Why not crack down on Sanctuary Cities that ursurp Federal laws?

2010-07-15 21:24:57

#1

Harmor: Error_Name_Not_Found; +605|6833|San Diego, CA, USA

So I was reading this article:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07 … ry-cities/

and it got me thinking about the argument that the Justice Department is making against Arizona. They claim that Arizona is making up their own laws when in fact places like San Francisco and most recently Pennslyvania have city ordinances that clearly go out of their way to not cooperate or assist Federal agencies.

Why the double standard? If you are going to sue Arizona why not the Sanctuary Cities as well?

I believe the answer is as simple as the meme ATG posted:

https://img682.imageshack.us/img682/9936/todayparcoltop3386038im.jpg

Its votes...or rather potential votes.

If Democrats believed as few as 60% of illegal aliens, once naturalized, would vote Republican then there would be a wall 50-feet high and check points at every street corner checking for paperwork.

2010-07-15 21:38:17

#2

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,056|7056|PNW

If all the Mexicans disappeared before next election, "vote early, vote often" would still prevail. And if that doesn't work, manufacture lost votes that you can "find" later.

2010-07-15 21:44:30

#3

KEN-JENNINGS: I am all that is MOD!; +2,981|6917|949

Illegal immigration is a hot button issue that many feel strong about. That's why it gets so much attention. Especially in AZ and other border states.

2010-07-15 21:49:01

#4

Harmor: Error_Name_Not_Found; +605|6833|San Diego, CA, USA

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
That's like asking why doesn't Arizona pass a law banning treason against the federal government. Illegal immigration is a hot button issue that many feel strong about. That's why it gets so much attention.

Many Democrats are upset that they have to run this election cycle with immigration so close to the election. National polls for Arizona are very high (I've seen upwards of 75% approve).

But shouldn't they nail down Sanctuary Cities? Don't Sanctuary Cities non-cooperation with Federal agencies actually makes it more dangerous for us?

The law should be blind. Its shouldn't matter if its politically expedient, its the law and they are clearly violating it.

2010-07-15 22:12:54

#5

ATG: Banned; +5,233|6814|Global Command

Yes, the feds are a bunch of souless whore who will say and do anything to get more power.

They have destroyed the economy in the gulf, ruined construction, housing and made everybody feel nothing but financial terror.

So, they will need a lot more than 12 million illegals, and the stupid fucks assume all mexis are democreeps.

They are not.

2010-07-15 22:32:42

#6

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6690|North Carolina

Harmor wrote:
Why the double standard? If you are going to sue Arizona why not the Sanctuary Cities as well?

Good question.

It doesn't really matter though. Just give citizenship to anybody that shows up. It doesn't really mean that much to begin with, and it's not like any laws we put forth will be effectively enforced. Illegals will keep coming regardless -- might as well make them legal.

2010-07-17 21:20:12

#7

HollisHurlbut: Member; +51|6282

Harmor wrote:
Why the double standard? If you are going to sue Arizona why not the Sanctuary Cities as well?

Sue them for what? Not enforcing federal laws the federal government itself won't even enforce? Aside from the obvious silliness of such a lawsuit, it wouldn't fly under the law. When Congress enacted the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, it compelled local chiefs of police to do background checks on handgun purchasers. Someone sued over this, and in Printz v. United States the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government cannot compel states to act on behalf of the federal government in enforcement of a federal law, on the grounds that it violates the tenth amendment.

2010-07-17 21:23:09

#8

Flaming_Maniac: prince of insufficient light; +2,490|6992|67.222.138.85

Harmor wrote:
when in fact places like San Francisco and most recently Pennslyvania have city ordinances that clearly go out of their way to not cooperate or assist Federal agencies.

source?

2010-07-18 14:43:21

#9

RAIMIUS: You with the face!; +244|6999|US

The Federal government either has no desire or power to enforce its own laws. Respect for the rule of law is decreasing, IMO, because the wisdom of law is being questioned more and more often.

2010-07-18 16:31:05

#10

ATG: Banned; +5,233|6814|Global Command

RAIMIUS wrote:
The Federal government either has no desire or power to enforce its own laws. Respect for the rule of law is decreasing, IMO, because the wisdom of law is being questioned more and more often.

Therefor they have failed in their basic duty and should be sacked right away by either peaceful or non-peaceful methods. Whatever.

2010-07-18 18:55:15

#11

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6690|North Carolina

I think what's most annoying is when people blame America for Mexico's shittiness. It's as if Mexico is never responsible for its own failings.

2010-07-18 18:58:56

#12

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5643|London, England

Turquoise wrote:
I think what's most annoying is when people blame America for Mexico's shittiness. It's as if Mexico is never responsible for its own failings.

I blame Obama.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2010-07-18 18:59:47

#13

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6690|North Carolina

JohnG@lt wrote:
Turquoise wrote:
I think what's most annoying is when people blame America for Mexico's shittiness. It's as if Mexico is never responsible for its own failings.
I blame Obama.

That gets annoying as well.

2010-07-18 19:10:08

#14

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5643|London, England

Turquoise wrote:
JohnG@lt wrote:
Turquoise wrote:
I think what's most annoying is when people blame America for Mexico's shittiness. It's as if Mexico is never responsible for its own failings.
I blame Obama.
That gets annoying as well.

Can I blame Bush then?

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2010-07-18 20:03:46

#15

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6690|North Carolina

JohnG@lt wrote:
Turquoise wrote:
JohnG@lt wrote:

I blame Obama.
That gets annoying as well.
Can I blame Bush then?

Yeah, unfortunately, Bush Derangement Syndrome has become Obama Derangement Syndrome....

and yeah, that was annoying too.

2010-07-18 20:04:42

#16

RTHKI: mmmf mmmf mmmf; +1,743|7022|Cinncinatti

JohnG@lt wrote:
Turquoise wrote:
I think what's most annoying is when people blame America for Mexico's shittiness. It's as if Mexico is never responsible for its own failings.
I blame Obama.

i blame people like uzique blaming america

2010-07-18 22:10:34

#17

ATG: Banned; +5,233|6814|Global Command

JohnG@lt wrote:
Turquoise wrote:
I think what's most annoying is when people blame America for Mexico's shittiness. It's as if Mexico is never responsible for its own failings.
I blame Obama.

That's because you trolling. Mindless troll does little else.

Move along troll.

2010-07-18 22:47:17

#18

RAIMIUS: You with the face!; +244|6999|US

Turquoise wrote:
JohnG@lt wrote:
Turquoise wrote:
That gets annoying as well.
Can I blame Bush then?
Yeah, unfortunately, Bush Derangement Syndrome has become Obama Derangement Syndrome....

and yeah, that was annoying too.

There is plenty of blame to go around. As much as people want to blame Wall Street, deregulation, over-regulation, Bush, Obama, Democrats, Republicans, the war on drugs, illegals, racists, bigots, Bugs Bunny, etc; it is not that simple.
Alas, we live in a sound byte era where the complex truth is overshadowed by whatever needs to be said/spun to get or keep power.
(I'm not sure if the US was ever significantly different, but it is very easy to see with 24/7 media.)

Last edited by RAIMIUS (2010-07-18 22:48:23)

2010-07-19 16:49:21

#19

ATG: Banned; +5,233|6814|Global Command

Lest we forget;

If the assholes in government would simply do what they say, like enforce e-verify, amnesty would not be so terrifying. But one thing we can count on and that is lies and failure. In God we trust because there ain't nobody else worthy.

2010-07-19 18:54:11

#20

Harmor: Error_Name_Not_Found; +605|6833|San Diego, CA, USA

I'm a Reaganite and I was against him for that. Reagan believed it was a one-time thing and I never forgave him for that. Everything else though, he's Saint Ronald in my book.

2010-07-19 20:15:37

#21

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5870

IIRC, he gave amnesty for the Cubans of were kicked out by Castro right? There were much less Cubans then there are illegals from Mexico, much less of a problem...

2010-07-19 21:58:50

#22

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6690|North Carolina

Macbeth wrote:
IIRC, he gave amnesty for the Cubans of were kicked out by Castro right? There were much less Cubans then there are illegals from Mexico, much less of a problem...

There is a long running association of organized crime with Cubans. The Cuban mob basically grabbed a lot of influence in Florida because of how many Cubans we've granted amnesty to over the years.

BF2S Forums Why not crack down on Sanctuary Cities that ursurp Federal laws?

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Harmor wrote:

Harmor wrote:

Harmor wrote:

RAIMIUS wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Board footer