Whining again about putting words in your mouth...'nope..you just dont get it, which is no surprise.

Their bias is no more than your bias that the fed arent doing the job..or my bias that I think the law in unconstitutiohnal..or the bias of some Whites who just dont like Hispanics.

Everyone has a bias...but you evidently think some are more biased than others.

Turn on the light, dimwit!

Uh no. That would not be true, but thats ok. If you really cannot see the difference between the two, thats fine.
Keep on pushing the same old tired partisan lines. Some here will cheer you on.

Of course, you know whats in the hearts of minds of every Hispanic person polled.

Just like you know whats in the hearts of minds of every constitutional expert or law enforcement officials who are concerned about the law...they are all motivated by politcal or financial interests.

No, you're not biased.

Cite for those left reading your dribble - or mine for that matter exactly where I said I know
Because I never did nor do I agree with your constant misrepresentations of my opinions. Is it too hard for you to just agree to disagree? Are you that small of a man that you cannot handle anyone else that doesn't agree with you? None of these issues are as black and white as you try to paint them.

Black and white would be...

...suggesting that if a Hispanic person is related to or knows an illegal, that would pretty much invalidate that poll info.

That would also be knowing whats in the hearts and minds of those Hispanic persons polled...and since you dont, it only demonstrates your own bias.

How much are you willing to personally pony up to do ENOUGH?

What are you dribbling about now?

Obama's 2011 proposed budget proposal (from Feb - before the AZ law) includes an increase to $3.6 billion to expand the number of Customs and Border Patrol officers....an increase to $1.6 billion for customs enforcement programs to identify and remove illegal aliens who commit crimes and $137 million more to expand immigration-related verification programs.

Completely irrelevant? Then lets put it to deficit reduction instead.

Which part were you incapable of understanding? Let me know, and I'll explain again. I'll even type it real slowly.

What is the relevance of your question. Why would I personally pay anything n addition to what I already pay the Fed Gov't to do the job they were elected and swore to do.

Given that a president's budget request doesnt matter as much as Congressional appropriations:

In 2007, discretionary spending on border security was $6.3 billion. When Democrats took control of Congress, discretionary spending on border security continued to rise year after year. It went to $7.9 billion in 2008; to $9.8 billion in 2009; and to $10.1 billion in fiscal year 2010.

Completely irrelevant?

Because you have espoused the concept of lowering taxes, but now you claim that not enough tax money is being spent to close the border and get illegal aliens out of our country. You even posted that you think spending should be cut evenly across the board. These seem to be conflicting positions, and I am merely asking for you to clarify.

Bullshit. You are being an asshole on purpose and we both know it.
:rant:
There is too much waste in our Gov't - across the board. I am not familiar enough with the inner machinations to give a comprehensive answer on where to cut/save/spend.
I can see that things are headed toward a very dangerous and potentially disastrous direction if we continue the path we are on.

This applies to more than just immigration. Its the direction and attitude of our leaders over the past decade or more. We are breeding a populous of entitlement. Who doesn't want something/everything for free? Well many are too ignorant and short-sighted to realize that it really isn't free. The cost is HUGE.
Much like the immigration issue. When one looks at the overall picture and the sheer number of people we allow to come here legally and illegally, it simply is not sustainable. We must control who comes into our country - period.
One area that needs to be addressed is how many we allow legally. Is it enough? Apparently not. Who set the number at what it is and why? How was that number determined? What is the process where are the bottlenecks ... Things need to be streamlined so that the legal path is more palatable to those who earnestly want to come here and become a part of this nation. Conversely, for those that want to simply feed off of us the penalties need to be clearly defined and swiftly meted out. Not tied up in months or years of red tape. Other countries have problems, other people have their issues. They need to fix their own problems - we cannot do it for the whole world. Actually we never could. No matter how noble that thought or gesture may have been. We need to get our own shit straight.
:rant:

I guess your definition of being an asshole is asking for clarification when someone is being a hypocrit. Gotcha.

But you posted
If you're "not familiar enough with the inner machinations to give a comprehensive answer on where to cut/save/spend" then shut the fuck up. IMHO, you just want to be the one who decides where to cut and where to spend more.

Who is "simply feeding off of us"? Who is enabling it? Who benefits? Who should you really be going after? How do you accomplish what you want to accomplish?

You are full of shit and we both know it.
So what you are saying is that anyone who doesn't have a comprehensive understanding of our gov't should STFU? Guess you won't be posting much anymore either.
Taking that to the next level would be telling those same people note to vote. You really are more stupider than even I thought.
You got that out of what I posted? You really need to learn how to read for comprehension.
You don't get to ask anymore questions - You must first elaborate upon the inner machinations of our Gov't and display your comprehensive knowledge thereof.

Your entire post was even less than what little I expected from you.