Yes, clamp down on companies that hire illigals. That's a big issue. Next build a wall/fence and guard it. That will help alot too, also arrest anyone who is caught across the border illigally, wich is half of them at least. It has to stop, talking is over, inforcement must take place. What's the point of haveing laws if none of them are inforced?

This country wasn't built on slavery, Yes there were slaves, but it wasn't built on it, that's bogus propaganda. 99% of people in the states didn't have a slave, they built the land themselves.

Slaves were only owned by a small % of wealthy land owners and utilized primarily for field labor. Plus, it wasn't cheap, they had to be housed, fed, clothed, taught english..not to mention the orignal price..wich in todays market would be 20,000 plus. Fact of the matter is the North didn't like the idea that the South had "free labor", since the Northern factories actually had to pay the street urchins they worked to death in sweat shops, a few pennies a week.

sorta not dude
 

please turn the light off when you leave this thread.

<hiss> NEWMAN!

Heh, that was actually pretty funny.

LINK:
Enforcing Arizona’s new immigration law

LINK:
Ride-along:
Arizona Cops Get Special Training - Video - FoxNews.com

How many in this thread fell in to this category:

Holder Admits to Not Reading Arizona's Immigration Law Despite Criticizing It

Sounds so much like the health care bill.

again sorta not
 

give it a rest.

This is the new conservative "battle cry". Let's not pretend that bills are any longer than they were 3 years ago, that conservative politicians read bills more than progressive ones, or that bills are not often written in difficult to understand language which is usually translated to the politician by lawyer-speak understanding advisors.

It's a fun argument to make, and more power to you for making it, but let's not pretend that since Obama has taken office all of sudden politicians on either side of the aisle have stopped reading their bills...10 pages or 2,000 pages long.

This is remarkable. The highest ranking legal advisor to the president comments on a law he has not read!. It is this administrations "mode of operation" - criticize first, read later.
This guy is the attorney general? Does anyone know what the attorney general does?
The highest ranking legal advisor to the president and comments on a law he has not read.

How incompetent can this be? The law is only a couple of pages long but he just can't be bothered. This is what this he does for a living. Just read the damn bill.

However time and time again in this adminstration, remarks are made without knowing the whole story in order to further an agenda. No more beer sumits and no more critisims on false accusations. This stuff needs to end now. Just the truth and only the truth.

Yes, bills have been brought to a vote before even being read, which was obvious in the health care bill. 2000 pages and a couple of hours to read it, or "we'll have to pass it before we know what is in it".

Yes there is decadence on both sides. We are closer every day to being Greece while adding more entitlements and growing government. The dems hold the majority, in the house, the senate and adminstation. This administration has really brought it to a head.

To be fair these aren't small bills here, these really "are" fundamental changes, as the president put it. Tarp, stimulus, bailouts, healthcare, wealth distribution, war, existing failing entitlement programs, growth of government, debt. These aren't going well and I see the wrong issues or non-issues being addressed as if there is no priority, at all!

Okay I'm off topic now but we can agree: No more charlatons; on either side. No more John McCains either. It will start in November.

Speaking of Greece. MSNBC's Brian Williams on Greece. Is he quoting Glenn Beck?
YouTube - David Letterman - Brian Williams on Wall Street's Free Fall
This is no joke folks. Those aren't anti-government protestors in the street in Greece.

Is this really remarkable?

Are you feigning naiveté, Clint, or do you really think we are experiencing a dramatic change in administrative policy when members of Cabinet speak about bills (in this case an Arizona state bill) that hasn't been read word-for-word?

Why would it surprise you that the Attorney General of the United States has not read every state bill that goes into state law?

But really, before our panties get too binded into knots, let's look at his exact words, according to your source, FOX News.

1) Three time in the article they use the term "voiced concerns". This is a ubiquitous phrase that doesn't call for the thunder and lightning you are trying to bring.

2) Attorney General Holder says he "fears the new law is subject to abuse". These are the same fears we have been talking about over the last couple weeks.

3) "On Thursday, Holder said he plans to read the law before reaching a decision on whether he thinks it's constitutional." So what is the problem? Your concerns are addressed in the very article you quote. Are you starting to see how FOX News operates?

4) "On Sunday, Holder said he does not think Arizona's law is racially motivated but voiced concern that its enforcement could lead to racial profiling." Again, the same things we have been talking about.

Here is a timely ditty on this topic.
Lewis Black on Glenn Beck on AZ Imigration Law