|
|
Post by ptsdthor on Jul 7, 2010 7:53:52 GMT -8
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/document-cloud/arizona-immigration-lawsuit-doc1.html?sid=ST2010070603384#document/p1Gee - don't ask about the trunk full of drugs, that is a question for the DEA who may want their medicinal benefits to go out to the public at large. Don't ask about the stash of South African Diamonds found in the bust, the US Customs Dept. may want the Diamonds to circulate as a help to the economy. Don't ask about the firearms found in the crack house, the ATF may want to have a free flow of guns for increased self defense. What this suit mostly says, in effect, is that Congress and the Admin may choose not to enforce immigration laws for humanitarian or political reasons known only to themselves and no one should interfere with their inaction. Do they actually expect us to take them seriously?
|
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Jul 7, 2010 8:55:16 GMT -8
It is interesting how everything is in the eye of the beholder. From my point of view it was the previous administration that ran rough shod over our civil rights, and did many things for political reasons. I seem to recall that the above poster thought different.
I did not take Bush the younger serious. I don't expect you to take Obama serious. Why would it be anything else?
|
|
|
|
Post by ptsdthor on Jul 7, 2010 10:23:40 GMT -8
When the Bush Admin pushed the envelope of the Patriot act, they paid a political price and ultimately backed off from those most edgy practices once exposed. But I highly doubt that anyone thought that GWB was doing what he did to collect political info or gain political favor with one or another constituency. Most would agree with me that he and his Admin were not that sophisticated and he just wanted to catch bad guys and make the US safer, nothing more. Not only is Obama trying to make Arizonans and other citizens living near the border more unsafe (and all the US now with people with terrorist ties reportedly having crossed the southern border), he is doubling down on his failure to fulfill his obligations to the U.S. Constitution for political purposes alone ... oh wait - humanitarian purposes  . The promise of border security and illegal immigration enforcement will only come with general amnesty and nothing less. And that border security is just an Obama promise. We have seen some of those before. I know we all enjoy exposing what we believe to be hypocrisy of the other side and, for the sake of argument, if I grant you that Bush failed his constitutional commitments, does two wrongs make a right? |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Jul 7, 2010 11:38:22 GMT -8
Your post makes my point.
|
|
|
|
Post by ptsdthor on Jul 7, 2010 11:48:36 GMT -8
I agree. We can't take him seriously.
|
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Jul 7, 2010 11:57:19 GMT -8
I agree. We can't take him seriously. That would be, you can't.  |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jul 7, 2010 12:04:30 GMT -8
Lets wait and see ho this plays out. I suspect and predict that AZ will prevail. The ruling may even mandate that the Federal Government and Obama live up to their responsibility and be told to do their job.
|
|
|
|
Post by ptsdthor on Jul 7, 2010 12:05:04 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by AlwaysAnAztec on Jul 7, 2010 15:16:00 GMT -8
Lets wait and see ho this plays out. I suspect and predict that AZ will prevail. The ruling may even mandate that the Federal Government and Obama live up to their responsibility and be told to do their job. Agree with the first part of your response. Don't believe that the 2nd will happen, at least in this instance. Now if a suit specifically addressed the Feds not enforcing the law, I might believe it. I am also surprised that no one has challenged the 14th amendment. Specifically, the language that grants automatic citizenship to anyone born in the U.S. The purpose of the amendment was to grant citizenship to freed slaves, not anyone who could drop a kid on U.S. soil. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jul 7, 2010 15:33:10 GMT -8
Lets wait and see ho this plays out. I suspect and predict that AZ will prevail. The ruling may even mandate that the Federal Government and Obama live up to their responsibility and be told to do their job. Agree with the first part of your response. Don't believe that the 2nd will happen, at least in this instance. Now if a suit specifically addressed the Feds not enforcing the law, I might believe it. I am also surprised that no one has challenged the 14th amendment. Specifically, the language that grants automatic citizenship to anyone born in the U.S. The purpose of the amendment was to grant citizenship to freed slaves, not anyone who could drop a kid on U.S. soil. You are probably right in that it will take some action by AZ to force action to seal the border. The Supremes will not and should not address anything that is not directly in front of them. I was thinking of a lower court ruling that would be upheld at the Supremem Court level. |
|
. The promise of border security and illegal immigration enforcement will only come with general amnesty and nothing less. And that border security is just an Obama promise. We have seen some of those before.
