Wetback Hits Squad Car, Flees

"Scott en Aztlán" wrote:

> Effin' liberal media - why are they trying so hard to avoid mentioning
> that this guy is a wetback?
>
> " The man, ......... is a citizen of Mexico "

Doesn't seem to me like they're avoiding it.

It could be seen as the punchline in fact.

Graham

Scott en Aztlán wrote:
> Eeyore > said in
> rec.autos.driving:
>
> >> Effin' liberal media - why are they trying so hard to avoid mentioning
> >> that this guy is a wetback?
> >>
> >> " The man, ......... is a citizen of Mexico "
> >
> >Doesn't seem to me like they're avoiding it.
>
> The phase "illegal immigrant" (or its equivalent) does not appear
> anywhere in the article. Why are they afraid to call a spade a spade?

Citizen of Mexico <> illegal immigrant.

E.P.

Ed Pirrero wrote:
> Scott en Aztlán wrote:
> > Eeyore > said in
> > rec.autos.driving:
> >
> > >> Effin' liberal media - why are they trying so hard to avoid mentioning
> > >> that this guy is a wetback?
> > >>
> > >> " The man, ......... is a citizen of Mexico "
> > >
> > >Doesn't seem to me like they're avoiding it.
> >
> > The phase "illegal immigrant" (or its equivalent) does not appear
> > anywhere in the article. Why are they afraid to call a spade a spade?
>
> Citizen of Mexico <> illegal immigrant.
>
> E.P.

Odds are high that Scott is right, but there's always a chance you
might be right. *Some* Mexicans are here via proper procedure.

MLOM wrote:
> Ed Pirrero wrote:
> > Scott en Aztlán wrote:
> > > Eeyore > said in
> > > rec.autos.driving:
> > >
> > > >> Effin' liberal media - why are they trying so hard to avoid mentioning
> > > >> that this guy is a wetback?
> > > >>
> > > >> " The man, ......... is a citizen of Mexico "
> > > >
> > > >Doesn't seem to me like they're avoiding it.
> > >
> > > The phase "illegal immigrant" (or its equivalent) does not appear
> > > anywhere in the article. Why are they afraid to call a spade a spade?
> >
> > Citizen of Mexico <> illegal immigrant.
> >
> > E.P.
>
> Odds are high that Scott is right, but there's always a chance you
> might be right. *Some* Mexicans are here via proper procedure.

I agree - there are legal migrants from Mexico, but their numbers are
tiny in comparison to the illegals.

If the paper doesn't know the immigration status of the guy, then it
shouldn't print one. Scott's got a tough hill to climb to prove that
the paper knew about the guy's immigration status, then glossed it
over.

E.P.

In article . com>, MLOM wrote:
> Ed Pirrero wrote:

>> Citizen of Mexico <> illegal immigrant.

> Odds are high that Scott is right, but there's always a chance you
> might be right. *Some* Mexicans are here via proper procedure.

One would think those "some" would be likely to have a DL and insurance.

Scott en Aztlán wrote:
> "Ed Pirrero" > said in rec.autos.driving:
>
> >Citizen of Mexico <> illegal immigrant.
>
> You and I both know that these smarmy liberals would have gone out of
> their way to mention a valid visitor's visa if he'd had one. Besides,
> how many legitimate visitors to this country are buying old jalopies
> and driving them around without licenses or insurance?

So, you're saying the paper actually knows the status, and choses not
to print it?

How could you possibly know that?

I know natural-born citizens who drive without license and insurance.

E.P.

Scott en Aztlán wrote:
> "Ed Pirrero" > said in rec.autos.driving:
>
> >Citizen of Mexico <> illegal immigrant.
>
> You and I both know that these smarmy liberals would have gone out of
> their way to mention a valid visitor's visa if he'd had one. Besides,
> how many legitimate visitors to this country are buying old jalopies
> and driving them around without licenses or insurance?

So, you're saying the paper actually knows the status, and choses not
to print it?

How could you possibly know that?

I know natural-born citizens who drive without license and insurance.

E.P.