« Kagan no. Sid Thomas, yes. pl | Main | Hysterical Zionist Children? »

12 May 2010

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Kim Viner

Col - If you are really intending to spend over $2 grand on a pair of boots, I'd suggest that you may be just a little addled. But that is just the opinion of a 5th generation Wyomingite. Around here we have a saying, "All hat and no cattle." Dare I say this may also apply to boots. Cowboy humor you know!

Patrick Lang

Kim Viner

I own about 20 pair. It's only money. pl

Jackie

Col.,
Please keep the blue. It's really pretty. I'm not into cowboy boots, but that's a fine looking pair.

Nancy K

Col Lang, I love those boots, and think the blue looks great. My husband and I are leaving for Nicaragua soon and supposedly they are famous for boots also.
I would like to see my husband in a pair but some how I don't think it will happen.

rjj

as they were wont to say in days of yore, "Hubba hubba ding ding"

Kerim

Hi Pat,

a number of years ago I read in your biography that you had a keen interest in boots. I was wondering when this would come up in a thread...
Wonderful!
For some time now I've been thinking about getting a pair made. Didn't know Rocketbuster. Have had various Tony Mora pairs for the last 15 years.
Any advice on bootmakers welcome!
On another note: thanks for a great forum and the chosen topics.
Best,
Kerim

Patrick Lang

Kerim

My usual buy is Lucchese, but I have some boots from other makers as well. pl

Redhand

I did not know about "Rocketbuster" until I Googled it after your post. I should get out more I suppose: only in Texas.

Knowing something of the Southwest, I can imagine a male getting away with wearing them, but here in the Northeast I'm afraid those boots would be considered rather "gay." So, as fashion statement I wouldn't be caught dead wearing them, I don't care how much they cost.

Which brings me to one of the most obscenely funny posts ever at "America's Finest News Source," the one that includes the deathless quote: "And where did he get those fantastic boots?"

If this post doesn't make it past moderation I'll understand. No offense intended. It just struck me . . . .

Andy

I think the blue is actually turquoise, which would look smashing with a silver and turquoise bolo tie.

Jackie

A while back I was at a grocery store favored by the hispanics in the area. The guy in the check out in front of me had on a pair of light colored boots and the toe must have been 4-5 inches long. Now, that was a pair of cockroach killers!

Someone told me later that that kind of toe means they like to dance. I'm not sure about that.

grae castle

i like boots; i have a pair of buffalo that i love.

i also have a brother that was born in them. those are a little much for me to see myself in, but they are beautiful. undoubetdly. my brother would wear them everyday.

i agree with jackie, keep the blue.

only slightly off topic (but not really), i wonder if all "artisans" were/are "legal".

i hate big brother, but recognize he's everywhere - including here. however, i've also always thought a national id card was a good thing.

lately (the past 20 or so years), my belief in a benevolent biggest brother has been subsumed by my adult realities - so i'm hesitant to advocate for that as a solution.

i tend to now look at what most of our visitors do for us and usually arrive at "if not for them, then who"??? i don't believe the answer any more is us...

i used to believe moving to a service economy was a good, and rightful, aspiration. now that we're here (more or less), i'm less convinced...

buy the boots and wear them where/when ever you damn well please. or, go with a different blue...

whatever you do, keep hosting.

R Whitman

The Arizona law, if allowed to go into effect will probably work and work very well. There will be a number of unintended consequences in addition to the wage inflation I have mentioned previously. Anyone care to speculate on what they will be??

BTW I have worn Lucchese boots for many years. The oldest ones in my closet are a pair of receeding square toe with a walking heel brown goat skins dating from 1974.

William R. Cumming

Just so their snake proof!

confusedponderer

That's one flamboyant pair of boots. It's really a pity that long pants would cover the most remarkable parts of it. I think that when choosing such a design, it ought to be colourful, just to make the point.

The Twisted Genius

Those boots... wow! In the words of Apu, "You magnificent bastard, I salute you!" I can't picture myself wearing them or any western boots for that matter.

I found the following passage in attached legal opinion to be eye opening.

"It should be noted that although an alien without legal authorization to be in the country is deportable under the INA, unlawful presence is not a crime under either federal or Arizona law."

I would have thought otherwise. Employing and housing illegal aliens seems to fall under the same legal ambiguity. Going after the businesses that employ illegal aliens, as many of us have suggested, may be a futile effort. Those businesses have the money and lawyers to tie any enforcement effort up in court forever. If the federal government wants to claim immigration law under federal premption, they better stop acting like negligent absentee landlords of said laws.

Fred

No Sasquatch? Okay, a little too feminine. A custom fit to your foot would be great, but it would be better to do that in person so it fits your arch as well.

I do have issue with this item on page 2:
"...These powers are limited by
the rights owed to individuals under the Constitution, ..."

Shouldn't this be rights RETAINED, since the power of the federal government stems from the consent of the governed, our rights as citizens are inherent, they are not granted BY the government.

What are the applicable parts of the Arizona state constitution?

Patrick Lang

All

Somebody once asked me if I didn't feel vulnerable to accusations of gayness because of the boots. No. I don't. From here south manly men wear cowboy boots. I am often asked in elevators who the maker is for a given pair of boots. This is usually followed by a discussion of leathers, etc.

Brings to mind the Dos Equis commercial about the "most fascinating man in the world." Quote. "He wouldn't be ashamed to show his feminine side if he had one." Or, "his mother has a tattoo that says 'Son'." pl

euclildcreek

Col. Lang, I always envisioned you wearing combat boots and camo (with a .45) when gardening or walking the dog.

Patrick Lang

EC

No. Ostrich boots and a Baby Browning. pl

Andy

It's not just south of where you live - Men (and women) in the mountain west and desert southwest love them too.

Raymond

What are the chances of this bill being overturned?

Redhand

@ Col. Lang:

Somebody once asked me if I didn't feel vulnerable to accusations of gayness because of the boots. No. I don't.

I was almost afraid to submit my post because of this, but agree that "from [there] south manly men wear cowboy boots."

@ The Twisted Genius:

It should be noted that although an alien without legal authorization to be in the country is deportable under the INA, unlawful presence is not a crime under either federal or Arizona law."

I can't speak to Arizona "law," such as it is nowadays, but as an immigration lawyer I can tell you that "unlawful presence" under the INA is a legal concept that has only existed since 1996, and that it only applies once an alien has left the USA.

Accrue 180 days or more of "unlawful presence" (ULP in the trade) in the USA after you reach the age of 18 and you can't return for 3 years. Accrue 365 days or more of "unlawful presence" in the USA after you reach the age of 18 and you can't return for 10 years.

Both bars can only be overcome by a showing of "extreme hardship" to a qualifying relative sufficient to allow the alien to return.

Think about the perversity of this law for a moment or two: it forces illegals to stay in the shadows, yet creates a huge incentive for them to stay here. The 3/10 year bars do not apply at all so long as you remain in the USA.

N. Anderthal

The law is unconstitutional. To make it constitutional make EVERYONE carry papers stating they are citizens. If the law is that important then the majority of citizens will put up with the inconvenience. If you are stopped by a police officer you must present papers ... what's the harm?

As good neighbors, the surrounding states should have border checks for those entering AZ, to make sure ONLY US citizens enter AZ. Heck, have State Troopers at every airport check passengers heading to AZ and turn them away if they have no papers. AZ citizens will thank you for protecting their right to pay fair wages for labor intensive jobs.

Anschluss? I was thinking more of Lebensraum, the State of Sonora and the Commonwealth of Baja have a nice ring to it. If we take your people we will take the land to settle them in, comprende?

optimax

For those who haven't seen today's Bizarro comic strip:

http://www.seattlepi.com/fun/comic.asp?feature_id=Bizarro

Sidney O. Smith III

Fascinating analysis re: CRS. In all fairness, I think the Government report should have been titled, “Did the United States Government Fail the People of Arizona?”. It probably is a good idea to remember who signed the authors’ checks, but the legal analysis is worth a close look, at least to me.

In my opinion, border security and the Bill of Rights, particularly the 4th Amendment, are inextricably woven together. Without proper border security, the inevitably result will be an erosion of our 4th amendment rights. People, in part out of desperation, are trying to create de-facto border security by legislating more and more exceptions to 4th amendment guarantees, some of which may not pass constitutional muster.

When I write, “border security”, I am referring to that which affects not only illegal immigration but also drug trafficking as well as terrorism. The 9-11 hijackers breached our security and look what has happened to the US Constitution subsequently.

Based upon this assumption, one could reasonably argue that those who view securing borders (including ports) as our number one security priority are more inclined to want to preserve the guarantees traditionally embodied in our Bill of Rights. Those who prefer overseas adventures -- actually wars of conquest -- care nothing about preserving our constitutional rights and indeed are taking affirmative steps to create a fascist state under the unitary executive theory.

Again, once the borders are secured, or at least made our number one national security priority, then the American people should debate the issues concerning the legalization of drugs as well as illegals currently residing the US.

As for myself, I am for a path to naturalization. As for the legalization of drugs, I just dunno yet.

But I do believe James Brown’s song, King Heroin, linked below warrants consideration and helps people stay rooted in a reality that encompasses more than what one may encounter at some symposium.

Plus…as a laignappe…check out his boots. It’s the “spats” look…excellent.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07SWjWaOxc4

“For the white horse of heroin will drive you to hell….until you are dead. Dead, brother, dead.”

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
Blog powered by Typepad