Dems don't want to seal border

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-27-2010
Dems don't want to seal border
197
Thu, 05-27-2010 - 1:09pm

http://www.azfamily.com/outbound-feeds/yahoo-news/Democrats-stop-bid-to-send-6000-troops-to-border-95020064.html

Democrats stop bid to send 6,000 troops to border
by The Associated Press
azfamily.com
Posted on May 27, 2010 at 8:05 AM

WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama's Democratic allies in the Senate have repelled a move by presidential rival John McCain to send an additional 6,000 National Guard troops to the U.S-Mexico border.

The Arizona Republican says the security situation along the order has deteriorated so badly that 3,000 guard troops are needed just to help protect his state. But McCain failed to muster the required 60 votes for his plan as the Senate continued debate on an a war funding bill.

Obama on Tuesday promised to send 1,200 Guard troops to the border to support efforts to block drug trafficking and temporarily supplement Border Patrol agents until more agents can be trained.

Former President George W. Bush sent thousands of Guard troops to the border in 2006.

(Copyright 2010 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-30-2009
Sun, 05-30-2010 - 1:54pm

"You mean your lame game"


No. I'm not playing games here.


Or what would you call it when I'm asking a question, and it takes several posts of explaining my question (while I'm sure you know what I'm asking) in hopes of getting a straight answer.


And I still didn't get one!


"Sure, yeah unless the law states it profiles it doesn't really, right" is NOT a straight answer.


iVillage Member
Registered: 01-24-2009
Sun, 05-30-2010 - 1:56pm

<<"Sure, yeah unless the law states it profiles it doesn't really, right" is NOT a straight answer.<<


Riight because I'm expected to state the part of the law that says it profiles otherwise it doesn't;-)

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-30-2009
Sun, 05-30-2010 - 2:51pm


"Riight because I'm expected to state the part of the law that says it profiles otherwise it doesn't;-)"

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-24-2009
Sun, 05-30-2010 - 3:03pm
Only I never claimed the law stated it profiled;-)
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-30-2009
Sun, 05-30-2010 - 3:07pm

"The problem with that kool-aid induced accusation of course being the law specifically disallows racial profiling and even if it did not, profiling is illegal so if it were done the state's case would be thrown out plus open itself to massive civil suits."


The kool-aid comment aside, (IMO your arguments don't need it!)

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-14-2010
Sun, 05-30-2010 - 3:28pm
If my mind operated at a below semi-concious state I would probably say the same thing.
iVillage Member
Registered: 02-14-2010
Sun, 05-30-2010 - 3:32pm

"Stating it doesn't make it fact;-)

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-14-2010
Sun, 05-30-2010 - 3:52pm

"Didn't know that

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-30-2009
Sun, 05-30-2010 - 4:09pm
" that

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-02-2009
Sun, 05-30-2010 - 4:14pm

Huh?

"Resist, we much. We must, and we much. About that, be committed."

Pages