RkFast Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Sure illegals are a 'class' of people. You can classify anything you moron. And news flash Dar Dar, all illegals don't come here to rob, steal and kill, in fact most don't. Just like most G.I.s don't murder civilians in Iraq, just some do. I still find your point laughable that a person has to kill 20 million people to be a bigot. Pretty high standard there! The media and Iraq? LOL, hey, they also don't show how Iraq was better off under Saddam. Don't see much of that in the media, but its the truth. Perhaps the media can focus on the more living space each individual Iraqi who is still alive or has not ran from the country ahead of the chaos now has. There is at least a million fewer souls in the country now. Think of the elbow room! I would pay MONEY to see this guy and BF duke it out. Wait...maybe I wouldnt. I mean...Im no brain surgeon....Tom and Darin make sure to remind me of that regularly...and Im ok with that. But this guy...man...this guy is just too "good" to be true.
molson_golden2002 Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 I would pay MONEY to see this guy and BF duke it out. Wait...maybe I wouldnt. I mean...Im no brain surgeon....Tom and Darin make sure to remind me of that regularly...and Im ok with that. But this guy...man...this guy is just too "good" to be true. Perhaps you could, well, you know, be specific, or semi-specific, or give even a slight hint about what you disagree with. I mean make an argument of some sort. Maybe the problem is that you can't. Is that it? Not smart enough?
RkFast Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Perhaps you could, well, you know, be specific, or semi-specific, or give even a slight hint about what you disagree with. I mean make an argument of some sort. Maybe the problem is that you can't. Is that it? Not smart enough? Little clue for ya...when even people who AGREE WITH YOUR POSITION take you to the woodshed, youre doing something wrong. Very wrong.
molson_golden2002 Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Little clue for ya...when even people who AGREE WITH YOUR POSITION take you to the woodshed, youre doing something wrong. Very wrong. That works both ways, maybe its you who is wrong, very wrong. But we won't find that out because you only speak in generalities
RkFast Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 That works both ways, maybe its you who is wrong, very wrong. But we won't find that out because you only speak in generalities Wrong on WHAT???!!!?? I havent stated an opinion on this topic! Holy sh--!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Are you drunk or something????!!!!?????
Alaska Darin Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Yes it does. But you're misrepresenting what "freedom of speech" is. You are equating it to 'You can say anything you want w/o consequences.' In reality, FoS just guarantees that the govt cannot put you in prison for what you say (besides making a threat of violence). I'm doing nothing of the sort, other than exposing yet another liberal hypocrite. It doesn't mean you can't be fired from your job for what you say, ostracised from the community or that people must continue doing business with you. FoS is like the freedom to jump off your roof and fly --- you can try it, but there are consequences. Of course there are - but I don't see them applying here. He's talking about people who are breaking the law. How weird for a judge to do that. The important point here is that this book offers real, physical proof of bias. Every time this judge hears a case involving illegal immigration in any way, it provides immediate grounds for appeal. Which says alot more about what is wrong with our "justice" system than it does about the man. Saying that ILLEGAL immigrants are a problem ain't a problem, nor is it likely to deny them one bit of their due process. There are simply too many checks and balances in the system for one dude to be able to screw that up. Sorry. The reason why nominees for SCotUS (i.e. Roberts' confirmation, memorably) decline to answer such broad questions on their philosophy is that it gives the appearance of prejudice. He had the right to write the book, but not w/o professional consequences. What those consequences may be, I don't know. Which they should, as it has little to do with their ability to do their job. That process is so laughable that I can't even find a better word for it.
Alaska Darin Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 I went to yahoo news thinking it was cureent and didn't waste anymore time with it Yeah, I'd hate to be informed on a topic I'm supposedly passionate about.
Alaska Darin Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Sure illegals are a 'class' of people. You can classify anything you moron. I'll leave that to you, my intellectual superior. And news flash Dar Dar, all illegals don't come here to rob, steal and kill, in fact most don't. I'd like you to point out a single instance where I stated anything of the sort. Try and stick to a single coherent thought without implying things. Just like most G.I.s don't murder civilians in Iraq, just some do. You libs. Just can't go a second without "supporting" the troops. I still find your point laughable that a person has to kill 20 million people to be a bigot. Pretty high standard there! You and Holcomb's Arm should get together and work on deductive reasoning. That'd be a sure winner on par with the best comedy shows in television history. The media and Iraq? LOL, hey, they also don't show how Iraq was better off under Saddam. Don't see much of that in the media, but its the truth. Perhaps the media can focus on the more living space each individual Iraqi who is still alive or has not ran from the country ahead of the chaos now has. There is at least a million fewer souls in the country now. Think of the elbow room! You're just awesome. Love the passion, hate the idiocy.
Lori Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 ROTFLMAO! In other words you can't explain it! Lori the dimwit Your screen name changes, but your idiocy doesn't. Have a nice day...
molson_golden2002 Posted January 5, 2007 Posted January 5, 2007 Your screen name changes, but your idiocy doesn't. Have a nice day... Nothing to say, yet again?
Chilly Posted January 5, 2007 Posted January 5, 2007 Horrors....illegal immigrants not getting a fair shake in court. Sounds like we need to clone him about a hundred times. The article doesn't actually mention whether attorneys are concerned about illegal immigrants or legal immigrants they are defending. In fact, the quote that was posted, just simply says "immigrants". Its worded to imply that illegal immigrants are the ones that aren't getting a fair shake but it doesn't actually say that. Anyway, it does raise a concern about the judge and his ability to rule without bias. However, while that does happen, given his position and the system of appeals in place, I'm sure his ruling would be reviewed enough to where it would be overturned if there was a perceived bias involved. Does it raise questions that there might be a problem? Sure does, I don't think theres anyway to deny that. But does this mean that he's going to suck at his job? No, a childrens book doesn't mean crap.
KD in CA Posted January 5, 2007 Posted January 5, 2007 The article doesn't actually mention whether attorneys are concerned about illegal immigrants or legal immigrants they are defending. In fact, the quote that was posted, just simply says "immigrants". Its worded to imply that illegal immigrants are the ones that aren't getting a fair shake but it doesn't actually say that. Oh I know that. But the issue in question specifically concerns illegal immigrants. The attorneys are concerned because 98% of them are more than happen to defend or protect illegal as well as legal immigrants.
Orton's Arm Posted January 7, 2007 Posted January 7, 2007 You and Holcomb's Arm should get together and work on deductive reasoning. That'd be a sure winner on par with the best comedy shows in television history. I see someone enjoys the taste of Bungee Jumper's Kool Aid.
Recommended Posts