Teapartiers: What an outrage!

Originally posted by skunknuts
Where did I bash true libertarian-styled Ron Paul tea-partiers??

Seemed like the entire Original Post. I would think it would be that hard to remember what was written...

Originally posted by skunknuts
I am pointing out that this is an issue that should be on their radar--front and center!

That depends entirely on your outlook on the issue, which, according to some of the responses herein, aren't shared by all.

Originally posted by skunknuts
I wrote the governor, and asked her to think like an American, not a politician. What have you done?

All I can say is: Good deal. It's actually a bit refreshing to see someone act on their beliefs, whether I agree with them or not.

As for what I have done, well I haven't done anything, as I have yet to formulate an opinion on this particular issue. Often it is as much a curse as it is a blessing to be able to see both sides of an argument. That's the thing, I can understand why you and others dislike this legislation. But, I can also see why it is being put in place. There is a definite problem with the undocumented illegals in this country, and I do not know where you live, but it is a problem that won't just 'go away.' I've spoken to a few illegals, who were proud of the fact that they were illegal. Laughing at America and her laws, and Americans themselves. We're seen as weak, like this is some kind of game, and the illegals are winning.

So what do you propose? Something that isn't unconstitutional, but will still send a strong message of zero-tolerance for illegal entry into the United States?

Chrono

Im sorry, but have you actually responded to the OP and the bill yet?

Originally posted by Subjective Truth
Boy you really want to brand me as a revolutionary dont you.

You have made it well clear where you stood on issues when it came to discussion regarding some overthrowing of the government. Didnt matter whether you supported the 'peaceful' removal of the constitutionally elected government, you have time and time again made it clear.

Now, tell me how requiring american born citizens to constantly show more identification for their birth right simple over their appearence is not an infringement over their constitutional rights?

If you were required to show a gun permit simply because you looked suspicious, would you be this silent over the matter?


[edit on 21-4-2010 by Southern Guardian]

Originally posted by Subjective Truth
reply to post by skunknuts

 

I think I made it pretty clear were I stand it is were you stand that I am concerned about.


And I know plenty about the progressives did you know that Hitler was one. That's right he looked into the early American progressive movement for tips on how to lead his people.


Progressive do not have a political party the latch on like leaches to who will ever listen to them. They are about on thing and that is control.


So if you like control and hate freedom become a progressive it is that simple and no matter how you try and cloud the issue it will remain that unless they the progressives get complete power and re-write history.

I'm sorry, you are wrong about Hitler. Aren't most American Jews liberals?

Anyway, that's besides the point. You are confusing Authoritarianism (a far-right ideology) w/ Social Liberalism (a center-left ideology).

I opposed Bush, Cheney, and Palin, because they trend Authoritarian, antithetical to my own beliefs. That's the same reason I oppose this Arizona bill, it's very authoritarian in nature.

Please read this whole thread, you seem to portray a person who likes to read and think for themselves. Just read the whole first page, I swear it won't hurt:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Best,
Skunknuts

[edit on 4/21/2010 by skunknuts]

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
Im sorry, but have you actually responded to the OP and the bill yet?

Originally posted by Subjective Truth
Boy you really want to brand me as a revolutionary dont you.

You have made it well clear where you stood on issues when it came to discussion regarding some overthrowing of the government. Didnt matter whether you supported the 'peaceful' removal of the constitutionally elected government, you have time and time again made it clear.

Now, tell me how requiring american born citizens to constantly show more identification for their birth right simple over their appearence is not an infringement over their constitutional rights?

If you were required to show a gun permit simply because you looked suspicious, would you be this silent over the matter?


[edit on 21-4-2010 by Southern Guardian]

I made it clear Hmm. I always say how stupid it is and how times are not that bad. I guess that is pretty clear I even authored a thread about it.



But like I said you are a coward who will not back anything up with facts.



Please to save your reputation just show me one post were I said it was a good idea. If not you should crawl back under the rock you came from.

my two cents will probably be lost in the bickering. but add it i shall.

america needs a law like this. i don't think it is unreasonable for you to be asked to show proof of citizenship if there is questionable doubt. why delude ourselves? this law targets hispanics illegally immigrating from mexico. my first choice to stop illegal immigration would be to build a large wall, top it with barbed wire, and build a second, and taller wall 40 feet back from the first one that rests on the border. so even if they climb over, they can be quickly rounded up, given some water/food if they desperatly need it, and put back on the mexican side of the border.

what liberty is being violated? if a police officer stops you walking around looking suspicious, hes probably going to stop you and question you. he might ask for identification. you as a citizen have the same right, to ask a police officer to identify himself. a large part of your "identity" is citizenship.

i don't understand how you can say that this is a breach of liberty.

reply to post by skunknuts


Actually you are mistaken all these forms of government are truly Oligarchies and Hitler regime was no different.


Communism and socialism do not exist they are Oligarchies. And this country is slowly transforming into one to. And history has shown the progressive movement is tied to it.




Hitler has actually written about the early American progressive movement and his love of it. They are his words this is how we know for sure. Hitler was a progressive at heart and ran his country just like they would have run it themselves. This is the truth and I can point you to some good books to help you to see the truth.

reply to post by Bob Sholtz


I am sorry about the bickering on my part and you do make a good point. But could we not stop it just as easily by truly enforcing laws we already have on the books. If they have no jobs they will leave. If the companies would not hire them they would have no money and would go home.

Good for AZ. About time the states start acting like they should. Legals just whip out the ol' green card then G2G. Illegals meet the INS like they should. Now pull our troops home and lock down the border and all will be good. I personally see nothing wrong with reinforcing our laws.


One more thing. Before we get to calling this stereotyping lets be a bit more PC. Instead we shall call it a demographic, like the politicians do.

Originally posted by Subjective Truth
reply to post by skunknuts

 

Actually you are mistaken all these forms of government are truly Oligarchies and Hitler regime was no different.


Communism and socialism do not exist they are Oligarchies. And this country is slowly transforming into one to. And history has shown the progressive movement is tied to it.




Hitler has actually written about the early American progressive movement and his love of it. They are his words this is how we know for sure. Hitler was a progressive at heart and ran his country just like they would have run it themselves. This is the truth and I can point you to some good books to help you to see the truth.

I am not a socialist, or a communist. I am a liberal-leaning centrist:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/8b4a341e9ac2.png[/atsimg]

You should take the test too. Post your results!

www.moral-politics.com...

Best,
Skunknuts

Originally posted by Subjective Truth
reply to post by Bob Sholtz

 

I am sorry about the bickering on my part and you do make a good point. But could we not stop it just as easily by truly enforcing laws we already have on the books. If they have no jobs they will leave. If the companies would not hire them they would have no money and would go home.

Well said. Simple solutions are usually the best. Unfortunately, there will always be resistance. It always boils down to the greed inherent in certain folks. As long as the dollar calls, these people will never stop hiring illegals. Unless, of course, you make it so difficult for them to do so that they can no longer continue the practice. It's tough, because your basically trying to change the nature of man, and good luck with that right? I've often wondered about the common excuse of people not being able to run their business without the low-income workers. What I hear in my mind is something like: "Because then I wouldn't be able to afford my third house!" Or some other such extravagance.

Chrono

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
Im sorry, but have you actually responded to the OP and the bill yet?

Originally posted by Subjective Truth
Boy you really want to brand me as a revolutionary dont you.

You have made it well clear where you stood on issues when it came to discussion regarding some overthrowing of the government. Didnt matter whether you supported the 'peaceful' removal of the constitutionally elected government, you have time and time again made it clear.

Now, tell me how requiring american born citizens to constantly show more identification for their birth right simple over their appearence is not an infringement over their constitutional rights?

If you were required to show a gun permit simply because you looked suspicious, would you be this silent over the matter?


[edit on 21-4-2010 by Southern Guardian]

we'd probably disagree over the "constitutionally elected" part, because the constitution also says to revolt whenever our rights are breached and establish a new government. if someone is already breaking your rights, there isn't much chance that they will go peacefully.

but that is a side topic.

you paint it as someone being hasseled non stop to provide their "papers". that isn't very accurate. i doubt anyone in the nice parts of town will even be bothered. who will then? the people walking around, causing trouble, looking like they don't belong.

it certanly isn't an infringement of their rights to be asked to identify themselves if there is due cause.

reply to post by Chronogoblin


oh yes. if the existing laws were inforced, this would not be an issue. but a greedy company is always going to look for cheap labor, so it isn't like they will turn themselves in. the wall is costly, but it would be the most effective and foolproof. it would also create alot of jobs, both in building the wall, and security positions to post along the border. (national guard perhapse?)

but i see nothing wrong with asking someone to prove who they are if there is any doubt. on a national level it could be abused. i mean, if you had to prove who you were to buy food, or even enter a store. *cough* rfid chip *cough*. but this law seems to have one purpose, help deporting illegal immigrants.

Wait wait WAIT

Did they finally learn teabaggers isn't the best title for them?

Oh and I never had any hope for this so called movement anyway, they seemed to be a bunch of hypocrites and phoneys who get their "news" from Rush and Glenn.

But some of them actually had a message...the government's senseless spending yes.

But where the hell were they during the Bush administration?

Taking a break from my own responsibilities, I keep reading all the bickering in this thread, and several issues seem to be all lumped into one thread. The Tea Party Movement is irrelevant to the Arizona legislation, and is nothing but a distraction. As far as the Arizona Bill goes, it is questionable whether or not such a Bill is Constitutional, state or federal in this matter. However, before supplying some tid bits from the Arizona constitution, I am compelled to point out that of those who seem to think this legislation is wrong, it is more than likely that many of those posters have with them a license to drive, or at the very least a DMV issued identification card.

It is more than likely that if ever pulled over by a police officer and asked for that drivers license these posters would supply that license and leave it at that. No protest, no aghast dumbfounded surprise, nor any care about the Constitutional issues brought about by DMV compliance, and it is my belief that those who are protesting the loudest about the AZ issue, have no problems at all with the regular abuse of force and lack of due process of law, brought about by the multitudes of traffic ordinances across the state.

Consider just some of these Declaration of Rights within the Arizona Constitution:

Section 2 of Article II states:

2. Political power; purpose of government Section 2. All political power is inherent in the people, and governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and are established to protect and maintain individual rights.

Section 3:

3. Supreme law of the land Section 3. The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the land.

4. Due process of law Section 4. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.

Section 8:

8. Right to privacy Section 8. No person shall be disturbed in his private affairs, or his home invaded, without authority of law.

Section 10:

10. Self-incrimination; double jeopardy Section 10. No person shall be compelled in any criminal case to give evidence against himself, or be twice put in jeopardy for the same offense.

Section 33:

33. Reservation of rights Section 33. The enumeration in this Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny others retained by the people.

It seems based on Arizona's own constitution that this legislation wont pass the muster of that constitution. No person, regardless of their birth place should have to supply any identification what so ever and a simple oath or affirmation of who they are must suffice:

Section 7:

7. Oaths and affirmations Section 7. The mode of administering an oath, or affirmation, shall be such as shall be most consistent with and binding upon the conscience of the person to whom such oath, or affirmation, may be administered.

Okay then, back to work for me.

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


Star for you Sir. Seems like you really do learn something new every day.

Chrono

Originally posted by GorehoundLarry
Wait wait WAIT

Did they finally learn teabaggers isn't the best title for them?

Oh and I never had any hope for this so called movement anyway, they seemed to be a bunch of hypocrites and phoneys who get their "news" from Rush and Glenn.

But some of them actually had a message...the government's senseless spending yes.

But where the hell were they during the Bush administration?

the movement was hijacked by glen and rush, who basically spout what the right wants to hear. then there are people who do the same on the left. and the dichotomy confuses the sheeple into bickering over things that could easily and quickly be solved once all the selfish politicians are ousted.

i disliked bush a whole lot, but there is a good youtube video on obama's spending. he equates their spending to miles per hour for a few presidents. bush would be going 60ish, where obama goes over 170. so critisisms on obama's spending are well merited.

Originally posted by boondock-saint

Originally posted by VintageEnvy
Teapartiers don't care about other people's liberties, they just care about making noise about things they have no solutions to. They protest against taxes in public funded parks for christ sake.

did u know that the Republican Party partially funds
the Tea Party ??? The tea party was created to offset
Democratic Party Majority in the future.

boondock-saint,
What is your source for RNC funding of the Tea Party movement??

The Tea Party is not an organized party but a bunch of concerned citizens getting together and voicing their support for the Constitution and trying to downsize the government accordingly.

Although I may be here in the ME, we Americans, gather in the local watering holes to voice support for our country along with the Brits, etc. Yeah, they also have a First Amendment here (of sorts)!!

I do agree with you on the other point of having to show an ID...traffic stops, airports, etc. Here most ex pats have to have a valid visa, passport, health card and local driver's licence, depending on your status. I have my NRA card, just in case...they definitely do not have the 2nd Amendment here.

And BTW, where do I get my RNC funding?

See you at the polls!!
thanks,
Tom

reply to post by skunknuts


It sad when you need a test to show you your place in the world. And all of pie charts does nothing to change the simple and utter truth Hitler was a progressive and this is from him not me. So take it up with him if you think he is a liberal.



And I know you pride yourself on knowledge please look up the word Oligarchy.

Originally posted by Subjective Truth
I made it clear Hmm. I always say how stupid it is and how times are not that bad. I guess that is pretty clear I even authored a thread about it.

But like I said you are a coward who will not back anything up with facts.

Please to save your reputation just show me one post were I said it was a good idea. If not you should crawl back under the rock you came from.

I will respond to you vai u2u over that matter. On this thread I am not concerned about you derailing from the OP. Please address my question, how is this not an infringement on the rights of americans? If you were constantly asked to show a permit for your gun because of your appearence, would you accept it?

Stop pushing the point of the OP and actually address is.

Originally posted by Subjective Truth
reply to post by skunknuts

 

It sad when you need a test to show you your place in the world. And all of pie charts does nothing to change the simple and utter truth Hitler was a progressive and this is from him not me. So take it up with him if you think he is a liberal.

This still has absolutely nothing to do with the point of the thread. Why do you keep running away from it? Are you afraid to actually address the OP directly? How is this not an infringement? Forcing americans to constantly show identification based on their appearance, how is this right? If this was based on gun rights would you be derailing this thread as you are now?