" of SB1020.
Okay, so would I be safer with mace spray or a stun gun? Forget the taser they are like $400.00.ReplyDelete
This is a legitimate question and I don't mean to change the subject.ReplyDelete
The Federals provide the verification, on E-Verify.ReplyDelete
When they audit, they see multiple payments on the legitimate but misused SS #. Information that Ranch Market cannot see.
Ranch Markets is in compliance, full compliance with the Law.
If you want to sanction employers, whit, how else to 'capture' them, but in an audit.
Please, tell me.
I do not see any other practical way, other than a Federal audit of each employer in the country.
"Interesting perspective on Federal intrusiveness, that you have."ReplyDelete
You're basically saying we don't enforce the laws we've got so why even try. I guess we culd say the same about drug dealers. We are losing the war on drugs so let's just forget about it.
Pure libertarian idealogy. All rght as a philosophy. As a practical solution to the drug problem. Not so much.
Melody, the first question you better ask is if any of them are legal in your state and if its the spray then at what concentration its allowed.ReplyDelete
Get a couple of really good cans of mace. Keep one in the car, one in your purse and if you don't feel safe in your home keep some handy there too.
If you really feel the need for protection, go take a gun safety course, let the professional advise you about the proper handgun for you. Buy one and then shoot a few hundred rounds of ammo in order to become proficient and comfortable with it.
In the home though, your best bet is a 12 gauge shotgun. An automatic would be best for you but you have to make sure that you get a good one that will fully eject the shells every time. Good shotguns are a little more expensive. Of course, if you turn out to be an Annie Oakley, you can get yourself a cheaper pump like this one.
We have a CCL law in our state that has reciprocal agreements with 38 other states. But before ou can go to one of those other states you have to check on what their law says since that is what applies while your there.ReplyDelete
I thought the same thing but the thing is I'm driving from PA to TN alone and I thought if I had some kind of deterrent it would make my husband feel a little better.ReplyDelete
Mel, the reason I mentioned the legality issue is that if this summer you've get a nice tan and are travelling in Arizona and get stopped with contraband in the car you may be deported.ReplyDelete
If you want to sanction employers, whit, how else to 'capture' them, but in an audit.ReplyDelete
Jose gets stopped on a traffic violation. He has no license and his documentation is shady.
The Officer checks and finds that guess what? Jose is an illegal guest worker.
The Officer asks Jose where he works.
Jose, says "I work for Senor Rat."
The Officer thinks to himself, "Well, dang, that's the fifth illegal in the last four weeks that said he worked for Senor Rat."
Senor Rat can expect a visit...
The Federal "War on Drugs" is misdirected.ReplyDelete
The Federals should decriminalize pot, treat it like booze, remove the Federal legislation, let each individual State regulate it.
Concentrate Federal law enforcement on the drugs that are left.
Secure the southern border.
Whit, you know how I feel about guns. But I'll take your advice on the mace. It's just for precautionary measures.ReplyDelete
One of my best friends just move to Tuscon this week. I told her to stay low and make sure her Puerto Rican husband carries ID at all times.
all that stuff about 'lawful' stopping is, essentially, skirting the issue. My key point is, it seems, in Arizona, an American needs to carry documentation of their status or risk spending time in jail until that documentation is produced. THAT is a new thing in America.ReplyDelete
I've seen pepper spray knock a big ol' boy down on his knees.ReplyDelete
That's what I'd recommend.
Melody, be afraid, be very afraid - just stay home!ReplyDelete
Ash, what is it about "liberalism" that precludes reading comprehension?ReplyDelete
There was Never a day in the U.S. of A. that a "Suspect in a Crime" w/o ID wasn't going to go to the "Station House."
Would your friend's husband drive his car w/o his driver's license, Mel? That has Always been illegal.ReplyDelete
This is just silly.
Ash...um, no. I'm taking my vacation and visiting an old friend. Swimming pool by day and hot tub by night and lots of alcohol in between. If my husband can't talk me out of it you sure as hell can't.ReplyDelete
And what is there to be afraid of anyway?ReplyDelete
an American needs to carry documentation of their status or risk spending time in jail until that documentation is produced.ReplyDelete
You mean documentation like a Driver License, photo ID, insurance card, voter registration card; that sort of thing? Come on, be reasonable.
THAT is a new thing in America.
Well, the severity of the problem is a relatively "new thing in America" too.
Rufus, I'm teasing.ReplyDelete
You've got to be flexible.ReplyDelete
You gotta adapt
If Senor Rat has HIS papers, in order, he'll skate.ReplyDelete
That's the point. Or Sheriff Joe would have enforced the existing Employer Sanctions law.
Three years, no successful prosecutions, one Letter of Settlement.
That's the reality, of employer sanctions, here.
The only folks that ever get busted, are caught in a Federal audit. There, at the Ranch Markets, the E-Verified but illegal workers were fired, but not detained by the Federals or State.
"The legislation has no real value, except for it being a 'feel good' moment for Mr Pearce and supplied as political fodder to Mr McCain."ReplyDelete
You repeatedly mention that the new law is a mere political fillip for John McCain. What about the Gov, the gal who's got to enforce it? She seems to have benefited handily from it.
I agree on the legalization vs. citizenship. And granting temporary, renewable worker status as part of a larger, comprehensive guest worker program seems to me far more practical than the fantasy of rounding up more than ten million undocumented workers. The former would also allow us to get their biometrics and other pertinent ID.
For those to whom it has become, however, far more of cultural issue than strictly or primarily one of legal status, this still won't fly.
I'll have a Negro Modelo. With a little Mexican flag in it.
The Governor has faded, trish, from the scene, as much as she can.ReplyDelete
May be doubtful that she even runs for reelection. She was a good Sec of State, but is a tad overwhelmed by the Governor's office.
It is McCain that is touting his and Senator Kyl's "Plan", on the radio, daily. Immigration must have polled as his "soft spot" with his constituents, his signature Comprehensive Immigration Reform legislation, not even a memory.
The "New Plan" is so far removed from his previous "Plan" as to make one's head spin.
"3,000 National Guardsmen, 3,000 new Border Patrolmen, finish the dang fence!"
That's the "New Plan".
Not very comprehensive, nor does it have any chance of being implemented.
All that work GWB did improving the GOPs numbers among Hispanic Americans - and doesn't that seem light years ago now? - flushed right down the commode by conservative media agitators who will continue to push the party down the path of political demise.ReplyDelete
Neo-Confederate Nativist Wanker Party.ReplyDelete
Neo-Confederate, God-Bothering Nativist Wanker Party.ReplyDelete
Well, ALL Republicans can't speak Spanish, Trish. Sad, but True.ReplyDelete
As for the Az Governor? She's not a Neo-Confederate. She's just a Struggling Administrator that's stumbled onto a "hot-button" issue, and is now, for the first time, ahead of her Democratic opposition in the polls.
Everybody's demogogueing. Everybody's getting their jollies.
Meanwhile, Phoenix has moved up to NO. 2 in the "kidnap Capital of the World Sweepstakes." No 2! No2! No 2!
That's not, "per-capita," either, I don't think.
all that stuff about 'lawful' stopping is, essentially, skirting the issue. My key point is, it seems, in Arizona, an American needs to carry documentation of their status or risk spending time in jail until that documentation is produced. THAT is a new thing in America.
Ash, you ignorant fuckstick. If I have no driver's license and choose to be stupid enough to drive without one, the police will arrest me when they pull me over for doing so.
They run plates and can figure out who is licensed and who isn't.
The po-po will as equally fuck my unlicensed ass as they double-fuck Pedro the unlicensed, illegal immigrant's ass.
I'm committing one crime and Pedro is committing two by being here illegally AND driving around without papers.
It's called "play stupid games, win stupid prizes."
Ash, you ignorant fuckstick.---I couldn't have said it better.ReplyDelete
"She's not a Neo-Confederate."ReplyDelete
I didn't say she was. I don't know anything about her but that there was a blurb somewhere about her approval numbers within the state associated with passage of the law.
My latter comment was meant to address the cultural drift of the party. And on that note, it's a dead dog headed downstream.
Yes, GWB could woo Hispanic Americans in part because of his facility with the language. But since 2005 there has been a decided shift in sentiment that would render such efforts, even wholly in the Mother Tongue, politically anathema on the one hand, and quite probably fruitless on the other.
Bro, did you know, our hero, Peter Sellers, great actor, had a NDE, during a heart attack, and became very withdrawn and quiet after that, he sat around thinking bout things, and his wife at the time, bacame a little concerned?ReplyDelete
I knew whay you meant, Trish. I was just warbling.ReplyDelete
Conservatives are a pain in the ass, Trish; but you gotta hav'em. Liberals, left alone, would have us pushing up daisies within a year. Don't ever think that either side has enough sense to govern. That way lies madness.
Well said, Rufus, but I'd add, when you are in a situation, of the govenor and the goverend, you are already fucked. It's why I am sad, and long for the old days.ReplyDelete
"Conservatives are a pain in the ass, Trish"ReplyDelete
A pain in the ass?
I don't want to be associated with the Party of Michelle Malkin, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich, Hugh Hewitt, Pat Buchanan, Sarah Palin, Mark Levin, and Fox News. I don't want to be a part of that. Ever.
Furthermore, I don't believe that as a nation we need them. I don't believe that they're in any way an improvement. On anything.
And when November doesn't deliver for them, will they be cashiered, so to speak?
Oh, hell no.
We're facing at least a decade (and I didn't get that from Krugman) of waning influence abroad, having not a fucking carrot to offer anyone - see Brazil and Turkey - and the noise will only increase, but with the Party continuing to consume itself.
All of those people are, actually, right about a lot of stuff from time to time, Trish.ReplyDelete
You don't have to invite them to your dinner parties, but you need them "pushing back" at the "Progressives." You really don't want the party of Obama, Napolitano, Barney Frank, and Barbara Boxer running the country, unobstructed.
Do you Always get cantankarous when you drink beer?
As for "carrots:" You can't make a good beef stew w/o them, but their usefulness is limited in effective, long-term foreign policy.ReplyDelete
Brazil is just a socialist shit-hole, and Turkey is, . . . well, Turkey. All those carrots didn't do us much good when it was time for the 4ID to deploy.
We have some really serious problems. Brazil, and Turkey are not involved in any of them.ReplyDelete
Poseiden Corp (whose stock was up 89% last year) just announced they're taking their factory, and its 500 jobs out of the little Wi town of 2,500 where they thrived for years, and heading for Mexico.ReplyDelete
Guys coming home from multiple tours in the Middle East are coming home to wages set by "Pedro, in Nogales." If they can find "wages," at all. Americans all over the country are working two, and three jobs with minimal healthcare, and obviously miniscule wage because a million jobs/yr are going to, and wage are being set by, newly-arrived "Illegals."
We're shipping a Billion Dollars/Day offshore for oil, and money isn't available for "new" businesses, or expansion of existing plants.
Trust me toots; Carrots for Turkey is WAY down the list of Our problems.
Rufus, I find no use for them. None whatsoever. I'm sorry.ReplyDelete
I have profited immensely from the insight of other Republicans, who are outside that daily Angry Fest - and in the workaday thick of things. But not primarily because they're Republicans.
I've left the Party as someone who engaged on the outskirts.
I don't want to go back there.
Kevin Costner Goes Postman...er...Postal on the SpillReplyDelete
"Trust me toots..."ReplyDelete
Why be "in a party" at all?ReplyDelete
Were you one of them "popular" gurls that just had to be in the "best clique?"
"...I don't want to be associated with the Party of Michelle Malkin, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich, Hugh Hewitt, Pat Buchanan, Sarah Palin, Mark Levin, and Fox News."ReplyDelete
I don't think your holding any Ann Coulter's so I will meet your list and raise with the Party of Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews, Pelosi, Reid, Katrina vanden Hueval, Bill Mayer, The Nation, MSDNC, the NYT Opinion columnists, and my trump card, Keith Olbermann, who while he lacks the audience of a Beck or Limbaugh, far outdoes them in vitriol.
"Were you one of them "popular" gurls that just had to be in the "best clique?"ReplyDelete
I didn't think redheads tended to bloom until after high school.
酒店經紀 酒店打工 酒店工作 酒店上班 酒店兼差 酒店兼職 打工兼差 打工兼職 酒店應徵 禮服店 酒店 經紀 打工 兼差 台北酒店 兼職ReplyDelete