Are you DREAMING?

[bigbadberry3]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/12 ... l-records/

Kind of been under the radar as taxes and UI has taken over as of late in the media. Personally, I'm against it as GED's are a joke and "good moral character" is laughable. Any other thoughts?

[AZhitman]

Oppose.

It's JUST like everything else - They're not satisfied with a measure of progress. They want it ALL. Compromise my a$$.

The White House aide is mistaken (and by "mistaken", I mean "stupid" and should STFU) - Just because a crime is designated a misdemeanor does NOT mean that the instant offense (the crime that brought the person to the attention of the CJ system) wasn't heinous.

WTF is wrong with these hand-wringing pansies? TAKE IT OUT and be happy with your accomplishment. F***, I hate progressives and their wack-job agenda.

Make anyone with a criminal record ineligible. THEN I'll support it. What's so hard about that?

You've got to wonder: What's the motivation of someone who won't accept a "Dream Act" passing that excludes eligibility for convicted criminals.

[IBCoupe]

What's wrong with a Dream Act that makes convicted criminals ineligible? Mostly that we've got a ton of laws that are complete bunk. This is the same line of reasoning often applied to the mandatory death penalty punishment: they might just maybe be not guilty, or otherwise not entirely warrant that penalty. Not all crimes are created equal.

I'm more and more liking open border policies. Avoids the back-bending required to come up with a coherent immigration policy, and it's true to the country's origins.

And what's the point of calling it a "misdemeanor" if it's so heinous?

[audtatious]

All you need to get a cheaper education is to be an illegal and have good moral character. Ignore the fact that the applicant has been using a forged SSN for the last few years, among other things......Not their fault tho, we should have simply given their parents citizenship on a whim.

[IBCoupe]

Hey, for all I know, I'm using a forged SSN. I just believed my parents when they told me what it is.

Silly me; I'm only supposed to trust the government.

[audtatious]

Look, it's the spin cycle...poor children and all.

[AZhitman]

What's wrong with a Dream Act that makes convicted criminals ineligible?

Nothing. That's what I want.

[AZhitman]

I'm more and more liking open border policies.

Lots of people in CT do. I hear there's not a single Hispanic in Maine.

...and spare me the inevitable righteous self-indignation rant about regional differences not mattering.

And what's the point of calling it a "misdemeanor" if it's so heinous?

I already explained that. Criminal Justice 101. For a budding attorney, you certainly know d!ck about instant offenses / plea bargaining & negotiations.

[IBCoupe]

Sure, Greg, but these are also misdemeanors:

Nothing. That's what I want.

And thanks for completely ignoring the substance of the point you were responding to, jackass.

[AZhitman]

Until you spend a substantial amount of time surrounded (yes, SURROUNDED) by a 'minority' criminal element, who has no regard for you or your family's safety, and knows they're 2 hours from getting away scot-free with any crimes they commit, then I really don't place a lot of value on your assessment of what crimes are "ok" with overlooking.

There's also NO mention of maintaining a certain GPA, no mention of staying out of trouble, NOTHING. No stipulations. Just throw the doors open and give away something that most CITIZENS have a tough time accessing.

What gives you people such a hardon for giving away the farm to people who have even committed MINOR offenses? WHY? What's wrong with saying, "No, you made a stupid choice, now GTFO." Are you afraid you won't get into Heaven? Are you thinking they'll thank you?

Meanwhile, my kids, who have high grades and have never gotten in trouble, have to pay for 100% of their higher education.

Of course, I'd help out, but I'm saving my pennies, just in case people like you get in power and want me to pay for criminal immigrants' higher education as well.

[AZhitman]

And thanks for completely ignoring the substance of the point you were responding to, jackass.

Mostly that we've got a ton of laws that are complete bunk.

As you yourself would say: Then work to get those laws changed. Stop looking for loopholes to circumvent them or undermine their effectiveness. Quit boo-hooing because a bunch of moronic cretins can't seem to FOLLOW the "bunk" laws.

Maybe those laws are there to weed out the people who will never contribute much to the fabric of society? You ever think of that? But NO, that doesn't sit well with you. You people want to tamper and interfere with things in a futile effort to make it match your utopian way of thinking.

Better yet, since changing the "bunk laws" is above your pay grade, go someplace that has no "complete bunk" laws.

You won't, because you've got it good here. Quite the quandry, I'd say.

I don't want to sponsor a criminal minority's education. That's my call and my right. YOU feel free to act otherwise. But don't try to force me to do what you do (especially since you haven't DONE it.)

[audtatious]

Wonder how IB will do in court when he starts calling the opposing counsel names in front of a judge because he's losing an argument.

[IBCoupe]

Care to tell me what possession has to do with the safety of your family? I call s***, Greg. I was fine letting the "CT people love open borders" thing slide, but that's utter crap.

So screw you; I'm not gonna waste my time with the rest of your post. I don't "place a lot of value" on the opinions of those who lack the ability to reason.

[IBCoupe]

Wonder how IB will do in court when he starts calling the opposing counsel names in front of a judge because he's losing an argument.

'Cause this is anything like a court of law. f*** off.

[audtatious]

Pretty much. Just like most young people today your solution to people not agreeing to you is to cuss and pout.

Comical and typical.

[IBCoupe]

Okay. Let me know if you have anything interesting to say.

[audtatious]

Sorry, I'm too busy trying to f*** off

[IBCoupe]

No worries. Glad to see some effort.

[audtatious]

Hey, nobody can be as good as you at f*** off. My generation has to learn these new moves.

[IBCoupe]

I'm a pro; takes years of training. Anybody can do it as good as me, just got to pick yourself up by your bootstraps and do it.

[audtatious]

We all know we can't be as good as you think you are. The rest of us are only mere humans.

[AZhitman]

Psst - Isaac:



You can't have it back, since you pussed out on responding to the content of my post. Calling it "crap" and a "lack of ability to reason" is a cop-out. Don't blame me for your failure to comprehend the position of someone who thinks differently than you do. Read it again, take a deep breath, put on your Spiderman Underoos and bring it like you're capable of bringing it.

p.s. There'll be no screwing me tonight. You gotta woo me first.

[mattblancarte]

More debate. Less

In defense of IB, he name-called in response to a reasonably offensive insult. Not saying it was worth it (as the thread has now spiraled into oblivion), but I can see why he chose to retaliate.

I'm confused about the bill at this point... the article claims that sexual offenders will be covered, yet it will not allow felons. What the hell kind of sexual assault is a misdemeanor? Heckling? Threats? Apologies for the layman question... It's late and I'm half-asleep.

I understand that plea bargains can reduce/remove charges brought against a defendant, but I would assume the final misdemeanor count would still be of a legitimately sinister nature.

[bigbadberry3]

Indecent exposure is a misdemeanor... or so I've heard.

[IBCoupe]

Read it again, take a deep breath, put on your Spiderman Underoos and bring it like you're capable of bringing it.

No. If you're going to operate on the assumption that my opinion doesn't matter because of where I live, then I'm going to operate on the assumption that giving my opinion is a waste of my time. I could have taken twenty minutes to write up an essay for you, but instead, I'm taking thirty seconds to write this.

[AZhitman]

In defense of IB, he name-called in response to a reasonably offensive insult. ... I can see why he chose to retaliate.

I'm still looking for this so-called "insult".

Isaac: I didn't say your opinion didn't matter, but you've certainly made no effort to counter any of my MULTITUDE of problems with this issue with facts or even a reasonable explanation. Hell, there's two posts chock-full of stuff for you to refute. I set the ball on the tee for you. Pick up your bat and hit it, if you've still got some swing in you. Quit using my factual statement as a cop-out to avoid the substance of the argument.

There's not a whole lot of illegal Mexicans in CT. That's a fact. And it WILL and DOES color your perceptions, whether you think it does or not. Argue away, you'll be wasting your time.

Kinda like me getting smacked around in grade school ONLY by Black kids. Think I had a few issues later on? Hell yes I did. Now, if you wanna vilify me for that, or presume that it makes me "racist", then by all means, feel free - don't care. But you weren't there, didn't experience it, and don't know how YOU would have responded or felt, so your opinion on that topic would be, at the very least, uninformed (assuming you and I didn't have parallel experiences).

Quit taking it as an insult. I know d!ck about shoveling snow, I can't put tire chains on a car, and I puss out and go back inside when it drops below 40*. Facts. Inescapable and irrefutable. The kind of facts that attorneys hang their hats on.

Back on topic: You've still not convinced me why it's so important for you to allow criminals to participate in the DREAM Act. Why can't we hold people to a higher standard? Or would you prefer we usurp Australia's position as the world's penal colony?

[mattblancarte]

Indecent exposure is a misdemeanor... or so I've heard.

Hmm... that's true.

Keeping violent and sexual offenders out of the DREAM act seems completely reasonable to me.

I'm still looking for this so-called "insult".

The part where you said he doesn't know d!ck.

[stebo0728]

I'm a pro; takes years of training. Anybody can do it as good as me, just got to pick yourself up by your bootstraps and do it.

So your into bondage now?

[AZhitman]

And what's the point of calling it a "misdemeanor" if it's so heinous?

I already explained that. Criminal Justice 101. For a budding attorney, you certainly know d!ck about instant offenses / plea bargaining & negotiations.[/quote]

Considering the question he asked, and his current field of study, I'd say it's a fairly defensible comment.

[IBCoupe]

My current field of study is entirely irrelevant. That there are some "heinous" crimes not badged as such does not mean that all crimes not badged as such are heinous. You haven't made any decent points, Greg, you've just convinced yourself that you have. You really are pissing me off, and it's final's season, so maybe it's easier than it normally would be. In any event, I'm tired of the digs at my personal life - if I bring it up, feel free to respond, but the only time I ever bring it up is if I'm saying "A nifty thing I heard in school today was..."

I'm just saying: I'm not throwing my weight around, so I'd like you to not act as if I am. I have already addressed your one real argument (hardly a multitude). You may have convinced yourself that you've got an army of points, but if you look back over it, you'll find that you're just repeating the same bad logic over and over, while simultaneously mischaracterizing and demonizing the motivations and inner-workings of people who disagree with you. You haven't said anything that I haven't already responded to.

So, once again: f*** off.