Gingrich braves the wrath of libertarians and privacy campaigners to endorse it. In today’s living-online, GPS-tracked world, I think a national identity card would find wide acceptance.Wait! Since when do liberal columnists love tough ID card policies? I don't know about Keller specifically, but I thought it was an article of faith that requiring a photo ID for voting is about disenfranchising minorities. Suddenly, a card with fingerprints is supposed to be a smart, brave, and compassionate idea?
Keller is talking about immigration policy, but I have to go over to Newt's website to puzzle it out:
There has to be a legal guest worker program....
We can build on the universal system of biometric, tamper-proof visa documents that all visitors must have, and invite a private-sector firm with a proven track record to monitor the guest worker program.
For guest workers, the new tamper-proof, biometric cards will replace the e-verify system, which has some promising elements, but is too error-prone. Employers will be able to swipe prospective employees biometric cards, and immediately be able to confirm that these workers are in the country legally.Oh, I see. Only the guest workers will need to have these cards in order to work. Not everyone else. Keller doesn't mention that, for some reason. Newt seems to be simply opening a path for some noncitizens to work here legally and to prove that's what they are doing. Obviously, others would continue to work here without the documentation, and then there's the problem of all the Hispanic people who really are citizens who might be hassled over their lack of cards. Why isn't Keller concerned about that? Remember all the fuss about ID-checking back in 2010 when Arizona adopted a new immigration policy?
UPDATE: Wow! Less than an hour after I posted this, the Supreme Court announced it was taking a case about the Arizona immigration law mentioned above! (I'll put up a new post about that.)
Posts
133 comments:
Is there really any more to get out of pointing out the obvious hypocrisy of the left? Even I'm bored with it now. The dishonesty of the their arguments is endless, shows no sign of slowing, and pointing it out is absolutely ineffective in making anyone on the left or even the middle make much use of the information.
will replace the e-verify system, which has some promising elements, but is too error-prone.
Really?
Where are these "facts" coming from?
There are already more than 15 "guest worker" type programs.
What we need are restrictions on most non-US labor so that Americans can have more jobs, even if they're jobs they "don't want" to do.
WV: unworse - See, I'm not the worst.
"the problem of all the Hispanic people who really are citizens who might be hassled over their lack of cards."
I don't see a problem there. Everyone, Hispanic or not, has to offer proof of citizenship to get a job in this country. If you aren't a citizen, you have to provide some other documentation to prove you're allowed to work. This card replaces that.
The problem I have with all this is that it will be expensive and won't solve any problems.
By the way,
In an annual reminder to taxpayers, the IRS announced today that it is looking to return $153.3 million in undelivered tax refund checks. In all, 99,123 taxpayers are due refund checks this year that could not be delivered because of mailing address errors
The IRS is too error prone, right Bill?
Und, ven you are pulled ovah fur zee most minor traffic infraction, or pozzibly even ven crossink state lines, zer vill be one auf us zer to ask you..."Papers, please?"
But how would a guest-only ID card system work? How do you judge the legality of folks without ID cards? The question of a national ID card is now when, not if.
Employers will be able to swipe prospective employees biometric cards, and immediately be able to confirm that these workers are in the country legally.
Yes, because as well all know the federal government is has a great track record of keeping realtime, error free databases up to date!
Does anyone really believe employers being tricked into hiring illegal immigrants is a widespread problem in this country?
I think employers know what they are doing. There is a large illegal immigrant workforce in the U.S. and local, state and federal governments ignore it, for the most part, because many industries depend on it.
Newt is posturing so he can say he's got a plan to deal with the "problem."
Oh, I dunno, our current catch-and-release program seems to provide the usual mix of government employment and utter ineffectiveness.
It's a federal jobs program; they pretend to enforce the law, and we pretend to benefit.
Scott M, whenever I've been pulled over for speeding - a 59-year old blue-eyed white guy - I've been asked to present my papers. Specifically I've been asked to hand over my drivers' license, my vehicle registration and my proof that I have the vehicle insured. If you've ever been pulled over I bet that's happened to you. In Arizona under the recently-passed bill, presentation of a valid Arizona drivers' license (and they always check that it's valid when they pull you over, that's one of the things they check up on when they take your license back to their car with them) is presumptive proof that you are a citizen and no further inquiry on that line is permitted.
Second - Federal law already requires aliens to carry proof that they are in this country legally on their persons at all times already. So what's the problem?
RonF wins the award for the most words typed out in the pursuit of debating obvious snark. I thought the faux-German would have been a dead giveaway, but apparently not.
Gingrich sure does love him some technology, don't he?
IT is his hammer, and to Newt everything looks like a nail.
That smartest-guy-in-the-room micromanagement is a bad sign in a leader. He's never practiced medicine, but damn if he ain't solved that problem too.
Surprisingly, it involves computers and databases.
Hat tip to Ann for noticing the seemingly obvious problems someone advocating a National ID has with someone else advocating against ID-based voting requirements.
Mr. Spinelli, please see me HERE
We quite get the wry humor. It is still bullshit.
What we need is for the Democrats to agree that the word "illegal" means illegal, then we can begin debating what is to be done about all the "undocumented" immigrants already here.
T some extent the situation is righting itself as Mexico is recovering somewhat from the disastrous fiscal policies followed by earlier governments, and the U.S. stays in recession, but we do not a more rational immigration policy and corresponding statutes, and we do need to enforce the existing laws regarding those who aid and abet criminal activities, i.e firms who knowingly hire "illegal" aliens.
Because everyone knows the problem with immigration is the legal, properly documented, guest workers, and providing yet a new, higher cost way for that segment to identify themselves is what will make everything better. Another government spending solution to solve an imaginary problem. Why? Because it gives Newt something to say about immigration, even if it's a complete non sequitur for the actual problem of illegal immigration.
We do need ....
Thurber, on a favorite part of French wild west novels:
"It occurred in a book in which, as I remember it, Billy the Kid, alias Billy the Boy, was the central figure. At any rate, two strangers had turned up in a small Western town and their actions had aroused the suspicions of a group of respectable citizens, who forthwith called on the sheriff to complain about the newcomers. The sheriff listened gravely for a while, got up and buckled on his gun belt, and said, ‘Alors, je vais demander ses cartes d’identité!’ There are few things, in any literature, that have ever given me a greater thrill than coming across that line."
Because everyone knows the problem with immigration is the legal, properly documented, guest workers, and providing yet a new, higher cost way for that segment to identify themselves is what will make everything better. Another government spending solution to solve an imaginary problem. Why?
Sounds just like the photo ID law in Wisconsin.
Sounds just like the photo ID law in Wisconsin.
Yeah, just like that...except that it's the complete opposite. Providing new ID to people (guest workers) who already have valid ID is nothing like providing ID to people who have none.
The e-verify cards are a bipartisan policy. Gingrich and other GOP-bots want the cyber-bio ID cards. Feinstein supported a similar proposal in CA a few days after 9-11 (along with checkpoints) for everyone, and had her crony Ellison at Oracle print some up.
Calypso
I was responding to "Another government spending solution to solve an imaginary problem".
Bad idea. I know it's only for non-citizens. Now.
Not everyone is living in a online, GPS-tracked world. What about their cards? Why should they have to give up their privacy just because a Politician thinks it is a good sound bite and will garner votes?
People like this. Although she seems to have given up her privacy for something else. Nevertheless, there are people in this state, and I doubt she is alone, who don't deserve extra paperwork.
So not having the card means you are either an illegal immigrant OR a citizen. That doesn't seem very clarifying.
What I don't get is that the House can set the manner of its own election. This means that they can require Voter ID right now, without interference from the Senate or Prez.
Do it already.
Legal immigrants have a Green Card, which is valid ID in this country.
It's the asking for it, or a driver's license, or a state non-driver ID (and I believe all states have them) that makes the Demos go all wee-wee.
PS The only question left after ScottM stole my original comment is whether it's worth a Godwin alert.
Scratch a Lefty, find a Nazi (or is it a Chekhist?).
Is Bill Keller a leftist, or even a liberal? Is it assumed that he is so merely because he works for the Times?
Is Bill Keller a leftist, or even a liberal?
The greater government involvement, the more left the policy sliding all the way through to absolute tyranny (redundant?). The less, the more right, all the way through to absolute anarchy (also, redundant?).
While I don't know what the mass of Keller's writings and opinions make him, on this issue, he's very much a leftist, ie, more government control.
Ultimately, there are 300 million people who have to live together. A common goal should be to maximize freedom. If you want to lose freedom, one quick way is to lose the integrity of elections.
Yeah, I know we have that basic disagreement about whether there may be a vote fraud problem, garage. But with some people willing to sign 80 recall petitions, I'm less confident than you that they don't vote a couple times too.
Robert Cook said...
Is Bill Keller a leftist, or even a liberal? Is it assumed that he is so merely because he works for the Times?
Um, yes. And he said the NYT is a liberal newspaper.
Any more dumb questions?
PS The only question left after ScottM stole my original comment is whether it's worth a Godwin alert.
A POINT OF ORDER, SIR! How do you know I wasn't doing an East German communist prior to 1989?
Who's arguing for a military crackdown on immigration? GOP-boys, freepers, teabugs. And for the AZ law. Didn't Bachmann say use drones or something. Again, the A-tards making sh*t up as they go along.
There has to be a legal guest worker program
Dammit Newt.
Yes, there has to be one... AFTER we get control of our border.
Same for the debt. Its pointless to raise taxes until you get control of spending.
A liberal supporting Gingrich?
About like an A-tard supporting Pelosi. Doesn't compute. Keller's a moderate.
tim in vermont said...
Ultimately, there are 300 million people who have to live together. A common goal should be to maximize freedom. If you want to lose freedom, one quick way is to lose the integrity of elections.
Sadly, elections are way overrated. We've already voted in plenty of pols who are quite willing to take most of our freedom, and already have taken quite a bit.
Is Bill Keller a leftist, or even a liberal? Is it assumed that he is so merely because he works for the Times?
What percentage of women working in a whore house are whores?
"The greater government involvement, the more left the policy sliding all the way through to absolute tyranny (redundant?). The less, the more right, all the way through to absolute anarchy (also, redundant?)."
Where is "leftist" defined this way?
Fen the freeper with the non sequitur of the hour. Keller's not a leftist. He sounds like BushCo man
Where is "leftist" defined this way?
Someone who tends to favor centralized government solutions, thus tending left on that plane. We're going by contemporary nomenclature, obviously.
Its not a non sequitur. The NYTs is Pravda. Its a propaganda organ of the Democrat party.
So Gingrich is a Democrat? No. Was the Iraqi war that the NYT supported for years, democratic? No. Wrong again.
Someone who tends to favor centralized government solutions, thus tending left on that plane. We're going by contemporary nomenclature, obviously.
So Gingrich is a leftist?
A national ID card will certainly simplify things for forgers. I'm sure somebody in China can make money selling phony ID cards to illegals, just as they make money selling phony driver's licenses to college students.
Scott M said...
PS The only question left after ScottM stole my original comment is whether it's worth a Godwin alert.
A POINT OF ORDER, SIR! How do you know I wasn't doing an East German communist prior to 1989?
Good one!
We must first decide whether Stasi took its lead from the Gestapo or the NKVD.
So Gingrich is a leftist?
On this issue and given the spectrum at hand, yes. So are people that advocate "blue laws".
The Supreme Court is now in the Althouse Vortex.
Futurist Gingrich tries to start a future that we can control by use of digital devices...but will we control our future or be controlled by it when the government grabs that power in a crisis?
So Gingrich is a leftist?
Gingrich, O Unit, has been all over the place, at one time or another.
He sounds like BushCo man
Sure, Byro-J.
That's why Keller has endorsed the candidacies of Dubya, Dick Cheney, and the rest of the crew.
And that's why you'll be able to produce evidence of such endorsements.
When you're done proving that Willard Mitt Romney is into Scientology...
J: L Was the Iraqi war that the NYT supported for years, democratic?
If by "democratic" you mean leftist, then yes. Keller even founded a group called "I can't beleive I'm a liberal hawk" in support of the Iraq war.
"Someone who tends to favor centralized government solutions, thus tending left on that plane."
Who says this is the definition of "leftist?"
Assuming this definition, a government that criminalizes homosexuality and puts homosexuals in prisons is leftist; or, a government that passes laws allowing homosexuals to marry is leftist.
By this definition, government of any kind is "leftist."
Only if you have a total of two choices on the plane, Cook. I'm surprised you don't see that. It's quite obvious.
My definition makes no such claim.
"Cook, what's your definition of a leftist?"
I wouldn't presume to offer a definition. Or rather, I wouldn't easily be able to, not without long pondering. It's easier to talk of "leftism" than to define it.
"You don't consider Keller to have the same views as Michele Bachmann, right?
"Ot even the same views as Mitt Romney."
I would assume not, in either case, but I don't know. I have no idea what Bill Keller's political views are, which prompted my question. How many people here are so familiar with Keller's views they can say he's a "leftist" or "liberal?" What, specifically, has he espoused that marks him as left of center?
And here is Obama's response:
Blaming budget cuts, the Obama administration early next year will cut the number of National Guard troops patrolling the U.S.-Mexico border by at least half, according to a congressman who was briefed on the plan.
The National Guard said an announcement will be made by the White House “in the near future,” but Rep. Duncan Hunter, a California Republican who has learned of the plans, said slashing the deployment in half is the minimum number, and he said it will mean reshuffling the remaining troops along the nearly 2,000-mile border.
Oh well, problem solved!
Perhaps the definition is the same as that of pornography. I know it when I see it.
What, specifically, has he espoused that marks him as left of center?
But you've just said you won't presume to offer a definition of "Leftist."
In which case, you aren't going to be defining "center" or "left of center"—or "moderate" or "conservative"— either.
It's a reasonable assumption the editor of the New York Times shares the political views regularly expressed, not only in editorials, but in the NYT's "news" coverage, and in the columns of its favored op-ed writers. For instance, that he follows the present-day Democratic Party talking points regarding voter identification laws.
Since when do liberal columnists love tough ID card policies?
Since when is Bill Keller considered a liberal columnist? Only in the fevered right wing brains of Althouse and her cohorts would Keller be considered a "liberal".
I guess since the left has been losing the battle of the comment threads for so long all over the web, their new strategy is to take every discussion into a clown dance territory.
The only counter is to not bite, but nobody seems able.
Only in the fevered right wing brains of Althouse and her cohorts would...
Your writing crutches have begun to show themselves. Try a belt that fits.
"Only the guest workers will need to have these cards in order to work. Not everyone else. Keller doesn't mention that, for some reason."
I hope you're being sarcastic here. I see no way for a program to work in which only guest workers will need to have these cards, because of the "I don't need one; I'm a citizen" argument.
Once this problem comes to light, everyone will be required to have such a card.
And when that happens, there is no longer such a thing as a right to life--at least not in the USA--people will be allowed to live only by permission of the government.
"I hope you're being sarcastic here."
You got it.
Am I irrational in thinking that this is a sleight of hand on Keller's part? He wishes to make Gingrich look rational and humane in the same way a farmer fattens up a pig for slaughter. In the coming election, the left will have a great deal of difficulty making Obama look successful, but far less problems in making Gingrich look unreliable.....Supply and demand: The access of cheap labor from Mexico lowers the cost of labor in the USA. I don't understand how Democrats square the circle and claim that law immigration policies help the working poor here. I would expect SEIU employees to be radically anti-immigrant, but that's not the case.
law immigration above should read lax immigration. Sorry.
"Newt seems to be simply opening a path for some noncitizens to work here legally and to prove that's what they are doing."
Mickey Kaus comments:
That impression is reinforced by [Gingrich's] additional embrace of the Krieble Foundation’s “red card” proposal. This plan would apparently grant immediate, legal, non-citizen status to all illegals in the country who went home and obtained an easy-to-get guest worker pass from an employer. There would be no “artificial limits on their number”–in effect, as many red cards would be issued as employers demanded. The catch is that in theory a red card holder would then be required to re-return “home” when his or her guest worker pass expired in order to obtain another one. How many of today’s illegals–especially the one’s who’ve been here “for 25 years”–are going to take this deal? If they don’t, will Gingrich immediately offer them Selective-Service style review? If so, his plan moves a lot closer to a near-term amnesty...
For recent and future illegal immigrants, the key apparent features of the Krieble Plan–the unlimited number of “red cards” and the ease of obtaining them**–effectively means something close to open borders. Millions of impoverished workers now living abroad could flood the U.S. labor market legally. Krieble’s plan is similar to the Papoon for President drug plan, which would “eliminate all illegal drugs” by simply making them all legal.
"'What, specifically, has he espoused that marks him as left of center?'
"But you've just said you won't presume to offer a definition of 'Leftist.'"
What, specifically, has Keller espoused that marks him as a "leftist" to those here who assume or assert he is?
(Besides, I can hesitate to offer a definition of "leftist" yet still entertain discussion of whether stated positions can be considered "left" or "right.")
"It's a reasonable assumption the editor of the New York Times shares the political views regularly expressed, not only in editorials, but in the NYT's 'news' coverage, and in the columns of its favored op-ed writers."
Is it? You're taking as a given that the Times is a "liberal" paper. Has this been demonstrated? What is meant that a particular news organ would be considered "liberal" or "conservative" in its overall coverage?
In comparison with Newsmax or Free Republic, the Times may be fairly described as "liberal," I suppose, but, on its own terms, what does such a descriptive mean? Is it "liberal" merely because it may offer news reporting that purports to offer facts--or analysis of facts--which differ from the facts--or analyses--that one has seen elsewhere?
I see the Times as being an establishment paper. It's editors and reporters may very well be mostly people who privately consider themselves "liberal," in that self-satisfied way that urbane, affluent cosmopolitans often are...but the paper, as an entity, is really committed to the status quo of American privilege and prerogatives, rather than to a critique of the status quo.
For a couple of examples, The Times fully supported our invasion of Iraq, and while it makes use of the documents obtained and shared by Wikileaks, it--and Keller, in particular--is disdainful of Julian Assange and his organization. Does this make them "liberal" or "conservative," or simply self-serving?
"What is meant that a particular news organ would be considered "liberal" or "conservative" in its overall coverage?"
Generally, when a paper is described as being "liberal" or "conservative", the description applies mainly to the editorial content, such as the piece under discussion here.
Not the news coverage.
I don't understand the "guest worker" thing. Seems like an obvious handout to people who want to benefit from artificially depressed wages.
"We only want the people in here who have no ties here and no plans to stay."
Shouldn't we prefer to let in the people who love America and want to become Americans?
As for "jobs Americans won't do," they'll do them if you stop stocking them up with entitlements, and if you pay competitive wages.
The Times fully supported our invasion of Iraq,
They did? How?
Even if true, how does that make the paper not liberal?
Is it "liberal" merely because it may offer news reporting that purports to offer facts--or analysis of facts--which differ from the facts--or analyses--that one has seen elsewhere?
Um, no, the "facts" that are "analyzed" always conveniently lead to a liberal conclusion.
Though I do find it comical you think these are serious questions.
It is doubly funny that the people working there say it is liberal yet you can't accept that.
I'll be first in line to get myself fingerprinting for my national ID card. Garage - are you with me?
I have yet to hear one cogent argument against a national ID card. Every other country in the civilized world has one.
@Sorepaw
Why isn't Keller asking the Feds to give everyone a personnummer, Swedish-style?
Hey, that's a keen idea, we could tatoo it on their forearm!
I have yet to hear one cogent argument against a national ID card. Every other country in the civilized world has one.
Yes, but how many that have landed on the moon?
Scott - explain me what are you afraid of?
Who says I'm afraid? Answer my question.
"...the people working there say it is liberal yet you can't accept that."
From what I've gleaned of Cook's political philosophy, I imagine that he considers everyone to the right of Noam Chomsky to be a reactionary. (And probably a war criminal.)
Scott is trying to make the useless "American exceptional-ism" canard to try and wiggle out of the need for national ID card. Yeah let's dare to be different even if it kills us!
I have yet to hear one cogent argument against a national ID card. Every other country in the civilized world has one.
I say let's go farther. ID's can be faked. Why not have a microchip implanted in the forehead? That will help enforcing all the new immigration/voting laws. One quick bar code-like scan and the potential perp can easily be identified.
garage - I have to wonder why you are fighting this to the death.
Every other country in the civilized world has one.
Let's hear it for American Exceptionalism!
Let's hear it for American Exceptionalism!
When conservatives like Rush Limbaugh talk about American Exceptionalism, they get blasted for being nationalistic/imperialist/racist, whatever. But suddenly liberals are for it when it's convenient?
I was trying to remember why I dislike Newt Gingrich so much, and Bill Keller comes along and reminds me.
Thanks, Bill!
To paraphrase Pogo upthread, the thin-skinned, micro-manager instinct that Gingrich has continually exhibited does not inspire confidence in his ability to govern with a light hand. I want to vote for a candidate that proposes eliminating government powers, not augmenting them. This sort of idea is one of those proverbial "slippery slopes" that will lead, inevitably, to mandatory national biometric identification.
But even that is not the bottom of the slope, it's just more lubrication that will accelerate our slide toward the gaping maw that lies, waiting, at the end point of almost all slippery slopes involving questions of government power: tyranny.
Not with a bang, but a whimper.
@garage
Why not have a microchip implanted in the forehead?
Actually Sen Dianne Feinstein tried several times to introduce a bill to implant ID chips in kids buttocks.
Dere does not hv 2 b a "guest worker program" Dats a chois, by politicos dat don wanna payy 4 border poliic, but insted wan use tax $$ for policcal patronage
Ol Newt d deceever is sayin, we cant stop 'em, so might as well register 'em An we need 'em for doin r dirtyy "guest worker" jobs.
Heres an altern:
1 Ramp up La Migra n clozz d border Do yor job, govmt
2 Illegals no wan register, den we no wan pay for em If u cost us $$, ur gon, deportal
3. Ifn illegals register, den dey gtta stay squeeky cleen. Any criim by any in family, whole family is gone, anchor babes n all
4. If illegals register or not, they will nevr become citizen, but deyr kids can be.
Its consistal w/ American tradition: work hard, stay cleen, yor kids will hv a betr liif dan u. Wat we wan: illegals to buy into d American dreem, lik all pas wavs of immigrals.
An obvious hitch that Keller misses is that Latino illegal workers, especially Mexicans and Guatemalans (the majority of illegals crossing our southern border), are very suspicious of government (theirs and ours for good reason) and few would voluntarily apply for a ID card that would allow their govts to track their US income without a meaningful economic benefit (aka more taxpayer $$ doled out as an incentive/offset)and special class protections which opens yet another door to political corruption.
btw- I wonder how govt agencies and MSM will address the issue of married men establishing second families, which is very common in the US and a custom of long standing in Mexico and Latin America.
In Mexico, for example, a man may officially register one spouse and one concubinato (and children from both) on their social security and medical benefits account.
I can't wait to see how the likes of Keller papers that one over given the NYT's open scorn for Sister wives.
"Actually Sen Dianne Feinstein tried several times to introduce a bill to implant ID chips in kids buttocks.""
BJM--
I'm picturing something more like OnStar. You plant it in a kid's cheeks and if he falls down or later in life when he has sex, a voice comes out saying "OnStar, is everything alright?"
I’m undecided about a national ID card. As others have pointed out, pretty much anyone who applies for a job at a legitimate employer already has to prove their eligibility with two forms of identification so I’m a bit at a loss to see how this would be a set too far. On the other hand, once someone figures out how to hack or counterfeit these cards (and you know someone will), it might make identity theft easier not to mention the problems with correcting or updating your information. So while I don’t think that this is an ominous intrusion on civil liberties, I can see that there could be problems down the road with it.
Alex sez mostall civvy countrys hv national ID crd, what u scared of?
Cart b4 horse What specific problm requirs an exercise of a specific enumerated Federal powr, and associal necesary n proper powrs
Burden is on u, Alex, 2 answer 1st,
1 wat national problem?
2 wat enumerated powr?
3 wats necesary n propr?
4 how uu gon prevent it frm bein yet anothr clikk in the 1-way ratchet from Liberty to tyranny.
garage - I have to wonder why you are fighting this to the death.
We let big gov arrest and pepper spray people in the face for having the wrong opinion, why not a microchip?
We let big gov arrest and pepper spray people in the face for having the wrong opinion
How does "having the wrong opinion" equate to trespassing and/or ignoring lawful orders to disperse?
@garage
We let big gov arrest and pepper spray people in the face for having the wrong opinion,
Nuking the fridge is the best you got?
"We let big gov arrest and pepper spray people in the face for having the wrong opinion"
Complete horseshit, GM.
Andinista-
so sorry for your obvious severe brain injury. Best wishes for speedy recovery.
Yr. humble & obed't srvnt,
Paco W.
I don't think the term "national ID" means what liberals think it means.
Once issued, a national ID will be required for all interface with govt, including voting...something they've fought tooth & nail as "unfair" to minorities.
So which is it?
A foolish inconsistency is the hobgoblin of Liberal minds, adored by politicans, statesmen, philosophers and divines. (apolgies to Emerson)
How does "having the wrong opinion" equate to trespassing and/or ignoring lawful orders to disperse?
Really, out of the 4000+ arrests, including journalists, you're 100% confident they were all "lawful orders" huh? I'm not. You trust government more than I do, it seems.
Really, out of the 4000+ arrests, including journalists, you're 100% confident they were all "lawful orders" huh? I'm not. You trust government more than I do, it seems.
Prove otherwise garbage.
garbage mahal - the master of outlandish claims, at least 10x a day!
garage trusts government until it bites his side in the ass.
This thread sure seems pretty cluttery and chatty to me. It needs some monitoring.
Really, out of the 4000+ arrests, including journalists, you're 100% confident they were all "lawful orders" huh? I'm not. You trust government more than I do, it seems.
When you move goal posts like that, Garage, do you lift with your legs or your back?
You know what's really hilarious? Garbage is accusing lefty Democrat mayors of oppressing HIS people. Remember all this OWS shit is going down in lefty cities.
Non-citizens have fake documents that say they are citizens; sometimes they have real documents that say they are citizens. Therefore, they wouldn't need to show biometric documentation unless every citizen had to - they would continue to show their fake documents.
That's not even getting into the cash economy.
When you move goal posts like that, Garage, do you lift with your legs or your back?
Uh, you made the claim "How does "having the wrong opinion" equate to trespassing and/or ignoring lawful orders to disperse?" I'm guessing you didn't verify any of these arrests to assure us they were all illegally trespassing and illegally not dispersing? It's why I could never be a conservative or libertarian.
?" I'm guessing you didn't verify any of these arrests to assure us they were all illegally trespassing and illegally not dispersing?
Oh, I put about as much work into as you did verifying that all 4000+ incidents were illegal, I'm sure. Further, I didn't disparage an entire group of people in doing so. Congrats. You're a multi-tasking bigot.
That's not even getting into the cash economy.
Good point, more than likely people who hire day laborers to perform landscaping and chores around their property probably aren’t too concerned with checking or filling out the proper paper work. One reason I suspect that calls for stepping up employer enforcement and levying draconian fines isn’t likely to have much of a dent until the government decides to make an example of individual home owners
garage thinks he "won" by making us prove the 4000+ arrests are all valid.
"The unit is, of course, not programmed to notice failures to provide evidence for claims when "liberals" or "progressives" are the ones failing to provide it."
Stack dump at 0E3F12R003x
CPU corrupt.
Message truncated due to
Nothing quite as hilarious as computer humor.
Nothing quite as hilarious as computer humor = SQUIRREL.
See? Gold card member.
Notice that the programmers for the unit known as ScottM didn't directly address my inquiry. Must be the slow clock cycles of the 286 CPU he is running.
HAHAHAHAHAHA
Hey Paco, not brain hurt; my kids: 24/7 txting, n I watch em nvent a new emo-inflected langual w new orthografi. Dis is n exprmt. Plus, Im educatin yall
Same diff as if estaba hablando en Espanol, me ignora y le rei de mi. Alwazz glad to add som hoomr
Lesse: millions a peeps here w/o papersss. Govmt says gotta hv hi-tech ID card Peeps here don wan reggistr Sounds likk bidness opportunal to smuggl in n sell fakiess FedGov aint dat smart Burocrazz is corrupt, will look othr way cuz new illegal peeps have politcal usess No burocrat wans 2 deny bennies to peeps: bennies cryy, and dey r d customer & client
Hi-tech solns are doomdd to failll FedGov is inept, not corrupt & evil enuf to enforce by feer Lo-tech is besstie: bild a fenss, patroll it
We don't need all of that.... Just take the damn sugar off of the table.... stop giving illegals free health care, housing, food and educations and they will go home.
Palladian,
"Not with a bang, but a whimper. "
Speak for yourself.
Alex,
"explain me what are you afraid of? "
You! Duh...
rh,
Dude, it's waaaay beyond cruel and unusual to post that little snippet of Thurber, and yet provide no link whereby we can RTWT!
As to the original, Newtron-related post:
"... tamper-proof ... "
You lost me right there. Look, Newt, don't be an idiot. If you mean "tamper-resistant", go ahead and say that. But to say the other means either you're clueless, or you're demagoging.
I like you post I share with you some more things hope you like Open the Windows Device Manager. Click Start > Control Panel, and open the "System" application. Click the tab labeled "Hardware" and press the "Device Manager" button. In Windows XP, the Device Manager will load directly in the Hardware tab, whereas in Vista and Windows 7, it will open in a new window.ID Card Software
Post a Comment