Thursday, April 29, 2010

Gov. Brewer On Greta Last Night

I must say that I was quite impressed in her appearance on Greta. She showed absolutely no weakness in supporting the new law despite the overheated uproar from both citizens and states! It’s like Arizona has been in a non-stop pressure cooker every since she signed in that law.
But Gov. Brewer is steadfast and it makes me like her even more. Since she signed this into law her approval rating went up 16 points.He tells Hannity that illegal immigrants don’t bring drugs across the border on foot, they do it in helicopters and cars, etc. And lastly he admitted that he did have a problem arresting people who come across the border just to get a better living even though they are here illegally. In the same line he also suggested that we should ignore the laws that the congress and President have enacted regarding illegal immigration.
Needless to say he set himself up for failure, and Michelle gladly obliges him:


21 comments:

  1. We don't need new laws, we need to enforce the existing laws....wait thats for gun control, not immigration. I can't keep up with the various hypocritical stances you guys take.

    ReplyDelete
  2. WTF are you talking about Joe? Existing laws need to be enforced before you enact MORE laws that will not be enforced. The Feds are not enforcing their existing laws, so Arizona took it to the state level. Not getting where the hypocrisy comes in on this, except for the fact that the Hypocrats are becoming Hystericrats because a law is going to be enforced. Sheesh. I can't keep up with the nonsense you have been spewing lately.

    ReplyDelete
  3. JoeC Batman, John nails you every single time. He twists you around like a pretzel! Hilarious!

    ReplyDelete
  4. JoeC Lately You Write And It Comes Out Like Your Hands Brain And Eyes Aint Talking To Each Other! There Was A Time When Debate With you Was Interesting NOW, Its Like Bruce In Stero!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Joe the problem is that the Fed isn't doing the jobs they were created to do because they are too busy doing the states and our jobs. If the fed can't do what they were created to do why would you want to give them more thing to do? That's dumb.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Joe Al has a point. You used to debate but now you're as shallow as Bruces arguments.

    ReplyDelete
  7. John, what am i talking about?
    The pro-gun lobby has opposed creating Federal laws on gun control despite the fact that state and local statutes have not worked and are not enforced to the extent they need to be, but many of the same people are in favor of states (like AZ) passing there own immigration laws when federal laws have not worked or have been enforced to the extent they need to be.

    I am suggesting that they apply their logic to both situations.

    If we don't need new federal laws to curb gun violence then we don't need new state laws to curb immigration.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anon, i know. your right John twists everything i say.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Hey, i heard Sarah Palin and the right changed their strategy on offshore drilling last night. She had "spill here, spill now" written on her hand.

    That my friends and brothers is the beauty of the Obama plan for offshore drilling. Open it up to states with heavy republican support for the issue and let them have the consequences while those states that are not thrilled with the thought have less risk.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I didn't twist anything Joe. You are absolutely right, laws need to be enforced. The Feds aren't enforcing their laws so the states have to step up and enforce the very same federal law. That is what the AZ law is about, enforcing the very same Federal law. What gun control laws aren't the states enforcing, and what good would it do for the feds to pass more gun control laws that they themselves wouldn't enforce? Now you are just being silly.

    That Palin thing is funny. Thanks for the laugh.

    But you know, Obummer and Big Sis are sending SWAT teams to the oil rigs. Sounds like this latest spill might be the work of eco-terrorists, you know, lefties. Remains to be seen, but it's pretty interesting that they are sending those SWAT teams out; I didn't realize SWAT trains in environmental clean-up.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Chris Number One Golf Is Lousy BUT Still Outside In Fresh Air With Buddys, Makes Us Old Farts Feel Great!

    Gun Control To Me Just Makes For Criminals Having Guns and Citizens At Their Mercy. Not Sure What Kills More Citizens Cars, Drugs Cigarettes or Hospitals But Im Pretty Sure They Give Guns A Run For Their Money!

    Off Shore drilling Will Be Under Attack Again and Like The Movie "China Syndrome" Will Set Drilling Back But In The Future What Is Alternative Fuels? Solar Power Wind Neither That Will Be Of ANY Effect For Decades. Another Thought About Drilling Why Not Try In One Of The MANY Land Areas We Have, Never Heard of Spill On Land. Any Production of Any Fuel Has Risk Other That If We Could To Start Burning Wood Again But Than Tree Huggers Would Protest. Eventually Nuclear Power May Be The Answer But Even Thats Long Way Off But Seems If France Can Do It We Can Plus Europe Would Be Thrilled!

    Immigration Has Been Ignored By Politicans For Decades And The 15 Million Here Now Aint Going Anywhere. Any Immigration Bill Now MUST Insure OUR Borders Are Protected and Stiff Penalties(Not Unlike Mexico) Must Be Put In Place To Insure Immigration Is Fair Yet Gaining Illegal Entry Is Not To Be Rewarded With Citiizenship!

    ReplyDelete
  12. Joe gun laws are working. Where the gun laws are the hardest they have higher crime. The states with the least crime are usually the ones with the most conservative gun laws. Just look at how crime has gone up in every nation that took away it's citizens gun right.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Open Carry States Do Give BAD Guys A Important Option. Do Not Do The Crime Or Suicide By Citizen! Either Way One Less Egg To Fry In Prison System

    ReplyDelete
  14. Chris, looking at the passage of the clarifying legislation in Az i can see where they addressed the vague language and removed one of the reasons for being overturned.

    I am still disappointed in language that attempts to keep the AG from investigating complaints of abuse based on profiling.

    Still the overall criticism that states can not become involved in foreign policy, of which immigration has been considered legally for many years is unanswered. I've read theories and legal profs go both ways. We'll have to wait for the legal system to handle it.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Chris, how does that correlate to other industrialized countries where more gun control results in much less crime per capita.

    Canada: 0.0149063 per 1,000 people
    United States: 0.042802 per 1,000 people

    ReplyDelete
  16. Chris, i'm looking a study on crime statistics in Canada and the overall crime rate has gone down since 1997 and violent crime has stayed the same.

    http://dsp-psd.pwgsc.gc.ca/collection_2009/statcan/85-004-X/85-004-x2009001-eng.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  17. Joe, take a look at Switzerland where a vast majority not only have guns but know how to use them. They also have an extremely low crime rate. There are a lot of factors in crime rates; the biggest factor being that Canada and Switzerland don't have Detroit, Chicago, NY, and DC! LOL

    Neither does Canada and Switzerland have problems with illegals, which kinda proves the point, eh?

    One thing is for certain; places like DC that heavily restrict gun-ownership prove that when you remove guns using laws, only criminals have the guns and law-abiding citizens have nothing to defend themselves with, other than a 911 call after a crime has been committed.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Here is an article on Switzerland if you are interested Joe. If not, no biggie, there will be no quiz!

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/1566715.stm

    ReplyDelete
  19. John, they also have a incrediable low unemployment rate, and nationalized healthcare and welfare.

    So they have the best of both worlds huh? I could live with that

    ReplyDelete
  20. Mark Adams, I didn't get to your question on the other thread but i'll post an answer here, since Lawful contact has removed and redefined.

    Lawful contact did not restrict police officers to just arrest, detention and suspicion of criminla activity. Any legal contact with police was okay, such as witnessing a crime, being a victim, and many other sorts of contact. Now that rule has been replaced with one that defines it as you suggested. before that it wasn't

    ReplyDelete

Please keep it clean and nice. Thank you for taking the time to post you thought. It means a lot to me that you do this.