For the make-or-break SCOTUS decision of, likely, the past thirty years.

On par with Brown v Board of Education. Roe v Wade.

We as Conservatives will be broken, or we will be — at least — partially vindicated.

It’s that important.

BZ

Welcome to WordPress. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!

[Sorry: Politics kicked aside for today. –BZ]

I think I’m done.

No; I know I’m done.

Everything, everywhere, requires a “username” and a “password.”

Everyone and everything, from grocery stores to bookstores, additionally, want you to sign up for their individual “cards.” I don’t have a key-ring or a wallet large enough. Nor am I going to get one.

I’m done. No more information or cards or usernames or passwords unless I ABSOLUTELY have to have one, say, for my credit card provider. And I blast RADIO SHACK for starting this bullshit. Even when paying cash, years ago, they would require a phone number or a zip code. Which is why I STOPPED purchasing ANYthing at RADIO SHACK.

I’m done with, for starters, blogs that require a username and password. If I don’t already read you and already have one of those with you, then I’m deleting you in my The Usual Suspects blogroll. I’m just done.

I’m not just at “threshold” — I’m beyond threshold.

I’m username’d and password’d and card’d OUT.

And — of course — you absolutely cannot use the same username or password from one site or blip or blog from one to another or you’re going straight to Hell. Because, naturally, the sites simply won’t let you do that. Here is essentially what each and every site would want for your password:

845JNVNMVBP-Q989IEHYFN VHkevnqp-8oenbn v-p84jmkbmqw-89e4nngv0q87njl.b-7NVH679039W3Ghvpq8vnn8884

Some sites might even think this a “weak” password.

So go ahead. Try to remember that crap.

I reflect my philosophy on my own blog.

Trolls make me, now and then, go on and off Comment Moderation. But, because I HATE word verification, you won’t see me forcing you to trudge through that inane bullshit.

So, to those of you whom I’ve deleted or to whom I will no longer read and/or comment: sorry. But life is already too terribly complicated for me. If I can’t figure your site or comments out in five seconds, I’m gone. I don’t have that many years left. No one’s site is worth my frustration. I’m just a: curmudgeon. Admitted.

I’ve actually gotten to the point where I have to carry a small notebook around with me which is alphabetically tabbed and contains NOTHING but usernames, passwords, addresses, URLs and phone numbers of the essential agencies and sites in my life.

Finally:

How do YOU handle all this burgeoning username and password garbage? How do you frigging COPE?

Or do you even try anymore?

I’m at my wit’s end. What about you?

BZ

Just as he literally threatened SCOTUS not so long ago. As on April 3rd of this year.

From the FinancialTimes.com:

It was the first sign that beyond the White House’s staunch defence of the Affordable Care Act Mr Obama is prepared to use the law as a rallying cry on the campaign trail. It is a risky strategy: about half the country remains opposed to the legislation, although most voters like the consumer protections that are guaranteed under the law.

With Justice Elena Kagan recusing herself, SCOTUS delivered a 5-to-3 ruling in re Arizona’s SB 1070 — as in Arizona v United States.

The provision requiring police to conduct immigration checks on those they arrest or stop for questioning — and they suspect as illegal — was upheld. From the Jurist.org:

Four specific provisions of the law were at issue: Section 2(B), which requires police officers to check the immigration status of anyone whom they arrest and allows police to stop and arrest anyone whom they believe to be an illegal immigrant; Section 3, which makes it a crime for someone even to be in the state without valid immigration papers; Section 5(C), which makes it a crime to apply for or hold a job in Arizona without proper papers; and Section 6, which gives a police officer the power to arrest an individual, without a warrant, whom the officer believes has committed a crime that could cause him or her to be deported, no matter where the crime may have occurred.

Everything else: struck down. Essentially the SCOTUS indicated that illegal immigration enforcement falls within the scope of federal authority only. The states must step aside and shut up.

In my opinion, this is merely one branch of the Fed, the Judicial [Executive, Legislative, Judicial], simply standing up for itself and the other two. In my view, to be expected.

Which is good if your version of the federal government believes in enforcing laws extant. Bad if your federal government involves Mr Obama.

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer crowed about the ruling in a positive fashion. I submit: she couldn’t be more wrong. Immigrant-rights advocates cried foul. They couldn’t be more wrong either.

Because, as a direct result of this ruling, Janet Napolitano declared immediately:

Homeland Security Suspends Immigration Enforcement Program For Arizona Officers

By Hernán Rozemberg

The Department of Homeland Security is suspending the program it uses to deputize local, county and state law enforcement officers in Arizona so they can double up as immigration agents.

The move affects only Arizona and it was made in direct reaction to the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on Monday regarding Arizona’s controversial immigration laws.

But with Homeland Security’s suspension of the program — called 287(g) from its section in immigration law — no future officers in Arizona will be given the training to arrest immigrants solely on their immigration status.

You’ll enjoy this. Further:

Homeland Security would not comment on the record. An official on background indicated that ICE agents in Arizona have been instructed not to respond for calls for assistance from local enforcement unless the person in question is a convicted criminal, was just caught crossing the border illegally or is a repeat illegal border crosser.

Not only will no more officers be trained in Arizona, but already existing agreements with state law enforcement agencies were also nixed, according to the Homeland Security official.

Because I’m a “bottom line” kind of individual, what did this ruling actually do, and what does it mean?

It means that Arizona peace officers can, for example, stop vehicles and inquire into immigration legality. But, once a potential illegal Mexican or otherwise is found, it can do nothing further.

Because the federal government has decided to ignore Arizona and its MOUs or JPAs.

It has kicked Arizona to the curb. It is now refusing to acknowledge Arizona or its ability to bring illegals to light. It is refusing to deal with illegals unearthed by Arizona.

The federal government, in a nutshell, is refusing to enforce its own laws. It has overtly suspended immigration enforcement in Arizona. By targeting Arizona. For having the balls to challenge federal authority. And challenging the US government to enforce its own laws.

Yet, with that in mind, Maricopa County (AZ) Sheriff Joe Arpaio weighs in during an interview with Fox’s Neil Cavuto:

Say what you will about Joe Arpaio, he clearly has balls the size of grapefruit.

God bless you, Sheriff Arpaio. You’re one of a few Actual Americans left in this country’s governments.

BZ