It’s certainly caused *you *enough problems.
Is that seriously the best you can do? Perhaps magellan can blame slipping U.S. education stardards on illegals and use you as evidence. God know he needs some.
Oooh, snap! :rolleyes:
Poor, clueless wanker.
I guess it is, indeed.
Just a few more posts 'til you reach orgasm …
What’s all this, then?
The guy’s got a hard-on for me, that’s all.
Does it hurt being you? All that cognitive dissonance can’t be good for one’s health.
Well, he has a vast support-group of like-minded people to help him cope.
Not here, mind you, but all over Fox News, selected blogs, circulating e-mails…
They’re claiming an event that hasn’t happened to them is harassment? Do you see a problem with this line of argumentation from them?
“Needling”, hmmm. You mean, kinda like trolling, but more nuanced?
As I understand it, “trolling” is throwing out something inflammatory to general view in hopes someone (not any specific person) responds.
If asking a specific person for evidence as a means of expecting to undermining their arguments when they fail to produce such evidence (or seeing them repeatedly make grade-school-level homophobic remarks) counts as trolling (or nuanced trolling), then so be it.
You’re right. It hasn’t been implemented yet. Therefore nobody has been harassed yet.
Will you please go on record as to whether or not you think such a system is likely to lead to harassment of people who aren’t “American-looking enough”?
-Joe
They’re predicting, very reasonably, that it will, and wish to forestall such unnecessary and unfortunate events. Is that really unclear to you?
Well, harassment is often in the mind of the harassee. Take my airport example. There are people insulted to high heaven that they’d be inconvenienced as I was. It didn’t bother may. Well it bothered me about as much as having to pay $2.50 for a bottle of water at the airport. So, the hard thing about answering your questions is what, objectively, constitutes harassment. Especially when opponents here and elsewhere have stated that they’re going to go out of their way to make sure that charges of harassment are hurled.
Do I think it can be abused and people be harassed. Yes. And that’s the very reason I think it will not. They want this to succeed, so they will be very careful.
And that’s fine. In fact, just raising the issue probably ensures that it will not be abused and people, objectively, be harassed. One problem I see is that your “they” want to do more than that; they want to take actions to skew the real-world results, to the point of manufacturing scenarios in which they can then cry “Help. Help. I’m being harassed!”
Are you in favor of such tactics?
I extend the question to Merijeek, as well.
I’m dying to know how you’re going to spin this when it comes out that this law has been grossly abused. I can’t wait to see your bigoted little ego try to protect itself from this one.
Trouble is, the two “theys” in that sentence don’t refer to the same groups. The first consists of politicians and various interests groups and supporting voters, while the second refers to the law-enforcement officers who will putting the law into practice. I expect the ability to detain and question people on nebulous grounds will prove quite useful to them.
What’s all this about complaining about something that hasn’t happened yet, then? 
That doesn’t even make sense. The very real cause for concern here is that the cops are going to be required (that’s the word in their law last I saw) to grab “Unamerican looking” people and ask to see their papers.
So…more brown people are going to get stopped. And your response is that people are going to “manufacture scenarios” where brown people will get stopped more? How are they going to manufacture that? Aryan kids going tanning just to sucker in the poor coppers?
The law is going to do exactly what it was intended to do - and people who can see more than thirty seconds into the future are protesting that.
-Joe