The U.S. is finished.

[mantas]

Originally Posted by hockeyrules

So what your saying is all immigrants hop the border just to come here to commit murders and sell drugs?

Theres as many if not more white/black/natives that murder and sell drugs, so what exactly is your point?

If anyone should be sympathetic it should be becuase you have dealt witht the beuracratic bullshit of trying to get citizenship.(irc)

No.

What im saying is jumping the border or overstating your visa and living here illegally is not as petty as taking a piss in public.

[Corbic]

Originally Posted by mantas

No.

What im saying is jumping the border or overstating your visa and living here illegally is not as petty as taking a piss in public.

Exactly.

Overstay your Visa in any other country and see what happens. Sneak into most countries and see what happens. Its not "oh... he's just looking for a job".

Once again, I ask. WHY CAN'T I GET FREE MEXICAN CITIZENSHIP?

[Corbic]

Originally Posted by BustedS13

yes. they're going to be the largest ethnic group in America

And look how well that has worked out for South America.

[Nickys13]

Originally Posted by mantas

We have all broken the law but have we all murdered or sold drugs? I dont think so, there are plenty of laws we break that are really just a nuisance, but if you commit a felony its a whole different game. Im sure all of us have jaywalked but im pretty certain none of us have robbed a bank.

Passing smog illegally is a felony. Do you think people should serve time for that?... people cross the border illegally to have a better life. do you think they should be locked up for that?... Locking up people doesn't have a positive effect on society in turns inmates into hard core criminals and it makes guards into ass holes that abuse there power. Not only that, we pay taxes to feed criminals, to keep them sheltered and to have guards baby sit them. If you really beleive in helping the U.S you should want "felons" to be killed without trial because that takes thousands of dollars and small time "criminals" to be helped out and straighten out there lfe, so they can contribute to sosciety...

[Origin]

If Obama can sign into act amnesty for a given man can he throw another out because he doesn't like how he is speaking against him?

[mantas]

Originally Posted by Nickys13

Passing smog illegally is a felony. Do you think people should serve time for that?... people cross the border illegally to have a better life. do you think they should be locked up for that?... Locking up people doesn't have a positive effect on society in turns inmates into hard core criminals and it makes guards into ass holes that abuse there power. Not only that, we pay taxes to feed criminals, to keep them sheltered and to have guards baby sit them. If you really beleive in helping the U.S you should want "felons" to be killed without trial because that takes thousands of dollars and small time "criminals" to be helped out and straighten out there lfe, so they can contribute to sosciety...

Ok this is really getting on my nerves when people dont read the thread and then post to some random post 5 pages into the thread.

I dont want the illegals crowding up our jails, they should be deported, and then they need to do things the right way. And i agree that our jails are overcrowded but thats why bails exist and we have a probation program for some criminals. Its not like we lock up everyone for breaking the law. Criminals dont contribute to society they are detrimental to society thats why some should not ever be released. And yes, anyone who is a mass murderer should just be executed like Timmy.

[cured13]

learn the language guys, this might be your next boss



Ok, don't shoot, just kidding!

[drivens13]

^Kidding? No, it's actuality.

In case you missed it...
Supreme Court mostly rejects Arizona immigration law; gov says 'heart' remains - CNN.com

[Origin]

I'd rather it happen by chance, but self-hating white men and liberals are forcing it to happen. Diversity.

[ineedone]

Not sure if this has been covered yet, but an understanding of the executive branch of government would be extremely helpful. Without going into to much detail... because yeah, the law, ew gross... the executive branch "executes" the laws. They have discretion on which laws to "execute" and in fact, do not "execute" every single law in the U.S. code. They also have this, gasp, discretion to decriminalize "criminal" acts. Further, immigration is a federal issue, in which they have full discretion on how to legislate, execute, and prosecute. Does that help?

[Origin]

Originally Posted by ineedone

Not sure if this has been covered yet, but an understanding of the executive branch of government would be extremely helpful. Without going into to much detail... because yeah, the law, ew gross... the executive branch "executes" the laws. They have discretion on which laws to "execute" and in fact, do not "execute" every single law in the U.S. code. They also have this, gasp, discretion to decriminalize "criminal" acts. Further, immigration is a federal issue, in which they have full discretion on how to legislate, execute, and prosecute. Does that help?

That branch doesn't create the laws. They sign them into effect. He created it, and executed it, without Congress. That's dictatorship power. That should help.

[ineedone]

Originally Posted by Origin

That branch doesn't create the laws. They sign them into effect. He created it, and executed it, without Congress. That's dictatorship power. That should help.

By federal issue I meant the federal government legislates, executes, prosecutes. Executive orders are constitutional... don't get caught up in the talk radio brain vomit. The executive branch can choose to not prosecute if they so wish, like with DOMA, minor drug offenses, etc. Further, since you seem to be all up on the current events, if congress votes to hold AG Holder in contempt, they can choose to clap their hands, look at it, laugh with each other, than toss that into the garbage pail.

It is not dictatorship power to use your constitutional discretion in deciding where you use your resources. Not sure how you make the logical leap there but hey... go for it, but you are wrong.

[Origin]

Originally Posted by ineedone

By federal issue I meant the federal government legislates, executes, prosecutes. Executive orders are constitutional... don't get caught up in the talk radio brain vomit. The executive branch can choose to not prosecute if they so wish, like with DOMA, minor drug offenses, etc. Further, since you seem to be all up on the current events, if congress votes to hold AG Holder in contempt, they can choose to clap their hands, look at it, laugh with each other, than toss that into the garbage pail.

It is not dictatorship power to use your constitutional discretion in deciding where you use your resources. Not sure how you make the logical leap there but hey... go for it, but you are wrong.

It is using dictatorship power when you make the laws, and then sign them into action. Legislate, execute, and prosecute. None of which mean create. It is an abuse of power when you use these for your own advancement. That is a bit of a hairy situation though. Saying own advancement can be good or bad. This case, bad. Just like using an executive order to hide certain things about Fast and Furious. One is vexed.

[ineedone]

Originally Posted by Origin

It is using dictatorship power when you make the laws, and then sign them into action. Legislate, execute, and prosecute. None of which mean create. It is an abuse of power when you use these for your own advancement. That is a bit of a hairy situation though. Saying own advancement can be good or bad. This case, bad. Just like using an executive order to hide certain things about Fast and Furious. One is vexed.

What law was created by the president? And how it is not an "abuse" of power when it is power you are constitutionally granted as the executive... and by "hiding" you mean using executive privilege... you know another constitutional grant of power... even Dick Cheney knows that shit is fine.

Stop listening to talk radio and thinking you are "learning" you have no clue what you are talking about. I am not even trying to be mean, you have no understanding about the stuff you are talking about.

[Origin]

Originally Posted by ineedone

What law was created by the president? And how it is not an "abuse" of power when it is power you are constitutionally granted as the executive... and by "hiding" you mean using executive privilege... you know another constitutional grant of power... even Dick Cheney knows that shit is fine.

Stop listening to talk radio and thinking you are "learning" you have no clue what you are talking about. I am not even trying to be mean, you have no understanding about the stuff you are talking about.

You have no idea what I am even saying, quit posting in my thread.

[ineedone]

Originally Posted by Origin

You have no idea what I am even saying, quit posting in my thread.

Waahh... I made stupid point and got called out on stuff I don't know about...wahhh.

Your my new favorite e-terd. Every thread you post with a stupid premise, comment, thought... well just anything you participate in. I will follow, and god willing, make a comment that will send you into a rage so hot and burning that even the fire lakes of hell will envy your burn.

There can be only one Highlander.

[Phlip]

Originally Posted by ineedone

Waahh... I made stupid point and got called out on stuff I don't know about...wahhh.

Your my new favorite e-terd. Every thread you post with a stupid premise, comment, thought... well just anything you participate in. I will follow, and god willing, make a comment that will send you into a rage so hot and burning that even the fire lakes of hell will envy your burn.

There can be only one Highlander.

See, that is your problem... it is not that he is not making any real points, it is that people lack the comprehension are too liberal for our new favorite 23 year-old who seems to know it all.

[Origin]

Originally Posted by ineedone

What law was created by the president? And how it is not an "abuse" of power when it is power you are constitutionally granted as the executive... and by "hiding" you mean using executive privilege... you know another constitutional grant of power... even Dick Cheney knows that shit is fine.

Stop listening to talk radio and thinking you are "learning" you have no clue what you are talking about. I am not even trying to be mean, you have no understanding about the stuff you are talking about.

Stop listening to yourself. I really hope you aren't like this in person, the world doesn't need people like you.

I'll wait for what I have no idea I am talking about. He granted amnesty, he over stepped his reach. Eh?

Originally Posted by ineedone

Waahh... I made stupid point and got called out on stuff I don't know about...wahhh.

Your my new favorite e-terd. Every thread you post with a stupid premise, comment, thought... well just anything you participate in. I will follow, and god willing, make a comment that will send you into a rage so hot and burning that even the fire lakes of hell will envy your burn.

There can be only one Highlander.

Never met a more butthurt 26 year old in my life, hahaha. Please, close your legs, the smell is atrocious.

[ineedone]

Originally Posted by Origin

Stop listening to yourself. I really hope you aren't like this in person, the world doesn't need people like you.

I'll wait for what I have no idea I am talking about. He granted amnesty, he over stepped his reach. Eh?

So granting amnesty is creating law? Yeah, no. Again (this time read it slower) point to a law the president has created. An executive order is not a "new" law, it is how the executive branch will carry out it's executive duties. But hey semantics.

And for bonus points, what did he overstep? Find me the part of the constitution (or shit any law, statute, reference, etc in the U.S. Code) in which he overstepped. and for extra extra bonus points - provide the correct blue book citation and I will give you a swell high five.

Originally Posted by Origin

Never met a more butthurt 26 year old in my life, hahaha. Please, close your legs, the smell is atrocious.

Ha, I see what you did there! (you watched workaholics last night, silly bear). But... again, your logic is horribly flawed. Being butt hurt would not make my ass smell (and closing your legs would not stop the smell from permeating). However, I will correct the "slam" for you. Sir, your starchy vagina is filling this room with a musty wheat aroma, would you kindly cross your dainty twigs so that the rest of us may carry on.

(see because vaginas smell when they have yeast infections, but butts do not smell when they are hurt)

PS. Jesus would not use such language and be so mean. Satan is calling!

[Origin]

I know you won't listen, but I would like to know if in fact you have any cultural engagements that you are regularly invited to. You seem like the type of person at car meets, or parties, or whatever you may invite yourself to, that when you arrive the people appear to react most dreadful at the prospect. You are 26, you can ignore me all you want (but I'm right again), but you really need to find some sort of a social life, and a work life.

In before, "I get drunk at parties everyday bro, and work 12 hours", yeah, I'm sure. You don't do that and still find time to sit at a computer for for over an hour (in before I was doing stuff or on my phone) tracking my responses to teach me how, exactly, to be what not to be.

P.S. - The God stuff really isn't doing anything for me, nor is your "logic". Logic doesn't contain such ghastly language. I was saying, since you still can't comprehend, I was merely stating or implying that you act like a sullen female. Or are one, you're still genderless.

[Phlip]

Originally Posted by Origin

I know you won't listen, but I would like to know if in fact you have any cultural engagements that you are regularly invited to. You seem like the type of person at car meets, or parties, or whatever you may invite yourself to, that when you arrive the people appear to react most dreadful at the prospect. You are 26, you can ignore me all you want (but I'm right again), but you really need to find some sort of a social life, and a work life.

In before, "I get drunk at parties everyday bro, and work 12 hours", yeah, I'm sure. You don't do that and still find time to sit at a computer for for over an hour (in before I was doing stuff or on my phone) tracking my responses to teach me how, exactly, to be what not to be.

P.S. - The God stuff really isn't doing anything for me, nor is your "logic". Logic doesn't contain such ghastly language. I was saying, since you still can't comprehend, I was merely stating or implying that you act like a sullen female. Or are one, you're still genderless.

Nowhere in your post do I see any response to a very specific set of questions you were asked...
Please re-read his post, I will quote it below, and respond accordingly.

Originally Posted by ineedone

So granting amnesty is creating law? Yeah, no. Again (this time read it slower) point to a law the president has created. An executive order is not a "new" law, it is how the executive branch will carry out it's executive duties. But hey semantics.

And for bonus points, what did he overstep? Find me the part of the constitution (or shit any law, statute, reference, etc in the U.S. Code) in which he overstepped. and for extra extra bonus points - provide the correct blue book citation and I will give you a swell high five.

[ineedone]

Originally Posted by Origin

I know you won't listen, but I would like to know if in fact you have any cultural engagements that you are regularly invited to. You seem like the type of person at car meets, or parties, or whatever you may invite yourself to, that when you arrive the people appear to react most dreadful at the prospect. You are 26, you can ignore me all you want (but I'm right again), but you really need to find some sort of a social life, and a work life.

In before, "I get drunk at parties everyday bro, and work 12 hours", yeah, I'm sure. You don't do that and still find time to sit at a computer for for over an hour (in before I was doing stuff or on my phone) tracking my responses to teach me how, exactly, to be what not to be.

Bro, I party err day. If by party you mean study. Luckily, a lot of bar prep requires me to be on the puter re typing notes like a G. But I am slamming (enjoying) a nice bottle of wine or two. And well, I have a super fast internets connection so when you post its easy for me to quickly apply snarky comments.

As far as "cultural" engagements, what the hell is that? I live in a city, I kinda just hang out with whoever feels like playing ball, studying, or fighting (Bro I got tapout shirts too). My facebook is hella "cultural?"

Originally Posted by Origin

P.S. - The God stuff really isn't doing anything for me, nor is your "logic". Logic doesn't contain such ghastly language. I was saying, since you still can't comprehend, I was merely stating or implying that you act like a sullen female. Or are one, you're still genderless.

Ghastly language? Ghastly does not mean what you think it means. How does having a smelly ass (you were talking about my ass, my girl does too, it is cute) equal being a sullen female? My comprehension skills are off the chart (I got the test scores to prove it).

[ineedone]

Phlip, I wonder how many times I could ask one question and not get a response that has any relevance to that question?

I have the over-under at 8

[Phlip]

Originally Posted by ineedone

Phlip, I wonder how many times I could ask one question and not get a response that has any relevance to that question?

I have the over-under at 8

What do I look like, some kind of sucker? I ain't taking that bet

[TougeLove]

You know what this means? you have to start your own business, go to school, and/or become really good at a trade. Those with high school diplomas will drown in the sea of immigrants that are "qualified" to work here.

America has become so lazy that those without much education and/or skill have been able to make it by....not anymore.

I have a question; what if employers made the requirements of getting a job to include obtaining a high school degree? It's legal to not hire someone based on their education so technically they can legally say no to all immigrants that do not have a US high school diploma. I am assuming the greater part of them do not have one. right? wrong? ethical?

[mantas]

Originally Posted by ineedone

Not sure if this has been covered yet, but an understanding of the executive branch of government would be extremely helpful. Without going into to much detail... because yeah, the law, ew gross... the executive branch "executes" the laws. They have discretion on which laws to "execute" and in fact, do not "execute" every single law in the U.S. code. They also have this, gasp, discretion to decriminalize "criminal" acts. Further, immigration is a federal issue, in which they have full discretion on how to legislate, execute, and prosecute. Does that help?

Ok since you are such a smart son of a bitch ill ask one question at a time. Why do we have an agency in the united states called ICE?

[mantas]

And answer one question at a time, you will see how dumb you are at the end of this.

[ineedone]

Originally Posted by mantas

And answer one question at a time, you will see how dumb you are at the end of this.

You could just tell me how dumb I am right up front. I know it may not seem like I have a lot to do (on forum = not busy) but I am double tasking here. No need for a chase down a rabbit hole... ICE is under DHS, which is a federal executive branch agency.

[TrustS13]

Most arrogant poster of the year award goes to : Origin

[ineedone]

Originally Posted by mantas

Ok since you are such a smart son of a bitch ill ask one question at a time. Why do we have an agency in the united states called ICE?

I know this is probably done in vein... but I am guessing you are going to go off on a rant how "doze mexercans dook er jerrrbbbs!" and are taking all your welfare and fun stuff like that.

To preempt your entire argument, I will (god please read) link to an article that is quite informative. It is written by Judge Richard Posner. Look him up, he is a conservative - but a smart one, like really smart. Anyway, this article explains the issue with the Arizona Immigration case (and the political celeb hack Justice Scalia has become). So, please. Read up. I read your other posts and well... you are sorely, and I mean SORELY misinformed. I am only here to help.

Supreme Court year in review: Justice Scalia offers no evidence to back up his claims about illegal immigration