Legal Showdown - Arizona's Immigration Law

[Jiro]

Reba - she's the one in her red/orange n' white stripes - link

 

[rockdrummer]

RD, that's a very limited definition. The sociologists' definition is more helpful.

Sociological Defintion. Of Racism - Topix

An more basic explanation here: (beginning at page 15)

The Sociological Perspective

I'm sorry but all I saw at the link you provided are posts in a forum by people that did not provide sources to support what appears to be nothing more than their opinions.

EDIT: the second link I would consider more credible than the first. (sorry I missed the second link when I responded)

 

[Reba]

daredevel looks very anglo but she is not.

ok.

 

[Reba]

any non-white people bearing Caucasian physical characteristics is considered an elitist or "elevated". Japanese royalty practiced this way. So does Argentina. Africa (the darker you are, the more inferior you are).

OK. That wasn't my point but that's interesting.

 

[Barbaro]

What I meant was, if the majority of the illegal border crossers didn't fit the stereotyped profile that everyone is screaming "racism" about.

The big contention seems to be that the Arizona law will be prejudicial against short, dark people because of their "look". Well, if there was no distinctive "look", would anyone be upset about the Arizona law? If almost all the illegal aliens looked Nordic, would there be the protests?

I have a light olive skinned, and noticed that when I go to store, and this cashier is Mexican descent or whatever treats me badly until I hand over my credit card with my Spanish last name. All of the sudden, she smiles and treats me like I am one of them.. *sighs* This is one of the situations I used to deal daily until I got married with a new name.

My brother and I have lived in AZ before. The AZ police has reputation for being strict. My brother always used to get pull over for speeding. He had never had any problems with AZ cops, and they did not question him about his last name. My Mexican born cousins are naturalized citizens live in Mesa, and have never had any problems.

 

[Reba]

Reba - she's the one in her red/orange n' white stripes - link

OK. Thanks.

 

[Reba]

I have a light olive skinned, and noticed that when I go to store, and this cashier is Mexican descent or whatever treats me badly until I hand over my credit card with my Spanish last name. All of the sudden, she smiles and treats me like I am one of them.. *sighs* This is one of the situations I used to deal daily until I got married with a new name.

That's why we shouldn't judge (or even identify) a book by its cover, heh?

 

[darkdog]

um.... Look at my OP - "Once the immigration law gets struck down - I call for Governor Jan Brewer's resignation because she knowingly and willfully signed an illegal law."

How do you know she believes the law is illegal? And once again to echo your question, should the majority rule it unconstitutional, will the judges in the minority who agree with the governor be fools for being in the minority?

Usually, I laugh when something's funny. What I said has no comedic value. I can go down to the Improv and deliver that line and I will be booed off the stage. It is not funny. Why do you laugh? I can only assume if you had an intelligent statement to make, you would have made it, but instead, you put up a laugh as if that's supposed to make me look or feel stupid. If that's your goal, you need to do it with well-thought out responses, not idiotic laugh emoticons. Or at least come up with some witty zinger that's actually funny.

ok. then I suppose those several Supreme Court cases and Founding Fathers' belief are lacking in any useful substance for you.

We already established that we agree that illegal immigrants should have some civil rights in this country. I was talking about your nonsensical assertion that Congress worked on that health care bill for 30 years, as if that were either true or relevant to the quality of the final product. Focus!

so was 18th Amendment constitutional? every once in a while - people lose a sense of direction. eventually they will come to sense and realize they have made mistake - thus 21st Amendment. We are flawed humans. The Constitution is designed to be fluidic as according to era as the Founding Fathers know it is the only way to do that in order to progress forward, not backward.

Yes, it was constitutional for over a decade because it was part of the Constitution itself. Are you trying to argue that the 16th amendment is somehow not constitutional because it could possibly be repealed in the future? Enough with the sloppy thinking already.

 

[darkdog]

I'm side with Jiro because he is exactly know about related to law and I have feel that Jiro should be our future president.

What part of the law contradicts what part of the Constitution?

 

[Jiro]

How do you know she believes the law is illegal?

In her mind - it's legal to her... which is why she is unfit for her duty as a Governor. Former Arizona Governor scorned her harshly. Take a look at their background and then tell me which one is more qualified in understanding the legal system.

And once again to echo your question, should the majority rule it unconstitutional, will the judges in the minority who agree with the governor be fools for being in the minority?

depending on what their dissenting opinions are.

Usually, I laugh when something's funny. What I said has no comedic value. I can go down to the Improv and deliver that line and I will be booed off the stage. It is not funny. Why do you laugh? I can only assume if you had an intelligent statement to make, you would have made it, but instead, you put up a laugh as if that's supposed to make me look or feel stupid. If that's your goal, you need to do it with well-thought out responses, not idiotic laugh emoticons. Or at least come up with some witty zinger that's actually funny.

*it's a cartoon pix of a smiley behind the computer, laughing so hard that his legs are up in the air

We already established that we agree that illegal immigrants should have some civil rights in this country. I was talking about your nonsensical assertion that Congress worked on that health care bill for 30 years, as if that were either true or relevant to the quality of the final product. Focus!

History of health care reform in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

it's been on table since 1900's.

Yes, it was constitutional for over a decade because it was part of the Constitution itself. Are you trying to argue that the 16th amendment is somehow not constitutional because it could possibly be repealed in the future? Enough with the sloppy thinking already.

it was unconstitutional therefore it was repealed. just the matter of time till it happens. that was one of dark chapters in American history. many innocent lives were killed. the corruption was rampage and deep in government and law enforcement agencies. Every country has its dark period of life.... like Milosevic. Castro. plenty in South America. plenty in Africa. It always repeat.

DC gun ban = recently struck down as unconstitutional..... after 30+ years....

 

[kokonut]

Funny thread so far.

 

[darkdog]

In her mind - it's legal to her... which is why she is unfit for her duty as a Governor. Former Arizona Governor scorned her harshly. Take a look at their background and then tell me which one is more qualified in understanding the legal system.

So now she isn't knowingly signing an illegal law. Wasn't that your basis for seeing her kicked out of office?

By the way, now the fact that a politician is scorning another politician is basis to kick politicians out of office?

*it's a cartoon pix of a smiley behind the computer, laughing so hard that his legs are up in the air

Wow, I think his mouth is actually bigger than the rest of his head.

History of health care reform in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

it's been on table since 1900's.

So now it's almost a century? That's a long time to screw something up as bad as they did. Yet, it's still irrelevant. Bad laws are bad laws, no matter how long people have been talking about writing bad laws.

it was unconstitutional therefore it was repealed. just the matter of time till it happens. that was one of dark chapters in American history. many innocent lives were killed. the corruption was rampage in government and law enforcement agencies. Every country has its dark period of life.... like Milosevic. Hitler. Castro. plenty in South America. plenty in Africa. It always repeat.

DC gun ban = recently struck down as unconstitutional..... after 30+ years....

Oh wow. Wow oh wow. The 18th amendment was part of the Constitution, not just some statute. The Constitution can't be unconstitutional! It wasn't struck down by a court- courts don't have the authority to strike down the Constitution itself. It was repealed by another amendment because the people decided that it was a bad idea. A constitutional amendment was the only way anyone could have possibly changed it.

 

[Jiro]

Funny thread so far.

indeed funny especially that I'm on your ignore list and you don't want to debate with someone at your own size

 

[Beowulf]

Relax, Jiro. I know from personal experience what monkeys do when you get too close.

 

[kokonut]

Unraveling.....badly.

If I ever get rich, DD, remind me to get you a guitar of your choice.

 

[Jiro]

So now she isn't knowingly signing an illegal law. Wasn't that your basis for seeing her kicked out of office?

It is governor's duty to read and sign the lawful bill. Passing new revisions to immigration law? uh-oh!!! something's up!

She neglected her duty and she failed her duty. That's how I see it but if the court disagreed with my view... oh well.

By the way, now the fact that a politician is scorning another politician is basis to kick politicians out of office?

basis? more like - a support to my view. Mind you - Former Arizona Governor isn't just a "politician".... and she's not even like most incompetent politicians. She's a seasoned public servant - Arizona US Attorney... and then Attorney General.... and then Governor.... and now Secretary of Homeland Security.

Jan Brewer's background is your typical incompetent politician - Arizona's House of Rep... Senate... Chairperson of Maricopa County (yes - that infamous sheriff).... Secretary of State.... and now assumed Governor.

Wow, I think his mouth is actually bigger than the rest of his head.

fo'shizzle

History of health care reform in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So now it's almost a century? That's a long time to screw something up as bad as they did. Yet, it's still irrelevant. Bad laws are bad laws, no matter how long people have been talking about writing bad laws.

now you know I don't make nonsensical assertion or incoherent post. egg on the face, eh?

Oh wow. Wow oh wow. The 18th amendment was part of the Constitution, not just some statute. The Constitution can't be unconstitutional! It wasn't struck down by a court- courts don't have the authority to strike down the Constitution itself. It was repealed by another amendment because the people decided that it was a bad idea. A constitutional amendment was the only way anyone could have possibly changed it.

hence... unconstitutional. a major major major mistake. 18th Amendment shouldn't have been there in the first place anyway. but we are human, yes? we do make some really bad mistakes, yes? Obamacare is, I believe, one of them. so is this Arizona's new immigration law.

 

[Reba]

Oops! Wrong thread.

 

[shel90]

indeed funny especially that I'm on your ignore list and you don't want to debate with someone at your own size

Yeppers

 

[kokonut]

Oops! Wrong thread.

??

 

[Reba]

??

I meant to post something in another thread. So many of the titles are similar in topic that I got off track.