Arizona v Douchebags

There are a number of drone numb-nuts parroting the pending demise of the State of Arizona. I am not one of those and I pride myself on not being a parrot for any side. That said, on the meme of tourism armageddon I thought some truth might prove interesting.

Arizona tourism

37.4 million

Overnight visitors in 2008

I have to confess that I do not know the full definition of “overnight visitors”. I imagine it is far ranging and at its base looks for people to stay “overnight” as opposed to passing through. It seems to be a number of some worth.

$18.5 billion

Annual visitor spending in 2008

Any money is good money and money from those that give but do not take (via services etc.) is the best.

200,000

Employees

In a state of 6.5 million that’s 3% of the population that is tied to tourism.One has to wonder how many are possibly illegal if this stat includes the hotel&hospitality industry.

Sources: Arizona Office of Tourism and Arizona Tourism Alliance

Immigration-law backlash

Cities that have approved boycotts of Arizona:

• Boston

A city with a myriad of problems of it’s own, it’s useless total shit bag Mayor deems this a good idea.

• St. Paul, Minn.

This “most livable city” has as a sister city. The Mexican city of Culiacán. This is a known narco-city.

• Oakland

Of what I know of Oakland this is another example of mindless political grandstanding. Oakland is a shit hole that once embraced the thought that teaching/accepting Ebonics was a good idea.

• San Diego

Guess they’re exorcising themselves by proxy the fact they voted for California’s Prop 187

• West Hollywood

See above

• El Paso (city and county)

If it’s Texas I really have to wonder about their mental status. El Paso TX is a major recipient of the backwash from Ciudad Juarez Mexico.

• Boulder, Colo.

Typical of Boulder

Pending decisions by cities

Los Angeles. Seven council members signed a proposal for boycott on April 27. A spokesman for the city controller identified at least 12 city contracts with Arizona companies that are worth an estimated $7.2 million, according to the Los Angeles Times.

San Francisco. Mayor issued edict banning travel. Board of Supervisors to consider boycott resolution May 11.

Milwaukee. Common Council was going to vote May 4, but resolution put on hold for more work.

Public bodies that announced Arizona boycotts:

Denver Public Schools, banning work-related travel to the state.

What travel could there be? Bogus posturing.

Groups that announced travel boycotts of Arizona:

• Service Employees International Union

This is a good thing!. Now Arizona employers can look forward to not being attacked by graft munching thugs.

• United Food and Commercial Workers International Union

See above. I also doubt they had a lot of AZ bound travel plans. There are 50 states in the union. Scratch the South and Alaska and you still have plenty of places to go blow your members money at. Great irony here is most boycotters will go to Vegas and take day helicopter trips to the Grand Canyon. DOUCHEBAGS!!!!!!!!!

• National Council of La Raza

This is awesome. If these racist shit bags boycott Arizona perhaps Arizonan law enforcement will never have to use their “new” powers.

• Asian American Justice Center

An organization that actively tries to undermine America. One of the many groups that paints the immigrant picture with a broad brush. No lines between illegals and legals with these lawyers.They stand for law mmmpphhh ;their law seeing as they obviously hate America.On the illegal front Arizona may or may not have illegals from an Asian background. Hard to know since the Asian demographic of the state  is less than 3%. Of note Asians do make up the second largest bloc of illegals in the USA

• Center for Community Change

A group that probably couldn’t get ACORN funds to go and protest in Arizona anyway.This organization is pro-Amnesty,anti-American sovereignty.

• League of United Latin American Citizens

Staying out? Way to represent.

• National Puerto Rican Coalition

I just don’t know how this one even matters.Per 2000 US Census the PR population was 17,587 persons making up .3% of the population.

• Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights

These fucking communists! No seriously though they are an organization cloaked in goodness but that ultimately hate America.

Known cancellations of meetings or events planned in Arizona:

• National Urban League. The group issued a scathing rebuke of the city and immediately suspended consideration of Phoenix’s bid to host its 2012 annual conference.

Good. let’s face it though you all still hate them since the MLK thing.The NUL is a band of racists in their own right though which is a pity since they allegedly predominantly represent a demographic that is most hurt by illegal immigration.

• National Autonomous University of Mexico has canceled its exchange program with the University of Arizona.

Good!

• Autonomous University of San Luis Potosí has canceled its exchange program with the University of Arizona.

Stay stupid compadre.

The Round Up

All in all I have to say I see no reason to go to Arizona other than the Grand Canyon. Hey that’s me. It’s a dry heat folks so go if you want to but don’t be delusional that not going is going to hurt the state.
Dips in tax revenue will first and foremost hurt groups the “feelings crowd” supposedly care about. All in all when the new law goes into effect there will be an air of positivity.People other than race groups can get into that. Golfing in Scottsdale is a lot more fun when you don’t risk getting shot via drive by or kidnapped.Legal immigrants can be positively engaged in the civics of their community. The choice is theirs. America first…then make her better.
Advertisements

145 Comments

  1. As for the cities mentioned. Every one of them is a sanctuary city. Every one of them has a major Hispanic gang problem. Every one of them has major social problems that at least a degree of which can be traced directly to an influx of illegal aliens.

    As for the groups? The Unions are nothing but thugs in suits, enough said. The rest of the groups, as noted, are either racists, communists or both. All hell bent on destroying the United States.

  2. graychin says:

    Who is predicting tourism Armageddon? That’s silly.

    Arizona tourism will actually spike upward this year as a result of improvement in the US economy. Arizona will lose some business it would otherwise have had, but not many businesses or jobs will really be hurt by the law.

    The law is stupid, and so is a lot of the faux outrage over it. But “conservatives” should understand faux outrage very well. We see so much of it from them.

  3. Elric66 says:

    Obama Supporters Paint “Burn This Racist City” On Arizona Sidewalk!

    And we see real violent outrage Graychin

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jf7DlNMx7kM&feature=player_embedded

  4. Alfie says:

    graychin:Well not too throw any specific person under the bus but…Rutherford for one.I do possibly see a collision coming on the thought train express. The faux outrage point being where I am looking. I think (and hope) this will become very true. That Arizona will shake this out for Arizona and that the cheer and jeer leaders on both sides take their pom-poms and go away.
    Patrick: Yup. And I’ll add that having grown up and worked in heavily Latino populated areas (Chelsea,Jamaica Plain) many of these so called advocacy groups serve themselves first and foremost as opposed to the groups they allegedly care about. In fact I have many times people just wanting to move along only to get caught up in the s@#$storms these groups kick up without thinking of consequences or real desires.

  5. graychin says:

    Alfie, you aren’t nearly as civil and reasoned over here as you are on that other blog. There are some extremely ugly remarks up there demonizing people you disagree with.

    This is why some of us see more motivation behind this law than a simple, honorable desire to “enforce the law.” All this hateful anger and animosity keeps bubbling to the top.

    As for Patrick Sperry – what can I say?

  6. Elric66 says:

    These race baiting drones are so easily exposed.

  7. Alfie says:

    Alfie, you aren’t nearly as civil and reasoned over here as you are on that other blog. There are some extremely ugly remarks up there demonizing people you disagree with.
    I don’t understand this comment. I have had major disagreements with Elric and even Patrick has made the case that we are far from being in lock step with one another.
    If you have something in mind from my post that you fund uncivil please point it out. As for the comments sections. I actually do police them to a degree as perhaps Elric will attest to;however I also allow conversation to take place. With the latter I appreciate some buttons get pushed and lines possibly crossed but as I say in My About Page
    All comments should adhere to the WordPress terms of service and should refrain from personal attacks and obscenities. Your comments are a form of communication and reflective of one’s character.
    Views of opposition are welcomed as this is consistent with the purpose of this site. Comments should focus on the post not personalities.
    Comments are subject to moderation by blog owner. Comments containing excessive language or other incendiary content are subject to : deletion,editing and blocking. I’m all for free speech however this is about communication. Rants,unrelated views and arguing on personalities can be done on your blog.The views and opinions of those that comment are not necessarily the views of the Ed BO (editor,blog owner).
    Comments should be your view not multiple links or clippings from somewhere else.

    I’d invite you to click on the About&Policy tab on top and see for yourself.

  8. Alfie says:

    @Elric: I don’t see that at play here regards gc as I see concern over profiling to be different from pure race based identity politics crap. chin seems to have a healthy dose of the former not the latter.

  9. Elric66 says:

    Alfie,

    Trying to figure out what “hateful anger and animosity” he is talking about. So far, its all been on the pro illegal immigration side. Even provided some videos to back my argument. I do hope more states follow through and push these illegals to go back home or heard them to deep blue states and let them deal with it.

  10. Elric66 says:

    Alfie,

    He was playing the card on another thread. The law mentions nothing about race but he said it would be enforced based on race. Its the same thing.

  11. graychin says:

    Elric, thanks for the link to that “fair and balanced” video.

    Tell me again – what does any of this have to do with “Obama supporters”? I missed that part. (Don’t forget -illegals can’t vote.)

    I seriously doubt that the refried-bean swastika was smeared there by anyone Mexican. That must be the “fair and balanced” part.

  12. Elric66 says:

    “(Don’t forget -illegals can’t vote.)”

    Really? They cant? You need more ID to rent from Blockbuster than to vote. We also know that the dems want amnesty so they can pad their voting block. Perhaps we should implement Mexico’s immigration laws. Then we wouldnt have to worry about illegals protesting on our streets.

    Glad you liked the video. 🙂

  13. graychin says:

    Alfie, I was referring to what I believed was your work in characterizing the groups joining the boycott:

    Boston’s “useless total shit bag Mayor.”

    “Oakland is a shit hole that once embraced the thought that teaching/accepting Ebonics was a good idea.”

    “El Paso TX is a major recipient of the backwash from Ciudad Juarez Mexico.” “Backwash,” Alfie? “Backwash.”

    And it goes on and on. Are those your words or not? In this case the blog post seems to violate the comment policy!

  14. Elric66 says:

    Interesting someone whining about characterizing groups……Race baiter

    http://thegreatspot.wordpress.com/2010/05/08/give-me-my-country-back/

  15. graychin says:

    Elric, point out two cases of an illegal voting in Arizona and I’ll apologize. You can’t do that. It’s a boogyman hiding under your bed.

    In your world, they are out to get us all aren’t they?

  16. graychin says:

    And Elric – you “forgot” to tell me how the “fair and balanced” video shows Obama supporters.

    Because it’s all part of a grand conspiracy. Right?

  17. Elric66 says:

    “In your world, they are out to get us all aren’t they?”

    Who is they????

  18. Elric66 says:

    “And Elric – you “forgot” to tell me how the “fair and balanced” video shows Obama supporters.”

    al-Thuggy is pushing for amnesty. You think they support the “racist” Republicans?

  19. Elric66 says:

    Notice that “burn this “racist” city” didnt bother him?

  20. Alfie says:

    Comment Policy is different from whatever standards I hold myself to. I do allow commenters to call me out on my writings though.
    Mayor Menino is what I called him. He is yet another in a long line of Boston legacy mayors who are corrupt and undeserving of their post.
    As for: “Oakland is a shit hole that once embraced the thought that teaching/accepting Ebonics was a good idea.”
    Yeah what’s your point? A city that would disenfranchise their citizens are somehow the wisdom dolers on immigration policy?
    And then:
    “El Paso TX is a major recipient of the backwash from Ciudad Juarez Mexico.” “Backwash,” Alfie? “Backwash.”
    Perhaps back lash would be better? You are aware of the hell Ciudad Juarez is living through right? You are further aware that it flows into the states negatively just like in Nogales?
    I stand by what I said and would point out that it should be obvious that what I say is pretty fair.Disenfranchising citizens=bad. Mexico’s hell is real and is bad and needs to be rectified for people on both sides of the border. Corrupt mayors getting hosed on fire dept contract then diverting attention to a situation that would likely get Boston sued=bad.
    If you ever have a problem with something I put forth call me on it. I’ll always do my best to clarify.

  21. Alfie says:

    graychin I’m going to call for my quid pro quo here and now. Regards the video: Do you think all the scrambling and vandalism is just the work of some gringo agent provocateur?

  22. graychin says:

    Fair warning about me – when you ask me if something is “just” this or”only” that, you’re highly likely to get a “no” answer from me. If only life were that simple!

    No, the rioters in Phoenix are responsible for their own behavior and wrong to behave that way, and also they are hurting their own cause by giving “fair and balanced” media something to salivate over. There are no gringo agent provocateurs responsible. They done it to themselves.

    It was interesting that the “fair and balanced” report couldn’t find enough pro-Mexican bad behavior to fill their clip without including the gringo-perpetrated refried-bean swastika. Wouldn’t you agree?

  23. Elric66 says:

    We know blogging about how the Tea Party wants to go back to slavery is “fair and balance”

  24. graychin says:

    Comment Policy is different from whatever standards I hold myself to.

    Alfie – it’s your blog and you can do what you want to. And I’m a newbie here with zero standing. But it seems to me that the blogger should hold himself to a standard as high or higher than the standard he sets for the world of drooling morons out there. Not violate his own comment policy in the blog post. Set an example and all that.

    Just saying.

  25. graychin says:

    I hold no one to a standard of “fair and balanced unless they use it as their tag line.

    A blog is not a a news source. It’s a blog.

  26. Elric66 says:

    Live to your own standards. Stop smearing the Tea Party as racists.

  27. Alfie says:

    Well gc I think I can back up what I say/type and will gladly discuss it with those that disagree. That is an exacting standard methinks.As for your standing you actually have the same as the rest. You are allowed to stand up for what you believe. Nothing wrong with that.
    Thanks for your answer btw although I lost you.
    I don’t like Fox as a rule but it must be said someone needs to aim a camera at behavior like that otherwise truth and reality isn’t be put out for public consumption. I think Fox does it knowing how some will take it up and that is sad but to not film it and screen it is equally bad.
    I think there maybe agent provocateurs at work in Arizona but I think they are from neither “side”. I think there is some credibility to the thought that bloc groups are on the ground on both sides of the issue.People should recognize that.

  28. graychin says:

    Did I smear the Tea Party people as racists? I don’t think so.

  29. graychin says:

    Lost me? Come on – it isn’t THAT complicated.

    Just wondering. If I called Elric a “douchebag” – and could back it up – would you censor my post?

    It’s a hypothetical question. I’m NOT calling Elric a douchebag. 😀

  30. Elric66 says:

    “Did I smear the Tea Party people as racists? I don’t think so.”

    Saying they probably want to go back to the Confederacy is smearing them as racists. Thats ok, thats all you guys know how to do. Smear and play the race card.

  31. Alfie says:

    Touche of sorts. I was going to comment earlier that I’ve fallen victim to the mainstream pacification/legitimization of the word “douchebag” and that I regretted this.On the flip side when I curse in the e world I more often than not try to go the @##%&^$* route but admittedly do allow my passion to flow at times.I’m off today so I have spent more time in front of the Mac than usual. Still I do tend to post rapidly and going to Rogets every time I want to express my displeasure,dislike, etc about a politician or policy isn’t really in the cards.
    As for specifically calling a fellow commenter something,I think Elric can testify that I try to police that.

  32. graychin says:

    Elric, I didn’t say that either.

    Are you hallucinating? Or are you just a d*******g?

  33. Elric66 says:

    I already posted your post on the “evil racist tea partiers” wanting their country back.

  34. graychin says:

    I just went to my blog and looked. That was just posted today by my buddy Bville Yellow Dog, and I think it’s kinda over-the-top. He’s a little more “out there” than I am.

    Did you read the Salon article that the Dog linked? It isn’t YOUR country or MY country, it’s OUR country. And to say that “I want MY country back” is about as un-American as it gets, because the country that the people holding that sign want “back” never existed. Except perhaps south of the Mason-Dixon line.

  35. Elric66 says:

    We want the country back to the founding principles, with small government. Thats OUR country, whats yours? Big government, nationalizing every industry, regulating everything, groups rights not individual rights, open borders etc?

  36. Rutherford says:

    LOL …. Gray, Elric doesn’t understand that Obama is his President too. 😀

  37. graychin says:

    Elric – I don’t know you very well, but you sound like the sort who wants small government for corporations and big government for individuals.

    Do you favor smaller government for:

    Abortion restrictions?
    Deciding who can marry?
    Marijuana laws?
    Having to carry around papers proving you are a citizen?
    Biometric ID cards?
    Arresting and holding people with out charges?
    Denying some people their rights under the constitution, just because you want to?
    Detention without charges?
    Warrantless eavesdropping?

    Or do you thing that Big Brother Government is your friend in those cases?

    (Try to answer without calling me names. Bet you can’t do it! 😀 )

  38. Rutherford says:

    Hey, I resemble that remark!!! 🙂

    I actually agree with Graychin on this one. Over at my blog, you and Huck and G have interpreted all this outrage on my part when all I’ve ever said is the law is redundant and a terrible public relations move. I’ve said it so many times it’s like a broken record by now.

    You know why the law is “stupid”, as Graychin put it? I wish I had thought of this back on my blog but it just occurred to me now. You don’t LEGISLATE procedure. The problem in Arizona is enforcement of current law … which is a procedural issue. You solve it via procedural measures. You don’t solve it with a new law that demands that all brown skinned people be prepared to prove they belong here on a minutes notice. And don’t hand me the crap about profiling because you know full well folks who appear to be white will never muster sufficient “suspicion” to have their citizenship challenged.

    Am I outraged? No actually, I’m not. Do I think Jan Brewer is incredibly stupid? Damn right I do.

  39. Elric66 says:

    “Having to carry around papers proving you are a citizen?
    Biometric ID cards?”

    Interesting since the demomarxists are bringing that up….

    “Warrantless eavesdropping?”

    Interesting since al-Thuggy removed the sunsets for the Patriot Act

    “Deciding who can marry?”

    That include polygamy like for the muslims??????

    “Arresting and holding people with out charges?”

    We talking about captured foreign jihadists or American citizens.

    Funny that you didnt answer my questions on regulating and nationalizing. Whats your limit for that?

  40. Rutherford says:

    Graychin, I must warn you …. I DO know Elric and he will not answer your questions. Now you’re more than welcome to pursue the discussion but don’t be disappointed with the result. Take a look at how he’s answered your big v. small gov’t question. With a bunch of wise-ass remarks.

    Oh you also need to buy the Elric dictionary:
    al-Thuggy = OUR President, Barack Obama
    Demo-marxists = anyone who does not agree with Elric
    Drones = anyone who does not agree with Elric
    Race-baiters = anyone who is sensitive to racial issues and … wait for it … does not agree with Elric

    😀

  41. graychin says:

    Nothing has been nationalized except for the businesses that Uncle Sam BOUGHT to save them and their workers from forced liquidation. No one intends for the US to own General Motors permanently.

    Some don’t like giving even American citizens their constitutional rights if charged with terrorism. Good policy or Big Brother?

    There are more Christian polygamists in America than Muslim polygamists.

    Regulating? I’m all for it. West Virginia coal miners favor it. People who make their livings off the natural beauty and treasures of the Gulf Coast favor it. People who live downstream from places where coal-fired power plants dump the toxic ash favor it. People who breathe the exhaust from coal-fired power plants favor it. People who drink the discharge from oil refineries favor it. People in my part of the world whose streams are choked by algae growing in waste from chicken producers favor it.

    What’s your problem with it? It abridges corporate “freedom” to poison us and kill us for the sake of making a buck?

    “Demomarxists”? I WIN!

  42. Alfie says:

    Rutherford I believe it is comment #237:
    As we speak, Hispanics are fleeing the GOP in droves. AZ tourism is in major trouble. This is a total man-made disaster.
    Emphasis mine and properly prefaced in my comment to graychin,now stand up and wipe the bus tire prints off.
    I won’t take anything away from you regards you calling the law redundant. I will say though that it actually isn’t and commented as such in the thread @ your place.The states need to do this if they want to enforce the laws you champion. Hopefully when they do ICE will do better than they did down at Rikers costing NYC 140k+.

  43. Alfie says:

    graychin I wonder if you think smaller government necessarily means ineffective govt.?

  44. Alfie says:

    I asked at Rutherfords and it went untouched. I’d be interested in people sharing their views on the following:
    Arizona is wrong for wanting to curb illegal immigration and the crimes that stem from it but Massachusetts is right in setting up a challenge against DOMA. Huh?

  45. graychin says:

    Hey! Now there are TWO polls showing Sestak ahead of Specter in Pennsylvania. Both have Sestak ahead 47-42.

    Was it Rutherford’s commercial that did it?

  46. Elric66 says:

    “Nothing has been nationalized except for the businesses that Uncle Sam BOUGHT to save them and their workers from forced liquidation. No one intends for the US to own General Motors permanently.”

    LOL That was hilarious.

    “Some don’t like giving even American citizens their constitutional rights if charged with terrorism. Good policy or Big Brother? ”

    Its a bit of a gray area but better to error on the side of the Constitution. Now Im for all for changing immigration policy so some jihadists doesnt immigrate here, get citizenship and carry out jihad less than a year later. That he was granted it despite being on the radar since 1999 should be a red flag.

    “There are more Christian polygamists in America than Muslim polygamists.”

    Christianity doesnt condone or teach polygamy like islam does, but ni9ce of you to dodge my question.

    “Regulating? I’m all for it.”

    Most socialists are. Still didnt answer whats the limit.

    “What’s your problem with it? It abridges corporate “freedom” to poison us and kill us for the sake of making a buck? ”

    Because dont trust people that have bankrupted our nation to regulate something they have no expertise in.

  47. graychin says:

    There you go again, Alfie. When you use a word like “necessarily” in a question, the answer probably is gonna be NO.

    Of course smaller government isn’t necessarily less effective. The goal should be to make government both smaller and more effective. The goal should NOT be to simply make government smaller, or to just make it less effective without making it smaller has happened during the Bush Administration.

    Not being a Bay Stater, I don’t know what you are talking about. But if a state wants to challenge a federal law in court it has that right. Such a challenge may be sensible (DOMA) or stupid (Obamacare). But a state does NOT have the right to supersede Federal law on its own (Arizona).

  48. Elric66 says:

    “I asked at Rutherfords and it went untouched.”

    LOL Of course it did.

  49. Elric66 says:

    “But a state does NOT have the right to supersede Federal law on its own (Arizona).”

    So a state is at the mercy of the Federal government if it will not enforce laws to protect its citizens?

  50. graychin says:

    Elric – I trust the government more than I trust Corporate America.

    You trust Corporate America more than you trust the government.

    I think that pretty well sums up our differences on regulation.

  51. Alfie says:

    Mass. didn’t go to court. Much like the marriage law was put into effect the Bay State pols have been cowards at every step. Their latest is leaving citizens hanging out solo regards taxes.
    AZ has not superseded federal law.
    As for my question structure I accept there are multiple aspects to a given answer. You see we could find common ground in your answer. Let’s push the envelope a little.
    No Oval occupant has shrunk government since the 80’s…T or F?
    Technically speaking I think this puts me fairly in the debt column regards asking questions.

  52. Hucking Fypocrites says:

    “(Don’t forget -illegals can’t vote.)”

    Unless they have stolen the identity of a real American citizen. But that’s an impossibility, isn’t it?

  53. Alfie says:

    On regulation the view away from the extremes must be taken into account.
    On one hand keeping people safe from poison,or the environment safe from being completely raped is good. On the other hand busting the chops and fining the living day lights out of some company over their hand railings being an inch lower than specs is insane.

  54. Hucking Fypocrites says:

    I love the logic at work here…

    Illegal immigrants voting is a boogeyman under the bed….but the AZ bill leading to racial profiling is an inevitibility.

    How exactly are we to prove that an illegal immigrant has voted if that person has stolen someone’s identity? The record will show the false identity as voting, not the identity of the actual voter.

    You don’t think out your arguments very well, do you?

  55. Hucking Fypocrites says:

    Neither does Obama.

  56. Hucking Fypocrites says:

    “All in all I have to say I see no reason to go to Arizona other than the Grand Canyon.”

    That’s because you’ve never partied at the Colorado River. 😉

    Californians go to AZ for “The River.” We make weekends out of it. And with summer coming, I would be tempted to bet actual money that calls for boycotts will not stop that age-old practice from continuing.

  57. Elric66 says:

    Again whats your limit to regulation and nationalizing? You failed to answer. You ok with regulating salt for instant?

  58. El Tigre says:

    @GC: What do you mean that “a state does NOT have the right to supersede Federal law on its own (Arizona)?” Where has that occured — SPECIFICALLY?

  59. Elric66 says:

    “I trust the government more than I trust Corporate America.”

    Given the governments track record on destroying things, I dont get it.

  60. Elric66 says:

    “So a state is at the mercy of the Federal government if it will not enforce laws to protect its citizens?”

    Never got an answer for that either.

  61. Alfie says:

    You live (blog) and learn. In my defense I live in MA ,am extremely busy and just can’t bring myself to interact with the TSA so an AZ trip isn’t on the horizon for me.You provide real human intel on it though and I thank you for it.

  62. Rutherford says:

    Sorry, I overlooked this at my place. Is MA opposing possible Fed DOMA legislation? I’m not familiar with the case. Or are they writing new law? I get the feeling you’re comparing apples to oranges.

  63. Rutherford says:

    I don’t think Obama WANTS to be Elric’s President and I can’t say I blame him. 😉

  64. Rutherford says:

    I’m not sure you’re sighting outrage on my part as opposed to a wee bit of exaggeration. To the latter, I plead guilty.

  65. graychin says:

    El Tigre – we’ll see. That’s what the court challenges to the AZ law will be about. My opinion doesn’t matter.

    Neither does yours.

  66. Hucking Fypocrites says:

    Even though he promised to be so in his victory speech.

    But some of us recognize that his lies started being exposed pretty quick after he was elected.

  67. graychin says:

    Elric, believe it or not I have a life outside answering your stupid questions. So don’t be such a d*******g.

    “So a state is at the mercy of the Federal government if it will not enforce laws to protect its citizens?”

    Could be. That’s why the Feds had to send the National Guard in to Little Rock and other places when the states would not enforce laws to protect its citizens. It’s why we have a court system to resolve federal/state disputes rather than open defiance.

    “I trust the government more than I trust Corporate America.”

    Given the governments track record on destroying things, I dont get it.

    I can see that. Given Corporate America’s track record of amoral chasing of profit regardless of consequences to citizens or the country, I don’t get you.

  68. Elric66 says:

    “Even though he promised to be so in his victory speech.

    But some of us recognize that his lies started being exposed pretty quick after he was elected.”

    You can tell by his pushing through all these unpopular bills. He is definitely a divider.

  69. graychin says:

    I can’t lay down a bright line for you on the limits of regulation. I favor regulation when private interests do not protect the health and safety of the public because it might cost them money.

    I certainly favor regulating salt when it’s being dumped into a fresh-water stream.

  70. Elric66 says:

    “Could be. That’s why the Feds had to send the National Guard in to Little Rock and other places when the states would not enforce laws to protect its citizens. It’s why we have a court system to resolve federal/state disputes rather than open defiance.”

    But yet it refuses to secure a border which is vital to everyone. Hmmmmm…

    “I can see that. Given Corporate America’s track record of amoral chasing of profit regardless of consequences to citizens or the country, I don’t get you.”

    But yet you dont care about these unsustainable programs the government is imposing against our will regardless of the consequences. I dont get you. Again, whats the limit to government regulation and nationalizing? Where do you draw the line?

  71. Hucking Fypocrites says:

    Well, as Obama’s latest Supreme Court nominee recently had to be informed, the Court can’t rule on a challenge until a challenge has been issued.

    So what’s the holdup? Where are the challenges? Is everyone too busy posturing outrage to worry about the legal parts of their legal argument?

  72. graychin says:

    Alfie –

    I don’t think that any Oval Office occupant has shrunk the government since at least 1900, and maybe a good long time before that.

    That includes anyone who happened to be president in the 1980’s. Check it for yourself.

    But who ever decided that shrinking government is the Prime Directive? When was that ideology handed down from upon high? Bigger isn’t necessarily better, but smaller isn’t necessarily better either.

  73. Elric66 says:

    “I certainly favor regulating salt when it’s being dumped into a fresh-water stream.”

    Nice dodge. Thats not what they are regulating it for.

  74. graychin says:

    Who are “they” – and what ARE they regulating salt for? I haven’t yet heard of this faux outrage. I don’t read enough right-wing blogs to understand EVERYTHING that you say

  75. Elric66 says:

    “That includes anyone who happened to be president in the 1980′s. Check it for yourself.”

    Demomarxists controlled congress in the 80’s…..check it out.

  76. graychin says:

    One more time – I’m not into line-drawing. Line-drawers are idiots.

    Give me an issue and I’ll tell you what I think.

  77. graychin says:

    Um…. we were talking about the White House.

    And who signed all those spending bills? Who never proposed a budget that was smaller than the one that was enacted?

  78. Elric66 says:

    They (meaning the government) wants to regulate salt because it feels we consume too much.

  79. graychin says:

    I gotta go now, Elric. I’m not ignoring you, so don’t get your underwear in a bunch. OK?

  80. Hucking Fypocrites says:

    So a couple of my questions have been either lost in the tiered structure of this forum, or are simply being ignored.

    The claim was made by Graychin that illegal immigrants can’t vote. I asked…

    “Unless they have stolen the identity of a real American citizen. But that’s an impossibility, isn’t it?”

    A challenge was issued by Graychin to produce evidence that an illegal immigrant has voted. I asked…

    “How exactly are we to prove that an illegal immigrant has voted if that person has stolen someone’s identity? The record will show the false identity as voting, not the identity of the actual voter.”

    Still waiting, Graychin.

  81. Elric66 says:

    “Um…. we were talking about the White House.

    And who signed all those spending bills? Who never proposed a budget that was smaller than the one that was enacted?”

    Congress controls the purse strings. Republicans forgot that and thats why they lost the House in 2006.

  82. Elric66 says:

    HF,

    Of course it depends on the state but in general, they dont do much in the way of insuring the person voting is who they claim to be. Doesnt help when the Black Panthers intimidate voters and the regime gives them a pass.

  83. Elric66 says:

    “One more time – I’m not into line-drawing. Line-drawers are idiots.

    Give me an issue and I’ll tell you what I think.”

    No. You tell me where you think the government reaches too far in regulating and/or nationizing. Much easier.

  84. Elric66 says:

    Obama administration to consider Miranda reform

    http://hotair.com/archives/2010/05/10/obama-administration-to-consider-miranda-reform/

    How about this for example?

  85. Alfie says:

    Elric I have to say I think it is easier if you pick an issue or talking point and allow graychin & others to offer an opinion. He obviously believes in regulation and intervention but seems receptive to the notion that there are indeed limits.

  86. Alfie says:

    @HF sorry but this theme especially seems to hate what WordPress calls “nested threads”.I think I’m gonna go a diggin’ and shut that feature off.

  87. Elric66 says:

    Alfie,

    Why should I ask him dozens of examples when he can just offer one from the beginning? Easier, isnt it?

  88. Alfie says:

    Well I’ll put myself in his shoes and say this. I do not have a universal one size fits all answer on the subject so I don’t find it easier. If you were to ask me something specific like the regulation of condiments though I’d be able to give you a concise answer. I am against the govt. regulating condiments.

  89. Elric66 says:

    Alfie,

    Well if he is against it, he will say so. Interesting that you mentioned condiments, with this nationalized healthcare, I bet its somewhere in those 2000 plus pages. And my guess is that he supported the bill.

  90. Alfie says:

    Well actually……. There are new powers bestowed upon the HHS Secretary that requires menus to list the nutrition facts of the stuff being served if you are a restaurant with 20+ locations and said signage has to be more clear and prominent than it is currently. Section 4205 pg 1206

  91. Elric66 says:

    Actually its 20 or more locations. Real job killer. Plus the awesome facts is if they change even one ingredient, all the menus must be changed. Isnt regulation awesome!!!!!!!!!!!

  92. graychin says:

    “How exactly are we to prove that an illegal immigrant has voted if that person has stolen someone’s identity?”

    Good point HF. I guess you can’t back up your statement then. You pulled it out of your rear. It’s bogus. More xenophobic paranoia.

    Illegals don’t vote. They don’t even try. They aren’t stupid enough to take a chance on getting busted for voting illegally. Better to stay home and stay out of sight.

    Elric, I repeat – line-drawers are idiots. They are also d*******s.

  93. Elric66 says:

    “More xenophobic paranoia.”

    Awesome. More race baiting!!!!!!!!

  94. Elric66 says:

    The drone couldnt even answer my example.

  95. Elric66 says:

    Illegal Immigrants Are Voting in American Elections
    Hans A. von Spakovsky August 4th 2008

    Products – Voting

    In 2005, the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that up to 3 percent of the 30,000 individuals called for jury duty from voter registration rolls over a two-year period in just one U.S. district court were not U.S. citizens. While that may not seem like many, just 3 percent of registered voters would have been more than enough to provide the winning presiden­tial vote margin in Florida in 2000. Indeed, the Cen­sus Bureau estimates that there are over a million illegal aliens in Florida, and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has prosecuted more non-citizen voting cases in Florida than in any other state.

    http://www.thecuttingedgenews.com/index.php?article=691

    Drones make it toooooooo easy.

  96. El Tigre says:

    @HF, I feel your pain. After all the b.s., I get:

    “El Tigre – we’ll see. That’s what the court challenges to the AZ law will be about. My opinion doesn’t matter.

    Neither does yours.”

    Now the answer is, “no one’s opinions matter.”

  97. Elric66 says:

    El Tig,

    Thats the joy of debating drones. If they dont play the race card, they move the goal posts. 🙂

  98. graychin says:

    In the final analysis, the opinions of only nine people matter when it comes to constitutional questions. Of course they are the Supreme Court justices.

    That’s our system. If you don’t like it, you just might be happier somewhere else. If you want to stay, why not start a movement for a constitutional amendment?

    Griping to me accomplishes nothing.

  99. Elric66 says:

    Not griping to you *******

  100. El Tigre says:

    G-Chin, I ain’t griping to you or anyone else. I just asked you to back up what you said. All that followed was dissembling (e.g. “tell me if are you in favor of racial profiling or not” ).

    Our system’s fine. You arguments are not. I ain’t movin’ . . .

    (But I sure wouldn’t mind if the illegals moved to your neighborhood where they would warmly embraced).

  101. Elric66 says:

    Heh, the PC police is on patrol.

  102. Hucking Fypocrites says:

    “Good point HF. I guess you can’t back up your statement then.”

    What statement would that be—specifically?

  103. Elric66 says:

    HF,

    Really amusing since I showed him that illegals can and do vote. Guess Im still a “xenophobe”.

  104. graychin says:

    Hans von Spatzcoffey (or however you spell it) is not proof of anything. He’s a notorious limit-the-vote advocate who lies about the facts when the truth would be easier.

    Hans didn’t say HOW MANY illegal aliens were prosecuted for voting in Florida. Just that it was more than in any other state. So – how many was it? One? If so, you still haven’t shown me more than two. The statement that illegals vote is the one you haven’t backed up, HF.

    We have plenty of illegals in these parts. Most of them work at a large local chicken processing plant that doesn’t check ID’s very closely. They don’t seem to cause any trouble. They keep to themselves and wire some of their money home. I never see them on the police blotter.

    Maybe they are taking jobs away from some of our legal locals, but we should be angry at the chicken plant for that.

  105. Elric66 says:

    “So – how many was it?”

    What does it matter? You said they didnt vote period. So even one is enough proof that illegals vote. Thanks for playing.

  106. Hucking Fypocrites says:

    “In the final analysis, the opinions of only nine people matter when it comes to constitutional questions. Of course they are the Supreme Court justices.”

    Translation: I am done attempting to defend my statement that the Arizona illegal immigration bill is unconstitutional.

    “Illegals don’t vote. They don’t even try. ”

    Oh really?

    Then why am I showing you this?

    Two noncitizens testified in the Compton election fraud trial Thursday that the campaign for a councilwoman who is allied with Mayor Eric Perrodin recruited them to register for voting and even directed them how to cast absentee ballots in the June 5 election.

    And this?

    Task force Chairman Vernon J. Ehlers, R-Mich., said investigators had found concrete evidence of 748 illegal votes by non-citizens, not enough to throw Sanchez’s victory into doubt. He and other Republicans said the results nonetheless show that Dornan’s challenge was not frivolous and that the GOP was not unfairly targeting Hispanic voters.

    And this?

    The issue of noncitizens getting onto voter rolls also has tainted jury pools, which are derived from voter rolls. In June, Circuit Court officials in Howard County, Md., had to decide if a guilty verdict in a murder case was valid after a noncitizen was discovered among the jurors. The verdict was deemed valid.

    And this?

    After 9/11, the Justice Department found that eight of the 19 hijackers were registered to vote.

    That is maybe half of the examples I can cite. But I think I have made my point (and destroyed yours), wouldn’t you agree?

  107. Hucking Fypocrites says:

    “The statement that illegals vote is the one you haven’t backed up, HF.”

    Where exactly did I stated that they do vote (prior to my last comment which is awaiting moderation because it has so many links proving you wrong)? I have stated that they can vote via identity fraud. Do you deny that potential?

    You folks are really cool with Obama’s hypotheticals on the subject. You’re all over what “could potentially happen” when Barry talks about it.

    And now that I have provided several examples to back up what I never said, which you can see as soon as Alfie approves the comment, what would you like to say?

  108. graychin says:

    You are worried about “potential” – not reality. There is also a potential that you and I could vote numerous times by stealing identities – but there in no indication that it happens.

    You’re being paranoid, HF. Those votes for Obama weren’t illegal. They were real.

    Face reality. Stop worrying about boogymen under the bed

  109. Elric66 says:

    “Those votes for Obama weren’t illegal.”

    ACORN says otherwise

  110. Hucking Fypocrites says:

    “You are worried about “potential” – not reality.”

    Kind of like how there is the potential for a brown-skinned American to be arrested while he takes his kids out for ice cream?

    Has that happened yet? No. But that fact hasn’t stopped the President of the United States from bringing it up, has it?

    “You’re being paranoid, HF.”

    Is Barack Obama also being paranoid?

    “Those votes for Obama weren’t illegal. They were real.”

    That is an interesting fact I will have to remember if I am ever on Jeopardy. But since my argument has nothing to do with the 2008 Presidential election, that’s about all it is.

    You might want to wait until you actually read what I have written before you comment on it.

    But then, why would I assume anyone does that anymore? Congress sure as hell doesn’t. Neither does our president and his supporters. Nor does the MSM.

  111. Alfie says:

    You are worried about “potential” – not reality.
    Ummmm isn’t that what people who are worried about profiling kinda doing???

  112. Hucking Fypocrites says:

    Shh Alfie. Logic is not allowed in this discussion.

  113. Elric66 says:

    Just heard that the government is going to try to nationalize 401K’s. Since the government has done such an awesome job with Soc. Sec./Medicare/Medicaid it should thrill Graychin.

  114. Hans von Spatzcoffey (or however you spell it) is not proof of anything. He’s a notorious limit-the-vote advocate who lies about the facts when the truth would be easier.

    And your proof of this notoriety would be…?

  115. Elric66 says:

    New recycling bins with tracking chips coming to Alexandria
    By: Markham Heid
    Examiner Staff Writer
    May 6, 2010

    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/New-recycling-bins-with-tracking-chips-coming-to-Alexandria-92880219.html

    Try not to get too excited Graychin

  116. *chuckles*
    Ya hit this one outta the ballpark Alfie! Keeping up with this thread will be tough, but I’ll try.

    Salt regulation: Do I really need to post links and all that about what the FDA is proposing?

    Purpose of Government: From Poly SCI 2500 @ UCSD circa 1970 “Government exist to protect the rights of the individuals that make up the citizenship of the nation and insure it’s own continuity.”

    The River: Spend a weekend at “The Blow Hole,” and head over to AZ for a cold one!

    Voter Fraud, including voting by illegal aliens: That is spelled “ACORN.” Well documented elsewhere.

    Profiling: It works, as in when was the last time a cavity search of an old woman, or a cub scout turned up a terrorist? When was the last time the Police stopped a guy with La Meh tattoo’s and found drugs on him? Yesterday it happened in Denver, and that is probably not the only time…

    Shrinking Government: That just has not happened, and both mainstream party’s are just as much to blame as anyone is. The main culprits being we the people for continuing to elect them…

    Potential? : Ask a lawyer (hint BIC) anyone and everyone has a “potential” for _____ (fill in the blank.)

    Lots of circular argumentation going on here Elric, don’t take the Red herring bait! 🙂

  117. graychin says:

    http://thinkprogress.org/2007/09/26/spakovsky-primer/

    “Just heard that the government is going to try to nationalize 401K’s.”

    It’s just those voices in your head. Stop letting them make you crazy.

  118. graychin says:

    I think I was wrong earlier when I said that no president since 1900 had shrunk the federal government.

    But I believe that Herbert Hoover did. Those were the days…. 😀

  119. Rutherford says:

    Profiling: It works, as in when was the last time a cavity search of an old woman, or a cub scout turned up a terrorist?

    Always good to site an absurd example to prove your point.

    The tragic thing is that there is evidence that the Taliban and other terrorist orgs are getting hip to our profiling ways. The ONLY obvious thing about Shahzad that would have worried any of you guys was his ethnic background. Otherwise, a model citizen. MBA, good job (until he got laid off), wife and kids. Nothing “terrorist” about him.

    The next step is for some crazy white boys to be radicalized and then we’ll see what good your profiling does you. Our “enemies” are already switching to hit men who have apparently assimilated into our society. It’s gonna be like “Body Snatchers” pretty soon guys. Elric may drive the car bomb any day now. 😉

  120. Rutherford says:

    Alfie, congrats on the 100+ thread. See, it’s not so hard if you just put douchbag in the main post and let Elric out of his cage. 😉

  121. Elric66 says:

    “It’s just those voices in your head. Stop letting them make you crazy.”

    Right. Just like I was wrong about everything else this regime is doing. Lets put it this way. Would it matter to you if it were true?

  122. Elric66 says:

    “But I believe that Herbert Hoover did. Those were the days…. ”

    Actually it was Harding who got us out of a depression. Hoover was a progressive. But your type was never good at history.

  123. Elric66 says:

    “Lots of circular argumentation going on here Elric, don’t take the Red herring bait!”

    You forgot the moving of goal posts Pat. 🙂

  124. Now Rutherford red herring fallacy is above you. Shazad was / is a naturalized citizen. How they tagged him so quickly is nothing short of amazing. Unless you look at how high end intel works. But, I digress.

    Some “crazy white boys?” Our civilian intel already does track those types. To the degree that most home grown race based white supremacy groups can’t do much more then sneeze without coming under a magnifying glass. True sleeper cells, whether foreign or domestic are much more difficult to track than idiots that post their intentions etc. on the internet. Congress said that we have Hamas and Hezbolla cells here already. Should the FBI look for them among Arabs, or would their time be spent more profitably investigating why Elric rented a Ryder truck?

    Had to Elric! 🙂

  125. Elric66 says:

    Pat,

    Bulk of conversion to islam in the prisons are black. People tend to forget that the jihadist that gunned down a recruiter was a black convert. You get the white converts too like the cell leader in NC was a white guy. But the common demoninator is islam. Also amusing that jihadist activity has spiked since al-Thuggy came to power. Thought he was suppose to reduce it, not increase it.

  126. Hucking Fypocrites says:

    So, how about those examples of non-citizens voting and registering to vote, Graychin?

  127. Elric66 says:

    HF,

    He doesnt care since the illegals voting will vote demomarxist.

  128. Hucking Fypocrites says:

    Yeah, but I thought he might have something to say on that, since he has already stated in no uncertain terms that illegal immigrants never vote or even try.

  129. Elric66 says:

    HF,

    He ignores what doesnt fit into his little world.

  130. Alfie says:

    student population of 80 percent white, 15 percent Hispanic, 3 percent Asian and 2 percent African-American.
    Yeah that’s a diverse school they have there. I’m thinking the political slant of the faculty is 100% leftist db. Sorry girls you are getting screwed. Girls look up your history and civics books (providing they haven’t been replaced with Alinsky & Ayers) and read up.The AZ law is Constitutional and your teachers and administrators are tools.

  131. Elric66 says:

    Sad, isnt it? These girls are getting screwed over for a political agenda.

  132. Elric66 says:

    Holder admits: No, I haven’t read the Arizona law I’ve been dumping on

    http://hotair.com/archives/2010/05/13/holder-admits-no-i-havent-read-the-arizona-law-ive-been-dumping-on/

    Typical. Wasnt even 2000 page plus like the fascist health bill. But then, the moron cant even talk about “radical” islam.

  133. Elric66 says:

    Got one for Florida. Watch at 3:15 and you will see why I despise RINO’s so much.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BLaPcYK1CE&feature=player_embedded

  134. Hucking Fypocrites says:

    Elric, why would you want Eric Holder to talk about radical Islam, when according to you the Muslims we are fighting are not radical?

    I am not asking that to incite an argument, but asking a genuine question to get past what seems like a contradiction.

    And yes it is sad that those girls are getting used as a political agenda. I was in a recent discussion with a guy who basically said they would be proud to be a part of it if they weren’t so selfish. I told him that there is plenty of time in life for activism and politics and that kids should be left alone to enjoy childhood for the short time it lasts. I think we ended agreeing to disagree.

    These girls know their school district’s bullshit doesn’t wash because as they pointed out, it send students to China.

  135. Elric66 says:

    “Elric, why would you want Eric Holder to talk about radical Islam, when according to you the Muslims we are fighting are not radical?”

    Because the man cant even go that far. A guy that will judge a law without reading it should at least judge “radical islam”.

    “These girls know their school district’s bullshit doesn’t wash because as they pointed out, it send students to China.”

    Shows how leftist the school is, doesnt it?

  136. Elric66 says:

    BTW what the hell is wrong with al-Thuggy disrespecting the people of AZ with his asshole buddy Calderon. Seriously, this is disturbing. How can these drones support this POS deliberately dividing this nation. I would ask the drones but they are too much ofcowards to actually defend him and his anti-American policies.

    So Alfie, al-Thuggy pass FDR yet? FDR never divided the nation like this. This regime is beyond the pale.

  137. Elric66 says:

    I have a plan to destroy America
    by Richard D. Lamm

    I have a secret plan to destroy America. If you believe, as many do, that America is too smug, too white bread, too self-satisfied, too rich, let’s destroy America. It is not that hard to do. History shows that nations are more fragile than their citizens think. No nation in history has survived the ravages of time. Arnold Toynbee observed that all great civilizations rise and they all fall, and that “an autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide.” Here is my plan:

    1. We must first make America a bilingual-bicultural country. History shows, in my opinion, that no nation can survive the tension, conflict and antagonism of two competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual; it is a curse for a society to be bilingual. One scholar, Seymour Martin Lipset, put it this way: “The histories of bilingual and bicultural societies that do not assimilate are histories of turmoil, tension and tragedy. Canada, Belgium, Malaysia, Lebanon all face crises of national existence in which minorities press for autonomy, if not independence. Pakistan and Cyprus have divided. Nigeria suppressed an ethnic rebellion. France faces difficulties with its Basques, Bretons and Corsicans.”

    http://michellemalkin.com/2008/02/09/i-have-a-plan-to-destroy-america-by-richard-d-lamm/

    Sound familar

  138. Elric66 says:

    Congressional douchebags

Comments are closed.