My ranting post where I said (in my most colorful language) that I don't care what the law says (on the issue of educating the children of illegal alienas) drew an interesting collection of responses. (some in my email box)
First, a quick question:
Should Oregon stop taking people's land under eminent domain for the purpose of increasing the tax base?
If you just answered yes then I could do a lenthy post about how you want to do something against the law. I could lay out the [flawed] supreme court decision on this issue. (Kelo v. City of New London)
Or I could say that I agree with you.
I obviously didn't advocate that anyone should break any laws. I said that I don't care what the law says, it doesn't affect my opinion. I am here to change bad laws. I will also respect people who have the right attitude on issues that I feel strongly about.
As for my colorful language, I have not written like that here before and don't plan to again. I apologize if you were offended. I don't apologize for my position.
7 comments:
Don't worry about it, Daniel. I mean after all, who gives a fuck anyway?
Daniel ... I'm not offended ... heck, it shows you're *very* passionate about your topic ... I just warned my readers when I linked to your post "in case" they might be ... forewarned is forearmed, after all.
Keep up the good work and do what you're doing so well. We appreciate you.
That's sweet, Bruce. But nobody gives a fuck.
In all fairness, states are free to protect land owners more than in the Kelo decision.
I understand your point, but your comparison is flawed...
My big problem with Saxton the other night isn't that he is simply saying we have a bad law that needs to be changed. He is making it sound like, as Governor, he would change it. This isn't being honest with the voters.
If Ron had said:
"The law of land, thanks to a liberal Supreme Court, is that we must educate illegal aliens. I think this is a bad law, and I support conservatives from the White House and the Senate who would like to see more conservative jurists on the bench, in order to undo the damage of 50 years of liberal judicial activism. Only then, can a state like Oregon lead the way in combating the evils of illegal immigration by radically reforming our education system to protect the lawful taxpayers who live and work here legally."
... then I would seriously respect Ron.
But he didn't say anything like that. He is simply making reactionary statements about cracking down on illegals, because his focus groups and polls tell him the crowd will eat it up.
Ron is really hurting our cause by making empty promises without presenting the facts and issues honestly.
Anonymous is at it again with his f-bomb limited vocabulary.
Don't worry Daniel. You just were truthful. You have never been one to follow the law, as your criminal record clearly states.
Your statements were forwarded on to the proper authorities. Thanks
a reminder that Ron S. is a lawyer, and every word in every statement he makes must be parsed. Like you, GB, I remain unimpressed by his lukewarm and loophole-filled verbiage. I suspect it will change after the primary, to the disappointment of conservatives.
Post a Comment