James Bovard on Tea Party Inconsistencies

[Amianthus]

AZ now leads the nation in apparent kidnappings, and has I believe even more "sanctuary towns" then even CA, where illegal immigrants can largely run drug running, kidnappings, and gang activity, as long as they don't get caught doing any of those. 

Actually, a big part of the problem is that there is at least one, possibly two or three, Indian reservations in Arizona that cross the border - part of the reservation is in Mexico. And Indian reservations generally do not allow federal police onto their land (nor state police).

[sirs]

Prince will want a source for that     

[Amianthus]

The Tohono O'odham Nation controls a 63 mile stretch of the US / Mexico border.

[Universe Prince]

Prince the part you're not seeing, or more likely refusing to see, is that AZ is simply doing with the FED is supposed to do, but isn't.

That's your opinion.

No, it's not.  Read the law.  You want it to simply be an opinion, so you can beat up on it with the nonsense of "supporting bigger government".  The fact is, this law simply supports local law enforcment to enforce EXISTING Federal immigration law, by the state.  A measure that was already passed by Clinton, some 14years ago.

No more, no less

No, Sirs. I did not say the law was an opinion. It's your opinion, and the opinion of others, that this law is about something the federal government should be doing.

I'll kindly turn Prince's attention the the wave of protests, by pro-illegal immgration folks, like Cardinal Mahoney, Rev Sharpton, and a myriad of other politicians, pundits, & protesters

I'd like to see quotes of them saying they are pro-illegal immigration. I'd like to see some proof they are in hysterics. Passionate they may be, in hysterics, I doubt it.

LOL...1 LAST time...a new law

Yes, a new law that you yourself said gives them more authority. It is not merely existing law. Glad we cleared that one up.

[Universe Prince]

Prince will want a source for that

I'm still waiting for you, Sirs, to produce a source. How long will I have to wait for that?

[sirs]

Interesting, now Prince appears to be arguing that since the Fed isn't enforcing their own immigration law, what business is it of the states to be doing so.  Yea, yea, he didn't really say that.  In fact, nothing he says is what he really says

And FYI, I'd like to see quotes of folks supportive of enforcing existing immigration law as being against LEGAL immigration.  And if the constant nazi & WWII Germany references aren't enough to demonstrate just how hysterical some of these folks are, then nothing's going to convince you.....See "template"

[Universe Prince]

Interesting, now Prince appears to be arguing that since the Fed isn't enforcing their own immigration law, what business is it of the states to be doing so.  Yea, yea, he didn't really say that.  In fact, nothing he says is what he really says

I should not have to explain this. But because there is clearly some confusion, and because I am a patient and generous man, I will try.

No, Sirs, actually, everything I say is what I really said. Unfortunately for you, what I actually say does not include all of your speculations, your assumptions and your vagaries that you may try to lay at my feet. My thoughts and my expression of my thoughts are formed by me and not by you. Last I checked, you were not on the Who's Who list of long distance mind readers. And just because you want me to have said and/or meant something for the convenience of your argument does not mean I actually did. You see, Sirs, you are not the authority on what I mean and what I say. If the fact that you don't get to define my thoughts bothers you, well, that is just too damn bad, isn't it?

And FYI, I'd like to see quotes of folks supportive of enforcing existing immigration law as being against LEGAL immigration.

Sure. Just as soon as you find me quotes both of people saying you're against, specifically, legal immigration and from people who claim to be pro-illegal immigration.

And if the constant nazi & WWII Germany references aren't enough to demonstrate just how hysterical some of these folks are, then nothing's going to convince you.....See "template"

I'm still waiting for the quotes and the source I have requested. I am guessing you haven't got a source for your earlier claim, or I would have seen it by now. And no, poor structuring of an argument is not proof of hysteria, otherwise you would be considered hysterical. But we both know you're not.