That means that's EXACTLY what it is! Tancredo did not say it, did not imply it, and said essentially the opposite of what the title indicates. How much more obvious does a LIE have to be for you? I mean, is there like some secret liberal criteria for when something magically becomes a lie? Does Mr. Spite, Ms. Huffington, and Mr. Stewart have a different standard than your typical right-winger? I've always thought, when someone says something that is patently untrue, that is a LIE!
Tancredo is against that, I am against that, the Founding Fathers were against that, the Constitution is against that, Arizona lawmakers were against that when they wrote the bill! I also don't think we should put babies in burlap bags and throw them in the river! What the fuck does it have to do with the law passed in Arizona? It doesn't "adequately address the dangers" of me gouging your eyes out with a pair of scissors! It doesn't need to! We have other laws that DO adequately address that, and in the case of the Arizona law and ANY law, we have a thing called the Constitution! There is no "special training" needed by law enforcement officers to enforce the law, it's what they do everyday!
NOPE!
The only one spinning here is YOU! After being exposed as a LIAR, you've continued to try and SPIN this into some brilliantly profound point, and you've come off looking like a total buffoon.
I've read the damn law! It does NOT give any such authority to ignore or disregard 'probable cause' or 'reasonable suspicion' and must be implemented in accordance with the Constitution. It is specifically worded to mirror the Federal law, and essentially gives local law enforcement the authority to do what the Federal government has the authority to do, but WON'T do! If the Federal law doesn't violate people's rights, then neither does the Arizona law, it's as simple as that.
Yes, you were in error, but you continue to try and spin this so that you come out smelling all rosy. You're still trying to argue that a lie was not told, that no one intended to mislead, and that Tancredo was somehow saying something he did not say. You've interjected your absurd opinion which has no basis in logic or reason, and now you've resorted to posting a 'division problem' in between your idiotic maya culpa. Math won't help you here!
Because you continue to falsely characterize the Arizona law, and argue that it does things it doesn't do, or it leaves some gaping loophole that usurps people's Constitutional rights... it just doesn't do that! You're an idiot, Arianna Huffington is an idiot, Mr. Spite is an idiot, Jon Stewart is an idiot, Lindsey Graham is an idiot, and anyone who thinks this law violates the Constitution, is an idiot!
