Total Posts:21|Showing Posts:1-21
Jump to topic:

Round them up and throw them all in jail

sadolite
Posts: 8,837
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2015 9:18:14 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
With precedent being set by the arrest and jailing of the county clerk in Kentucky for refusing to obey federal law by refusing to issue marriage licenses to gay couples, all public officials refusing to obey and enforce any federal law should also be thrown in jail. Primarily all public officials of sanctuary cities who refuse to enforce and obey federal immigration laws. We either have rule of law or we don't. Now lets hear some excuses why the public officials who refuse to obey federal immigration laws get a pass and still think in your mind there is still rule of law in this country.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,207
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2015 10:46:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/4/2015 9:18:14 PM, sadolite wrote:
With precedent being set by the arrest and jailing of the county clerk in Kentucky for refusing to obey federal law by refusing to issue marriage licenses to gay couples, all public officials refusing to obey and enforce any federal law should also be thrown in jail. Primarily all public officials of sanctuary cities who refuse to enforce and obey federal immigration laws. We either have rule of law or we don't. Now lets hear some excuses why the public officials who refuse to obey federal immigration laws get a pass and still think in your mind there is still rule of law in this country.

Sure dude. All for it. Just stroke the check for buses, police overtime, plane tickets, monitoring and tracking, set aside some legal money for those who will be hurt or worse during such raids... no worries, though. I am sure its not THAT expensive... right? I mean, its probably practically free. Right?
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
sadolite
Posts: 8,837
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2015 10:51:34 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/4/2015 10:46:57 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 9/4/2015 9:18:14 PM, sadolite wrote:
With precedent being set by the arrest and jailing of the county clerk in Kentucky for refusing to obey federal law by refusing to issue marriage licenses to gay couples, all public officials refusing to obey and enforce any federal law should also be thrown in jail. Primarily all public officials of sanctuary cities who refuse to enforce and obey federal immigration laws. We either have rule of law or we don't. Now lets hear some excuses why the public officials who refuse to obey federal immigration laws get a pass and still think in your mind there is still rule of law in this country.

Sure dude. All for it. Just stroke the check for buses, police overtime, plane tickets, monitoring and tracking, set aside some legal money for those who will be hurt or worse during such raids... no worries, though. I am sure its not THAT expensive... right? I mean, its probably practically free. Right?

How about we use all the money public money being spent for food stamps, housing free education, on and on and on. We seem to have an unlimited supply of tax dollars for that.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
Outplayz
Posts: 1,267
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2015 2:05:08 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/4/2015 9:18:14 PM, sadolite wrote:
With precedent being set by the arrest and jailing of the county clerk in Kentucky for refusing to obey federal law by refusing to issue marriage licenses to gay couples, all public officials refusing to obey and enforce any federal law should also be thrown in jail. Primarily all public officials of sanctuary cities who refuse to enforce and obey federal immigration laws. We either have rule of law or we don't. Now lets hear some excuses why the public officials who refuse to obey federal immigration laws get a pass and still think in your mind there is still rule of law in this country.

Holdings: The Supreme Court, George, C.J., held that:
1 opponents of same sex marriage lacked standing to pursue claims for declaratory relief; but
2 they preserved ability to present their views through amicus curiae status;
3 privacy and due process provisions of state Constitution guarantee basic civil right of marriage to all individuals and couples, without regard to their sexual orientation;
4 for purposes of determining applicable standard of review under state Constitutional equal protection analysis, discrimination based on sexual orientation is not encompassed within constitutional prohibition against discrimination based on sex; but
5 as issue of first impression, sexual orientation is a suspect classification for purposes of state equal protection clause, and thus statutes that treat persons differently based on their sexual orientation are subject to strict scrutiny analysis;
6 differential treatment accorded opposite-sex and same-sex couples by state statutes impinges upon same-sex couples' fundamental privacy interest in having official family relationship accorded equal respect and dignity, and thus strict scrutiny analysis applies on this basis as well;
7 Family Code provisions limiting designation of marriage to opposite-sex couples are not necessary to serve compelling state interest, and thus those provisions violate state equal protection clause;
8 language in Family Code provision limiting marriage to a union "between a man and a woman" is unconstitutional, and must be stricken from the statute; and
9 Family Code provision stating that "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California" is unconstitutional, and cannot stand.

This is why the clerk didn't win.

Now, tell me what immigration laws you think are being broken, and i will try to do the research to explain what's going on. I'm not too familiar with immigration law.

"*1 Juvenal Gutierrez"Garcia appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 57"month sentence for being an illegal alien found in the United States following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. " 1326. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Gutierrez"Garcia's counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided Gutierrez"Garcia the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.
Gutierrez"Garcia has waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence. Because the record discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the appeal waiver, we dismiss the appeal. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986"88 (9th Cir.2009)." U.S. v. Gutierrez-Garcia, (2015) WL 5167870.

At first glance, it doesn't seem like they are going soft on the issue.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2015 3:27:52 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/4/2015 9:18:14 PM, sadolite wrote:
With precedent being set by the arrest and jailing of the county clerk in Kentucky for refusing to obey federal law by refusing to issue marriage licenses to gay couples, all public officials refusing to obey and enforce any federal law should also be thrown in jail. Primarily all public officials of sanctuary cities who refuse to enforce and obey federal immigration laws. We either have rule of law or we don't. Now lets hear some excuses why the public officials who refuse to obey federal immigration laws get a pass and still think in your mind there is still rule of law in this country.

Several good answers so far. All I will add is, the government employees are not the ones "refusing" to do the job on immigration. The local governments are telling them not to because they can't afford to do the job. Your post is turning this on its head.
sadolite
Posts: 8,837
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2015 11:05:49 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/6/2015 3:27:52 AM, TBR wrote:
At 9/4/2015 9:18:14 PM, sadolite wrote:
With precedent being set by the arrest and jailing of the county clerk in Kentucky for refusing to obey federal law by refusing to issue marriage licenses to gay couples, all public officials refusing to obey and enforce any federal law should also be thrown in jail. Primarily all public officials of sanctuary cities who refuse to enforce and obey federal immigration laws. We either have rule of law or we don't. Now lets hear some excuses why the public officials who refuse to obey federal immigration laws get a pass and still think in your mind there is still rule of law in this country.

Several good answers so far. All I will add is, the government employees are not the ones "refusing" to do the job on immigration. The local governments are telling them not to because they can't afford to do the job. Your post is turning this on its head.

Why is it that they can't afford to do their job but we can afford billions upon billions in welfare subsidies. The very people who say they can't afford to do their job are the ones who created the problem in the first place when it would have cost very little comparatively. Saying one can't enforce the law because it will cost to much is the ultimate straw man.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
sadolite
Posts: 8,837
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2015 11:12:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/6/2015 11:05:49 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 9/6/2015 3:27:52 AM, TBR wrote:
At 9/4/2015 9:18:14 PM, sadolite wrote:
With precedent being set by the arrest and jailing of the county clerk in Kentucky for refusing to obey federal law by refusing to issue marriage licenses to gay couples, all public officials refusing to obey and enforce any federal law should also be thrown in jail. Primarily all public officials of sanctuary cities who refuse to enforce and obey federal immigration laws. We either have rule of law or we don't. Now lets hear some excuses why the public officials who refuse to obey federal immigration laws get a pass and still think in your mind there is still rule of law in this country.

Several good answers so far. All I will add is, the government employees are not the ones "refusing" to do the job on immigration. The local governments are telling them not to because they can't afford to do the job. Your post is turning this on its head.

Why is it that they can't afford to do their job but we can afford billions upon billions in welfare subsidies. The very people who say they can't afford to do their job are the ones who created the problem in the first place when it would have cost very little comparatively. Saying one can't enforce the law because it will cost to much is the ultimate straw man.

We as a nation do not have to round up illegal immigrants we simply make them self deport at their expense. Make it impossible to work or earn money. The idea that there is only one way to deal with illegal immigrants is absurd. There are dozens of ways to get them out of the country that will cost the taxpayer nothing. Saying the only way is to go door to door is also the ultimate straw man. People who say such absurd things don't want to deal with the problem and want to stick their head in the sand and go la la la la la I can't hear you. The truth is they can't defend their position of lawlessness so they make excuses not to up hold the law, Illegals can easily be dealt with it is a matter of govt acting and enforcing the law.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2015 11:17:06 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/6/2015 11:05:49 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 9/6/2015 3:27:52 AM, TBR wrote:
At 9/4/2015 9:18:14 PM, sadolite wrote:
With precedent being set by the arrest and jailing of the county clerk in Kentucky for refusing to obey federal law by refusing to issue marriage licenses to gay couples, all public officials refusing to obey and enforce any federal law should also be thrown in jail. Primarily all public officials of sanctuary cities who refuse to enforce and obey federal immigration laws. We either have rule of law or we don't. Now lets hear some excuses why the public officials who refuse to obey federal immigration laws get a pass and still think in your mind there is still rule of law in this country.

Several good answers so far. All I will add is, the government employees are not the ones "refusing" to do the job on immigration. The local governments are telling them not to because they can't afford to do the job. Your post is turning this on its head.

Why is it that they can't afford to do their job but we can afford billions upon billions in welfare subsidies. The very people who say they can't afford to do their job are the ones who created the problem in the first place when it would have cost very little comparatively. Saying one can't enforce the law because it will cost to much is the ultimate straw man.

It is the states that are having trouble covering the costs, not the fed. It is not a strawman, it is you wish fulfilment - looking for a parallel that doesn't work.
sadolite
Posts: 8,837
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2015 11:24:43 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/6/2015 11:17:06 PM, TBR wrote:
At 9/6/2015 11:05:49 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 9/6/2015 3:27:52 AM, TBR wrote:
At 9/4/2015 9:18:14 PM, sadolite wrote:
With precedent being set by the arrest and jailing of the county clerk in Kentucky for refusing to obey federal law by refusing to issue marriage licenses to gay couples, all public officials refusing to obey and enforce any federal law should also be thrown in jail. Primarily all public officials of sanctuary cities who refuse to enforce and obey federal immigration laws. We either have rule of law or we don't. Now lets hear some excuses why the public officials who refuse to obey federal immigration laws get a pass and still think in your mind there is still rule of law in this country.

Several good answers so far. All I will add is, the government employees are not the ones "refusing" to do the job on immigration. The local governments are telling them not to because they can't afford to do the job. Your post is turning this on its head.

Why is it that they can't afford to do their job but we can afford billions upon billions in welfare subsidies. The very people who say they can't afford to do their job are the ones who created the problem in the first place when it would have cost very little comparatively. Saying one can't enforce the law because it will cost to much is the ultimate straw man.

It is the states that are having trouble covering the costs, not the fed. It is not a strawman, it is you wish fulfilment - looking for a parallel that doesn't work.

It is the federal govts responsibility. Again you totally ignore the fact that it is the very public officials refusing to enforce the law that created the problem. They all should be rotting in prison.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
AureusRex
Posts: 66
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2015 1:06:21 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/4/2015 10:51:34 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 9/4/2015 10:46:57 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 9/4/2015 9:18:14 PM, sadolite wrote:
With precedent being set by the arrest and jailing of the county clerk in Kentucky for refusing to obey federal law by refusing to issue marriage licenses to gay couples, all public officials refusing to obey and enforce any federal law should also be thrown in jail. Primarily all public officials of sanctuary cities who refuse to enforce and obey federal immigration laws. We either have rule of law or we don't. Now lets hear some excuses why the public officials who refuse to obey federal immigration laws get a pass and still think in your mind there is still rule of law in this country.

Sure dude. All for it. Just stroke the check for buses, police overtime, plane tickets, monitoring and tracking, set aside some legal money for those who will be hurt or worse during such raids... no worries, though. I am sure its not THAT expensive... right? I mean, its probably practically free. Right?

How about we use all the money public money being spent for food stamps, housing free education, on and on and on. We seem to have an unlimited supply of tax dollars for that.

Oh, you clever man. That sounds like an excellent idea. Next time there's an election let's say that we value tracking down Mexicans more than the welfare of our own people.
sadolite
Posts: 8,837
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2015 1:44:29 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/8/2015 1:06:21 AM, AureusRex wrote:
At 9/4/2015 10:51:34 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 9/4/2015 10:46:57 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 9/4/2015 9:18:14 PM, sadolite wrote:
With precedent being set by the arrest and jailing of the county clerk in Kentucky for refusing to obey federal law by refusing to issue marriage licenses to gay couples, all public officials refusing to obey and enforce any federal law should also be thrown in jail. Primarily all public officials of sanctuary cities who refuse to enforce and obey federal immigration laws. We either have rule of law or we don't. Now lets hear some excuses why the public officials who refuse to obey federal immigration laws get a pass and still think in your mind there is still rule of law in this country.

Sure dude. All for it. Just stroke the check for buses, police overtime, plane tickets, monitoring and tracking, set aside some legal money for those who will be hurt or worse during such raids... no worries, though. I am sure its not THAT expensive... right? I mean, its probably practically free. Right?

How about we use all the money public money being spent for food stamps, housing free education, on and on and on. We seem to have an unlimited supply of tax dollars for that.

Oh, you clever man. That sounds like an excellent idea. Next time there's an election let's say that we value tracking down Mexicans more than the welfare of our own people.

We don't have to track them down. That is the big straw man. We make it impossible to access govt benefits and find work. The solution is that easy. What we lack is will to do it or enforce it.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
AureusRex
Posts: 66
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2015 2:06:43 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/8/2015 1:44:29 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 9/8/2015 1:06:21 AM, AureusRex wrote:
At 9/4/2015 10:51:34 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 9/4/2015 10:46:57 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 9/4/2015 9:18:14 PM, sadolite wrote:
With precedent being set by the arrest and jailing of the county clerk in Kentucky for refusing to obey federal law by refusing to issue marriage licenses to gay couples, all public officials refusing to obey and enforce any federal law should also be thrown in jail. Primarily all public officials of sanctuary cities who refuse to enforce and obey federal immigration laws. We either have rule of law or we don't. Now lets hear some excuses why the public officials who refuse to obey federal immigration laws get a pass and still think in your mind there is still rule of law in this country.

Sure dude. All for it. Just stroke the check for buses, police overtime, plane tickets, monitoring and tracking, set aside some legal money for those who will be hurt or worse during such raids... no worries, though. I am sure its not THAT expensive... right? I mean, its probably practically free. Right?

How about we use all the money public money being spent for food stamps, housing free education, on and on and on. We seem to have an unlimited supply of tax dollars for that.

Oh, you clever man. That sounds like an excellent idea. Next time there's an election let's say that we value tracking down Mexicans more than the welfare of our own people.

We don't have to track them down. That is the big straw man. We make it impossible to access govt benefits and find work. The solution is that easy. What we lack is will to do it or enforce it.

You do realise that if your presence in the country is illegal that it is thus illegal to seek work or benefits? Either your position is that people do need to be tracked down or that a rigid bureaucracy, i.e. the government, is ignoring its own regulations. Either way, it would require an impressive amount of hysteria-inducing propaganda to make this popular. 'We've cut this family's benefits in order to track down Mariusz the undocumented strawberry-picker', cue rapturous applause.
sadolite
Posts: 8,837
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2015 9:00:42 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/8/2015 2:06:43 AM, AureusRex wrote:
At 9/8/2015 1:44:29 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 9/8/2015 1:06:21 AM, AureusRex wrote:
At 9/4/2015 10:51:34 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 9/4/2015 10:46:57 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 9/4/2015 9:18:14 PM, sadolite wrote:
With precedent being set by the arrest and jailing of the county clerk in Kentucky for refusing to obey federal law by refusing to issue marriage licenses to gay couples, all public officials refusing to obey and enforce any federal law should also be thrown in jail. Primarily all public officials of sanctuary cities who refuse to enforce and obey federal immigration laws. We either have rule of law or we don't. Now lets hear some excuses why the public officials who refuse to obey federal immigration laws get a pass and still think in your mind there is still rule of law in this country.

Sure dude. All for it. Just stroke the check for buses, police overtime, plane tickets, monitoring and tracking, set aside some legal money for those who will be hurt or worse during such raids... no worries, though. I am sure its not THAT expensive... right? I mean, its probably practically free. Right?

How about we use all the money public money being spent for food stamps, housing free education, on and on and on. We seem to have an unlimited supply of tax dollars for that.

Oh, you clever man. That sounds like an excellent idea. Next time there's an election let's say that we value tracking down Mexicans more than the welfare of our own people.

We don't have to track them down. That is the big straw man. We make it impossible to access govt benefits and find work. The solution is that easy. What we lack is will to do it or enforce it.

You do realise that if your presence in the country is illegal that it is thus illegal to seek work or benefits? Either your position is that people do need to be tracked down or that a rigid bureaucracy, i.e. the government, is ignoring its own regulations. Either way, it would require an impressive amount of hysteria-inducing propaganda to make this popular. 'We've cut this family's benefits in order to track down Mariusz the undocumented strawberry-picker', cue rapturous applause.

" thus illegal to seek work or benefits?" You do realize that is patently false. Illegals have access to all kinds of govt benefits. Just because illegal aliens are not legally entitled to these benefits does not mean they do not apply for them. Yes. It is true that illegal aliens have received grants, professional accreditations, loans, WIC, disability, public housing, college educations, food stamps, unemployment benefits, and tax credits from state and federal agencies.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, at least one third of foreign born citizens in the United States are illegal aliens. Since children born in the United States are considered U.S. Citizens, illegals get welfare. It's called anchor baby. They get one born here and move the whole family over.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
AureusRex
Posts: 66
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2015 4:08:58 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/8/2015 9:00:42 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 9/8/2015 2:06:43 AM, AureusRex wrote:
At 9/8/2015 1:44:29 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 9/8/2015 1:06:21 AM, AureusRex wrote:
At 9/4/2015 10:51:34 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 9/4/2015 10:46:57 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 9/4/2015 9:18:14 PM, sadolite wrote:
With precedent being set by the arrest and jailing of the county clerk in Kentucky for refusing to obey federal law by refusing to issue marriage licenses to gay couples, all public officials refusing to obey and enforce any federal law should also be thrown in jail. Primarily all public officials of sanctuary cities who refuse to enforce and obey federal immigration laws. We either have rule of law or we don't. Now lets hear some excuses why the public officials who refuse to obey federal immigration laws get a pass and still think in your mind there is still rule of law in this country.

Sure dude. All for it. Just stroke the check for buses, police overtime, plane tickets, monitoring and tracking, set aside some legal money for those who will be hurt or worse during such raids... no worries, though. I am sure its not THAT expensive... right? I mean, its probably practically free. Right?

How about we use all the money public money being spent for food stamps, housing free education, on and on and on. We seem to have an unlimited supply of tax dollars for that.

Oh, you clever man. That sounds like an excellent idea. Next time there's an election let's say that we value tracking down Mexicans more than the welfare of our own people.

We don't have to track them down. That is the big straw man. We make it impossible to access govt benefits and find work. The solution is that easy. What we lack is will to do it or enforce it.

You do realise that if your presence in the country is illegal that it is thus illegal to seek work or benefits? Either your position is that people do need to be tracked down or that a rigid bureaucracy, i.e. the government, is ignoring its own regulations. Either way, it would require an impressive amount of hysteria-inducing propaganda to make this popular. 'We've cut this family's benefits in order to track down Mariusz the undocumented strawberry-picker', cue rapturous applause.

" thus illegal to seek work or benefits?" You do realize that is patently false. Illegals have access to all kinds of govt benefits. Just because illegal aliens are not legally entitled to these benefits does not mean they do not apply for them. Yes. It is true that illegal aliens have received grants, professional accreditations, loans, WIC, disability, public housing, college educations, food stamps, unemployment benefits, and tax credits from state and federal agencies.

Exactly how stupid are you? I state that it is illegal to seek work or benefits, and you read that, you thought about it, and you decided to 'refute' that statement by pointing out that 'illegal aliens' are not legally entitled to work or receive benefits, i.e., exactly what I said. This is interesting, because you said that no one needs to be tracked down, it just needs to be made 'impossible' for such people to work or receive benefits, which I can only assume means that you want for that to be made illegal. Again, I am confused by how these ideas float around in your head.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, at least one third of foreign born citizens in the United States are illegal aliens. Since children born in the United States are considered U.S. Citizens, illegals get welfare. It's called anchor baby. They get one born here and move the whole family over.

I do not quite understand what you mean here. Do you think an American baby should not receive help from the government, or that babies born in the US should no longer become US citizens?
sadolite
Posts: 8,837
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2015 2:06:07 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/10/2015 4:08:58 AM, AureusRex wrote:
At 9/8/2015 9:00:42 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 9/8/2015 2:06:43 AM, AureusRex wrote:
At 9/8/2015 1:44:29 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 9/8/2015 1:06:21 AM, AureusRex wrote:
At 9/4/2015 10:51:34 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 9/4/2015 10:46:57 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 9/4/2015 9:18:14 PM, sadolite wrote:
With precedent being set by the arrest and jailing of the county clerk in Kentucky for refusing to obey federal law by refusing to issue marriage licenses to gay couples, all public officials refusing to obey and enforce any federal law should also be thrown in jail. Primarily all public officials of sanctuary cities who refuse to enforce and obey federal immigration laws. We either have rule of law or we don't. Now lets hear some excuses why the public officials who refuse to obey federal immigration laws get a pass and still think in your mind there is still rule of law in this country.

Sure dude. All for it. Just stroke the check for buses, police overtime, plane tickets, monitoring and tracking, set aside some legal money for those who will be hurt or worse during such raids... no worries, though. I am sure its not THAT expensive... right? I mean, its probably practically free. Right?

How about we use all the money public money being spent for food stamps, housing free education, on and on and on. We seem to have an unlimited supply of tax dollars for that.

Oh, you clever man. That sounds like an excellent idea. Next time there's an election let's say that we value tracking down Mexicans more than the welfare of our own people.

We don't have to track them down. That is the big straw man. We make it impossible to access govt benefits and find work. The solution is that easy. What we lack is will to do it or enforce it.

You do realise that if your presence in the country is illegal that it is thus illegal to seek work or benefits? Either your position is that people do need to be tracked down or that a rigid bureaucracy, i.e. the government, is ignoring its own regulations. Either way, it would require an impressive amount of hysteria-inducing propaganda to make this popular. 'We've cut this family's benefits in order to track down Mariusz the undocumented strawberry-picker', cue rapturous applause.

" thus illegal to seek work or benefits?" You do realize that is patently false. Illegals have access to all kinds of govt benefits. Just because illegal aliens are not legally entitled to these benefits does not mean they do not apply for them. Yes. It is true that illegal aliens have received grants, professional accreditations, loans, WIC, disability, public housing, college educations, food stamps, unemployment benefits, and tax credits from state and federal agencies.

Exactly how stupid are you? I state that it is illegal to seek work or benefits, and you read that, you thought about it, and you decided to 'refute' that statement by pointing out that 'illegal aliens' are not legally entitled to work or receive benefits, i.e., exactly what I said. This is interesting, because you said that no one needs to be tracked down, it just needs to be made 'impossible' for such people to work or receive benefits, which I can only assume means that you want for that to be made illegal. Again, I am confused by how these ideas float around in your head.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, at least one third of foreign born citizens in the United States are illegal aliens. Since children born in the United States are considered U.S. Citizens, illegals get welfare. It's called anchor baby. They get one born here and move the whole family over.

I do not quite understand what you mean here. Do you think an American baby should not receive help from the government, or that babies born in the US should no longer become US citizens?

And now we come full circle to the point of the OP. The god damn govt isn't enforcing the law. That is why all the public officials who don't enforce the law who took an oath to should all be thrown in jail. They created this problem. They should pay dearly for it. I as the taxpayer have been paying billion upon billions of dollars for their worthless excuse as enforcers of law. They are the worst of all human kind. They are evil and think they are good.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
AureusRex
Posts: 66
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2015 1:01:03 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/11/2015 2:06:07 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 9/10/2015 4:08:58 AM, AureusRex wrote:
At 9/8/2015 9:00:42 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 9/8/2015 2:06:43 AM, AureusRex wrote:
At 9/8/2015 1:44:29 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 9/8/2015 1:06:21 AM, AureusRex wrote:
At 9/4/2015 10:51:34 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 9/4/2015 10:46:57 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 9/4/2015 9:18:14 PM, sadolite wrote:
With precedent being set by the arrest and jailing of the county clerk in Kentucky for refusing to obey federal law by refusing to issue marriage licenses to gay couples, all public officials refusing to obey and enforce any federal law should also be thrown in jail. Primarily all public officials of sanctuary cities who refuse to enforce and obey federal immigration laws. We either have rule of law or we don't. Now lets hear some excuses why the public officials who refuse to obey federal immigration laws get a pass and still think in your mind there is still rule of law in this country.

Sure dude. All for it. Just stroke the check for buses, police overtime, plane tickets, monitoring and tracking, set aside some legal money for those who will be hurt or worse during such raids... no worries, though. I am sure its not THAT expensive... right? I mean, its probably practically free. Right?

How about we use all the money public money being spent for food stamps, housing free education, on and on and on. We seem to have an unlimited supply of tax dollars for that.

Oh, you clever man. That sounds like an excellent idea. Next time there's an election let's say that we value tracking down Mexicans more than the welfare of our own people.

We don't have to track them down. That is the big straw man. We make it impossible to access govt benefits and find work. The solution is that easy. What we lack is will to do it or enforce it.

You do realise that if your presence in the country is illegal that it is thus illegal to seek work or benefits? Either your position is that people do need to be tracked down or that a rigid bureaucracy, i.e. the government, is ignoring its own regulations. Either way, it would require an impressive amount of hysteria-inducing propaganda to make this popular. 'We've cut this family's benefits in order to track down Mariusz the undocumented strawberry-picker', cue rapturous applause.

" thus illegal to seek work or benefits?" You do realize that is patently false. Illegals have access to all kinds of govt benefits. Just because illegal aliens are not legally entitled to these benefits does not mean they do not apply for them. Yes. It is true that illegal aliens have received grants, professional accreditations, loans, WIC, disability, public housing, college educations, food stamps, unemployment benefits, and tax credits from state and federal agencies.

Exactly how stupid are you? I state that it is illegal to seek work or benefits, and you read that, you thought about it, and you decided to 'refute' that statement by pointing out that 'illegal aliens' are not legally entitled to work or receive benefits, i.e., exactly what I said. This is interesting, because you said that no one needs to be tracked down, it just needs to be made 'impossible' for such people to work or receive benefits, which I can only assume means that you want for that to be made illegal. Again, I am confused by how these ideas float around in your head.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, at least one third of foreign born citizens in the United States are illegal aliens. Since children born in the United States are considered U.S. Citizens, illegals get welfare. It's called anchor baby. They get one born here and move the whole family over.

I do not quite understand what you mean here. Do you think an American baby should not receive help from the government, or that babies born in the US should no longer become US citizens?

And now we come full circle to the point of the OP. The god damn govt isn't enforcing the law. That is why all the public officials who don't enforce the law who took an oath to should all be thrown in jail. They created this problem. They should pay dearly for it. I as the taxpayer have been paying billion upon billions of dollars for their worthless excuse as enforcers of law. They are the worst of all human kind. They are evil and think they are good.

Unfortunately you suffer from a serious delusion, namely, that the government is not a soulless bureaucracy. I have an Australian friend, who is white, wealthy, and furthermore, a completely legal resident of the UK. Yet, and I asked him, he had to provide documentation when he applied for a place at university, a student loan, a driving license... and every time he enters the country of course. I cannot speak for employers, but they are private entities. Do you really mean to argue that US officials disobey the law to approve applications for benefits?
sadolite
Posts: 8,837
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/13/2015 12:53:09 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/12/2015 1:01:03 AM, AureusRex wrote:
At 9/11/2015 2:06:07 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 9/10/2015 4:08:58 AM, AureusRex wrote:
At 9/8/2015 9:00:42 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 9/8/2015 2:06:43 AM, AureusRex wrote:
At 9/8/2015 1:44:29 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 9/8/2015 1:06:21 AM, AureusRex wrote:
At 9/4/2015 10:51:34 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 9/4/2015 10:46:57 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 9/4/2015 9:18:14 PM, sadolite wrote:
With precedent being set by the arrest and jailing of the county clerk in Kentucky for refusing to obey federal law by refusing to issue marriage licenses to gay couples, all public officials refusing to obey and enforce any federal law should also be thrown in jail. Primarily all public officials of sanctuary cities who refuse to enforce and obey federal immigration laws. We either have rule of law or we don't. Now lets hear some excuses why the public officials who refuse to obey federal immigration laws get a pass and still think in your mind there is still rule of law in this country.

Sure dude. All for it. Just stroke the check for buses, police overtime, plane tickets, monitoring and tracking, set aside some legal money for those who will be hurt or worse during such raids... no worries, though. I am sure its not THAT expensive... right? I mean, its probably practically free. Right?

How about we use all the money public money being spent for food stamps, housing free education, on and on and on. We seem to have an unlimited supply of tax dollars for that.

Oh, you clever man. That sounds like an excellent idea. Next time there's an election let's say that we value tracking down Mexicans more than the welfare of our own people.

We don't have to track them down. That is the big straw man. We make it impossible to access govt benefits and find work. The solution is that easy. What we lack is will to do it or enforce it.

You do realise that if your presence in the country is illegal that it is thus illegal to seek work or benefits? Either your position is that people do need to be tracked down or that a rigid bureaucracy, i.e. the government, is ignoring its own regulations. Either way, it would require an impressive amount of hysteria-inducing propaganda to make this popular. 'We've cut this family's benefits in order to track down Mariusz the undocumented strawberry-picker', cue rapturous applause.

" thus illegal to seek work or benefits?" You do realize that is patently false. Illegals have access to all kinds of govt benefits. Just because illegal aliens are not legally entitled to these benefits does not mean they do not apply for them. Yes. It is true that illegal aliens have received grants, professional accreditations, loans, WIC, disability, public housing, college educations, food stamps, unemployment benefits, and tax credits from state and federal agencies.

Exactly how stupid are you? I state that it is illegal to seek work or benefits, and you read that, you thought about it, and you decided to 'refute' that statement by pointing out that 'illegal aliens' are not legally entitled to work or receive benefits, i.e., exactly what I said. This is interesting, because you said that no one needs to be tracked down, it just needs to be made 'impossible' for such people to work or receive benefits, which I can only assume means that you want for that to be made illegal. Again, I am confused by how these ideas float around in your head.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, at least one third of foreign born citizens in the United States are illegal aliens. Since children born in the United States are considered U.S. Citizens, illegals get welfare. It's called anchor baby. They get one born here and move the whole family over.

I do not quite understand what you mean here. Do you think an American baby should not receive help from the government, or that babies born in the US should no longer become US citizens?

And now we come full circle to the point of the OP. The god damn govt isn't enforcing the law. That is why all the public officials who don't enforce the law who took an oath to should all be thrown in jail. They created this problem. They should pay dearly for it. I as the taxpayer have been paying billion upon billions of dollars for their worthless excuse as enforcers of law. They are the worst of all human kind. They are evil and think they are good.

Unfortunately you suffer from a serious delusion, namely, that the government is not a soulless bureaucracy. I have an Australian friend, who is white, wealthy, and furthermore, a completely legal resident of the UK. Yet, and I asked him, he had to provide documentation when he applied for a place at university, a student loan, a driving license... and every time he enters the country of course. I cannot speak for employers, but they are private entities. Do you really mean to argue that US officials disobey the law to approve applications for benefits?

Yes that is exactly what I am saying, Illegal aliens attend our public schools with impunity. Like I said, the anchor baby is what they use to get govt funds. It is you that is delusional and lives in denial.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
AureusRex
Posts: 66
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/13/2015 12:50:39 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/13/2015 12:53:09 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 9/12/2015 1:01:03 AM, AureusRex wrote:
At 9/11/2015 2:06:07 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 9/10/2015 4:08:58 AM, AureusRex wrote:
At 9/8/2015 9:00:42 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 9/8/2015 2:06:43 AM, AureusRex wrote:
At 9/8/2015 1:44:29 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 9/8/2015 1:06:21 AM, AureusRex wrote:
At 9/4/2015 10:51:34 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 9/4/2015 10:46:57 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 9/4/2015 9:18:14 PM, sadolite wrote:
With precedent being set by the arrest and jailing of the county clerk in Kentucky for refusing to obey federal law by refusing to issue marriage licenses to gay couples, all public officials refusing to obey and enforce any federal law should also be thrown in jail. Primarily all public officials of sanctuary cities who refuse to enforce and obey federal immigration laws. We either have rule of law or we don't. Now lets hear some excuses why the public officials who refuse to obey federal immigration laws get a pass and still think in your mind there is still rule of law in this country.

Sure dude. All for it. Just stroke the check for buses, police overtime, plane tickets, monitoring and tracking, set aside some legal money for those who will be hurt or worse during such raids... no worries, though. I am sure its not THAT expensive... right? I mean, its probably practically free. Right?

How about we use all the money public money being spent for food stamps, housing free education, on and on and on. We seem to have an unlimited supply of tax dollars for that.

Oh, you clever man. That sounds like an excellent idea. Next time there's an election let's say that we value tracking down Mexicans more than the welfare of our own people.

We don't have to track them down. That is the big straw man. We make it impossible to access govt benefits and find work. The solution is that easy. What we lack is will to do it or enforce it.

You do realise that if your presence in the country is illegal that it is thus illegal to seek work or benefits? Either your position is that people do need to be tracked down or that a rigid bureaucracy, i.e. the government, is ignoring its own regulations. Either way, it would require an impressive amount of hysteria-inducing propaganda to make this popular. 'We've cut this family's benefits in order to track down Mariusz the undocumented strawberry-picker', cue rapturous applause.

" thus illegal to seek work or benefits?" You do realize that is patently false. Illegals have access to all kinds of govt benefits. Just because illegal aliens are not legally entitled to these benefits does not mean they do not apply for them. Yes. It is true that illegal aliens have received grants, professional accreditations, loans, WIC, disability, public housing, college educations, food stamps, unemployment benefits, and tax credits from state and federal agencies.

Exactly how stupid are you? I state that it is illegal to seek work or benefits, and you read that, you thought about it, and you decided to 'refute' that statement by pointing out that 'illegal aliens' are not legally entitled to work or receive benefits, i.e., exactly what I said. This is interesting, because you said that no one needs to be tracked down, it just needs to be made 'impossible' for such people to work or receive benefits, which I can only assume means that you want for that to be made illegal. Again, I am confused by how these ideas float around in your head.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, at least one third of foreign born citizens in the United States are illegal aliens. Since children born in the United States are considered U.S. Citizens, illegals get welfare. It's called anchor baby. They get one born here and move the whole family over.

I do not quite understand what you mean here. Do you think an American baby should not receive help from the government, or that babies born in the US should no longer become US citizens?

And now we come full circle to the point of the OP. The god damn govt isn't enforcing the law. That is why all the public officials who don't enforce the law who took an oath to should all be thrown in jail. They created this problem. They should pay dearly for it. I as the taxpayer have been paying billion upon billions of dollars for their worthless excuse as enforcers of law. They are the worst of all human kind. They are evil and think they are good.

Unfortunately you suffer from a serious delusion, namely, that the government is not a soulless bureaucracy. I have an Australian friend, who is white, wealthy, and furthermore, a completely legal resident of the UK. Yet, and I asked him, he had to provide documentation when he applied for a place at university, a student loan, a driving license... and every time he enters the country of course. I cannot speak for employers, but they are private entities. Do you really mean to argue that US officials disobey the law to approve applications for benefits?

Yes that is exactly what I am saying, Illegal aliens attend our public schools with impunity. Like I said, the anchor baby is what they use to get govt funds. It is you that is delusional and lives in denial.

You're trying to argue that bureaucrats are breaking the law in order to help illegal immigrants, yet you have provided no evidence, and are attempting to prove something that appears to be extraordinarily unlikely in the first place. Bare assertions will not get you anywhere.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,250
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/13/2015 6:35:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Why would government officials themselves call it a sanctuary city.

Sanctuary from what? hmmm...

The law.

It really is no different, the supreme court won't overturn immigration laws, so conscientious objectors who work in the government ignore the law. They should be fired, they are law enforcers, not evangelists.
sadolite
Posts: 8,837
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/13/2015 10:07:07 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
"You're trying to argue that bureaucrats are breaking the law in order to help illegal immigrants, yet you have provided no evidence, and are attempting to prove something that appears to be extraordinarily unlikely in the first place. Bare assertions will not get you anywhere. "

You truly live in a state of denial. What is a sanctuary city? I am sure you have heard of this term. But you act ignorant and need everything spelled out for you. Go on sticking your head in the sand and saying LA :LA LALA LA I cant hear you.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
sadolite
Posts: 8,837
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/14/2015 3:07:37 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/13/2015 10:07:07 PM, sadolite wrote:
"You're trying to argue that bureaucrats are breaking the law in order to help illegal immigrants, yet you have provided no evidence, and are attempting to prove something that appears to be extraordinarily unlikely in the first place. Bare assertions will not get you anywhere. "

You truly live in a state of denial. What is a sanctuary city? I am sure you have heard of this term. But you act ignorant and need everything spelled out for you. Go on sticking your head in the sand and saying LA :LA LALA LA I cant hear you.

There is neither honor ,virtue or intellect in willful ignorance
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%