Jun 1, 2010

Join freedom loving Michiganders to protest Show-me-your-papers law

Freedom loving Michiganders will gather at noon tomorrow - Wednesday June 2 - on the lawn of the State Capitol in Lansing to protest the attempt to pass a law similar to Arizona’s unconstitutional and racist Show-me-your-papers law in Michigan.

The event is sponsored by Gamaliel Civil Rights for Immigrants-Cristo Rey Chapter. Speakers include Rep Rashida Tlaib, D-Detroit, and Arizona Rep Kirsten Cinema. The Michigan Peace Team will be there to speak on their experience in Juarez, Mexico. Also set to speak is the Peace Education Center, Ryan Bates from Reform Immigration For America and other speakers yet to be confirmed.

In an attempt to gain votes in the Republican Senate primary election, carpetbagger Rep. Kim Meltzer, R-Clinton Twp.?, has sponsored legislation to similar to Arizona’s racist law.

Come out and enjoy a beautiful day and celebrate freedom. For information, call (517)899-1412.

The mission of Gamaliel Foundation is to assist local community leaders to create, maintain and expand independent, grassroots, and powerful faith-based community organizations so that ordinary people can impact the political, social, economic, and environmental decisions that affect their lives; to provide these organizations with leadership training programs, consultation, research and analysis on social justice issues; to be a network for mutual learning environments and working coalitions.

38 comments:

Not Anonymous said...

When the Socialist Democrats support a law that is the same as Mexico's law, I'll believe they have a leg to stand on.

It's hard to believe they are against racial profiling when Mexico's law is exactly that and the Arizona law specifically prohibits it.

If you cross the border illegal into the U.S. you get free health care, you get a job, you don't pay taxes and you can't be asked on the street if you're here legally.

If you cross the border illegally into Mexico and you're caught, you go to jail for two years. When you're released, if you come back illegally again, you're put in jail for 10 years.

If you cross the border LEGALLY into Mexico, you must prove you have health care in case you're sick or hurt there. You must prove you have funds available in case you have problems and need to pay for repairs to your car or whatever. If you're there working, they can and do come into the place of business, without any notice, to see if you're there legally. You MUST carry papers at all times in Mexico or you'll be arrested and thrown in jail for two years.

And you socialists want to protest a law that says if we catch you doing something else, such as speeding, and find out that you're here illegally we'll send you back to your home country. This is typical of lack of intelligence of the left wing in this country.

Silverfiddle said...

They should be protesting the federal government. US Code demands that non-citizens carry "papers."

Better yet, why not go march on the Mexican government that is locked in a love embrace with the moneyed oligarchy that steals bread from the mouths of the poor? That would take some balls...

Communications guru said...

Once again, anonymous, there is no such thing as a “socialist” Democrat in this country, and that is just a fascist Republican talking point.

The U.S. is not Mexico, and their laws are irrelevant.

“If you cross the border illegal into the U.S. you get free health care, you get a job, you don't pay taxes and you can't be asked on the street if you're here legally?” The only thing true about that statement is the job part.

There will be no socialists protesting tomorrow, but there will be plenty of freedom loving Americans. I will be there; come by and say hello.

Communications guru said...

This law requires everyone carry papers. That’s why it’s called the Show-me-your-papers law. Again, the law in Mexico is irrelevant.

Silverfiddle said...

Have any of these hysterical people ever tried to rent an XBox game at Blockbuster?

They demand papers! Including drivers license and a credit card, which they immediately tag as a warning to you to remember to return the game. Granted, it lacks the gravity of being stopped by the Gestapo at the Swiss border with fake identity, but this is the state of things in America today.

It starts when you are born:

... and your parents submit your hospital birth "papers" to the county so they can generate your official birth "papers" called a birth certificate.

You then take that and go get your New World Order card and 666 stamp, also known as a Social Security Card with your unique Social Security Number printed on it.

If you want to travel outside of the country, you've got to use those previously mentioned papers to get "Travel Papers," also known as a passport...

When you get hired you must present a birth certificate or passport so they know who you are, and so Uncle Sam can immediately stick the withholding siphon in.

Get stopped by the cops and you'd better have your "papers!" ID is the first thing they ask for.

We've been a "Show me your papers" nation for over 100 years.

Nobody on the left outside of Nat Hentoff gave a damn about any of this until it could be used as a political issue against the "racist Arizonans."

Not Anonymous said...

Guru,

Please identify for me the page number and line number where the law says that everyone must carry papers.

I have read the law and I've browsed through it again following your statement that everyone must carry papers. I cannot find that.

Each person here that is not a citizen is required to carry their papers indicating that they are a guest here.

However, each citizen is not required to carry papers. If you're driving, yes, you need a drivers license, car registration and proof of insurance. But that's it. If you're walking along the road, you do not need to carry any form of identification at all.

So, since you're going to the trouble of protesting tomorrow, or at least your advocating that people attend, and since I can't find it in the bill, I'm sure that you can tell me exactly where that part of the law is written. After all, I'm not afraid to admit when I make a mistake. I just need to see the mistake.

jrfoleyjr said...

Hey Kevin, do you actually have a copy of the Arizona law? I do. Have you read it? I have. It requires not one iota more than the federal law that it was modeled on. It was VERY carefully crafted to mirror the federal law. Don't like it... tough.

To "Not Anonymous"... he can't identify any given line or passage in the law because Kevin only spouts officially sanctioned DNC talking points and the official propaganda from "on high" is that it is a racist law so it must be so.

Communications guru said...

That’s BS. As an American citizen I am not required to carry any papers at all times. Not only that, I can’t be detained for simply not having them. There is this thing called the 4th Amendment.

There is a huge difference between presenting an ID card when I want something and being forced to present it just to prove I’m a citizen. Likewise, there is a difference between being asked to present and ID when a law enforcement officer has probable cause to believe a crime has occurred and being forced to present just to prove I’m a citizen.

“You then take that and go get your New World Order card and 666 stamp?” I hope that is a joke. I’m not required to carry a SS card, and I don’t have to present it on demand because I may look like an illegal alien.

When I get stopped by the cops they have to have a reason to stop me, not just because I may look like an illegal alien.

It’s just amazing to me that people who claim to love freedom and hate big government are supporting giving up some of that freedom and giving government more power just to stop some poor guy earning less than minimum wage trying to feed his family.

We need go after the people hiring illegal aliens and getting rich off of them just as hard as we want to prosecute the guy who simply wants to work to feed his family.

Silverfiddle said...

Guru does "The Twist":

I did not say we were required to carry our SS card.

Nothing in any of these laws says someone can be stopped because they "look like an illegal alien."

These laws don't require citizens to give up anything. Another red herring.

Giving big government more power? Protecting our borders is a legitimate function of the federal government.

Keep slingin' that BS!

Communications guru said...

Ditto. You just said “We've been a "Show me your papers" nation for over 100 years,” and then you list the things we must show. Now, you’re trying to weasel out of your own claim. Keep slingin' (sic) that BS!

It certainty does mean someone can be stopped because they "look like an illegal alien." The law requires we give away the 4th Amendment. Yes, “Giving big government more power. I agree, “Protecting our borders is a legitimate function of the federal government.” It’s not a legitimate function of state government.

There is no doubt we need comprehensive immigration reform. This is just one piece, and you can’t have just one piece and expect it to work.

Not Anonymous said...

I'm sorry that you can't present the page number to back up what you're saying from the law. Even if you were to guess, you'd have a one in ten chance of being right if it was in there.

So, let's clear up your "Misconceptions". I won't call them lies. I'll just assume that you're working on ignorance of the law.

First, the cops in Arizona cannot stop someone just because they look like an illegal alien. Racial profiling is specifically prohibited in the bill. Let me say that a different way. It is ILLEGAL to stop someone just because they look foriegn.

Obama's example of taking your child out for ice cream may lead to your being arrested for being an illegal alien. That is blatantly false. The only way that a person may be arrested going out for ice cream with his kid is if he robs the ice cream parlor, or gets in a fight with another patron, or refuses to pay for his ice cream or commits a crime while there. If you're illegal and standing in line waiting to get to the window to buy your ice cream, and a cop happens to be in line behind you, he cannot get you for being illegal unless you're committing a crime standing in that line.

This line that the socialist Democrats use about how people hate big government, but are now advocating for big government is also a red herring. First of all, if I'm against big government and should be against this law, then it would seem that you're being just as disengenuous because you love big government and should be in favor of this law.

Second, this is actually a function of government. This is what government, big or small, is required to do. They are required to protect our borders. When our borders are infringed upon, it is the responsibility of the government to stop that infringement.

The Federal Government is failing at protecting our borders. They aren't just sloppy, they are failing. Now, before you use the same old line "Bush failed too" or "Bush failed first", you'll get no argument from me on that. The Federal Government has failed for years to protect our borders.

The minutemen that were out there a couple of years ago did a much better job of controlling the border than the government did.

It's really too bad that you couldn't produce the page and line. It was a simple request, but Jr. has it right. It's not there so you must ignore my request for a page number.

Communications guru said...

That was pretty easy, even if I didn’t do it quickly enough for you, anonymous. Page one where it says, (uppercase comes right from the bill, not me)
http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070s.pdf

FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE, WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON.

If you are a dark-skinned person in Arizona, who can be stopped for, say, a license plate light out and forced to show your citizenship papers, whatever those may be. If you don’t have them, you can be detained until you produce your papers.

Communications guru said...

To make the claim that racial profiling does not go on is sticking your head in the sand. Now, we are going to ask law enforcement to investigate a crime targeting Hispanics and still claim racial profiling is not going on is ridiculous.

I’m not familiar with President Obama’s example, but it sounds reasonable. Ask any African-American who has been stopped by police with the line “you fit the description of a (fill in the blank) suspect.”

Once again, anonymous, there is no such thing as a "Socialist” Democrat in this country, and that, as you know, is just a false, fascist Republican talking point.

Apparently you are for big government if you support this expansion of government and loss of freedom. Of course immigrating is a function of government, but not state government.

Not Anonymous said...

Very good. You just proved my point. "For any lawful contact made.." which means if they are pulled over for a burned out headlight, speeding, or any suspicion of violation. I've been pulled over for a headlight out before. I've been pulled over for changing lanes without signaling. I've been pulled over for speeding. Are you suggesting that they should allow this guy to skip on those violations as well so that they can't catch them as illegal aliens?

"reasonable suspicion" It's Arizona. If they pull someone over, the person apparently speaks with an accent, doesn't have a drivers license, registration, or proof of insurance, they now have reasonable suspicion. So the question would be "Are you a citizen of this country sir?" If the answer is yes, and he has the proper driving credentials, it would end there. If the answer is no, the next question would be obvious. "Do you have the proper documentation to show that you are here legally, sir?"

If the answer is yes, problem solved. If the answer is yes, but he can't produce them, he's in trouble because all LEGAL ALIENS are REQUIRED to carry their guest papers with them at all times.

If the answer is yes, but the guy is lying, he has a whole new set of problems. If it's discovered that he's not here legally, he's now in trouble for lying to law enforcement, also a crime.

Everyone profiles by race, by gender, by age and so on. You do it. I do it. Everyone does it. You claim to be married. Is your wife a female? If so, why? Did you look for a female or were you looking for anyone you could get along with male or female? Are you straight or are you bi-sexual? If you're straight, then again, you're profiling based on gender. If you're gay, you're profiling based on gender.

In Arizona, the majority of illegal aliens are Mexican. It's only logical to be suspicious of Mexicans. It's also not likely that you'll find a blue eyed blonde haired woman that speaks perfect English that is illegal. However, if this was Montana or the State of Washington, they would look for people with a Canadian accent.

You made my point by finding that in the law (which amazes me by itself that you actually turned to the law). There must be lawful contact AND reasonable suspicion.

Welcome to the right side of the law.

Communications guru said...

Lawful contact is what the law enforcement officer says is lawful. I’m glad to see you proved my point, “If they pull someone over, the person apparently speaks with an accent.” That is the very definition of profiling. A driver’s license does not prove residency or citizenship. If it were, I could use it to get across the Canadian border. Now, Michigan has started an enhanced DL that allows you to cross the border, but it’s not cheap.

No, everyone does not “profile by race, by gender, by age and so on.” Its’ illegal. You’re right, a “blue eyed blonde haired woman that speaks perfect English” will never get pulled over, but a U.S. citizen with brown skin will. That is called profiling, and it’s wrong.

Once again, the show-me-your-papers law is unconstitutional and racist.

Not Anonymous said...

A drivers license is supposed to prove residency. You're not supposed to have a drivers license in Arizona unless you're a legal citizen of Arizona. In Michigan, it's illegal for illegal aliens to get drivers licenses as well.

If the person speaks with an accent, then they should be scrutinized since illegal aliens are so rampant. By the way, the Federal Government doesn't even have the racial profiling provision in their law. The difference is that the Federal government is not doing their job. Arizona is having to do it for them to protect the citizens of their state.

This is funny because I'm arguing for what the law says and I don't like the law either. But the reason that I don't like the law is because it doesn't allow racial profiling. They should be rounding up these illegal aliens and shipping them back into Mexico or wherever they are from. And I don't mean just drop them off at the border and goose them to cross the line going south, but I'd rather see them dumped off at the very southern tip of Mexico so that it would be more difficult to get back to this country.

You're wrong. The blue eyed blonde haired girl will get pulled over for the same offense that a Mexican gets pulled over. A violation of the law. But they would have no reason to suspect she's here illegally unless she was to speak with an accent.

People have died. Americans have died at the hands of illegal aliens in Arizona. They have not earned the right to be given the benefit of the doubt.

It's not the "show me your papers law" unless it applies to everyone. Since it doesn't require LEGAL CITIZENS to carry papers, your characterization of it that way is just contrived to invoke Nazi Germany into a political situation.

By the way, didn't you say you lived in Howell, Michigan? So you don't believe in States passing their own laws that apply to their own issues? What do you have against Americans that live in other states?

Your little security thing that requires you type in the letters that are displayed, says "inglys". How appropriate that your requirement for this post is the misspelling of English that sounds like a Mexican saying English. ooops, now I'm profiling. Lock me up.

Communications guru said...

Are you saying only U.S. citizens can drive in Arizona? Not true. Besides, a DL does not prove citizenship. There are many people here on work visas that can drive, let alone tourists.

If the person speaks with an accent, it’s called racial profiling and illegal. Sorry, I have never heard of anyone being pulled over for driving while blond and blue-eyed. You are wrong.

Really, “People have died.” Most of the deaths along the border are because of the drug trade, not people crossing over to find employment. It is the show-me-your-papers-law because it encourages racial profiling, and a DL is not proof of citizenship.

Yes I live in Howell. Silly me, it’s OK if other states pass unconstitutional and racist laws. I’m sure glad people in other states spoke out about other states passing racist laws; Like Jim Crow.

“Your little security thing that requires you type in the letters that are displayed, says "inglys". How appropriate that your requirement for this post is the misspelling of English that sounds like a Mexican saying English. ooops, now I'm profiling. Lock me up.”

I have no idea what the hell you’re talking about, anonymous.

Not Anonymous said...

You know, I have stones in my driveway that don't even act as stupid as you do. Legal Drivers Licenses. If you don't have an Arizona Drivers license, you have a drivers license from somewhere. If not, the chances are you're illegal.

"most of the deaths along the border are because of the drug trade"? You moron, where do you think they are coming from?

By the way, since you said "most", what are the others from?

Another question. How many American deaths are acceptable to you?

Thank you for debunking yourself. It was fun to watch.

Communications guru said...

Thanks for that compliment. Coming from an anonymous coward like you, it means a lot. Again, are you trying to make the claim that only U.S. citizens can drive in the U.S.? You may recall in February of 2008 that Gov. Jennifer Granholm signed House Bill 4505 into law that corrected the Michigan Attorney General’s ruling barring non-U.S. citizens legally in Michigan from obtaining a driver’s license. The bill passed the Senate unanimously and almost unanimously in the House. If not corrected, this AG ruling would have had a serious negative effect on the thousands of students, workers, business people and their families living legally here in Michigan. Not addressing this problem would also have cost Michigan jobs and investment dollars.

That is correct, most of the deaths and crime along the border are because of the drug trade, not because of illegal immigrants crossing the border looking for work; just like I said.

Not Anonymous said...

Yes, in Michigan LEGAL visitors can get a drivers license to drive while they are here. ILLEGAL Aliens cannot get a drivers license in Michigan.

Nice dodge. You ran from the question. If most are from the drug trade (which comes from Mexico airhead), what are the rest of the deaths and crime from?

When you can say ALL deaths and crime are not from illegal aliens, then you've removed just one of my reasons for not wanting illegal aliens in this country. But that won't matter because ILLEGAL aliens have already broken the law (by being ILLEGAL) and should be rounded up and shipped back. Maybe the Feds could try and save their failing post office by sticking a stamp on an illegals forehead and shoving him into a mail slot to send back to Mexico.

You're on an awful lot the past two weeks for a guy that works three jobs. Or maybe you work for the government and you're collecting taxpayer dollars for playing on the internet rather than working at your job(s)

Communications guru said...

Once again, anonymous, a driver’s license is not proof of citizenship. Proof of citizenship is your birth certificate, passport or green card.

I didn’t run from anything or dodge anything. “What are the rest of the deaths and crime from?” I only know of one death.

I know I kicked your sorry ass when you stoop to the personal attack, and here it is. Really, like debunking you takes any real effort or time? Please.

Not Anonymous said...

The only one you've debunked was yourself when you copied the law earlier in all CAPS. You proved that it's lawful contact and that the police are not going to be out there profiling by race.

Must be confusing for you to dispute your own statements.

Silverfiddle said...

Not Anonymous:

You should have used this line:

"I’m glad to see you proved my point."

It seems to be the temple chant around here.

Mysteriously, it is almost always preceded by someone disproving his point, so I don't know what the real meaning of this statement is...

Johnny C said...

Police officers are order to stop people if they feel that the person is a illegal alien.. Therefore that person needs to prove to the officer that yes indeed they're a American citizen either with documents proving they're either American born or they gone through the process of nationalization or face being taken to a holding cell.

Communications guru said...

Again, anonymous, the only person debunked is you. Again, anonymous, lawful contact is what the law enforcement officer says is lawful. They certainly are going to be out there profiling by race. Johnny C said it very well, “Police officers are ordered to stop people if they feel that the person is an illegal alien. Therefore that person needs to prove to the officer that yes indeed they're an American citizen either with documents proving they're either American born or they gone through the process of nationalization or face being taken to a holding cell.”

Like you said earlier, anonymous, “If the person speaks with an accent, then they should be scrutinized.” By your example, people in Alabama or Texas are going to be scrutinized. They better have their passports or birth certificates on them.

Not Anonymous said...

I've been searching all night long to find out if being stupid is a pre-requisite to being a socialist Democrat. Good news Guru. You and Johnny come by it all by yourselves. It's not a pre-requisite.

First proof. You said Little Johnny said it well. Little Johnny says nothing very well. If he talks like he writes, I'd have to assume that therapy didn't work.

I can guarantee you that lawful contact will be heavily scrutinized because you socialist Democrats have raised such a stink about it. Lawful contact means that a cop has pulled you over for another reason and found during the course of his stopping you that you're possibly an illegal alien.

Although, I guess if you have such a distrust of law enforcement, it makes sense that you'd immediately think that they are all corrupt. This law is like the seatbelt law used to be here in Michigan. They could not pull you over for not wearing a seat belt. They had to pull you over for something else and if you weren't wearing your seat belt, then they could give you a ticket for the lack of a seat belt. I didn't hear you complain then.

As for your accent comment, you're just playing stupid again, but I'm convinced you're not playing. You didn't have to prove it to me.

It is ILLEGAL to racial profile according to the law. So you tell me. Do you expect the cops to break the law to catch those breaking the law (ILLEGAL aliens)? I'm curious, do you think all cops are lawbreakers or just the Arizona cops?

Little Johnny, you're wrong. The cops are not ordered to stop people that they feel are illegal. The law doesn't even take effect until the end of July. So how could they be ordered to stop people now? Are you an Arizona law officer and been told to stop people that look illegal?

People don't need to prove they are American citizens. They need to prove that they are here legally if they tell the cop that they are here legally. Guests to this country that are legal are required to carry their visitation documents with them at all times.

The Federal law that the Obama Administration is tasked with enforcing is actually more strict than the Arizona law. But Obama doesn't want to follow the law.

If you really want to make sure that this law is of no significance, the best way to do that is to tell Obama get off his lazy ass and do his job at the border by stopping the illegal aliens from coming here in the first place. Then you wouldn't have to worry about all of those corrupt Arizona law enforcement people. Let's see, Arizona law enforcement. Government. I guess now you socialist Democrats are anti-Government. That would make you the same as Timothy McVeigh.

Interesting turn of events.

Johnny C said...

Still using the same lame ass line of attack.. Dude you do know you belong to a movement that can't spell worth a damn?

But then again you're the guy who can listen to a three hour right wing talk show during a work week, and you claim you don't read any right wing blogs but you know the talking points. And little Not Anonymous jr got the world on his finger while asking someone do they want fries with that Big Mac.

Again the police have to stop people who they might believe are here illegally and ask them for proof that their American citizens. I don't know what right wing blog or right wing media outlet told you but your "information" but that's how it works.

I agree with Greg Palast's report, this law is about ensuring Arizona remind a Republican state.
Since the Latino population is growing and they're trending Democratic it would be only a matter of time that Arizona transforms from solidly Republican, leaning towards Democratic to outright Democratic state much like California.


I never seen a party that's willingly to tell the fastest growing minority group F.U. and vote for our opposition party only to pander to a dying voting base.

Communications guru said...

Again, anonymous, and you know this, there is no such thing as a “socialist” Democrat in this country, and that is just a false, fascist Republican talking point. The Republican strategy of telling that lie so many times that it will begin to stick is not going to work in this case. I’m not going to allow your constant lies to go unchecked, anonymous.

Again, anonymous, there is no person called “Little Johnny” who comments here. If you are referring to Johnny C, he is exactly correct.

Once again, anonymous, and you know this, there is no such thing as a “socialist” Democrat in this country, and that is just a false, fascist Republican talking point. Once Again, anonymous, lawful contact is what the law enforcement officer says is lawful. It should be scrutinized.

I have a distrust of law enforcement? Funny, it’s OK to have a distrust of government – hell, isn’t that what your teabagger movement is all about? – but I hate law enforcement because I suspect they may do what they have been doing? By the way, law enforcement is the government. You didn’t hear me complain about the seat belt law? Gee, how many years ago was that? How long has this blog been up? Michigan’s’ seatbelt law went into effect in effect on March 10, 2000. Seatbelts save lives, racial profiling does not.

As for your accent comment, all I did was use your words. If anyone is playing dumb, it’s you. I guess you need to specify that only those with a Hispanic accent are illegals.

Yes, it is illegal to racial profile according to the law, but it still goes on. Ion fact, the show-me-your-papers law ensures it will go on in Arizona.

Again, anonymous, there is no person called “Little Johnny” who comments here. If you are referring to Johnny C, he is exactly correct. The cops will be ordered to stop people that they feel are illegal when the law goes into effect.

Yes, people do need to prove they are American citizens, especially if they happen to have dark skin or speak with an accent – but according to you only those with a Hispanic accent.

President Obama is following the law, and if you think the immigration problem has only occurred on his watch, you, are, again, sadly mistaken. Like I have said before, we need comprehensive immigration reform, and just going after one aspect will not solve it.

Once again, anonymous, and you know this, there is no such thing as a “socialist” Democrat in this country, and that is just a false, fascist Republican talking point. I am also not anti-government, and Timothy McVeigh is one of your people, who spouted some of the same crap the teabaggers are spouting off about right now.

Not Anonymous said...

And there it is. Blame Bush or "Bush did it too".

Guru McVeigh, I read something last night, that I've been studying all morning. Perhaps you Socialist Democrats should take a look at it. It is the ONLY solution that has ever been successful and it took place in the 1950's.

It's called Operation Wetback.

By the way, I didn't say those with a hispanic accent. What you morons don't understand is that TERRORISTS from the middle east are coming in through our southern borders because they know that the gate is wide open and those that are supposed to be minding the store, are not there because President blase' is not interested.

I agree, we need illegal alien reform. Round them up. Ship them back and watch as thousands of others see that the round up has begun and they leave before getting caught. But you socialist Democrats don't have the balls to follow the law and do what's necessary. Too many feelings might get hurt.

Communications guru said...

And there it is. The hypocrisy of it’s OK for Bush to do it, but Obama.

“Guru McVeigh?” I don’t get it? My distaste for your teabagger and Militia “movement” is pretty clear on this blog. Once again, anonymous, there is no such thing as a “socialist” Democrat in this country, and that, as you know, is just a false, Fascist Republican talking point.

So you didn't say only those with Hispanic accents will be discriminated against, so I guess I was right when I said those people in Alabama and Texas need to have their papers ready.

Really? What terrorists from the Middle East came through “our southern borders?” The 9/11 terrorists, for example, flew into the U.S. from major U.S. airports.

I don’t know what you are agreeing with because I never said we need “illegal alien reform.” Like I have said before, we need comprehensive immigration reform, and just going after one aspect will not solve the problem. President Obama said he will address it, but right now he is busy driving us out of the Bush recession – the worst recession since the Great Depression by the way – and reforming health insurance that no president has been able to accomplish. Why not also address the reason they are crossing the border? It seems so typical of you that you want to persecute the poor laborer who just wants to work to feed his family, but ignore the employer hiring them and getting rich off of exploiting them.

Once again, anonymous there is no such thing as a “socialist” Democrat in this country, and that, as you know, is just a false, Fascist Republican talking point. Again, I’m not going to allow your constant lies to go unchecked, anonymous.

Not Anonymous said...

So, let me get this straight. It's not the aliens fault for coming here illegally. He just wants a job. You want to go after the employer who hires the illegal alien so that the illegal aliens can't get a job which is the reason they came here illegally in the first place and you think that these employers are getting rich employing aliens that are here illegally.

There are two things that can happen if you're successful. Those illegal aliens that you don't want to send back and don't want to arrest, won't have jobs because under your plan, the employers will be all locked up for hiring illegal aliens, or they will be fined for hiring illegal aliens in an attempt to get them to stop hiring illegal aliens. This would mean that the illegal aliens here would then have to find another way to feed themselves, clothe themselves and provide shelter for themselves. So they'll be hanging out under overpasses in their boxes, wandering the streets during the day, stealing from people and businesses, and likely assaulting citizens of this country just to get something to pay for food/clothes. Or, they could walk back through the desert to their homes, which they left because they couldn't get a job in their home country and couldn't earn a living wage if they did find a job.

Am I the only one that fails to see the logic in your position? Is this what all Socialist Democrats think or just your own warped opinion?

Regarding terrorists coming here from the south, last week the Homeland Security Department put the Texas border on alert for terrorists that were believed to be coming across their border from Mexico. Yep. No terrorists coming from the south, despite a myriad of reports of them already being here by way of South America and Mexico.


I'm really wondering if you're able to dress yourself in the morning if your mommy has to do it for you.

Not Anonymous said...

By the way, if you look back at previous comments, you'll see that I never said it was okay for Bush to ignore the borders and I said that the AMerican people were against the Bush comprehensive immigration plan which gave amnesty to those that have broken the law in coming here and are already here. It was done in 1986 under Reagan and it failed. I know it failed because it's happening again.

Bet you didn't read Operation Wetback. The only successful operation that got illegals out.

Communications guru said...

First, anonymous, I don’t think your capable of getting anything straight because it's very clear what my position is. The illegal alien who comes here is just as guilty as the person who hired them just so he can pay a slave wage. Is that straight enough? Again, anonymous, we need comprehensive immigration reform, and just going after one aspect will not solve the problem.

Are you seriously calling what you wrote logic? If you eliminate the reason they come here, that addresses part of the problem. Who said anything about locking up employers?

Once again, anonymous, there is no such thing as a “socialist” Democrat in this country, and that, as you know, is just a false, Fascist Republican talking point. Again, I’m not going to allow your constant lies to go unchecked, anonymous.

Name one terrorist or suspected terrorist who crossed over into the U.S. from the southern border.

I know I won this debate again because you had to break out the personal attacks. Just sad.

Communications guru said...

I never said you never said you said it was okay for Bush to ignore the borders, but why didn’t we hear any of this crap when Bush was in office?

I read every piece of twisted logic and lie you have posted.

Not Anonymous said...

You'll know that you've actually won a debate with me when you see me at one of your silly little meetings carrying the socialist signs, screaming the socialist mantra, and pledging allegiance to this Socialist President.

As for terrorists coming across the souther borders, here's just one link. There are many others. http://www.congress.org/congressorg/bio/userletter/?letter_id=5241829636&content_dir=congressorg

You want to fix the problem of illegal aliens. There's a very simple way to do it.

ENFORCE THE EXISTING LAW.

Why pass new laws when these assholes in Washington can't enforce the existing laws?

Communications guru said...

Sorry, anonymous, I already won the debate, but I know I can never change a closed mind. Once again, anonymous, there is no such thing as a “socialist” Democrat in this country, and that, as you know, is just a false, Fascist Republican talking point. Again, I’m not going to allow your constant lies to go unchecked, anonymous.

I’m still waiting for you to name one terrorist or suspected terrorist who crossed over into the U.S. from the southern border. Seriously, WorldNetDaily is your source? Give me a break. You’re better off sticking to your false, personal smears.

The fact remains this is a complex problem that needs a comprehensive solution.

Not Anonymous said...

World net daily? Where the hell did you get that from?

Ok, look, it's from Congress.org. Had you looked at the link that I sent you'd have seen it was a link with Congressman Scott. He's a Socialist Democrat, just like you.

Tell you what. Ask your mom to come down to your basement and look at your computer and have her pull up the link. Then have her read it to you.

Man, you're funny. They list on there the ones that they've caught and show how many came from what country and you come up with World Net Daily. You really are dumber than the knot in a piece of wood.

Thank you so much for once again making my points for me.

If someone punched you in the face, you'd claim it didn't happen that you instead rammed your face into their knuckles.

Communications guru said...

Are you serous? That article is from written by Chelsea Schilling, a staff writer at WorldNetDaily, and if you look at the top of that piece, you will see her byline.
http://www.wnd.com/Who's%20Who%20at%20WND

I’m still waiting for you to name one terrorist or suspected terrorist who crossed over into the U.S. from the southern border. There well may be one, but no where near the number that have simply flown into the country on an airline.

Once again, anonymous, there is no such thing as a “socialist” Democrat in this country, and that, as you know, is just a false, Fascist Republican talking point. Again, I’m not going to allow your constant lies to go unchecked, anonymous. I am a proud liberal Democrat. I see by the false, personal smears you again have no facts. I win the debate again.

Someday maybe you will grow a pair, anonymous coward, and grow a pair and stand by the shit you write.