It isn't a state's responsibility to enforce a federal immigration law.
You said exactly that by pointing out that this law doesn't matter because the Patriot Act exists.
Why did he bring it up then?
Obama is a schmuck for not doing away with the PA. That has nothing to do with Arizona's law.
LOL.
Reading comprehension really isn't yer strong suit, eh?
YOU had just finished suggesting that detaining folks for "no reason" is not kosher. (Of course, the AZ immigration bill provides for no such thing, but why quibble about reality?)
BH responded to your sophomoric blather by noting liberal hypocrisy, specifically that the child-king hasn't done anything to undo the USA PATRIOT Act.
I believe both of you (in different ways) misinterpret the PATRIOT Act. But that's a debate for another day and another thread.
Why not ask BH what he meant instead of making an ass of yourself by reading shit into his question that was never actually there?
My interpretation of BH's comment might be a bit off. But it sure looks like he was suggesting that if you are "concerned" with such civil rights as not being detained without probable cause, then you OUGHT to be all riled up at the child-king for his refusal to "do something about" the PATRIOT Act.
Obama is a schmuck for not doing away with the PA. That has nothing to do with Arizona's law.
LOL.
Reading comprehension really isn't yer strong suit, eh?
YOU had just finished suggesting that detaining folks for "no reason" is not kosher. (Of course, the AZ immigration bill provides for no such thing, but why quibble about reality?)
BH responded to your sophomoric blather by noting liberal hypocrisy, specifically that the child-king hasn't done anything to undo the USA PATRIOT Act.
I believe both of you (in different ways) misinterpret the PATRIOT Act. But that's a debate for another day and another thread.
Why not ask BH what he meant instead of making an ass of yourself by reading shit into his question that was never actually there?
My interpretation of BH's comment might be a bit off. But it sure looks like he was suggesting that if you are "concerned" with such civil rights as not being detained without probable cause, then you OUGHT to be all riled up at the child-king for his refusal to "do something about" the PATRIOT Act.
~BHObama is a schmuck for not doing away with the PA. That has nothing to do with Arizona's law.
LOL.
Reading comprehension really isn't yer strong suit, eh?
YOU had just finished suggesting that detaining folks for "no reason" is not kosher. (Of course, the AZ immigration bill provides for no such thing, but why quibble about reality?)
BH responded to your sophomoric blather by noting liberal hypocrisy, specifically that the child-king hasn't done anything to undo the USA PATRIOT Act.
I believe both of you (in different ways) misinterpret the PATRIOT Act. But that's a debate for another day and another thread.
Why not ask BH what he meant instead of making an ass of yourself by reading shit into his question that was never actually there?
My interpretation of BH's comment might be a bit off. But it sure looks like he was suggesting that if you are "concerned" with such civil rights as not being detained without probable cause, then you OUGHT to be all riled up at the child-king for his refusal to "do something about" the PATRIOT Act.
Obama is a schmuck for not doing away with the PA. That has nothing to do with Arizona's law.LOL.
Reading comprehension really isn't yer strong suit, eh?
YOU had just finished suggesting that detaining folks for "no reason" is not kosher. (Of course, the AZ immigration bill provides for no such thing, but why quibble about reality?)
BH responded to your sophomoric blather by noting liberal hypocrisy, specifically that the child-king hasn't done anything to undo the USA PATRIOT Act.
I believe both of you (in different ways) misinterpret the PATRIOT Act. But that's a debate for another day and another thread.
Why not ask BH what he meant instead of making an ass of yourself by reading shit into his question that was never actually there?
My interpretation of BH's comment might be a bit off. But it sure looks like he was suggesting that if you are "concerned" with such civil rights as not being detained without probable cause, then you OUGHT to be all riled up at the child-king for his refusal to "do something about" the PATRIOT Act.
Special Ed back in school eh? I figured so.
Dope. The Patriot Act has nothing to do with Arizona's law. Quite the non-sequitor on you part.
Phoenix, Arizona
Over the past month as the illegal immigration debate has heated up, one illegal immigrant as grown to certain prominence in Arizona. His name is believed to be God. God, age unknown, has no birth certificate, no valid social security number, no green card or other legal documents and was born outside of the United States. Aliases include Jesus (pronounced “hey-zeus”, Allah, and Yahweh.
While very few have claimed to have actually seen God, it is believe by many scholars, philosophers, clergy members and the theologians that God is omnipresent. It is believed that God takes up residence all over the state of Arizona in churches, mosques, and synagogues. However, the reality is God is but one of millions of illegal immigrants believed to be living in the United States.
Outside of the Arizona Capital Building, protesters were waving signs saying “GET GOD OUT OF ARIZONA!” and “HELL NO, ILLEGALS GO!”
An Arizona state senator who wished to remain nameless commented “This law was crafted with the intention of avoiding racial profiling. Its not my damn fault so many Hispanics, Latinos, and Chicanos commit minor traffic violations, give officers reasonable suspicion to investigate them, or commit crimes.”
Sarah Palin (Fox News commentator, former GOP vice presidential candidate, and GOP frontrunner for President in the 2012) speaking at an event had this to say “We don’t want those who are tired, poor huddled masses, hungry, or homeless illegals entering our country. Americans didn’t build the Statue of Liberty so America could be undermined by Mexicans.” While factual inaccurate the sentiment drew applause.
An ACLU attorney had this to say “We find it ironic that we have been trying to keep Jesus out of the government for so long but now have to come to Jesus’ defense against civil liberty violations. We remain committed to bringing forth and exposing all claims of racial profiling.”
