Shared publicly  - 
Maria Jose Navarrete (Joey Navarrete)'s profile photoTim O'Born's profile photoRobert Thompson's profile photoJeffrey Hamby's profile photo
#Foxnewsistan -- dispatches from the conservative bubble
#briangauspohltroll follows simply to troll.
oh haters have no sense of humor, don't player hate, hater
Yeah... don't mess up our site with thought. or discussion.
Jeffrey Hamby - humor involves thinking, at least the with progressive minded. Maybe if Mitt Romney had an authentic laugh people wouldn't think he is a Stepford Husband plastic robot model 3000.
I was thinking in general Jeffrey. I have been called a troll on this site many times. I tell them I am just giving my logrythm something to do. And also I love to debate.
Can you imagine if this gets upheld and obamacare gets shut down? Ahhh
Your not a troll Margaret, your polite, more of a pest.
I love to debate. But in that first comment there's nothing sparking debate or thought. Just a hashtag insult.
My pleasure Margaret, we have argued but kept it civil.
Back in 1950 this would have been unthinkable; borders are kept; it's how countries stay who they are, and keep from getting invaded.

But now, people are actually SUING from the fed, because states are doing the job they used to do? People need jail time. This is as wrong as wholesale voter fraud.
Katie Huber - actually I think this will galvanize latino and hispanic voters even more to vote democrat and for obama. Republicans will take this victory and try to replicate the Arizona law in other states. This will be viewed negatively in the latino/hispanic community as they will feel targeted even more by law enforcement. More people with another reason to join the occupy and 99% spring marches come this fall. I expect to see a lot of young latino/hispanic college students rallying around this cause just like they did in Arizona. The republican GOP might want to be careful in what they wish for in terms of how the US Supreme Court rules both on the Arizona immigration law and the affordable care act (Obamacare). They might ensue a backlash against conservative politicians come November.
I thought we wanted less government in our lives? Why can't Brewer get a handle on her own state? Why should the federal government be involved in a states rights issue. It shouldn't have gone to the Supreme Court. Fight your own battles lady. Or step aside and let someone competent do it.
Like I said... the federal government should be out of this one. Let the states fight it out.
She's whining about the federal government not giving her enough money to fight illegal immigration. Have at it lady. Go for it.
Now see Margaret and I agree on this one. Leave it to the states.
Brewer didn't go to the federal government asking it to fight her battle. She challenged the federal governments authority in the one place that can be done... Federal Court.
Did you want me to get you some quotes? She wants her cake and eat it too.
I'm just commenting on the article. Did you want to make the discussion much broader?
Before the ALEC written bill was passed. Hang on. I'll be right back.
If so let her be appointed to a cabinet position in the new administration then, there will be lots of openings.
I can't speak for AZ voters. However funding I can.

In that sense she's arguing that the federal government has a responsibility to spend taxpayer money (remember, the federal government has no money) protecting its borders. They don't.

In light of that fact it would stand to reason that AZ should get their portion of that money back so they can do it effectively.
Oh and they all be filled post haste I am sure. Unlike the current Congress that has obstructed every appointment. Disgusting. Really disgusting.
Cut spending on non essentials and divert money to enforcing the borders. from what I have heard some idiot is giving guns to criminals down there.
I think that would be fair. They have the increased burden perhaps they should have a higher trade off. A broad brushed reversal of privacy and rights is not the answer imho.
Balance of power? Aren't they supposed to be legislating? Getting something done?
previous administration of 8 years vs 3 and a half?
Nope. More is more. And we need more Obama less Tea Party obstructionists.
In a Representative Republic we send Representatives to protect us against passing of unconstitutional laws and taxes, I'm glad nothing is being passed, Obamacare was shoved up our ##### and no one even read it. Time to send them all home.
Long Live the Tea Party, we have only begun to fight.
For the first 2 years, the Dems had Obama in the White House, a majority in the House, and a supermajority in the Senate and got nothing done, except for the health care law, which most people didn't want. This incompetence is the only thing that saved us from complete tragedy.
Sorry Jeffrey.. I thought I did. You can't really compare since Bush was in office for 8 years. And Obama has been in office for less than 4. We can discuss in 4 years whether they are on a par.
I'm not really asking you to compare, I'm just asking how disgusted you were that there were 28 rejections in the previous administration.
ps... riders or signing statements? Riders uh I couldn't find your number?? Source?
rejections of what? Sorry. I lost you. My bad.
Those aren't what I was talking about. And even those numbers don't reflect much . I am talking about federal judges and appellate judges going all the way down. There are hundreds waiting and being obstructed by filibuster.
Well if you are waiting for justice in a court I'd say it was a bad thing. May not matter to you.
I guess I misunderstood it to be about cabinet members.

I will say though that it's not as if this is a new development nor is it something only one political party does.
Until your case is put on hold because the docket is so long. Oh the howls we'll hear. How justice is for the rich. And you need your day in court. That's fine. You go ahead and wish for the worst for our America. How sad and discouraging. You'd rather have failure than have something good come of his administration. To me that is unpatriotic. You must hate this country.
Funny how the Great Divider is spending so much time/money fighting Arizona's law which is nothing more than enforcing laws already on the federal books. If Washington won't do it's job, at least Arizona is willing to do it.
I don't think you can define filling the courts with one mentality of legislating from the bench as "something good".
Jeffrey.. I think the word 'unprecedented' is key. Yes filibuster is a tactic. Not one to hold the american people hostage. They are supposed to be doing what WE want. Not their corporate masters. Dems and Repubs alike.
We had enough vile with George and Karl. No more vile. I like community organizer. Law professor. Teacher. I don't like Hedge Fund millionaire serial tax evader.
Oh, with that I do agree, and should point out that I'm no fan of either major party... Though admittedly I consider the Republican party the (slightly) lesser of two evils.
Constitution... Constitution.... Nope, drawing a blank.
No they are supposed to be enacting legislation for the good of their constituents and their country. We could all stay home and vote on line if that were all they were there for.
You mean they thought it might be good for the country? They thought parents with kids in college can keep them on their health care policy until 26? You mean I don't have to incur the cost of someone going to the emergency room with no health insurance? You mean they can't hold a pre existing condition against me when acquiring coverage? Wow that sucks!
+Margaret McEvoy barely, and not without bribery, and with polls showing the (narrow) majority of Americans didn't want it.
They didn't understand it. It was poorly presented and vilified by the opposition.
Neither did Congress according to the House Majority Leader at the time.
That has not been proven john. Details if you can. Otherwise it is just fear mongering. What will bankrupt the country is health care costs and pharma. We can have lower rates. 800 billion? no that is the Ryan Health care plan.
Aaahh healthcare costs. Rise in costs similar to cpi until the early 70s when it began to skyrocket.

Hmmm, what important piece of legislation was passed in the early 70s with regard to healthcare...
Margaret crazed spending has bankrupted my state, what makes you think the country is any different as they print bad money, inflating the money we already have? What happens to you when you spend to much, does you bank say go for it, good job? If the bank contenues to let you do it they go bankrupt. (See housing crisis). Healthcare is a personal responsibility. Not the taxpayers. if it was so then they can tell you what to eat, when to sleep, who to have kids with ...etc.. People get sick and die, welcome to life. The government cannot change that by taxing us to death. I'm sorry for those that have issues but we cannot help everyone. It wont work.
Dennis... how do you pay for your healthcare? Are you covered by an insurance company? Kaiser,Blue Cross etc?
Unless you pay out of pocket for your healthcare then you should be concerned that along with your costs all people who use the hospital are being 'charged'. Their operating costs come directly from the pool of insurees the insurance company bills. When costs go up because the hospital is taking care of uninsured patients your costs go up. Now if you are willing to incur the costs of everyone who isn't paying it flies in the face of your argument that everyone should pay their own bills. You aren't. You are paying for everyone who isn't insured and the hospital cares for.
I am self insured, not that it's your business. I know how the industry works and I know it needs fixing but passing an unconstitutional law making people buy a product is well, unconstitutional and insane. Toss the Constitution away and why should I obey any law? Seriously, The Constitution was designed to protect us from government. I took an oath to protect that, so did Congress and the President. If you don't get that arguing healthcare is meaningless. A man or men that cant obey their oaths of office are not going to keep their words to you no matter what they promise. They robbed SS, it's bankrupt, what makes you think they won't rob Obamacare as well or any other law, especially if they ignore Constitutional law?
+Margaret McEvoy and those costs have been inflated over the last 40 years by artificially pumping money into the industry.

What Obamacare plans to do is solve the problem by artificially inflating prices by pumping even more money into the industry.

The answer to my previous question was the HMO bill by the way. There was a time when health care insurance was only necessary for extreme care such as surgeries, not medications and regular doctor visits. There was a fascinating article on recently by a doctor on that very topic.
Have you read the law? It penalizes you at the end of the year if you do not have health care. Do you want to pay for people who can but choose not to have health care? And then show up at an emergency ward when they need it? Oh how about meth cookers who show up at the burn unit and can't or won't pay burn unit costs.
If the SCOTUS doesn't strike it down. As far as people not wanting to have health care, it is none of my business and I am not willing to give up my rights under the Constitution for anything. Why is that so hard to understand? Do you not understand the oath? It's not just something you do because your bored.
Well Dennis... get ready for your health care costs to go up. And don't complain when your local hospital closes because it cannot keep up with the cost of caring for uninsured people.
No, I want government to stop intervening so the cost of healthcare can normalize again.

That very same hyperinflation in health care costs has driven out charitable hospitals and those funded by private and religious groups solely for the care of indigent people and people ego couldn't afford the costs associated with healthcare.

And why isn't anyone talking about the healthcare already provided by CHOs? Those are already funded to provide care to those who normally can't afford it, negating the need to insure everyone.
Health care costs have skyrocketed because of government intervention. Do you really think more intervention will help?

That's like saying "he's dying because he's been stabbed. Stab him some more so he'll live."
Good luck waiting for the industry to make those cost cutting reforms Jeffrey. That's like having the fox guard the hen house. Take a look at the subsidies given to charitable hospitals by the 'government' . I think you will find there is substantial support being given by this administration. So all the poor people... you go over there. The church will take care of you. Government can't be bothered. You're dirty and sweaty. Out of sight out of mind. That sounds like a great country to live in.
Some of us have lost many members of out family and do know the costs of healthcare, I have lost my mother and father, a sister, an uncle over a 20 year period of time and I still will not sell my soul to the government to be covered by an unconstitutional law. I am a freeman and will go to my grave one. Socialized healthcare, no thanks. I'll pass. Those of you that want daddy government to help you, good luck with that, those that don't will take care of our own. If you really want to know the truth behind all of this, the unspoken truth is fear of death, people have replaced god with government, they now hope government will save them from ilness and hopefully postpone death, Government is their new god. They will give up freedom in hope the new god will save them.
Margaret, as soon as revenue drops because there's no magic government money flowing in you can bet they'll figure out how to make it affordable to keep from losing their jobs due to lack of revenue.
Great news! I hope you are right Garret!
So Dennis I assume you won't be taking that medicare and social security? And wwjd? What would Jesus do Dennis?
Would Jesus cite the constitution when faced with a person in need? Would he turn his back? or would he throw the money lenders and the hateful out on their ears? Would he provide food and solace to the poor? Help the least of us?
By the way who will be policing this agency, the GSA?
+Margaret McEvoy it's impossible to mix in discussion the law vs. what's "a good thing."

One is objective while the other is subjective.

The only proper way to institute something like Obamacare would be to pass an amendment.
Don't care what Jesus would do, I'm not Christian, besides I payed into SS, assuming there is any money left when I retire not that I plan to that was my money to start with Margaret. They took my money. I would phase out SS if I had my way, all Congress does is rob it.Pay me what I payed into it and I'm happy. Then were even.
Only someone that didn't know me would try that what would Jesus do guilt trip on me. Nice
Well said Jeffery. But for that to happen they would have to have a majority and they know that will never happen.
+Dennis Mix exactly, which is why it was rushed without even having been read in the first place.
It was passed by the Congress guys. After months of scare tactics about death panels. Everyone voted and they counted the votes in plain sight. We will see what happens. If it gets struck down we will probably have the majority in the next session so we can try again. If not Hillary will pass it when she is POTUS. And she will be POTUS. Unless you guys can come up with a viable candidate in 4 years. Got any ideas?
Talk to the SCOTUS Margaret, looks like they disagree and think it's Unconstitutional.
By the way, if no one read it (and no one did) just what Representative was being responsible to us when they signed it? Their job is to read and write the laws.

Hey I got a deal Margaret, I have this nice bridge, here is the paperwork, you don't need to read it, you can trust me, you have to buy the bridge to find out whats in the paperwork.
So we have a deal? It's a really nice bridge Margaret....
You know in real life you would never do that, why the hell would a sane person do that?
I dont see why the we cant have the same policy mexico has toward illegals. They put you in jail and you cant recieve a job, voting rights or benifits. You can never truly become a mexican citizen unless born there. Is anyone calling them racist against other latin peoples?
Screw it. Let's get rod of our system entirely. Let's create a new form of government for this country where no one works and we all live off government handouts. We won't be allowed to own anything and everything is nationalized. The government will provide free housing, healthcare, food. We will all wear civil uniforms complete with the occupation the government assigned to us on the back. Transportation will all be mass transit (free of course). We will all be fitted with GPS trackers to ensure we are where the government tells us to be and when just so they can make sure we are all pulling our weight for the good of the system. All government reps will be appointed by the president (we'll call him premier by then). The people won't be burdened with voting or politics... Everything decided for us. All individual rights removed except those considered good for the system. Police and military will enforce the laws deemed good for the system. Violations will be treated severely, but you will not be imprisoned... You will be sent for re-education. Sounds pretty good huh? Pretty much sounds like Soviet Russia doesn't it? We aren't far off from crap like this with 4 more years with lib-tards in charge.
1.It's not solely about constitutionality, it's also about human rights.
2.+allen smith that's because the mexican law doesn't really target people based on the way they look.
3. This sounds awful, but I really hope republican states fall on their faces after the cost of production and hence the price of domestic goods rice, tourism plummets, and their gdp falls, as a result of lack of illegal immigrants.
Xenophobia seems to be a concept that applies to their basic principles. It even seems to cloud their judgement: I mean, either people that think like this have had no recollection of what they learned in school or they were never taught economics and US history.
The US was built with immigrants, may I remind you all. And these immigrants were NOT legal. They all came in waves, Irish, German, Poles, Italian, Russian, etc.
Also, do you not see the economic benefit of this? First of all, because of the mere fact that they are illegal, they aren't payed minimum wage and so the cost of production is less, hence the final good is cheaper. Second of all, these people contribute more to public coffers in taxes than they cost in social services. Furthermore they contribute to the economy through their spending and consumption of goods and services.
Lastly, get over yourselves, immigrants don't want citizenship and they don't want to live in America all their lives. If they established some sort of work permit for people who want to work in the US, they'd go for a couple months, work and go back to their home country, maybe even be able to do this yearly by paying a fee to renew their permit. Moreover, they'd be subject to submit tax returns.
It is solely about Constitutionality, we are a country of laws. The federal government refuses to enforce laws defending the borders. people are being killed down there on both sides.
To the point of immigrants (Illegal) I said before perhaps if My Indian ancestors (Cherokee) had had enforceable laws and strong borders we could have protected our land. We were over run once before, stop making excuses for the same crap, it's wrong. I hate is when that stupid excuse is used. My people were moved because because we were not united. have you learned nothing in almost 300 years?
+Maria Jose Navarrete no, it's about Constitutionaliy. There is no provision in the constitution allowing for "other things that sound like a good idea." There's also no provision in federal law that says it's OK too break the law if you didn't like your life where you used to live.

It's not about xenophobia, it's about enforcing existing laws.
All those Russians, Irish, etc were received LEGALLY. Ellis Island??
Obama deported more illegal immigrants in one term than George Bush did in two. Sooo... why is everyone repeating the myth about Obama not doing anything about illegals?

As for SB1070, I don't see anything wrong with it... other than (a) the fact that there is no way it can be enforced without racial profiling and (b) You go to jail for SIX MONTHS if you have an illegal in your car. So if you drive a co worker to lunch and you didn't know they were here illegally... guess what? You're getting locked up. And if you work in public transit, there's a good chance you can go to jail over some bulls**t.
Bush hired the workforce to enforce the immigration laws. They finally completed training and received their assignments during Obama's time in office. This is also not solely an issue against hispanics, but I have to admit the bulk of the issue is on the southern border. Up here in Montana, an illegal Irish immigrant is going to prison for conning people out of everything they had. What makes it worse is he had been deported. He came back. Now he will serve a 3 year state sentence and then be deported again. I bet he will attempt to come back a third time. To me, personally, it isn't so much the folks coming here to feed their families that bother me. It's the ones coming here to commit crimes again and again. Hurting good people. The question then becomes how do you tell the difference between criminals and folks desperate for a better life? That's where I don't see anything wrong with a police officer checking the status of people in a car during a traffic stop. It is already a requirement to show proof of identity, insurance and registration for everyone regardless of ethnic background. And checking immigration status in those instances is a federal law already (but if you get pulled over by a federal cop your immigration status is probably not the only reason you've been pulled over). Arizona is simply trying to enforce laws already on the books. The whole point of the state law is because the feds can't/won't enforce them. The feds (border patrol) does as good a job as they can on the border, but what about the folks that get past the border? CBP can't be everywhere. Again, it's the criminals I worry about most. People of every nationality come through Arizona. Muslim extremists have even been caught, Chinese, etc. In todays era of terrorism and airport strip searches, we need to know who is coming into this country.
+Jeffrey Hamby it's also constitutional for states to have a death penalty and that doesn't mean it's right, or discard human rights conventions with have been ratified in the GA of the UN.
If you've studied even a little bit of philosophy of law and ethics, you realize that what's legal doesn't necessarily mean it's right, and what's illegal doesn't necessarily mean it's wrong.
With that logic, there are tons of existing laws in America that are still technically "active" and have been around for a couple of decades and are simply retrograde and outdated.
There are a lot of things that are done legally in the United States that aren't right, these immigration law is one example. All of this just contributes to the decaying image of America in the international community.
It is xenophobia, because everything that is foreign to Republicans is seen as a threat and as anti-American. This goes beyond immigration.
+Tim O'Born in 1929 there was a law passed that restricted immigration from certain parts of Europe. People came illegally anyways. Although, the percentage of illegal immigrants was a lot lower than now.
I suggest instead of blaming immigration for their economic problems and their unemployment, why not focus on getting better and more affordable education. Seriously public schools in Repubican-run states are pitiable, and even in private liberal arts colleges (where it's supposedly more selective and expensive) you realize why Americans have been stereotyped as stupid. Nowadays, economic growth doesn't come unless there's good education, health care and family planning, there's real data on this collected by statistician and doctor Hans Rosling.
It's not about the enforcement of laws, +Francis Moran, it's about the Republican attitude with anything that is foreign. Like "OMG Obama is trying to turn us into Europe" or "OMG the president is muslim and his middle name is Hussein"
It really sounds like a 7 year old's accusation.
And yes, conservative states HAVE worse educational systems than non-conservative ones (eg. Texas). Although I agree, over all the educational system in the country is messed up. And I say it's worse because of their textbook scandal (specially regarding History and Science textbooks) and their knack of shoving down religion down kids' throats in PUBLIC schools, might I add.
I understand that America is the land where "everyone can pursue the American dream," but for God's sake! People should know better than electing Governors/Senators/House Representatives who don't have a proper higher education, or what's even worse: none at all (Yes, Brewer, I am looking at you)
+Maria Jose Navarrete that's a pretty lame excuse. The fact is the federal government has been granted no authority by the constitution to compel its citizens to purchase private products.

Blaming racism, European methods, or the color of the sky simply ignores that.
P.s. the education system in Texas, since you used it as a target red state, is ranked higher than that of nh, vt, nj, ar, and ca (all blue stares) with regard to output, with a teacher quality ranking of 1.
It IS about enforcing laws. It is about protecting citizens. It is about the constitution. The UN also wants to outlaw gun ownership. 2nd amendment. Screw the UN. There are legal ways to enter the country and illegal ways. By your logic, speeding is illegal, but not necessarily wrong? You can't pick and choose here. It is illegal. Enforce it. You are thinking on am emotional level... Start thinking from a security standpoint.
+Jeffrey Hamby I don't see where you get your data from. but the Statistical Research Center at the American Institute of Physics at FSU published some results about the quality of Math and Science at schools by state.
Massachusetts and Minnesota (surprisingly) ranked "best in the country,"
New York, New Jersey, and New Hampshire ranked "well above average,"
Virginia, Delaware, Maryland, Illinois, and Maine ranked "Above Average.
Texas, Arkansas, Missouri, Iowa, California, North Dakota, Idaho, South Carolina and North Carolina ranked "below average," Mississippi ranked the lowest in the country.
The rest are ranked average.
Obviously not even MA can compete with countries like China, Korea and Singapore.
+Tim O'Born whoever is ready to trade liberty for security deserves none.
Maria you got off topic. You have to respect law and if mexico can shut thier southern border we can too. what mexican people should be doing is trying to make their country better and protest in mexico city oh i forgot, the cartels may kill them! when mexico opens up there southern border, will talk
I don't see her being able to get past the view that it is the state of Arizona vs hispanics...
+Jeffrey Hamby nice to know you're one of those people who doesn't trust academics. You must believe global warming is a sham, and that religious preachers are more trustworthy than scientists when it comes to their knowledge of the world.
+Maria Jose Navarrete make all the incorrect assumptions you like if it makes you feel better. In the meantime, one study from one college doesn't really represent all academics.
+Ana Nicole Viaud
ouais, c'est très incroyable que les americans sont considéré une pays du "première monde," leur éducation c'est trop primitive et la religion est encore beaucoup plus forte spécialement dans la politique. Peut-être économiquement, mais socialement c'est mal mal mal.
c'est drôle, mais triste quand tu vas a l'aéroport et la police et migration crois que tous les hispaniques sont pauvres et veut d'emploi aux Etas Unis, hahaha. Ils sont surpris quand je leur dit que j'étudié à Georgetown et maintenant a l'Université de Genève, et ils ne comprennent pas pourquoi je parle Anglais très bien, si j'ai n'habité pas aux Etas Unis quand j'étais petite.
Tu sais, il y a une correlation entre l'habilité d'analyser et l'agnosticism? Et tu sais, les Americans sont trop stupides quand il s'agit de sciences et mathématiques. Oui, les jeunes au MIT, UChi, CalTech, sont l'exception mais je crois que ça c'est moins que le 0.1% de la population.
you know what they say ... once you go swiss, you never go back.
or german, or french, or british, or dutch, or belgian, or norwegian, or swedish or finnish, or dane, or austrian... I could go on. en fin, you get my point.
+Maria Jose Navarrete 1) I am educated. 2) I'm not religious. 3) your country has similar immigration laws.

4) And if you're going to insult someone you should not try to hide it behind a language you assume they don't speak.
+Jeffrey Hamby what country am I from? Are you plainly assuming I'm Mexican?
I am not insulting anyone, I am just making a comment which I've previously pointed out before.
And well, I just assumed you were a science-skeptic. It's not hard to conclude that from what I've read.
+Maria Jose Navarrete the fact that I understand French so read your comment wouldn't naturally lead me to believe you're Mexican. Any thought that would bring you to that conclusion should be tossed out immediately.

All pure scientists are skeptics. Skepticism is how we went from Newton's gravity to Einstein's relativity, to M theory's non-finite speed of light.

Any scientist who is not a skeptic is trying to sell something.
Add a comment...