Arizona Official Threatens to Cut Off Los Angeles Power as Payback for Boycott

[_Simpson_ 250]

The thread is yet another example of OT trash. Someone asks El E. how the law is at odds with the Constitution. He posts a legal opinion showing this, and instead of debating the opinion, half of you go straight in to personal attacks against him. Do you have no argument?

Start debating this issues instead of going straight to attack mode on the poster.

Somebody did challenge it! Steve has yet to respond. What are your opinions on the 14th amendment and how these legal minded people with there legal opinions are using it as a argument against the AZ law?

[The_Dude 1,142]

Looks like Charles will have to fill out this form.

[DukeOfYork 28]

Stop attacking El E. just because you don't want to bother responding to his post.

I did respond. I quoted a section of the legal opinion. Didn't you see that?

[Nik+Heather 121]

Well, Arizona did declare war on California once....

It's a funny story....

To Moeur (AZ's governor at the time), a showman politician in the grand carnival style, California's threats (to build Parker Dam) were worse than outrage. In the arid West, denying one's neighbor water was virtual declaration of war. But Moeur had his own response to such a challenge. he would begin waging a real war.

The advance expeditionary force consisted of a Major, sergeant, three privates and a cook. Their instructions, issued personally by the governor, were to report "on any attempt on the part of any person to place any structure on Arizona soil..."

When the newspapers caught wind that an army had actually been dispatched, they were ecstatic. The Los Angeles Times promptly instructed its military correspondent to cover the hostilities. He made it to the Parker Dam site on his state's fast macadam roads before the expeditionary force even arrived. When it did, exhausted from the heat, dust, and 12 fords across the ooze of the Bill Williams River, the Major requisitioned a ferry boat from the town of Parker, and the force was instantly renamed the Arizona Navy. After full inspection of the offending cable, the major tried to steam up the Colorado to the mouth of the Bill Williams to reconnoiter, but the ferry was too high to sneak under the cable, and it got hung up. It was the harbinger of how things were to turn out that the occupants were finally delivered to their campsite by the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power's fast motor launch.

Major Pomeroy stayed at the site for 7 months, sending daily dispatches to the governor by radio. When the bureau finally began to lay a bridge to the Arizona shore, Moeur decided to demonstrate that he meant business. He declared the whole Arizona side of the river under martial law and sent out a hundred-man militia unit in 18 trucks, some with mounted machine guns. According to residents of the town of Parker, who were watching a good joke turn sour in a hurry, the guardsmen seemed eager for a fight. By now, however, the imbroglio had become national news and a source of embarrassment.....(so they took it to court, blah blah blah) Four months later, California's Congressional delegation pushed a bill through Congress that authorized the dam, and Arizona was left without recourse, unless it wanted to declare war on the United States

http://books.google....epage&q&f=false

[KaiserD 12]

VJ OT is a ####### place for debate.

It's become like this (it wasn't always this way) because there are uneducated idiots who haven't had to formulate much of an argument outside of what they are spoon-fed by the mass media.

It's why soundbites, slogans and news commentary shows are so popular in the US.

One of the first things I noticed on returning here is that the level of political and social debate is the same quality as Gaia Online, which is an online community for teenagers.

There's a lot to be said for politely ignoring a response altogether if it has lost the scope of being discussion or has become purely inflammatory. I can think of a couple of responses that I'm very tempted to call out for being just down right ignorant but it's a waste of their time and mine. I'm not gonna change their mind and they sure aren't going to change mine

Not that you need telling this, just in general...

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Somebody did challenge it! Steve has yet to respond. What are your opinions on the 14th amendment and how these legal minded people with there legal opinions are using it as a argument against the AZ law?

Personally? I don't think the 14th amendment will be the main issue here. However, if a citizen is detained for the simple fact that he can't prove his citizenship then I do think thats a violation of section 1.

Edited May 19, 2010 by Sousuke

[SMOKE 1,426]

I'm just asking you to concede that the constitution is open to legal interpretation.

If you can't do that, then you're not being honest.

i can do that. can you concede that illegal immigrants shouldn't be considered for protection under this amendment?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

i can do that. can you concede that illegal immigrants shouldn't be considered for protection under this amendment?

My feeling is that they probably shouldn't, yes.

But the salient point there is what Sousuke mentioned above.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

I did respond. I quoted a section of the legal opinion. Didn't you see that?

You didn't respond to it though, you basically said that having no ID equals an illegal.

[DukeOfYork 28]

You didn't respond to it though, you basically said that having no ID equals an illegal.

No, I gave a hypothetical scenario in which not having an ID and not being able to produce one would bring about reasonable suspicion.

Then I quoted the person who wrote the law up above on this page where he said that wouldn't be enough. I stand corrected.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

No, I gave a hypothetical scenario in which not having an ID and not being able to produce one would bring about reasonable suspicion.

Then I quoted the person who wrote the law up above on this page where he said that wouldn't be enough. I stand corrected.

Sorry Duke, I feel that I was unfairly venting my frustrations about OT on you.

[DukeOfYork 28]

Sorry Duke, I feel that I was unfairly venting my frustrations about OT on you.

No problem. I think this place is about venting frustrations anyway, isn't it? I got a load off my chest and can now go on about my day!

Oh, and the article was on the previous page. These message board pages fill up quickly!

[Ban Hammer 13,334]

No Charles, that's your opinion and it is completely irrelevant. The fact that there have been numerous court cases across the country prove that it is not unambiguous.

It's a question of simple fact.

i didn't think you'd step up to the plate and explain it.

Charles, that was just a fat bailiff chick who wanted to know where you live so she can stalk you.

nah, they were just hassling me because i'm white.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

Really, the larger question for us here on VisaJourney is why any kind of hate talk towards a race or category of people is tolerated.

And why a member of the moderation team participates in it.

[Ban Hammer 13,334]

Really, the larger question for us here on VisaJourney is why any kind of hate talk towards a race or category of people is tolerated.

And why a member of the moderation team participates in it.