Speaking of illegal aliens, what's the status on Obama's "auntie"?

It's all about the power of the state and control over you, something that liberals seem to relish.

The libs are just trying to secure a large voting block so they can continue to bless us all with their smarter more sensitive way of screwing us from the plantation.

By the way, here go the dems trying to arrange a proposal for amnesty today. Barrys next illegal attempt is underway.

If the libs really want to pee on the electric fence, I'm not going to stop them. If a vast majority of Americans support AZ, it's just going to make November all the sweeter.

"So, what would be an alternative explanation?"

Objection! Rhetorical question, yer honor!

Athough, I think it has more to do with pedigree than anything:

Is the majority of your family Democrat?
Do they have "old" money?
Does an acceptable amount of that money go to the right causes?

If the answer to all the above (and more) is "yes" then you are exempt from being lumped in with or having to mingle with, the unwashed.

Where I stand, FWIW:

SItuations where people must present proper papers:

When getting your children out of the government-assigned public school and into an elite public school.

Yes. As part of a normal application process.

When challenged to prove you have health insurance.

Private hospitals, etc. And not randomly, mind you. Just in stiuations where relevant.

When you wish to exercise your 2nd Amendment rights and keep and bear arms.

To the extent necessary to ensure compliance with laws. I do not wish felons or the mentally disturbed to obtain firearms.

When you wish to buy alcohol.

Not really. I want the drinking age tossed out the window.

When you wish to buy tobacco.

I'd toss this out the window, too.

When you want to buy a frigging decongestant.

I think a certain brand of conservative favors this too -- that brand of conservative that supports the war on drugs.

Situations where demanding people present proper papers is absolutely unacceptable and RAAAAACIST!:

Showing up to vote.

I can't understand why we don't present ID of some sort here in the first place.

Getting birth control while a minor and without parental consent or knowledge.

No, no, no no. The way the damn laws get worded, I'd have to show ID before obtaining prophylactics.

Getting an abortion while a minor and without parental consent or knowledge.

This gets a little tricky. In cases where parents are clearly abusive toward the minor, then, yeah, parents don't need to know.

Getting public assistance, funded by American citizens and legal, documented aliens.

I assume you're talking about non-emergency assistance. I'm not going to begrudge life-saving medical treatment or police and fire services to somebody who can't show papers.

James H,

The Left has consistently stated that having to show ID to vote, obtain welfare, get an abortion, etc. is racist (because poor blacks, hispanics, and so forth don't have a driver's license, etc.).

If you're unaware of this, it's time you woke up and smelled the coffee...

Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

Although I think at a certain point that an insistence on perpetrating your ignorance on the rest of the world IS malice.

JT,
Even simply raising this issue proves beyond doubt that you are a RACIST. Now apologize to all of the "government sponsored" population that you OFFENDED by your evil, demeaning remarks.

Put up a damn wall and be done with this idiocy. Offer any illegal laborers that come forward and agree to work on the wall and other infrastucture safety projects such as getting the liar in chief out of office, they earn their citizenship after 2 years service.

But 914, MASS doesn't WANT a wall.

How does this all tie into the Quincy, MA black boot review the other day?

The Left has consistently stated that having to show ID to vote, obtain welfare, get an abortion, etc. is racist (because poor blacks, hispanics, and so forth don't have a driver's license, etc.).

Sat --

Whatever "the Left" thinks, it's not necessarily what I think.

--JH

Excuse me, Jay Tea, but I'm going to have to ask to see your Blogging License!

I'm a liberal and don't consider it consider it racist or unacceptable to require an ID for:

Showing up to vote.

Getting birth control while a minor and without parental consent or knowledge.

Getting an abortion while a minor and without parental consent or knowledge.

Getting public assistance, funded by American citizens and legal, documented aliens.

As long as the following provisions were made I would support all of the above:

If an ID were required to vote than we would also have to prevent most people from voting by mail, which I don't have a problem with. Although there would need to be a provision that made it possible for people with certain physical handicaps that prevented from them from getting to a voting booth.

In addition, I think minors living in orphanages, foster care, ect should be exempt from any parental consent.

Parental consent should be required only for non-over-the-counter forms of birth control. As long as health professionals and not politicians determine which forms of birth control should require a prescription.

The only common themes I've ever seen in liberals is their desire to stay in power and to control peoples lives.
(Well, that, and hatred for anyone that disagrees with them.)

The 4 non-id items Jay noted are all geared toward that.
Illegal voting is a must for dems to win elections.
Abortion keeps the feminists and single issue abortion voters on their side.
And public assistance is also a guaranteed vote since liberals are so generous with other people's money.

Where papers are required fits into the liberal need to contol peoples behavior.

epador,

Let Me clarify. I meant our southern border, specifically AZ,NM,TX. And this should have been completed 30 years ago.

How does it tie in to the Taxachussetts black boot tie affair?

Well if putting up a wall were on the agenda, which it's not, but if it were it would have to be funded and you know the leftists in office would never do that, so when and if AZ starts funding/building anyways on their own, the SEIU blackjac boot THUGS and ACLU (American Commie Liberal Unionpukes) would show up overnight to AZ cities to start riots, file racist lawsuits on behalf of non-citizens and use La Raza to burn the cities to the ground. That's how.

Not necessarily in that order mind you.

For some reason I'm reminded of the fact of how reluctant Obama is to produce any of his papers, from his original long form birth certificate to his college transcripts to his passport to his Illinois state senate records and on and on.

The only common themes I've ever seen in liberals is their desire to stay in power and to control peoples lives.

Hank, I'm not trying to be a smart ass but can you or someone else explain how a conservative that believes in limiting the role of government in our lives can also support social conservatism. Doesn't social conservatism entail passing laws that limit individual freedoms?

We could just ask the big unions to build the wall for us with all the illegals from the other side. You know they would wall themselves out.

Tina,

Not all conservatives are social conservatives. Some conservatives are fiscal conservatives who believe in smaller government and personal responsibility.

There are at least 2 camps under the 'conservative' tent.

Tina, you're coming along nicely. I don't always agree with you, but I do read your stuff.

Tina -

I consider myself to be conservative both fiscally and somewhat socially (much more so over the last couple, three decades, oddly enough - but I tend to go with what works instead of what 'feels' like it ought to be...) but as a 'social' conservative I feel the following things are important:

A strong family structure.
Abortion when needed.
Schools which teach kids how to think, not simply parrot the current PC slant.
Drugs? I've found life difficult enough to deal with straight - I can't imagine what things would have been like with my senses addled.
Alcohol? I think 18's a reasonable age - 21 is too late.

Homosexuality? Ain't my thing - but if it's yours and you want to get married, I don't see any problem with it - as long as it's all done by the book and a split up entails gay divorce. (Hey, gotta toss a bone to the lawyers - it's a completely untapped market!)

None of the above, I think, need new laws to enforce, and could stand to have a few (like same sex marriage prohibitions) repealed. I don't believe abortion is a good thing (I was ambivalent until I held my 10 minute old son) but I wouldn't think of legislating away a woman's right to CHOOSE for herself what course to take. It's not my call, it's not my right - and if someone tries to shove a law through saying it should be banned I'd vote against it in a heartbeat.

Same with drugs. I think the current prohibition on drugs is counterproductive. We may well need a time where people can have free access - and, I'm sorry to say, the survivors will have a better understanding of the risks/benefits thereof and how to manage it.

Alcohol? Like I said - I think 18's old enough. 12? No way. 16? Iffy. At 18, you're considered a legal adult - that's good enough. There will be some who aren't mature enough to handle it - but Darwin's pretty effective.

I really think the leftist boogyman of the 'social conservative' that's looking to keep women barefoot and pregnant and force everyone into church at gunpoint doesn't actually exist. You've got nuts who want to make abortion illegal - but you see how much traction they get generally, which isn't much at all.

On the other hand, there IS a religious group who's moderate to extreme factions really want to see women subjugated and homosexuals destroyed - but the left has no problems at all with looking the other way for THEM. (Which I find baffling, but that's as may be.)

I'm really thinking a lot of the objections from the left about what social conservatives 'want' are based on projection and ignorance. If THEY were in control, and THEY believed what they think conservatives believe, then THEY would be pushing for the things that THEY think conservatives would be pushing for - so THEY have to be against this conservative image they've got in their heads.

Even if it doesn't match up to reality.

Tina S,

Like JLawson, I am a fiscal and social conservative. I agree with JLawson on most items, except:

I think abortion should be returned to the state level. Let each state decide for themselves how they want to handle it.

I think the government should be out of the "marriage" business altogether. The government really has no business dictating who can and cannot get married. Whoever wants to should get 'married' by whatever religious rite they choose. Then let them get a 'civil union' certificate from the local government so everything is 'legal'. As long as both parties are legally adult homo sapiens in whatever jurisdiction they live in, then let 'em get hitched.

That said, I'll argue as much as you want that homosexuality is a sin, but that's between you and God, not between you and the state.

Other than that, I agree with JLawson.

The vast majority of SoCons are not the boogey men the MSM and far left would have you believe.

"I think abortion should be returned to the state level. Let each state decide for themselves how they want to handle it."

That actually works for me, SYB. I'd like to see it. And I'll still vote against it. :)

Well, lets see,

#1 Sorry folks, in my rush to skim stuff I thought the MFFT folks were from MA not IL. My bad. I'm sure JT would like a wall at the NH border with MASS, however.

#2 However, using the police force to intimidate people, well, that is a somewhat common thread here. Now the TP folks weren't intimidated (except a young girl, it seems). I'm not worried about intimidating folks that break the law - you can call them Democrats, Republicans or illegal whatevers - they are supposed to be intimidated by the police. Sadly it doesn't seem the first two groups are. I'm wondering if folks protesting the AZ law really feel intimidated, or just using that as an excuse to complain about something they politically don't support. If they think they are being intimidated, if its OK to intimidate others in response (massive rallies and riots). Sounds like left-wing liberal ideology as currently practiced here in the good ol' USA to me. I don't think it has as much to do with worrying about whether you are dependent on gov. or not, as much as whether you agree with them or not. Period. If you agree with us, that's all the documentation you need. If not, three ID's and a letter from your kindergarten teacher is not going to suffice. Get thee to a reeducation center until you agree with us.

#3 I really shouldn't comment while eating donuts, drinking high octane caffeine while blogging with the pewter at work. Uggh! Of course I shouldn't be eating donuts period or using the company IT for personal pleasure either.

Over and out. Gotta burn those calories before I crash.

FEDERAL law already requires legal aliens to carry proper documentation at all times, and the Arizona law does NOT authorize any "random" stops - it mandates "reasonable suspicion," the same standard used nationwide for police stops, the same standard which has been in place for decades.

Were there any arguments against the AZ law not answered by the above paragraph?

"I think abortion should be returned to the state level. Let each state decide for themselves how they want to handle it."

I think abortion should be returned to from whence it came.... Hell

"Parental consent should be required only for non-over-the-counter forms of birth control. "

?? So if you happen to be bending over a counter? Consult a therapist and then shoot yourself in the head.

Thanks to everyone for responding to my question. It should be pointed out that it is possible for a liberal to criticize conservatives on Wizbang without getting flamed. My advice to liberals visiting this site is to be respectful to the authors and commentors on this site and they will return it in kind. Remember that this site is essentially for conservatives. When one is a guest whether in someone house or blog, if you do not treat your host well than you will not be welcomed.

Tina

Are you sure you're liberal?
You make too much sense for it to be so.

Hank, yes I'm a genuine tree hugging liberal.

I LOVE TREES