Chuck 
Member since May 6, 2009


Stats

Friends

  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “Ask a Mexican!

It's a shame you have been given a platform to spew your nonsensical venom because you are a disgusting, racist individual. To claim that Republicans only care about Latinos as "tokens" when you know that the Democrats only claim to care in order to get their vote is disengenuous to say the least. No, I'm not a Republican. I am an Independent, but I know that both parties use the concerns of minorities to gain their vote. We are all suppose to be Americans, not Latino-Americans, African-Americans, etc.

4 likes, 10 dislikes
Posted by Chuck on 02/16/2012 at 3:06 AM

Re: “Ask a Mexican!

Dear Mexican, Why do you always resort to calling people names like, piedejo whenever they disagree with you, especially on the matter of illegal immigration? Also, it is not malice that determines whether a crime is a felony or misdemeanor. In addition, just because a crime is not committed with malice does not make it any less a crime.

Posted by Chuck on 07/29/2011 at 12:55 PM

Re: “¡Ask a Mexican!

Dear Mexican, Your argument that it's too expensive and time consuming for Mexicans to legally immigrate to the U.S. has no basis in logic or fact. According to your logic, Mexicans can't afford to pay "a couple thousand dollars," and wait for what could be years to migrate legally, but they are perfectly willing and apparently able to pay "thousands of dollars in smuggling fees and subject themselves to the terrorizing whims of coyotes." This makes no sense. So, let's see if I've got this right. Because they can't afford to "waste years in poverty" or pay what is required to immigrate legally, you think it's alright to break our laws and even steal someone Else's identity which enables them to work here illegally, and possibly obtain government benefits because the conditions in their own country are just too inhumane. In addition, you think, "American jobs for Americans only is creating "an insular, xenophobic economy that keeps away all foreign labor" some how equates to wanting "nothing to do with foreign investors." Well, this is what I think. You sir, and others of your ilk are the very same people who seek open borders and a one world government, and are attempting to destroy this country by turning it into a third-world Marxist, Socialist, Communist, Banana-Republic. Therefore, I feel I must warn you. It will be a cold day in Hell before real Americans let you and your Marxist, Socialist, Progressive, Democrats get away with destroying this country. Oh, and by the way, I am a Libertarian.

Posted by Chuck on 06/09/2011 at 5:25 AM

Re: “Messina

First, I feel I need to correct your assertion that "The freedom to practice—or not practice—a particular religion is one of the privileges we enjoy in the United States." Freedom of religion is not a privilege, it is a right guaranteed under the Constitution in the 1st Amendment of the Bill of Rights, which states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishing of a religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." There's nothing in the Constitution or the 1st Amendment that prohibits the government from establishing "A National Day of Prayer." In addition, the establishment of "A Day of Prayer," either by a state or the federal government does not violate the individuals' right or "freedom to practice—or not practice—a particular religion." We can still "gather at churches, synagogues, mosques or even parks to exercise our beliefs," and we can still "choose whether or not we pray or believe in God."

There's no violation of the "Establishment Clause of the First Amendment ("Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion ..."), because Congress is not making a law respecting the establishment of a religion. Rather, what Congress is doing is designating a particular day for individuals to pray, if they choose to pray. It is clear that the "Establishment Clause of the First Amendment" is meant to prohibit Congress from making a law that would establish a religion. It does not prohibit Congress from making a law to honor all religions, which is what a National Day of Prayer does, nor does it prohibit any state from making a law that would either establish a particular religion, prohibit a particular religion or prohibit all religions. Moreover, the "Establishment Clause of the First Amendment" specifically refers only to Congress, or the federal government, not the states.

After all, establishing a "National Day of Prayer" does not force anybody to pray, or to believe in God or anything else. However, according to you and the FFRF it's okay for everyone else to be forced to accept your beliefs, even though what Congress has done clearly does not violate the Constitution.

Posted by Chuck on 05/05/2011 at 5:28 AM

Re: “Guest Commentary

I suggest Chemerinsky and Kleiner read the Constitution before making such ridiculous claims.

0 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by Chuck on 04/08/2011 at 2:38 AM

Re: “Guest Commentary

Although it is true that Article VI of the Constitution provides that the "Constitution, and laws and treaties made pursuant to it, are the supreme law of the land," there are no provisions within Article VI or anywhere else in the Constitution granting the federal government the power to establish the FBI or any other unconstitutional agency.
The key word here is pursuant. In other words, the laws and treaties must first be pursuant to the Constitution. The laws and treaties must be legal under under the Constitution. In other words, the "Supremacy Clause" is effective only when the federal government is acting pursuant to the authority delegated to it by the United States Constitution, and federal laws enacted by Congress are founded on the delegated authority provided by the United States Constitution.



Posted by Chuck on 04/08/2011 at 2:21 AM

Re: “Being Baldenegro

This is in response to chassbass. Regarding your statement about being reminded of MLK and what you termed "Institutional Hateism," as being a more appropriate term than racism. Apparently, you prefer replacing the term "Institutional Racism," which was perpetrated by the government with "Institutional Hateism." However, you obviously are unaware of what is actually being taught in these, so called, "ethnic studies" classes. I'm sure that if you were aware, you would have to agree that, today, these Chicano or "ethnic studies" classes are the real institutions of hate and racism. As to your statement about all Americans being immigrants, well maybe you are an immigrant, but you cannot speak for all Americans. As a matter of fact, we are not all immigrants. Although we may all be descendants of immigrants, the majority of all Americans alive today are not immigrants because they were born here. I for one am not an immigrant. I was born in the United States, therefore I am a Native American. It amazes me how many people will support someting they really know very little about when attempting to be politically correct. I guess it's more important to be politically correct than to investigate the facts, or accept the truth.

1 like, 2 dislikes
Posted by Chuck on 03/31/2011 at 7:53 PM

All Comments »

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.
 

© 2016 Tucson Weekly | 7225 Mona Lisa Rd. Ste. 125, Tucson AZ 85741 | (520) 797-4384 | Powered by Foundation