prole Posted May 7, 2010 Posted May 7, 2010 Prole, if you're going label me at least do it right...Scott Baio's wife was the one who went on the anti-lesbian rant. Your loyalty to Scott Baio is touching. Quote
Nitrox Posted May 7, 2010 Author Posted May 7, 2010 Prole, if you're going label me at least do it right...Scott Baio's wife was the one who went on the anti-lesbian rant. Your loyalty to Scott Baio is touching. Scott Baio for President! Quote
Stonehead Posted May 10, 2010 Posted May 10, 2010 (edited) [video:youtube]lyE9OWc27X4 Edited May 11, 2010 by Stonehead Quote
Fairweather Posted May 14, 2010 Posted May 14, 2010 http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/13/holder-admits-reading-arizonas-immigration-law-despite-slamming/ "Despite repeatedly voicing concerns about Arizona's new immigration enforcement law in recent weeks and threatening to challenge it, Attorney General Eric Holder said Thursday he has not yet read the law, which is only 10 pages long. . . ." Quote
Gary_Yngve Posted May 14, 2010 Posted May 14, 2010 An Illinois school district is stopping a high school basketball team from attending a tournament in AZ. Sarah Palin is encouraging the kids to "go rogue" and attend the tournament. http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/05/13/sarah-palin-arizona-girls-basketball-team-illinois-school-superintendent-travel/ Though I dislike both the AZ law and Sarah Palin, I agree with her message.. the kids should go rogue. Quote
Doug Posted May 14, 2010 Posted May 14, 2010 ya know, I read the washington times article, and I read the law; it starts out saying that there has to be "lawful contact" between law enforcement and an individual. any of you legal scholars want to define "lawful contact"? wasn't in the text of the AzHB..... Quote
Nitrox Posted May 14, 2010 Author Posted May 14, 2010 http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/13/holder-admits-reading-arizonas-immigration-law-despite-slamming/ "Despite repeatedly voicing concerns about Arizona's new immigration enforcement law in recent weeks and threatening to challenge it, Attorney General Eric Holder said Thursday he has not yet read the law, which is only 10 pages long. . . ." Why would he, he's the same guy who took enemy combatants from a battlefield and sent them to US court for criminal prosecution...and then waffled. All this stuff about AZ is nonsense...reinstate the cutoff funds to the BP and complete the fence project as passed by the last administration. Of course, most here probably didn't realize (or care) that the AZ law was a reaction to the federal government reneg'ing...just racism by gawd!! Quote
olyclimber Posted May 14, 2010 Posted May 14, 2010 my problem with the fence is its not high enough. it should at least reach the outer limit of breathable atmosphere. Quote
AlpineK Posted May 14, 2010 Posted May 14, 2010 Maybe the fence should be an immigration test. If it's a tough climb and you get over it you're obviously talented and may deserve some work. Quote
Nitrox Posted May 14, 2010 Author Posted May 14, 2010 Looks like the 'racism' is spreading. http://www.cabq.gov/mayor/news/mayor-ends-sanctuary-for-criminals Quote
olyclimber Posted May 14, 2010 Posted May 14, 2010 why do they need a Spanish version of the document? This is a America. Speek American or go back to Spain. Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted May 17, 2010 Posted May 17, 2010 The ACLU just announced that it will attempt to block the Arizona law in federal court. Go team. Quote
olyclimber Posted May 18, 2010 Posted May 18, 2010 Wake up america. The aclu and other atheist groups have pushed out "the one" that this country was established on. This is just the results. thats alright because he is soon to return and will run things his way. Come Lord quickly. I believe in this country we should worship Jesus. Take your so called other deitys somewhere else. Quote
Buckaroo Posted May 18, 2010 Posted May 18, 2010 "He" is pretty busy right now trying to clean house. Seems there's a problem with the priests and their crooked leaders, they have a fetish for butt humping little boys. The "One Nation Under God" that wasn't established until the late 50's will have to go on the back burner. Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted May 18, 2010 Posted May 18, 2010 "He" is pretty busy right now trying to clean house. Seems there's a problem with the priests and their crooked leaders, they have a fetish for butt humping little boys. So, the ACLU must be defending them... that's what they are best at defending - buggery, not to mention white supremacists and any other POC walking God's Green Earth. Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted May 18, 2010 Posted May 18, 2010 "buggery?" You mean equal protection under the law for gays, right? Just want to clarify that for our viewing audience. Quote
rob Posted May 18, 2010 Posted May 18, 2010 "He" is pretty busy right now trying to clean house. Seems there's a problem with the priests and their crooked leaders, they have a fetish for butt humping little boys. So, the ACLU must be defending them... that's what they are best at defending - buggery, not to mention white supremacists and any other POC walking God's Green Earth. They also defended the rights of Jehovah's Witnesses to freely express their faith on the streets, and successfully defended the existence of a faith-based homeless center in Maryland, and argued to allow a group of Christians to protest a gay pride parade in St. Petersburg, Florida. They also came to the defense of a 2nd grade student in Pennsylvania who wrote a story about Easter and redemption, after the public school rejected it because of it's religious content. Likewise, they prevailed in allowing a student to sing religious songs during a talent show. They sure do sound like a bad bunch of dudes. Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted May 18, 2010 Posted May 18, 2010 They also defended the rights of Jehovah's Witnesses to freely express their faith on the streets, ... Cool, I can also blame the ACLU for allowing those a-holes to knock on my door and annoy me. Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted May 18, 2010 Posted May 18, 2010 The ACLU is not defending any priests charged with child molestation at present. Sorry to disappoint. We do, on occasion, help to defend the rights of some unsympathetic defendants, such as detainees at Guantanamo. We do that to preserve the rule of law and our most fundamental values of liberty: the right to a fair trial. If you do not believe in the right to a fair trial, I suggest you take it up with the Founding Fathers. We also defend litigate in behalf of some unsavory plaintiffs: the American NAZI party being perhaps our most infamous case. They exercised their constitutional right of assembly and speech. When that was threatened, we defended it. Again, if you disagree with those two basic principles of liberty, take it up with the Founding Fathers. The question is cases like this is: if you're going to limit non-criminal speech and assembly, who gets to decide what an individual can express, and by what criteria, backed by what rule of law? We've also successfully defended the privacy of Rush Limbaugh's medical records. Sometimes our plaintiffs hate us, too. We've often defended fundamntalist Christian sects freedom of assembly, speech, and religion, despite their well know opposition to our defending a woman's right to choose. I know matters of principle and the concept of the rule of law are invariably obscured by the media sensationalism and histrionics in your uncomplicated, single channel mind, TripleKunt, but surely someday you may be able to grasp that the preserving the ability to express opinions that may not be to your personal liking is a often more broad reaching issue with far reaching ramifications than the event that sparks the controversy. Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted May 18, 2010 Posted May 18, 2010 They also defended the rights of Jehovah's Witnesses to freely express their faith on the streets, ... Cool, I can also blame the ACLU for allowing those a-holes to knock on my door and annoy me. Again, you can blame the Founding Fathers. You might also blame the Jehovahs. I share your pain, though. Having to politely decline a visit from the Jehovahs, which takes 10 seconds of your precious time every 5 years or so, is an ENORMOUS price to pay for free speech. I really don't know how you get through a traumatic sacrifice like that. Quote
rob Posted May 18, 2010 Posted May 18, 2010 They have left me alone ever since I put a pentagram on my front door next to the statue of a horned devil and a small fountain of blood. Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted May 18, 2010 Posted May 18, 2010 They have left me alone ever since I put a pentagram on my front door next to the statue of a horned devil and a small fountain of blood. What I hate is that 10 seconds? I could be spraying. We can only imagine TripleKuntz grand mall reaction if anybody ever borrowed his stapler. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.