Supreme Court upholds key part of Arizona immigration law

CinnamonGirl wrote: Hey this was my opinion and I give LJ lots of crap too. But Ugly truth knows what I am talking about, he is trolling. Have not seen the crap I give LJ? Come on. Ugly truth has not said much that is intelligible at all. And bringing up this silent moderator thing was a smoke screen and he knows it.

Sure... a smoke screen. You saw right through me. I'm so busted. I apologize to you and Kate and everyone else... honest.

The Blunt Ugly Truth wrote:

CinnamonGirl wrote: Hey this was my opinion and I give LJ lots of crap too. But Ugly truth knows what I am talking about, he is trolling. Have not seen the crap I give LJ? Come on. Ugly truth has not said much that is intelligible at all. And bringing up this silent moderator thing was a smoke screen and he knows it.

Sure... a smoke screen. You saw right through me. I'm so busted. I apologize to you and Kate and everyone else... honest.

Thank you, apology accepted.

The Blunt Ugly Truth wrote:

CinnamonGirl wrote: Hey this was my opinion and I give LJ lots of crap too. But Ugly truth knows what I am talking about, he is trolling. Have not seen the crap I give LJ? Come on. Ugly truth has not said much that is intelligible at all. And bringing up this silent moderator thing was a smoke screen and he knows it.

Sure... a smoke screen. You saw right through me. I'm so busted. I apologize to you and Kate and everyone else... honest.

rofllol What did he pay you to say that?

I have been gone for awhile but I have never seen LJ told anything about her posting. Thanks for the links CG.

Seriously archer you would do better if others did better? What kind of excuse is that?

Missed reading your posts Blunt Ugly Truth. Give em hell.

Now as to the topic. Read the syllabus of the opinion, haven't had time to read the whole thing, but it doesn't seem surprising the way they ruled given the fed vs. state issue.

Listen, I did not take issue with Blunt's beliefs, I took issue with his calling awful names and talking about Archer eating her children. And on this board, unless it has changed, we call people out for trolling. I do the same to LJ when she does her knuckle dragging thing @ republicans. LJ, truly does get upset and think Republicans are awful (sorry LJ that is how I look at it). But trolls are just out to attack everyone and disrupt a forum. Either way I am not biased I will do it over and over if this forum allows it.

archer wrote: Rick...you sure can feign amnesia when it comes to your own side. I'm well aware that you have some kind of obsession about. LJ...but there are many on your own side as bad or far worse than LJ and you just can't....or won't see it. This place would be a MUCH cleaner and happier place without the nasty attitude the lies, and personal attacks of several of your right wing cohorts. Then maybe LJ and I and other liberals wouldn't have to respond in kind.

jus sayin'

Tell you what archer, you show me some examples of threads where LJ has just given her opinions about the issues without insulting posters directly, or the groups they identify with like the Tea Party or conservatives in general. And if she doesn't insult, she expressed her ugly hatred. Good luck finding that rare gem of a thread!

CinnamonGirl wrote: Listen, I did not take issue with Blunt's beliefs, I took issue with his calling awful names and talking about Archer eating her children. And on this board, unless it has changed, we call people out for trolling. I do the same to LJ when she does her knuckle dragging thing @ republicans. LJ, truly does get upset and think Republicans are awful (sorry LJ that is how I look at it). But trolls are just out to attack everyone and disrupt a forum. Either way I am not biased I will do it over and over if this forum allows it.

Maybe you're a bit more sensitive than I am, or than I try to be, but we are all adults here (yes?) and the slings and arrows fly fast. I don't troll. How can you even suggest that since I am posting numerous messages and threads on a daily basis, and my rhetoric varies from informative to crass, especially when I am holding up a mirror to someone and letting their hyperbole return (sometimes with a vengeance). Maybe your definition of a troll is different than mine.

There are those on 285 Bound that don't call anyone out for "trolling" for any other reason than to try to shut them down (if the shoe fits). It's a tactic similar to claiming anyone who doesn't agree with President Obama is a racist. There are folks here that are quite talented at using dog whistles. Just because someone has political differences with the Obama administration, calling then a racist falls flat if that person is not really a racist. But use of that term is a dog whistle, which others can hear, and it's an attempt to embarrass someone, to shut down the debate. The same thing with the word "troll."

I have no idea why I would be intent on disrupting this forum. That would only result in diminishing the activity here, and I would not have the soap box that I presently have (and enjoy... thank you Science Chic). You are correct in one of your propositions above. I do attack. If you think I'm just going to sit back twiddle my thumbs while certain people on 285 Bound constantly make all inclusive, bigoted and unfounded remarks about the flavor of the politics I embrace, you must think I'm a knuckle-dragging-just-learned-to-walk-upright-still-fascinated-by-shiny-objects-banjo-playing-hick (Lady Jazzer... feel free to use that compound word at your leisure).

I am not falling for it Blunt.

CinnamonGirl wrote: I am not falling for it Blunt.

Falling for what? That comment was an honest opinion, not something designed to throw dust in your face. You called me out yesterday on something and you were flat out wrong. Are you interested in making that mistake a second time. If you don't agree with my opinion, fine, no tears on this end. But "falling for it" indicates deception, and forget that. My statement was honest (and damn truthful). Some folks around here just don't like facts.

Then go on... no response needed.

Yes, and I'll do it again when they act like knuckle-dragging Neanderthals... But that's why I keep Butt-Ugly Teabagger on IGNORE... Apparently he has no other function than to troll. (And he really should get some counseling for this stalking obsession...)