I can't find the video clip that provoked my original irritation. Unfortunately, I've got clients with deadlines so I'm posting the relevant google searches in the interim. Besides, it's fun to stir the hornets' nest every once in a while.
Over everyone ****ting on the teabaggers. Our nation was founded on the right to teabag whomever we please. I don't really have anything to say about the thread topic.
they could've been protesting the opening of some random corporate-owned business. it is santa cruz afterall.
There are obvious differences between this and the tea party movement. One, this is a single issue demonstration about 1 particular law. These people didn't hold an official convention and invite vandals to their convention. These people didn't vandalize or yell at anyone who was a worker for immigrants rights along side of Caesar Chavez. You didn't really post any examples. That being said the violence is obviously unacceptable. If these people want to have a future of being taken seriously on the issues they should weed out the vandals from their movement. They don't seem to be too concnerend with a future as a movement other than affecting this one issue.
True true true. Although I've heard that "like" attracks "like". And I don't think these "anarchist losers" would ever try to join a Tea Party march.
Congratulations... Your argument still revolves around POTENTIAL violence by protestors of the immigration bill being a reason to be angry at the "porous borders"... A lesson in logic would be a good start.
As much as I dislike using Bill O'Reilly as a source, the first 45 minutes of his show tonight dealt with the issue quite well. I am not sure how to show a link to it, but it will repeat at 10 p.m. The profiling issue is non-existent when the facts are examined. The Arizona law a repeat of current federal immigration law -- in some places word for word. There is no police targeting someone because he or she "looks Hispanic." However, if that person is arrested or questioned in connection with a criminal investigation, they could be detained if illegal. If not, that person has grounds for a handsome payoff in a civil lawsuit. I have no problem with producing proper identification if a police officer pulls me over for speeding or questions me as a witness to a barroom brawl.
Bingo! The focal point of the thread is the heat the Tea Parties have taken for "potential" violence as opposed to the press virtually ignoring the "actual" violence in the illegal immigration protests.
An outstanding quote. Just had to tell you that. thumbs, I'd have to do some research to back it up (which I'm not going to do tonight), but I don't think you needed "papers" as such once you made it past Ellis Island. And the multi-generational Latino Texans, of which I knew several back in Houston many years ago, certainly didn't need them, with many families being Texans dating back to the Revolution. Heck, some of the folks I knew could barely speak Spanish. People are apt to forget that the multi-cultural heritage of Texas isn't a "recent" phenomenon.
So you were waiting for the "immigration violence thread" and then realized that there was no violence but proceeded to start the thread yourself? It seems you have 'violenced' the D&D once again...
As someone who defends Federalism I'm surprised that you don't see a problem with that as the Constitution grants the power of enforcing things like that to Congress and not the States.
What "actual" violence are you talking about? The only thing you've posted is an article about a small fire at a paper company, the cause of which is unknown. Like I said before, is that really all you've got? Seriously?? Is this a joke thread?
