WWTBAM Bored

Bob78164 wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:Like it or not, my state is in fact complying with the law -- in particular the Constitution you claim to revere. In particular, under the Constitution, the federal government has no right at all to require states to use their own resources to enforce federal laws or policies. My state has made the political decision to withhold our resources from Donny's efforts, and I can assure you that it's a decision that has majority support within California. If you don't like California's decision, you can either convince us to change our minds or you can convince people to change the Constitution. I won't hold my breath waiting.

And you seem to be utterly unable to resist caricaturing my actual position, presumably because you can't substantively respond to it. So I expect that ultimately my side will win the battle to get the law changed. In the meantime, you can count on me to continue to defend my friends and neighbors any way that's available to me. --Bob

State your actual position without pontificating or emotionalizing and I will respond in kind.

I'm entirely comfortable with how I'm expressing myself. It's not going to change. Whether you change how you express your views is on you. --Bob

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote: State your actual position without pontificating or emotionalizing and I will respond in kind.

I'm entirely comfortable with how I'm expressing myself. It's not going to change. Whether you change how you express your views is on you. --Bob

I don't know what your 'Actual Position' is on illegal immigration, bob-tel. I'm asking you to express it without framing it in emotional or holier than thou arguments. Is that too much to ask?

Bob78164 wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:I'm entirely comfortable with how I'm expressing myself. It's not going to change. Whether you change how you express your views is on you. --Bob

I don't know what your 'Actual Position' is on illegal immigration, bob-tel. I'm asking you to express it without framing it in emotional or holier than thou arguments. Is that too much to ask?

I have expressed my position. Repeatedly. And I'll continue to express it in words of my own choice. Just as you have done. And that's why I'm satisfied that you don't have a response based on anything other than emotion. --Bob

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote: I don't know what your 'Actual Position' is on illegal immigration, bob-tel. I'm asking you to express it without framing it in emotional or holier than thou arguments. Is that too much to ask?

I have expressed my position. Repeatedly. And I'll continue to express it in words of my own choice. Just as you have done. And that's why I'm satisfied that you don't have a response based on anything other than emotion. --Bob

Apparently, your position on illegal immigration is purely based on emotion and political motives and political correctness. You always seem to declare you've won the argument by ignoring answers you don't like and saying you've won the argument because no one has answered your questions. I'm giving you the chance to state your position, clearly and with no room for misinterpretation, right here and now, on people crossing the border of our country against current law, and you won't do it. I guess by your definition, I have won the argument. You can't.

Bob78164 wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:I have expressed my position. Repeatedly. And I'll continue to express it in words of my own choice. Just as you have done. And that's why I'm satisfied that you don't have a response based on anything other than emotion. --Bob

Apparently, your position on illegal immigration is purely based on emotion and political motives and political correctness. You always seem to declare you've won the argument by ignoring answers you don't like and saying you've won the argument because no one has answered your questions. I'm giving you the chance to state your position, clearly and with no room for misinterpretation, right here and now, on people crossing the border of our country against current law, and you won't do it. I guess by your definition, I have won the argument. You can't.

Here it is again: Your premise is that our current immigration rate is a problem because too many people are entering the country. I don't accept your premise. In my view, not enough people are entering the country for me to feel comfortable that we'll have enough workers to pay social security benefits when it becomes time for me to collect the benefits I've earned. There certainly aren't enough people being born here to fill out the workforce.

So defend your premise that the United States has a problem in that too many people are entering the country. Bear in mind when you do so that the rate of violent crimes and crimes against property committed by undocumented workers is substantially lower (per capita) than the rate of those same crimes committed by citizens.

And as of yet you've made no effort at all to defend your premise. --Bob