Arizona or Obama Administration?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

[EOM]

Edited July 7, 2010 by ##########

[Obama 2012 1,714]

surprised to see so many Obama administration supporters on this issue on this kind of site...

Of course, it's not entirely shocking and he's had a flock of sheep since the moment he opened his mouth in 2007.

[Nikita2Charles 33]

With the current Justices sitting on the Supreme Court Bench, Most likely they will side with Arizona

it's Conservative Activism in the supreme court, specially after they declare a corporation

has the same voting right as you and I, Do we all have Millions $$ to buy out lobbyists?

[Obama 2012 1,714]

With the current Justices sitting on the Supreme Court Bench, Most likely they will side with Arizona

it's Conservative Activism in the supreme court, specially after they declare a corporation

has the same voting right as you and I, Do we all have Millions $$ to buy out lobbyists?

Conservative activism?

That's not what they said.... go read and understand the ruling before making such absurd comments and why the decision was made...

Corporations can be regulated, it was the fact the law restricted individuals as well...

This is why our country is in political turmoil... Stop listening to Rachel Madcow or PMSNBC and actually look on your own.

The SCOTUS will uphold AZ's law because there's nothing wrong with it... It's not the first law of its type and won't be the last. It's political grandstanding by the administration. There's already a precedent set that state's can assist in enforcing immigration laws. As the laws written do nothing to interfere with Federal authorities/federal ability to write laws....

[thongd4me 69]

I take a broader view than that of "states' rights vs. federal control."

In most countries it would be normal for police at any level to check if

a foreigner was in the country legally and they wouldn't have to go through

a gauntlet of "just cause" to justify their doing so. I look at it as just good

police work (knowing the status of the person they are dealing with,

irrespective of whether they are a citizen or not). Our government has

bumbled along with "one hand not knowing what the other is doing"

for too long. Japanese police have a system of knowing the whereabouts

of all citizens in their juristiction, not just foreigners and I don't hear

any outrage about that. Given, Japan is not the US, but I think this

Arizona thing is being drawn way out of proportion.

[trailmix 77]

surprised to see so many Obama administration supporters on this issue on this kind of site...

Of course, it's not entirely shocking and he's had a flock of sheep since the moment he opened his mouth in 2007.

I find it funny when people say stuff like this. They normally say it when people don't agree with them. If you agree with the opposing view, you are a 'sheep'. We get this in Western Canada all the time, which is an area that historically votes conservative (not to be confused with being conservative) as opposed to Eastern provinces that vote liberal (not to be confused with being liberal).

Is it not possible that (omg!) there are informed people that just don't agree with it?

Edited July 8, 2010 by trailmix

[Obama 2012 1,714]

I find it funny when people say stuff like this. They normally say it when people don't agree with them. If you agree with the opposing view, you are a 'sheep'. We get this in Western Canada all the time, which is an area that historically votes conservative (not to be confused with being conservative) as opposed to Eastern provinces that vote liberal (not to be confused with being liberal).

Is it not possible that (omg!) there are informed people that just don't agree with it?

Go back to the 2008 elections and ask anyone what they knew about Obama.. Hell, you can probably find some rallies where "supporters" were interviewed. It was quite hilarious... Obama in no way was elected by an informed electorate. Obama was elected because he was different, because he spoke well, and because it was the 'thing to do.' - It was literally a homecoming court/prom kind/queen vote...

[trailmix 77]

Go back to the 2008 elections and ask anyone what they knew about Obama.. Hell, you can probably find some rallies where "supporters" were interviewed. It was quite hilarious... Obama in no way was elected by an informed electorate. Obama was elected because he was different, because he spoke well, and because it was the 'thing to do.' - It was literally a homecoming court/prom kind/queen vote...

Well I suppose that could be true - or, is it possible that the media tried to spin it that way?

I was there, I voted for him, I knew exactly what I was doing and I didn't vote for the "prom king".

[Darnell 8,479]

I keep seeing this 'google ad' here on VJ, as well - Arizona vs Obama, blah blah blah.

I say a state can do what it wants to, until the feds shut it down.

Still waiting for the AZ law to 'be live',

and still waiting for a month's worth of 'data', after.

I've been paying attention to Obama's choice of language on 'this issue', though - apparently he's happy with 'illegal aliens' being present in the USA. #### the INA, apparently. In my mind, he lost all credibility on immigration issues when his relative wasn't deported this year.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Well I suppose that could be true - or, is it possible that the media tried to spin it that way?

I was there, I voted for him, I knew exactly what I was doing and I didn't vote for the "prom king".

so you purposefully voted for an inexperienced in the real-world individual who spent more time campaigning than he did in office? Who voted strictly along party lines, who weaseled his way into the illinois state legislature, who has complete resentment for being half-white and did everything he could to fit in with the 'black community' and associated himself with known terrorists? On top of that who was indecisive on many issues in illinois and decided he didn't want to vote on important issues, making us excuses about certain provisions, at the same time not commenting on the root of the legislation...

[trailmix 77]

so you purposefully voted for an inexperienced in the real-world individual who spent more time campaigning than he did in office? Who voted strictly along party lines, who weaseled his way into the illinois state legislature, who has complete resentment for being half-white and did everything he could to fit in with the 'black community' and associated himself with known terrorists? On top of that who was indecisive on many issues in illinois and decided he didn't want to vote on important issues, making us excuses about certain provisions, at the same time not commenting on the root of the legislation...

You see things one way, I see things another way. I bet you voted for Bush.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

You see things one way, I see things another way. I bet you voted for Bush.

of course I didn't. What does a guy who owned part of a baseball team, failed a run at congress, ran the easiest state to run as Governor (as the Texas governor has very little power in the state), have any business being president just because of his family name?? Cmon..

I will give GW Bush one thing over Obama though. At least GW Bush passed the smell test of less of a politcian than Obama. Politician and Obama go hand in hand, even though he was able to deceive millions... Funny really when all anyone had to do was a bit of research, not even a lot, just a little...

Edited July 8, 2010 by Paul and Vanessa

[thongd4me 69]

I keep seeing this 'google ad' here on VJ, as well - Arizona vs Obama, blah blah blah.

I say a state can do what it wants to, until the feds shut it down.

Still waiting for the AZ law to 'be live',

and still waiting for a month's worth of 'data', after.

I've been paying attention to Obama's choice of language on 'this issue', though - apparently he's happy with 'illegal aliens' being present in the USA. #### the INA, apparently. In my mind, he lost all credibility on immigration issues when his relative wasn't deported this year.

Although I'm in favor of the AZ law as I said above,

I can imagine a bit of opposition among AZ law enforcement,

particularly by those with Latino backgrounds.

The new law gives people one more reason to make them targets

of insults or worse. People forget they don't make the law, they

only enforce it.

Edited July 8, 2010 by thongd4me

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

I'm the only "Neither" it seems. It does bother me slightly when part of the Federal Government's argument is that they don't have the resources to handle the influx of illegals that the AZ law will create, and that it will bother their "system" of focusing on the violent illegals only.

[Saddle Bronc 124]

Arizona is correct, and its law is constitutional as it only reiterates existing US immigration law. 0bama is entirely wrong to sue Arizona for the skyving of his own (and other post-1986) administration!

Edited July 9, 2010 by Saddle Bronc