Sound Off! (Feb. 10)

Sound Off! (Feb. 10)

There are 46 comments on the Las Cruces Sun-News story from Feb 10, 2011, titled Sound Off! (Feb. 10). In it, Las Cruces Sun-News reports that:

Who is a hypocrite, Senator Fischmann? If you want the state to ban illegals from working in hotels and the casino and other businesses, why don't you introduce a bill that will do just that? I don't blame the illegals that enter this country to try to better their condition.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Las Cruces Sun-News.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Who What Why When Where

Monroe, MI

#1 Feb 10, 2011
Quote: We are seeing the extreme weather conditions resulting from global warming. The summers will get hotter and the winters will get colder.

Is that you Al? You still touting that same old global warming thingy?

Since: Sep 08

Albuquerque, NM

#2 Feb 10, 2011
"Why do the Democrats in the New Mexico House and Senate not want to keep us New Mexico citizens safe? They do not want the New Mexico State Police to check for illegal aliens."

And just how in the hell is that going to keep anyone safe?

Judged:

11

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Rebecca from Las Cruces

Albuquerque, NM

#3 Feb 10, 2011
Quote: We are seeing the extreme weather conditions resulting from Global Warming. The summers will get hotter and the winters will get colder.

What a load of rubbish. We are seeing what I call a climate cycle. Ups and downs. What we just had,we have had before. This is nothing new. Maybe some of you younger people don't remember how it use to be, but I sure do. Winters were colder, then we had a warming trend, now it has started in to a cooler cycle. This has always gone on and will probably continue as long as there is an Earth. Al Gore made his millions, now maybe he will shut up and let people live, without trying to convince them that Doomsday is cometh.
la mosca

Albuquerque, NM

#4 Feb 10, 2011
PlacitasRoy wrote:
"Why do the Democrats in the New Mexico House and Senate not want to keep us New Mexico citizens safe? They do not want the New Mexico State Police to check for illegal aliens."
And just how in the hell is that going to keep anyone safe?
Roy, you are Captain Konflikto today. This flies right in the face of what you posted on http://www.topix.com/forum/source/las-cruces-...

And I quote your sarcastic comment here: "'Tis a brilliant solution offered - Take down the Interstate check points so then the traffickers can make better time getting thier cargo to distant cities."

Which is it dude?

Since: Sep 08

Albuquerque, NM

#5 Feb 10, 2011
la mosca wrote:
<quoted text>
Roy, you are Captain Konflikto today. This flies right in the face of what you posted on http://www.topix.com/forum/source/las-cruces-...
And I quote your sarcastic comment here: "'Tis a brilliant solution offered - Take down the Interstate check points so then the traffickers can make better time getting thier cargo to distant cities."
Which is it dude?
Mixing apples and oranges.

No where in by 'sarcastic comment' did I remotely mention safety. I'd never claim they add one little bit to safety. In fact, I'd call them a pain in thebutt. But every now and then you read about some massive bust being made.
"Why do the Democrats in the New Mexico House and Senate not want to keep us New Mexico citizens safe? They do not want the New Mexico State Police to check for illegal aliens."
And just how in the hell is that going to keep anyone safe?

Judged:

11

10

9

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
la mosca

Albuquerque, NM

#6 Feb 10, 2011
PlacitasRoy wrote:
<quoted text>
Mixing apples and oranges.
No where in by 'sarcastic comment' did I remotely mention safety. I'd never claim they add one little bit to safety. In fact, I'd call them a pain in thebutt. But every now and then you read about some massive bust being made.
"Why do the Democrats in the New Mexico House and Senate not want to keep us New Mexico citizens safe? They do not want the New Mexico State Police to check for illegal aliens."
And just how in the hell is that going to keep anyone safe?
I agree, it won't.
But your other argument was in favor of BP checkpoints --Just what do you think these "big busts" are relative to?
They are directly related to public safety. think about it Roy.

Since: Jan 11

Jackson, TN

#7 Feb 10, 2011
If I see John Boehner crying again....?

This guy really gotta get a hold of his emotions.

I really believe that HE KNOWs that in the #3 position he's too far over his head. I doubt he'll last the entire two years before conceding to illness.
OrvilleWyatt

Santa Fe, NM

#8 Feb 10, 2011
Caller:
"I don't blame the illegals that enter this country to try to better their condition. I blame the people that hire them"

The people who hire them are trying to better their condition too. Voluntary trade for mutual benefit ... that's what capitalism is.

Caller:
"Instead of complaining about the lack of a Trader Joe's, why don't you sped some time at Toucan Market?"

Because Toucan caters to smart foodies, not phony neo-lib a**holes who just want their cotton shopping bag to say 'Trader Joes'. Toucan is far superior. Good work Bob & Richard, we love you guys.

Caller:
"We are seeing the extreme weather conditions resulting from global warming. The summers will get hotter and the winters will get colder"

Either figure out a way to profit by providing a more sustainable solution for energy / food production or go join the christian ignorami who think the world's coming to an end in May. You guys are the same ilk.

Pollution IS bad. We shouldn't screw with the atmospheric mix. Agreed, all the way. I, however, realize that this problem is too big for government and can only be fixed by the power of the market.

Since: Sep 08

Albuquerque, NM

#9 Feb 10, 2011
Mr_Know it all wrote:
If I see John Boehner crying again....?
This guy really gotta get a hold of his emotions.
I really believe that HE KNOWs that in the #3 position he's too far over his head. I doubt he'll last the entire two years before conceding to illness.
Think he will cry because he is stepping down for whoring around on his wife?
Or will he cry with his wife at his side while he apologizes for whoring around with the lobbyists as he states his intentions to stay on the job?

Either way - I'm giving 10-1 he cries.

SEX SCANDAL MIGHT BRING DOWN JOHN BOEHNER

"[snip]Boehner has been involved in extramarital affairs with at least two women, according to a new report in the National Enquirer. We don’t normally cite supermarket tabloids as primary source material. But the Enquirer was first to write about the John Edwards’ infidelity, and the newspaper proved to be right on target. And back in the early ’90s, the mainstream press picked up on the Bill Clinton/Gennifer Flowers story after it broke in a tabloid.

In Boehner’s case, the Enquirer gets into specifics–and that gives the story a ring of truth:

Capitol Hill insiders and political bloggers have been buzzing about an upcoming New York Times probe–detailing an alleged affair that the 61-year-old married father of two had with pretty Washington lobbyist LISBETH LYONS.

And an ENQUIRER investigation has uncovered a bedroom encounter that Boehner–second in line of succession to the presidency–allegedly had with LEIGH LaMORA, a 46-year-old former press secretary to ex-Colorado Congressman JOEL HEFLEY.

There's SO MUCH MORE: http://my.firedoglake.com/rogershuler/2011/02...
Brushybill

Albuquerque, NM

#10 Feb 10, 2011
Who What Why When Where wrote:
Quote: We are seeing the extreme weather conditions resulting from global warming. The summers will get hotter and the winters will get colder.
Is that you Al? You still touting that same old global warming thingy?
As you debate in your head if global warming is true or not, just always remember: "Always take the advice and conclusions of the lawyers for the oil companies and the talk show hosts over the vast consensus of climate scientists!" Thank God for the lawyers and the talk show guys for keeping things in balance! Afterall, the faster we can bring-on Armagaeddon the faster good Christians can be sucked into heaven in the Rapture. It's all part of God's plan. Why should we interfere! Do NOT be dissuaded by science. They are eveil! EVILLLL I say.
Weather Forecaster

Las Cruces, NM

#11 Feb 10, 2011
OrvilleWyatt wrote:
Pollution IS bad. We shouldn't screw with the atmospheric mix. Agreed, all the way. I, however, realize that this problem is too big for government and can only be fixed by the power of the market.
Pollution IS bad but CO2 is no more a pollutant than H2O. Furthermore, as atmospheric CO2 levels are still well within what is considered normal by atmospheric scientists AND humans account for only 3 percent of the daily CO2 releases into the atmosphere I argue that we have not messed with the "atmospheric mix."

“Live Free or Die Trying”

Since: Feb 09

Las Cruces

#12 Feb 10, 2011
Too much snow, Global warming, Not enough snow Global warming. Too hot, Global warming, too cold, Global warming. Is it any wonder that so many have issues with believing this crap. Please give us validated data in order to back up the claims and maybe we will belive in it. After all scientists have also been known to alter data in order to advance their own agenda, and there is a huge amount of money to be made if global warming can at least look to be true. Just ask Al Gore and his carbon trading exchange.
Dickey Punchcock

Montgomery, AL

#13 Feb 10, 2011
Why is it so hard for some people to understand that if the climate changes the weather will also change. This can lead to greater extremes in local weather patterns. Try to look at the evidence from a non-political viewpoint and maybe you'll feel different.

I do think that climate change is a real issue, but i am unsure of the cause or what to do about it. I think that clean energy generation is a good thing a pollution is undesirable. Lets just use some common sense and not turn this into a political football.
Armondo

Broken Arrow, OK

#14 Feb 10, 2011
If they ban illegals they will have no one to do the work.
Just me

El Paso, TX

#15 Feb 10, 2011
PlacitasRoy wrote:
"Why do the Democrats in the New Mexico House and Senate not want to keep us New Mexico citizens safe? They do not want the New Mexico State Police to check for illegal aliens."
And just how in the hell is that going to keep anyone safe?
Good Point - but as long as white people kill each other it is ok, they only worry when the illegals kill whites.
Brushybill

Albuquerque, NM

#16 Feb 10, 2011
lcirishman wrote:
Too much snow, Global warming, Not enough snow Global warming. Too hot, Global warming, too cold, Global warming. Is it any wonder that so many have issues with believing this crap. Please give us validated data in order to back up the claims and maybe we will belive in it. After all scientists have also been known to alter data in order to advance their own agenda, and there is a huge amount of money to be made if global warming can at least look to be true. Just ask Al Gore and his carbon trading exchange.
OMG. show me validated data! how about thousands of pages endorsed by every credible scientist in teh world. validated data? why, you and Sarah wouldnt bother to read it anyway! You just consult the quacks. Show me validated data. You have got to be kidding.
Zippity Doo Da

Brighton, MI

#17 Feb 10, 2011
Weather Forecaster wrote:
<quoted text>
Pollution IS bad but CO2 is no more a pollutant than H2O. Furthermore, as atmospheric CO2 levels are still well within what is considered normal by atmospheric scientists AND humans account for only 3 percent of the daily CO2 releases into the atmosphere I argue that we have not messed with the "atmospheric mix."
Tell it to the Supreme Court. The court held in a 2007 ruling that greenhouse gases (including CO2) are a pollutant and EPA is REQUIRED to regulate them, in accordance with the Clean Air Act signed by President George HW Bush in 1990.

It's already been argued and decided by people smarter than yourself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_v....

“Live Free or Die Trying”

Since: Feb 09

Las Cruces

#18 Feb 10, 2011
Brushybill wrote:
<quoted text>
OMG. show me validated data! how about thousands of pages endorsed by every credible scientist in teh world. validated data? why, you and Sarah wouldnt bother to read it anyway! You just consult the quacks. Show me validated data. You have got to be kidding.
I have read data from credible studies both for and against global warming, so who is correct? Besides, as long as there is money to be made selling carbon credits, I wouldn't believe a word Al Gore and his scientist says as he and his friends stand to make a killing if they can hoodwink the rest of the world. What criteria do you use to decide which data is credible and which is not. How are your scientist better than my scientist?
Left in Las Cruces

Rio Rancho, NM

#19 Feb 10, 2011
When I was a young man, paranoid right-wingers had a favorite conspiracy theory that severe weather was being cause by the soviets using a super secret weather machine. Our government was keeping this from us to keep us from panicking. It was all the rage amongst right-wing talk show hosts.

How times have changed! Now, the ideological heirs of those folks deny humans can do anything at all to change the weather. Scientists, they say, are lying to us to create panic, so we'll fund their research.

That's the fascinating thing about paranoids - if an authority says that no one is changing the weather, as when the government denied knowledge of the soviet weather machine, they believed it was being changed. When an authority says that we are changing the weather, as scientists do today, they immediately take the opposite stance.

Maybe the best strategy is to provide them with some hopelessly confusing conundrum. For instance, has anyone heard about a new expert report that says all expert reports are false?

Let 'em work on that for a while.
Oh Sure

Albuquerque, NM

#20 Feb 10, 2011
Zippity Doo Da wrote:
<quoted text>
Tell it to the Supreme Court. The court held in a 2007 ruling that greenhouse gases (including CO2) are a pollutant and EPA is REQUIRED to regulate them, in accordance with the Clean Air Act signed by President George HW Bush in 1990.
It's already been argued and decided by people smarter than yourself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_v....
The Supreme Court can rule that any gas is a pollutant IF they want the EPA to regulate it. Their ruling was just throwing more politics into an area where politicians know nothing. Interesting that you consider politicians to be so intelligent in view of the many dumb and stupid things they do.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Bill Richardson Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Freed US student - brutalised' by North Korea c... Jun '17 Ronald 30
News Hillary is best candidate for U.S. president (Feb '08) Jul '16 Responsibilty 938
News Once again, Hispanics were considered for VP. O... (Jul '16) Jul '16 All For Show 1
News Republican Martinez claims NM governor's seat (Nov '10) Jul '16 Lorenzo 247
News 'Double dippers' fought legislation (May '09) Apr '16 concerned citizen 56
News Who still takes global warming seriously? (Jan '10) Jan '16 Brian_G 30,923
News Janway: Plutonium has already been disposed at ... (Sep '15) Sep '15 texinnewmex 2
More from around the web