Post by: gatoveintisiete on January 10, 2018, 08:23:46 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 10, 2018, 10:21:17 PM
There’s only one plausible explanation. Body double. Can anyone account for Alec Baldwin’s whereabouts?
Dems are in a bit of a pickle. Trade DACA for a (partial) wall - make your activists crazy mad and help Trump keep a campaign promise. Refuse to trade DACA for a wall - show America that you care more about open borders than helping those “Dreamers,” and Trump still gets a valuable campaign issue.
Of course, any sensible person knows Option 1 is better than Option 2. If Papa Trump is gonna win either way, at least help the Dreamers.
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on January 10, 2018, 10:37:11 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiet on January 10, 2018, 10:48:20 PM
If you want to say mean republicans don’t want little brown people to be dacacized, you got clownsuited
If you want to stop legislation with the excuse that Trump will never sign it, you got clownsuited
If you wanted to say you want DACA but you really want to keep it as a midterm issue to flip congress,
You got clownsuited
If you wanted Trump to get defeated in the 2020 election, you got clown-suited
If you wanted to keep Trump from honoring his promise of a wall at all cost, you got clownsuited
Post by: 8manpick on January 10, 2018, 11:19:01 PM
Post by: cfbandyman on January 10, 2018, 11:27:56 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 11, 2018, 10:56:05 AM
Lol, like a wall, the biggest boondoggle ever, secures the border at all.
If it does. great. If it doesn't, the open border zealots have nothing to worry about! :cheers:
Post by: catastrophe on January 11, 2018, 11:21:12 AM
Five years ago I would not have believed in my wildest dreams self-proclaimed conservatives would be saying "hey let's spend like $50 billion on this thing and see if it helps with security. If not, oh well."
Post by: cfbandyman on January 11, 2018, 11:38:27 AM
Lol, like a wall, the biggest boondoggle ever, secures the border at all.
If it does. great. If it doesn't, the open border zealots have nothing to worry about! :cheers:
I am glad you are willing to pay a ton of money for nothing. So weird coming from a don't tax me and take my money person like you.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on January 11, 2018, 11:44:59 AM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 11, 2018, 01:48:22 PM
But seriously, I am loving the liberal butthurt packages in faux fiscal conservativism. Didn’t bat an eye at a trillion dollar “stimulus” package or the billions in federal bureaucratic bloat, but spending 20 bil on a wall over 10 years is going to BANKRUPT us.
Post by: DQ12 on January 11, 2018, 01:50:04 PM
Is Mexico still paying for wall? That was a promisethey for sure are.
Post by: wetwillie on January 11, 2018, 01:56:59 PM
Post by: catastrophe on January 11, 2018, 02:38:32 PM
But seriously, I am loving the liberal butthurt packages in faux fiscal conservativism. Didn’t bat an eye at a trillion dollar “stimulus” package or the billions in federal bureaucratic bloat, but spending 20 bil on a wall over 10 years is going to BANKRUPT us.
Don’t forget that some of us are actual conservatives who were pissed when Democrats pass stupid spending and are now pissed when Republicans do it.
It’s like you honestly believe the only option for “true conservatives” is to chortle Trump’s balls. Principles be damned.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 11, 2018, 02:44:50 PM
But seriously, I am loving the liberal butthurt packages in faux fiscal conservativism. Didn’t bat an eye at a trillion dollar “stimulus” package or the billions in federal bureaucratic bloat, but spending 20 bil on a wall over 10 years is going to BANKRUPT us.
Don’t forget that some of us are actual conservatives who were pissed when Democrats pass stupid spending and are now pissed when Republicans do it.
It’s like you honestly believe the only option for “true conservatives” is to chortle Trump’s balls. Principles be damned.
I don’t believe that. I also don’t believe you are a conservative.
Post by: wetwillie on January 11, 2018, 02:46:32 PM
Post by: catastrophe on January 11, 2018, 02:58:47 PM
But seriously, I am loving the liberal butthurt packages in faux fiscal conservativism. Didn’t bat an eye at a trillion dollar “stimulus” package or the billions in federal bureaucratic bloat, but spending 20 bil on a wall over 10 years is going to BANKRUPT us.
Don’t forget that some of us are actual conservatives who were pissed when Democrats pass stupid spending and are now pissed when Republicans do it.
It’s like you honestly believe the only option for “true conservatives” is to chortle Trump’s balls. Principles be damned.
I don’t believe that. I also don’t believe you are a conservative.
Fiscal conservative.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 11, 2018, 03:09:43 PM
But seriously, I am loving the liberal butthurt packages in faux fiscal conservativism. Didn’t bat an eye at a trillion dollar “stimulus” package or the billions in federal bureaucratic bloat, but spending 20 bil on a wall over 10 years is going to BANKRUPT us.
Don’t forget that some of us are actual conservatives who were pissed when Democrats pass stupid spending and are now pissed when Republicans do it.
It’s like you honestly believe the only option for “true conservatives” is to chortle Trump’s balls. Principles be damned.
I don’t believe that. I also don’t believe you are a conservative.
Fiscal conservative.
Right. I don't believe that.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on January 11, 2018, 03:17:13 PM
I hate wasteful spending, but I don’t think this is wasteful. I see real benefit to the wall coupled with additional border security manpower.
But seriously, I am loving the liberal butthurt packages in faux fiscal conservativism. Didn’t bat an eye at a trillion dollar “stimulus” package or the billions in federal bureaucratic bloat, but spending 20 bil on a wall over 10 years is going to BANKRUPT us.
It wasn't supposed to cost anything. That was an actual promise he made at least a dozen times.
Post by: 8manpick on January 11, 2018, 03:36:05 PM
I hate wasteful spending, but I don’t think this is wasteful. I see real benefit to the wall coupled with additional border security manpower.
But seriously, I am loving the liberal butthurt packages in faux fiscal conservativism. Didn’t bat an eye at a trillion dollar “stimulus” package or the billions in federal bureaucratic bloat, but spending 20 bil on a wall over 10 years is going to BANKRUPT us.
It wasn't supposed to cost anything. That was an actual promise he made at least a dozen times.
Seriously, not literally Dug
Post by: Kat Kid on January 11, 2018, 04:12:08 PM
Post by: The Big Train on January 11, 2018, 04:33:16 PM
Post by: puniraptor on January 11, 2018, 04:48:29 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiet on January 11, 2018, 05:28:23 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 11, 2018, 05:29:47 PM
Are we talking about the meeting where Trump talked about not wanting immigrants from "shithole" countries and complained we didn't get more from Norway?
Different meeting. And they are shithole countries. Which is why they left.
Post by: wetwillie on January 11, 2018, 05:35:03 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 11, 2018, 05:44:02 PM
Which countries outside of the USA would you consider to be not a shithole?
Lots.
Post by: wetwillie on January 11, 2018, 05:46:44 PM
Which countries outside of the USA would you consider to be not a shithole?
Lots.
Can you name one that's not predominately white?
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 11, 2018, 06:31:53 PM
Which countries outside of the USA would you consider to be not a shithole?
Lots.
Can you name one that's not predominately white?
Why?
Post by: The Big Train on January 11, 2018, 06:39:13 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 11, 2018, 07:24:17 PM
We have our answer guys
:lol: Guys! Hey guys! We have our answer.
Post by: bucket on January 11, 2018, 07:31:09 PM
I hate wasteful spending, but I don’t think this is wasteful. I see real benefit to the wall coupled with additional border security manpower.
But seriously, I am loving the liberal butthurt packages in faux fiscal conservativism. Didn’t bat an eye at a trillion dollar “stimulus” package or the billions in federal bureaucratic bloat, but spending 20 bil on a wall over 10 years is going to BANKRUPT us.
Clearly, you understand that liberals are pointing to the hypocrisy conservatives are exhibiting by being open to increasing the deficit now. If that wasn't enough, you even have Trump talking about bring back earmarks.
Personally, not that it matters, I believe deficits are necessary during recessions or economic lulls. We should work to reduce the deficit when the economy is humming. However, we're going to greatly disagree about what to cut from the budget.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on January 11, 2018, 07:41:01 PM
Post by: bucket on January 11, 2018, 08:21:23 PM
Post by: bucket on January 11, 2018, 08:22:18 PM
Are we talking about the meeting where Trump talked about not wanting immigrants from "shithole" countries and complained we didn't get more from Norway?
Different meeting. And they are shithole countries. Which is why they left.
https://twitter.com/FrankLuntz/status/951586174379835392
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 11, 2018, 08:36:29 PM
Also, I hear liberals whining all the time about how if only we were more like... [insert predominantly white Scandinavian country]. Never once heard any liberal wish we were more like a predominantly non-white country. What a pack of racists, am I right? I think we have our answer guys.
Post by: wetwillie on January 11, 2018, 08:40:36 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 11, 2018, 08:41:30 PM
I hate wasteful spending, but I don’t think this is wasteful. I see real benefit to the wall coupled with additional border security manpower.
But seriously, I am loving the liberal butthurt packages in faux fiscal conservativism. Didn’t bat an eye at a trillion dollar “stimulus” package or the billions in federal bureaucratic bloat, but spending 20 bil on a wall over 10 years is going to BANKRUPT us.
Clearly, you understand that liberals are pointing to the hypocrisy conservatives are exhibiting by being open to increasing the deficit now. If that wasn't enough, you even have Trump talking about bring back earmarks.
Personally, not that it matters, I believe deficits are necessary during recessions or economic lulls. We should work to reduce the deficit when the economy is humming. However, we're going to greatly disagree about what to cut from the budget.
First, please appreciate that there is a often a difference between conservatives and GOP politicians. Many Pub politicos are massive hypocrites on spending and deficits. Don’t tar me or most other conservatives with that brush. Favoring tax cuts is not hypocritical when our deficits are primarily driven by and should be addressed by spending. Favoring spending on things you find important, like border and military security, is not inconsistent with wanting to reduce spending overall. Again, I readily agree with you on most pub politicians. You do the best with the choices you’re given.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 11, 2018, 08:43:20 PM
the correct answer was Singapore or Hong Kong and you failed, sad really....
Actually, I chose not to answer a question premised on racism, and instead asked a one word question in response to try to get people to consider why the question was premised on racism. And you all failed. Sad really.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on January 11, 2018, 08:51:16 PM
Post by: treysolid on January 11, 2018, 09:02:35 PM
Post by: wetwillie on January 11, 2018, 09:04:03 PM
Post by: treysolid on January 11, 2018, 09:16:27 PM
Good grief the U.S is without a doubt the best place to live on planet earth and its not even remotely close.
by what metrics?
Post by: wetwillie on January 11, 2018, 09:22:30 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on January 11, 2018, 09:24:17 PM
Boys I think we can take the “who is a shithole country” and “who is gonna pay for the wall we said would never go up” as acknowledgement that Trump is kicking ass. It’s as close as you can get with children.
I am not wondering who is going to pay for the wall. Mexico is
Post by: gatoveintisiete on January 11, 2018, 09:26:45 PM
Boys I think we can take the “who is a shithole country” and “who is gonna pay for the wall we said would never go up” as acknowledgement that Trump is kicking ass. It’s as close as you can get with children.
I am not wondering who is going to pay for the wall. Mexico is
Yes you are correct
Post by: treysolid on January 11, 2018, 09:27:51 PM
The scoreboard metric
ok, so that adds vietnam and afghanistan to the list of countries better than us. what else?
Post by: wetwillie on January 11, 2018, 09:29:18 PM
Post by: The Big Train on January 11, 2018, 09:30:02 PM
Which countries outside of the USA would you consider to be not a shithole?
Lots.
Can you name one that's not predominately white?
Why?
This is a public, honest request, which you will not answer, can't say for sure why? Because you are a 'lawyer' and all :jerk:
If you don’t think Nigeria is a crap hole, move there. My goodness.
Also, I hear liberals whining all the time about how if only we were more like... [insert predominantly white Scandinavian country]. Never once heard any liberal wish we were more like a predominantly non-white country. What a pack of racists, am I right? I think we have our answer guys.
Have you been there? Do they just live in huts?
the correct answer was Singapore or Hong Kong and you failed, sad really....
Actually, I chose not to answer a question premised on racism, and instead asked a one word question in response to try to get people to consider why the question was premised on racism. And you all failed. Sad really.
The racist who lives in America in a gated community(probably, not confirmed), who agrees 100% with the President, who also sends his kids to public schools(ONLY because there are no students WHO CAUSE disruptions). Out of all of this, he wants more brown/black people here? Right???????
Hey KSUW, I'm talking out you, HINT HINT
Post by: Dugout DickStone on January 11, 2018, 09:30:37 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on January 11, 2018, 09:32:07 PM
The scoreboard metric
ok, so that adds vietnam and afghanistan to the list of countries better than us. what else?
uh no
Post by: treysolid on January 11, 2018, 09:39:54 PM
Love it or leave it treysolid, we are the best the world has ever known and people will do anything to get here.
just not swedes, or norwegians, or danes, or spaniards, or new zealanders, or icelanders, or austrians, or australians, or the swiss...
Post by: gatoveintisiete on January 11, 2018, 09:41:12 PM
Post by: wetwillie on January 11, 2018, 09:48:57 PM
Love it or leave it treysolid, we are the best the world has ever known and people will do anything to get here.
just not swedes, or norwegians, or danes, or spaniards, or new zealanders, or icelanders, or austrians, or australians, or the swiss...
Quote
More Swedish residents chose to leave the Nordic nation to live in other countries in 2015 than at any other time in the last 160 years, freshly released figures suggest.
Quote
The United States featured at the top of the table, with 150,000 Swedes following in the footsteps of their ancestors. Meanwhile 90,000 are understood to live in the UK, with a similar figure settling in sunny Spain. Other warm climes including Thailand, France and Italy were among the leading ten choices.
Someone get the body bag :lol:
Post by: renocat on January 11, 2018, 10:04:07 PM
Post by: Institutional Control on January 12, 2018, 06:28:36 AM
But seriously, I am loving the liberal butthurt packages in faux fiscal conservativism. Didn’t bat an eye at a trillion dollar “stimulus” package or the billions in federal bureaucratic bloat, but spending 20 bil on a wall over 10 years is going to BANKRUPT us.
Don’t forget that some of us are actual conservatives who were pissed when Democrats pass stupid spending and are now pissed when Republicans do it.
It’s like you honestly believe the only option for “true conservatives” is to chortle Trump’s balls. Principles be damned.
I don’t believe that. I also don’t believe you are a conservative.
Fiscal conservative.
Right. I don't believe that.
It is possible to be conservative without being an extremist like yourself.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 12, 2018, 08:48:33 AM
The scoreboard metric
ok, so that adds vietnam and afghanistan to the list of countries better than us. what else?
The fun thing about liberals playing the “lets call everyone who doesn’t think like me a racist” game is that it leads them increasingly bizarre statements, like the above. It’s adorable.
Post by: treysolid on January 12, 2018, 08:49:59 AM
Love it or leave it treysolid, we are the best the world has ever known and people will do anything to get here.
just not swedes, or norwegians, or danes, or spaniards, or new zealanders, or icelanders, or austrians, or australians, or the swiss...QuoteMore Swedish residents chose to leave the Nordic nation to live in other countries in 2015 than at any other time in the last 160 years, freshly released figures suggest.QuoteThe United States featured at the top of the table, with 150,000 Swedes following in the footsteps of their ancestors. Meanwhile 90,000 are understood to live in the UK, with a similar figure settling in sunny Spain. Other warm climes including Thailand, France and Italy were among the leading ten choices.
Someone get the body bag :lol:
So 180,000 Swedes chose the UK and Spain, and 150,000 chose the US. Makes sense - both of those countries have a higher quality of life than the US.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 12, 2018, 08:52:19 AM
But seriously, I am loving the liberal butthurt packages in faux fiscal conservativism. Didn’t bat an eye at a trillion dollar “stimulus” package or the billions in federal bureaucratic bloat, but spending 20 bil on a wall over 10 years is going to BANKRUPT us.
Don’t forget that some of us are actual conservatives who were pissed when Democrats pass stupid spending and are now pissed when Republicans do it.
It’s like you honestly believe the only option for “true conservatives” is to chortle Trump’s balls. Principles be damned.
I don’t believe that. I also don’t believe you are a conservative.
Fiscal conservative.
Right. I don't believe that.
It is possible to be conservative without being an extremist like yourself.
Post a few quotes of conservative things you’ve posted on this board. I’m not saying you haven’t - just that I honestly can’t think of any and I’m not sure what I would search for.
Post by: treysolid on January 12, 2018, 08:53:23 AM
The scoreboard metric
ok, so that adds vietnam and afghanistan to the list of countries better than us. what else?
The fun thing about liberals playing the “lets call everyone who doesn’t think like me a racist” game is that it leads them increasingly bizarre statements, like the above. It’s adorable.
Who was I calling a racist? If you think (like ww does) that America is simply better than every other country because we win wars, then by that logic we aren't better than Vietnam or Afghanistan.
Post by: wetwillie on January 12, 2018, 09:07:34 AM
Post by: Institutional Control on January 12, 2018, 09:35:48 AM
But seriously, I am loving the liberal butthurt packages in faux fiscal conservativism. Didn’t bat an eye at a trillion dollar “stimulus” package or the billions in federal bureaucratic bloat, but spending 20 bil on a wall over 10 years is going to BANKRUPT us.
Don’t forget that some of us are actual conservatives who were pissed when Democrats pass stupid spending and are now pissed when Republicans do it.
It’s like you honestly believe the only option for “true conservatives” is to chortle Trump’s balls. Principles be damned.
I don’t believe that. I also don’t believe you are a conservative.
Fiscal conservative.
Right. I don't believe that.
It is possible to be conservative without being an extremist like yourself.
Post a few quotes of conservative things you’ve posted on this board. I’m not saying you haven’t - just that I honestly can’t think of any and I’m not sure what I would search for.
I'm a left leaning moderate but catastrophe has absolutely made posts indicating he's conservative.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 12, 2018, 09:40:55 AM
The scoreboard metric
ok, so that adds vietnam and afghanistan to the list of countries better than us. what else?
The fun thing about liberals playing the “lets call everyone who doesn’t think like me a racist” game is that it leads them increasingly bizarre statements, like the above. It’s adorable.
Who was I calling a racist? If you think (like ww does) that America is simply better than every other country because we win wars, then by that logic we aren't better than Vietnam or Afghanistan.
K. I don't think that's what WW was saying. And if you weren't calling anyone a racist, my apologies.
Anyone can cherry pick one statistic or another but all things considered America is better than every other country in the world. This isn't seriously debatable. We enjoy one of the highest standard of livings overall. The other countries with a GDP per capita even close to (or higher) than us have significantly smaller and less ethnically diverse populations and do not import poverty nearly at our level. Even our "poor" enjoy a standard of living significantly better than the poor in developing (aka shithole) countries.
We are the pinnacle of scientific achievement and are still the only country to have sent men to the moon (we did this 50 years ago, btw). You may recall that we liberated an entire continent from a genocidal maniac a while back. We've got the best music, the best movies, the best indoor plumbing. We enjoy relatively great freedom and tax our citizens at relatively low rates. We drive bigger cars and live in bigger homes and enjoy a far bigger diversity of goods and services to choose from than most countries.
Take it all together, warts and all, it's tough to find anybody who's better than the US of A.
Post by: wetwillie on January 12, 2018, 09:52:57 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on January 12, 2018, 09:54:59 AM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on January 12, 2018, 10:01:37 AM
Post by: wetwillie on January 12, 2018, 10:07:21 AM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on January 12, 2018, 10:12:39 AM
The people coming from the countries Trump doesn't want are incredibly bright and have crazy work ethics, it's like saying bill self wouldn't take a 5 star because he was from eudora
El Salvador?
Post by: MakeItRain on January 12, 2018, 10:17:01 AM
If you don’t think Nigeria is a crap hole, move there. My goodness.
Also, I hear liberals whining all the time about how if only we were more like... [insert predominantly white Scandinavian country]. Never once heard any liberal wish we were more like a predominantly non-white country. What a pack of racists, am I right? I think we have our answer guys.
Goddamn, this rough rider is so racist he is comfortable shitting all over an African nation without even doing 2 minutes of research. KSUW only thinks it's a shitty place because it's majority niggers.
Nigeria has the 22nd highest GDP, the only higher GDP out of the five Scandinavian countries is Sweden at 21. Nigeria has a higher GDP than Poland, Belgium, Ireland, Portugal, New Zealand, Hong Kong, UAE, Singapore, Austria, etc.
Post by: MakeItRain on January 12, 2018, 10:21:06 AM
(https://i.onthe.io/vllkyt2k9vvtvn5i5g.a8411a86.jpg)
Post by: puniraptor on January 12, 2018, 10:46:00 AM
Protip: the issue isn't that he called some countries shitholes, it's that he thinks because someone lives in a shithole they are not worthy of immigrating to America.
exactly
america isnt about where youre from
its about where you want to go
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 12, 2018, 10:48:27 AM
Beyond the racism, you are talking out of your ass. Posting pictures of the Lagos financial district is utterly meaningless. There are pockets of extreme wealth, often based on oil, found in many shithole countries. Lagos is consistently ranked as one of the absolute worst major cities to live. On the planet.
I have a friend born and raised in Nigeria. He’s actually back there right now for the holiday. Took his kids with him for the first time. His village still gets its water from a well. No indoor plumbing. They do at least have some spotty cell coverage if you drive in to the nearest town.
But you don’t need to take my personal anecdotes. You could actually do some research.
Stop being such an ignorant racist hate monger.
Post by: star seed 7 on January 12, 2018, 10:50:16 AM
Post by: treysolid on January 12, 2018, 10:59:56 AM
Win wars? What on earth?
What else could you possibly mean by "scoreboard"?
Post by: renocat on January 12, 2018, 11:00:15 AM
Post by: Trim on January 12, 2018, 11:03:20 AM
Win wars? What on earth?
What else could you possibly mean by "scoreboard"?
I take it to mean how the rest of the world is enthralled with american culture. Things like how in soccer games in Europe, the ads on the field are for coke and mcdonalds, and that american boy bands can go to asia and be mobbed in malls while their pop stars are largely unrecognized here. You know, important stuff.
Post by: Institutional Control on January 12, 2018, 11:05:34 AM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: wetwillie on January 12, 2018, 11:05:56 AM
Win wars? What on earth?
What else could you possibly mean by "scoreboard"?
Our currency is the basis for the world economy, we have the biggest GDP, our standard of living is the best in the world etc. No other country on earth affords you the opportunity to go from having nothing to being wealthy like the US does. It's why winners come here, because they know they can win.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 12, 2018, 11:08:13 AM
If you only let in smart immigrants they’ll take all the good jobs.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Huh. Isn't it kind of racist to support importing poorly educated brown people (as opposed to highly skilled brown people) to work all of our crap jobs?
Post by: renocat on January 12, 2018, 11:09:19 AM
Minimum wage slavery.If you only let in smart immigrants they’ll take all the good jobs.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Isn't it kind of racist to support importing poorly educated brown people to work all of our crap jobs?
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 12, 2018, 11:13:33 AM
Protip: the issue isn't that he called some countries shitholes, it's that he thinks because someone lives in a shithole they are not worthy of immigrating to America.
exactly
america isnt about where youre from
its about where you want to go
That's a nice sentiment, and I agree to an extent. But we could still stand to be a bit more selective in our immigration policies. Our immigration policies currently favor the importation of poverty (and poverty's associated ills, like crime) over skill. Glad a few folks are least walking back from arguing there aren't a lot of shithole countries in the world. Progress.
Post by: treysolid on January 12, 2018, 11:14:24 AM
The scoreboard metric
ok, so that adds vietnam and afghanistan to the list of countries better than us. what else?
The fun thing about liberals playing the “lets call everyone who doesn’t think like me a racist” game is that it leads them increasingly bizarre statements, like the above. It’s adorable.
Who was I calling a racist? If you think (like ww does) that America is simply better than every other country because we win wars, then by that logic we aren't better than Vietnam or Afghanistan.
K. I don't think that's what WW was saying. And if you weren't calling anyone a racist, my apologies.
Anyone can cherry pick one statistic or another but all things considered America is better than every other country in the world. This isn't seriously debatable. We enjoy one of the highest standard of livings overall. The other countries with a GDP per capita even close to (or higher) than us have significantly smaller and less ethnically diverse populations and do not import poverty nearly at our level. Even our "poor" enjoy a standard of living significantly better than the poor in developing (aka shithole) countries.
We are the pinnacle of scientific achievement and are still the only country to have sent men to the moon (we did this 50 years ago, btw). You may recall that we liberated an entire continent from a genocidal maniac a while back. We've got the best music, the best movies, the best indoor plumbing. We enjoy relatively great freedom and tax our citizens at relatively low rates. We drive bigger cars and live in bigger homes and enjoy a far bigger diversity of goods and services to choose from than most countries.
Take it all together, warts and all, it's tough to find anybody who's better than the US of A.
There's a lot of false assumptions here. You assume that people from other parts of the world want the same things that Americans want. Based on an accumulation of a whole bunch of different metrics, the quality of life that America provides it's citizens is 19th-best in the world. This whole mindset is the reason we continue to slide down in terms of infant mortality rate, life-expectancy and education.
Post by: treysolid on January 12, 2018, 11:16:58 AM
Win wars? What on earth?
What else could you possibly mean by "scoreboard"?
Our currency is the basis for the world economy, we have the biggest GDP, our standard of living is the best in the world etc. No other country on earth affords you the opportunity to go from having nothing to being wealthy like the US does. It's why winners come here, because they know they can win.
No! We're not! We're only 19th-best.
Post by: Trim on January 12, 2018, 11:18:03 AM
Protip: the issue isn't that he called some countries shitholes, it's that he thinks because someone lives in a shithole they are not worthy of immigrating to America.
exactly
america isnt about where youre from
its about where you want to go
That's a nice sentiment, and I agree to an extent. But we could still stand to be a bit more selective in our immigration policies. Our immigration policies currently favor the importation of poverty (and poverty's associated ills, like crime) over skill. Glad a few folks are least walking back from arguing there aren't a lot of shithole countries in the world. Progress.
Should also start merit-based deportation of americans.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 12, 2018, 11:21:11 AM
The scoreboard metric
ok, so that adds vietnam and afghanistan to the list of countries better than us. what else?
The fun thing about liberals playing the “lets call everyone who doesn’t think like me a racist” game is that it leads them increasingly bizarre statements, like the above. It’s adorable.
Who was I calling a racist? If you think (like ww does) that America is simply better than every other country because we win wars, then by that logic we aren't better than Vietnam or Afghanistan.
K. I don't think that's what WW was saying. And if you weren't calling anyone a racist, my apologies.
Anyone can cherry pick one statistic or another but all things considered America is better than every other country in the world. This isn't seriously debatable. We enjoy one of the highest standard of livings overall. The other countries with a GDP per capita even close to (or higher) than us have significantly smaller and less ethnically diverse populations and do not import poverty nearly at our level. Even our "poor" enjoy a standard of living significantly better than the poor in developing (aka shithole) countries.
We are the pinnacle of scientific achievement and are still the only country to have sent men to the moon (we did this 50 years ago, btw). You may recall that we liberated an entire continent from a genocidal maniac a while back. We've got the best music, the best movies, the best indoor plumbing. We enjoy relatively great freedom and tax our citizens at relatively low rates. We drive bigger cars and live in bigger homes and enjoy a far bigger diversity of goods and services to choose from than most countries.
Take it all together, warts and all, it's tough to find anybody who's better than the US of A.
There's a lot of false assumptions here. You assume that people from other parts of the world want the same things that Americans want. Based on an accumulation of a whole bunch of different metrics, the quality of life that America provides it's citizens is 19th-best in the world. This whole mindset is the reason we continue to slide down in terms of infant mortality rate, life-expectancy and education.
Oh good heavens.... the old "infant mortality rate" myth resurfaces. A favorite of liberals. And yes, I do assume people from other parts of the world want what we have, which is why so many are trying to get in. A lot of people also don't know what they're missing out on. I can say, objectively speaking, any sane person would take the size of American cars and homes over what they have to settle for in Europe, if they could. My parents host foreign military officers from these "enlightened" NATO European countries every year. When they arrive, they buy a car. They rent a house. They take road trips. They all buy grills and BBQ sauce by the case to ship home when they leave (not shitting you). They effing love it here. These folks actually have a pretty decent standard of living as military officers, and they all elect to extend their "tours" in the US if they possibly can. One of the families has a special needs child and the wife actually cried when it was time to go home to Denmark with its supposedly superior socialized medicine. The ability for her son to see specialists here was far far better. They're trying to come back.
So you can say "it's all relative." That's one of the most bedrock arguments of liberalisms. Except at the end of the day, it isn't. Not really.
Post by: wetwillie on January 12, 2018, 11:21:30 AM
Protip: the issue isn't that he called some countries shitholes, it's that he thinks because someone lives in a shithole they are not worthy of immigrating to America.
exactly
america isnt about where youre from
its about where you want to go
That's a nice sentiment, and I agree to an extent. But we could still stand to be a bit more selective in our immigration policies. Our immigration policies currently favor the importation of poverty (and poverty's associated ills, like crime) over skill. Glad a few folks are least walking back from arguing there aren't a lot of shithole countries in the world. Progress.
Should also start merit-based deportation of americans.
This would be amazing
Post by: MakeItRain on January 12, 2018, 11:21:56 AM
MIR, please take your racist claptrap elsewhere. Nobody wants to hear you spew your venom.
Beyond the racism, you are talking out of your ass. Posting pictures of the Lagos financial district is utterly meaningless. There are pockets of extreme wealth, often based on oil, found in many shithole countries. Lagos is consistently ranked as one of the absolute worst major cities to live. On the planet.
I have a friend born and raised in Nigeria. He’s actually back there right now for the holiday. Took his kids with him for the first time. His village still gets its water from a well. No indoor plumbing. They do at least have some spotty cell coverage if you drive in to the nearest town.
But you don’t need to take my personal anecdotes. You could actually do some research.
Stop being such an ignorant racist hate monger.
Awwwww look guys, KSUW has a black friend.
There are places in America without indoor plumbing and cell coverage, you ignorant racist prick.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 12, 2018, 11:25:23 AM
MIR, please take your racist claptrap elsewhere. Nobody wants to hear you spew your venom.
Beyond the racism, you are talking out of your ass. Posting pictures of the Lagos financial district is utterly meaningless. There are pockets of extreme wealth, often based on oil, found in many shithole countries. Lagos is consistently ranked as one of the absolute worst major cities to live. On the planet.
I have a friend born and raised in Nigeria. He’s actually back there right now for the holiday. Took his kids with him for the first time. His village still gets its water from a well. No indoor plumbing. They do at least have some spotty cell coverage if you drive in to the nearest town.
But you don’t need to take my personal anecdotes. You could actually do some research.
Stop being such an ignorant racist hate monger.
Awwwww look guys, KSUW has a black friend.
There are places in America without indoor plumbing and cell coverage, you ignorant racist prick.
I'm just gonna quote this here for posterity. MIR just compared Nigeria - a county with about 100 million people living on less than a $1 a day - to the United States.
Post by: MakeItRain on January 12, 2018, 11:26:55 AM
MIR, please take your racist claptrap elsewhere. Nobody wants to hear you spew your venom.
Beyond the racism, you are talking out of your ass. Posting pictures of the Lagos financial district is utterly meaningless. There are pockets of extreme wealth, often based on oil, found in many shithole countries. Lagos is consistently ranked as one of the absolute worst major cities to live. On the planet.
I have a friend born and raised in Nigeria. He’s actually back there right now for the holiday. Took his kids with him for the first time. His village still gets its water from a well. No indoor plumbing. They do at least have some spotty cell coverage if you drive in to the nearest town.
But you don’t need to take my personal anecdotes. You could actually do some research.
Stop being such an ignorant racist hate monger.
Awwwww look guys, KSUW has a black friend.
There are places in America without indoor plumbing and cell coverage, you ignorant racist prick.
I'm just gonna quote this here for posterity. MIR just compared Nigeria - a county with about 100 million people living on less than a $1 a day - to the United States.
:ROFL:
Post by: MakeItRain on January 12, 2018, 11:37:53 AM
Post by: treysolid on January 12, 2018, 11:40:54 AM
The scoreboard metric
ok, so that adds vietnam and afghanistan to the list of countries better than us. what else?
The fun thing about liberals playing the “lets call everyone who doesn’t think like me a racist” game is that it leads them increasingly bizarre statements, like the above. It’s adorable.
Who was I calling a racist? If you think (like ww does) that America is simply better than every other country because we win wars, then by that logic we aren't better than Vietnam or Afghanistan.
K. I don't think that's what WW was saying. And if you weren't calling anyone a racist, my apologies.
Anyone can cherry pick one statistic or another but all things considered America is better than every other country in the world. This isn't seriously debatable. We enjoy one of the highest standard of livings overall. The other countries with a GDP per capita even close to (or higher) than us have significantly smaller and less ethnically diverse populations and do not import poverty nearly at our level. Even our "poor" enjoy a standard of living significantly better than the poor in developing (aka shithole) countries.
We are the pinnacle of scientific achievement and are still the only country to have sent men to the moon (we did this 50 years ago, btw). You may recall that we liberated an entire continent from a genocidal maniac a while back. We've got the best music, the best movies, the best indoor plumbing. We enjoy relatively great freedom and tax our citizens at relatively low rates. We drive bigger cars and live in bigger homes and enjoy a far bigger diversity of goods and services to choose from than most countries.
Take it all together, warts and all, it's tough to find anybody who's better than the US of A.
There's a lot of false assumptions here. You assume that people from other parts of the world want the same things that Americans want. Based on an accumulation of a whole bunch of different metrics, the quality of life that America provides it's citizens is 19th-best in the world. This whole mindset is the reason we continue to slide down in terms of infant mortality rate, life-expectancy and education.
Oh good heavens.... the old "infant mortality rate" myth resurfaces see below. A favorite of liberals. And yes, I do assume people from other parts of the world want what we have, which is why so many are trying to get in or just trying not to get murdered in El Salvador and Honduras. A lot of people also don't know what they're missing out on Same can be said for you. I can say, objectively speaking, any sane person would take the size of American cars and homes over what they have to settle for in Europe, if they could. My parents host foreign military officers from these "enlightened" NATO European countries every year. When they arrive, they buy a car because they have to. They rent a house because that's what you do when you move somewhere new. They take road trips Imagine that! Living in a foreign country and wanting to get out and see the sights!. They all buy grills Cooking meat over a flame?! No one ever did that before America! and BBQ sauce by the case to ship home when they leave (not shitting you) you should tell them its just ketchup and brown sugar and a couple other things, they can make it really easily. They effing love it here. These folks actually have a pretty decent standard of living as military officers, and they all elect to extend their "tours" in the US if they possibly can yeah, because it's safe and they still get hardship pay. One of the families has a special needs child and the wife actually cried when it was time to go home to Denmark with its supposedly superior socialized medicine. The ability for her son to see specialists here was far far better I will admit, Amercia does have the best medical specialists. Too bad 90% of the population doesn't need them. They're trying to come back.
So you can say "it's all relative." That's one of the most bedrock arguments of liberalisms. Except at the end of the day, it isn't. Not really.
I'm sorry, but anecdotes don't beat statistics.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/09/29/our-infant-mortality-rate-is-a-national-embarrassment/?utm_term=.b284884f1141 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/09/29/our-infant-mortality-rate-is-a-national-embarrassment/?utm_term=.b284884f1141)
Post by: catastrophe on January 12, 2018, 11:54:03 AM
MIR, please take your racist claptrap elsewhere. Nobody wants to hear you spew your venom.
Beyond the racism, you are talking out of your ass. Posting pictures of the Lagos financial district is utterly meaningless. There are pockets of extreme wealth, often based on oil, found in many shithole countries. Lagos is consistently ranked as one of the absolute worst major cities to live. On the planet.
I have a friend born and raised in Nigeria. He’s actually back there right now for the holiday. Took his kids with him for the first time. His village still gets its water from a well. No indoor plumbing. They do at least have some spotty cell coverage if you drive in to the nearest town.
But you don’t need to take my personal anecdotes. You could actually do some research.
Stop being such an ignorant racist hate monger.
This is a fantastic self-righteous tirade to defend your calling Nigeria a crap hole.
Post by: catastrophe on January 12, 2018, 11:56:33 AM
Post by: catastrophe on January 12, 2018, 11:59:29 AM
Protip: the issue isn't that he called some countries shitholes, it's that he thinks because someone lives in a shithole they are not worthy of immigrating to America.
exactly
america isnt about where youre from
its about where you want to go
That's a nice sentiment, and I agree to an extent. But we could still stand to be a bit more selective in our immigration policies. Our immigration policies currently favor the importation of poverty (and poverty's associated ills, like crime) over skill. Glad a few folks are least walking back from arguing there aren't a lot of shithole countries in the world. Progress.
Should also start merit-based deportation of americans.
This would be amazing
I think this should seriously be floated in Congress just to see what exactly the defense is. Trump has already openly questioned whether simply being born in the U.S. is enough to make you a U.S. Citizen.
Post by: Kat Kid on January 12, 2018, 12:02:00 PM
Post by: Institutional Control on January 12, 2018, 12:06:06 PM
If you only let in smart immigrants they’ll take all the good jobs.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Huh. Isn't it kind of racist to support importing poorly educated brown people (as opposed to highly skilled brown people) to work all of our crap jobs?
While I was kidding, I also didn't say anything about a person's skin color or country of origin.
Post by: OK_Cat on January 12, 2018, 12:06:36 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: cfbandyman on January 12, 2018, 12:30:00 PM
If you only let in smart immigrants they’ll take all the good jobs.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Huh. Isn't it kind of racist to support importing poorly educated brown people (as opposed to highly skilled brown people) to work all of our crap jobs?
While I was kidding, I also didn't say anything about a person's skin color or country of origin.
Haha wow
Post by: cfbandyman on January 12, 2018, 12:33:00 PM
Protip: the issue isn't that he called some countries shitholes, it's that he thinks because someone lives in a shithole they are not worthy of immigrating to America.
exactly
america isnt about where youre from
its about where you want to go
That's a nice sentiment, and I agree to an extent. But we could still stand to be a bit more selective in our immigration policies. Our immigration policies currently favor the importation of poverty (and poverty's associated ills, like crime) over skill. Glad a few folks are least walking back from arguing there aren't a lot of shithole countries in the world. Progress.
Yet most immigrants statistically do not get involved with crimes
http://www.politifact.com/california/statements/2017/aug/03/antonio-villaraigosa/mostly-true-undocumented-immigrants-less-likely-co/
And before you get all "well politifact is a liberal rag"
https://www.cato.org/publications/immigration-reform-bulletin/criminal-immigrants-their-numbers-demographics-countries
Post by: wetwillie on January 12, 2018, 12:36:03 PM
And I love America, but you're crazy if you think you could have grown up in just about any other developed nation in the world and seriously think America is hands down the best country out there. The objective evidence is lacking.
The evidence is lacking
Post by: treysolid on January 12, 2018, 12:40:48 PM
Post by: Trim on January 12, 2018, 12:45:21 PM
That's a nice sentiment, and I agree to an extent. But we could still stand to be a bit more selective in our immigration policies. Our immigration policies currently favor the importation of poverty (and poverty's associated ills, like crime) over skill. Glad a few folks are least walking back from arguing there aren't a lot of shithole countries in the world. Progress.
Should also start merit-based deportation of americans.
This would be amazing
I think this should seriously be floated in Congress just to see what exactly the defense is. Trump has already openly questioned whether simply being born in the U.S. is enough to make you a U.S. Citizen.
Is australia still the place to exile those people to?
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 12, 2018, 01:32:18 PM
If you only let in smart immigrants they’ll take all the good jobs.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Huh. Isn't it kind of racist to support importing poorly educated brown people (as opposed to highly skilled brown people) to work all of our crap jobs?
While I was kidding, I also didn't say anything about a person's skin color or country of origin.
Sorry. Im sure you’re not a racist. I was just taking a turn at the Dems’ “call people I disagree with racist” game. And not very well since now I just feel guilty doing it.
Post by: Kat Kid on January 12, 2018, 01:37:21 PM
like the millionth obvious example of the same thing
Post by: The Big Train on January 12, 2018, 01:44:44 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 12, 2018, 01:48:32 PM
Why do you think KSUW likes Trump so much?
Why am I so in your head, bub? It’s getting weird. But in answer to your question, I posted my Trump pros and cons and report card in the 2017 in review thread.
Post by: The Big Train on January 12, 2018, 01:50:22 PM
Why do you think KSUW likes Trump so much?
Why am I so in your head, bub? It’s getting weird. But in answer to your question, I posted my Trump pros and cons and report card in the 2017 in review thread.
Because I just don’t understand how someone could be as bad of a person as you and it’s frustrating to me.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 12, 2018, 01:55:49 PM
Why do you think KSUW likes Trump so much?
Why am I so in your head, bub? It’s getting weird. But in answer to your question, I posted my Trump pros and cons and report card in the 2017 in review thread.
Because I just don’t understand how someone could be as bad of a person as you and it’s frustrating to me.
You want to believe that, so I guess you just want to frustrate yourself. You don’t know the first thing about me or my family but you want to call me a racist because I believe in American Exceptionalism and more selective immigration policy. That is a disgusting, shameful thing to do. Whatever, keep on with the hate.
Post by: MakeItRain on January 12, 2018, 01:56:20 PM
If you only let in smart immigrants they’ll take all the good jobs.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Huh. Isn't it kind of racist to support importing poorly educated brown people (as opposed to highly skilled brown people) to work all of our crap jobs?
While I was kidding, I also didn't say anything about a person's skin color or country of origin.
Sorry. Im sure you’re not a racist. I was just taking a turn at the Dems’ “call people I disagree with racist” game. And not very well since now I just feel guilty doing it.
This is a classic deflection technique of racists. They aren't calling me a racist, they're calling all of us racists.
I saw some of the tweets from Republicans disavowing Cheeto's comments, none of the replies were calling them racists.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 12, 2018, 01:57:34 PM
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/01/12/sen_durbin_chain_migration_is_offensive_to_those_whose_ancestors_came_to_us_in_chains.html (https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/01/12/sen_durbin_chain_migration_is_offensive_to_those_whose_ancestors_came_to_us_in_chains.html)
Classy, Dick.
Post by: The Big Train on January 12, 2018, 02:00:08 PM
Why do you think KSUW likes Trump so much?
Why am I so in your head, bub? It’s getting weird. But in answer to your question, I posted my Trump pros and cons and report card in the 2017 in review thread.
Because I just don’t understand how someone could be as bad of a person as you and it’s frustrating to me.
You want to believe that, so I guess you just want to frustrate yourself. You don’t know the first thing about me or my family but you want to call me a racist because I believe in American Exceptionalism and more selective immigration policy. That is a disgusting, shameful thing to do. Whatever, keep on with the hate.
I mean IRL you probably are a good person as most of us are. You are just a pretentious egotistical prick on here though.
Post by: treysolid on January 12, 2018, 03:53:02 PM
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/01/trump-shithole-norway/550382/ (https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/01/trump-shithole-norway/550382/)
Post by: MakeItRain on January 12, 2018, 06:41:03 PM
Why do you think KSUW likes Trump so much?
Why am I so in your head, bub? It’s getting weird. But in answer to your question, I posted my Trump pros and cons and report card in the 2017 in review thread.
Because I just don’t understand how someone could be as bad of a person as you and it’s frustrating to me.
You want to believe that, so I guess you just want to frustrate yourself. You don’t know the first thing about me or my family but you want to call me a racist because I believe in American Exceptionalism and more selective immigration policy. That is a disgusting, shameful thing to do. Whatever, keep on with the hate.
I mean IRL you probably are a good person as most of us are. You are just a pretentious egotistical prick on here though.
He's a rough ridin' racist tbt, don't soft shoe that crap.
Post by: catastrophe on January 12, 2018, 08:46:38 PM
Very complex. Like a someone who makes me uncomfortable.
Post by: MakeItRain on January 12, 2018, 09:36:35 PM
https://twitter.com/ChrChristensen/status/951596415423209472
Post by: catastrophe on January 12, 2018, 10:18:10 PM
Also, I am legitimately curious to know if someone immigrated to a country because it had more women in political power...
Post by: gatoveintisiete on January 12, 2018, 11:03:46 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiet on January 12, 2018, 11:29:08 PM
They are picky about what country you are coming from. You don’t qualify for welfare or other government benefits until you have been there long enough to have paid in enough taxes to cover it.
They pretty much have their crap together, which is probably a 3D point Trump was making. That’s right he was trolling dumbasses again.
Post by: bucket on January 13, 2018, 12:26:44 AM
Why do you think KSUW likes Trump so much?
Why am I so in your head, bub? It’s getting weird. But in answer to your question, I posted my Trump pros and cons and report card in the 2017 in review thread.
Because I just don’t understand how someone could be as bad of a person as you and it’s frustrating to me.
You want to believe that, so I guess you just want to frustrate yourself. You don’t know the first thing about me or my family but you want to call me a racist because I believe in American Exceptionalism and more selective immigration policy. That is a disgusting, shameful thing to do. Whatever, keep on with the hate.
What do you mean by "American Exceptionalism?"
Post by: The Big Train on January 13, 2018, 12:29:47 AM
Why do you think KSUW likes Trump so much?
Why am I so in your head, bub? It’s getting weird. But in answer to your question, I posted my Trump pros and cons and report card in the 2017 in review thread.
Because I just don’t understand how someone could be as bad of a person as you and it’s frustrating to me.
You want to believe that, so I guess you just want to frustrate yourself. You don’t know the first thing about me or my family but you want to call me a racist because I believe in American Exceptionalism and more selective immigration policy. That is a disgusting, shameful thing to do. Whatever, keep on with the hate.
What do you mean by "American Exceptionalism?"
He means America First, unless you aren’t white(just like the POTUS has expressed).
Post by: puniraptor on January 13, 2018, 05:33:44 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on January 13, 2018, 09:40:02 AM
I believe in American Exceptionalism too, but our definitions seem to be completely opposite.
I think what kdub actually believes in is American exclusionism
Post by: bucket on January 13, 2018, 09:56:54 AM
The scoreboard metric
ok, so that adds vietnam and afghanistan to the list of countries better than us. what else?
The fun thing about liberals playing the “lets call everyone who doesn’t think like me a racist” game is that it leads them increasingly bizarre statements, like the above. It’s adorable.
Who was I calling a racist? If you think (like ww does) that America is simply better than every other country because we win wars, then by that logic we aren't better than Vietnam or Afghanistan.
K. I don't think that's what WW was saying. And if you weren't calling anyone a racist, my apologies.
Anyone can cherry pick one statistic or another but all things considered America is better than every other country in the world. This isn't seriously debatable. We enjoy one of the highest standard of livings overall. The other countries with a GDP per capita even close to (or higher) than us have significantly smaller and less ethnically diverse populations and do not import poverty nearly at our level. Even our "poor" enjoy a standard of living significantly better than the poor in developing (aka shithole) countries.
We are the pinnacle of scientific achievement and are still the only country to have sent men to the moon (we did this 50 years ago, btw). You may recall that we liberated an entire continent from a genocidal maniac a while back. We've got the best music, the best movies, the best indoor plumbing. We enjoy relatively great freedom and tax our citizens at relatively low rates. We drive bigger cars and live in bigger homes and enjoy a far bigger diversity of goods and services to choose from than most countries.
Take it all together, warts and all, it's tough to find anybody who's better than the US of A.
There's a lot of false assumptions here. You assume that people from other parts of the world want the same things that Americans want. Based on an accumulation of a whole bunch of different metrics, the quality of life that America provides it's citizens is 19th-best in the world. This whole mindset is the reason we continue to slide down in terms of infant mortality rate, life-expectancy and education.
Oh good heavens.... the old "infant mortality rate" myth resurfaces. A favorite of liberals. And yes, I do assume people from other parts of the world want what we have, which is why so many are trying to get in. A lot of people also don't know what they're missing out on. I can say, objectively speaking, any sane person would take the size of American cars and homes over what they have to settle for in Europe, if they could. My parents host foreign military officers from these "enlightened" NATO European countries every year. When they arrive, they buy a car. They rent a house. They take road trips. They all buy grills and BBQ sauce by the case to ship home when they leave (not shitting you). They effing love it here. These folks actually have a pretty decent standard of living as military officers, and they all elect to extend their "tours" in the US if they possibly can. One of the families has a special needs child and the wife actually cried when it was time to go home to Denmark with its supposedly superior socialized medicine. The ability for her son to see specialists here was far far better. They're trying to come back.
So you can say "it's all relative." That's one of the most bedrock arguments of liberalisms. Except at the end of the day, it isn't. Not really.
You've made this argument before. Yes, these are pros but there are also cons.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 13, 2018, 10:53:38 AM
Why do you think KSUW likes Trump so much?
Why am I so in your head, bub? It’s getting weird. But in answer to your question, I posted my Trump pros and cons and report card in the 2017 in review thread.
Because I just don’t understand how someone could be as bad of a person as you and it’s frustrating to me.
You want to believe that, so I guess you just want to frustrate yourself. You don’t know the first thing about me or my family but you want to call me a racist because I believe in American Exceptionalism and more selective immigration policy. That is a disgusting, shameful thing to do. Whatever, keep on with the hate.
What do you mean by "American Exceptionalism?"
There’s a thread on this. Search it. One of my favorites actually. The “yeah but per capita” argument! :lol:
Post by: Dugout DickStone on January 13, 2018, 11:58:19 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on January 13, 2018, 12:07:35 PM
Protip: the issue isn't that he called some countries shitholes, it's that he thinks because someone lives in a shithole they are not worthy of immigrating to America.
exactly
america isnt about where youre from
its about where you want to go
That's a nice sentiment, and I agree to an extent. But we could still stand to be a bit more selective in our immigration policies. Our immigration policies currently favor the importation of poverty (and poverty's associated ills, like crime) over skill. Glad a few folks are least walking back from arguing there aren't a lot of shithole countries in the world. Progress.
I really don’t think you based that statement on anything except for your personal beliefs.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 15, 2018, 05:20:46 PM
Dems are in a bit of a pickle. (1) Trade DACA for a (partial) wall - make your activists crazy mad and help Trump keep a campaign promise. (2) Refuse to trade DACA for a wall - show America that you care more about open borders than helping those “Dreamers,” and Trump still gets a valuable campaign issue.
Of course, any sensible person knows Option 1 is better than Option 2. If Papa Trump is gonna win either way, at least help the Dreamers.
Durbin leaking the alleged “shithole” remark from a private meeting indicates to me that the Dems have chosen Option 2 and are trying to save what face they can by setting off another media feeding frenzy. I think this is going to backfire spectacularly on the Dems (both killing the deal and leaking a private comment most Americans likely agree with).
Post by: gatoveintisiete on January 15, 2018, 06:14:22 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on January 15, 2018, 06:53:47 PM
Post by: wetwillie on January 15, 2018, 07:00:23 PM
Post by: The Big Train on January 15, 2018, 07:03:54 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 15, 2018, 08:16:07 PM
Here’s the dirty little secret: Dem politicos don’t care any more about these illegal immigrants than the Pubs do - maybe less.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on January 15, 2018, 08:18:18 PM
Post by: LickNeckey on January 15, 2018, 08:47:00 PM
mexico's paying for it you rubes!
and because you question this it just got eleventy feet taller
Post by: gatoveintisiete on January 15, 2018, 08:49:30 PM
Post by: catastrophe on January 15, 2018, 09:24:30 PM
All the Dems has to do was give Trump his wall.
Trump promised two things: (1) we’d build a wall, and (2) we wouldn’t pay for building a wall. Republicans want to fulfill #1 while Democrats want to fulfill #2.
I don’t think you could really call either side obstructionist when both are trying to satisfy Trump’s promises.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on January 15, 2018, 10:03:22 PM
You dumbasses think Mexico is going to pay for a wall that hasn’t been built? They are not falling for that one
I guess we just submit pay apps for progress payments to them then
Post by: The Big Train on January 15, 2018, 10:03:27 PM
You dumbasses think Mexico is going to pay for a wall that hasn’t been built? They are not falling for that one
That was a core promise from YOUR candidate who is now president, dumbass.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on January 15, 2018, 10:23:41 PM
You dumbasses think Mexico is going to pay for a wall that hasn’t been built? They are not falling for that one
I guess we just submit pay apps for progress payments to them then
Yes, this is customary in a building project
Post by: Dugout DickStone on January 15, 2018, 10:40:48 PM
You dumbasses think Mexico is going to pay for a wall that hasn’t been built? They are not falling for that one
I guess we just submit pay apps for progress payments to them then
Yes, this is customary in a building project
problem solved and no tax dollars used. close this ticket and let this thing for bid
Post by: MakeItRain on January 15, 2018, 11:17:21 PM
Here’s the dirty little secret: Dem politicos don’t care any more about these illegal immigrants than the Pubs do - maybe less.
You're normalizing your racism again, it's just you, no one else. It's not a Democrat or Republican thing, your racism is all yours.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on January 15, 2018, 11:19:14 PM
Post by: renocat on January 16, 2018, 09:39:19 AM
Post by: Kat Kid on January 16, 2018, 10:17:24 AM
Post by: Institutional Control on January 16, 2018, 10:23:50 AM
wait a second. Republicans control all three branches of government. why would there be a government shutdown?
They need a 60% vote.
Post by: sys on January 16, 2018, 10:36:12 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on January 16, 2018, 10:40:19 AM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on January 16, 2018, 10:50:40 AM
the wall (not building one) is more important, i really hope these dumbass dems don't cave on that just so these dacas can hang around the country a little longer.
D’s will never do DACA deal, it is not in their political interest
Post by: Institutional Control on January 16, 2018, 11:03:41 AM
the wall (not building one) is more important, i really hope these dumbass dems don't cave on that just so these dacas can hang around the country a little longer.
D’s will never do DACA deal, it is not in their political interest
Just like the GOP will never outlaw abortion because they wouldn't have an issue to run on.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 16, 2018, 11:10:12 AM
the wall (not building one) is more important, i really hope these dumbass dems don't cave on that just so these dacas can hang around the country a little longer.
D’s will never do DACA deal, it is not in their political interest
Just like the GOP will never outlaw abortion because they wouldn't have an issue to run on.
That’s a weird thing to say. Whether states are permitted to outlaw abortion is up to the Supreme Court. Are you suggesting there is a conspiracy among the Republican-appointed justices to never overturn Roe for political purposes? That’s a pretty wild theory if that’s what you think.
And this, right after you correctly pointed out the 60% vote issue for the government “shutdown.” You’re all over the map this morning!
Or wait, are you saying there’s a conspiracy among GOP presidents in whom they nominate to the SC to not overturn Roe? It’s kinda fascinating to think about. But seems more likely that past Republican presidents have just made some shitty court picks.
Post by: star seed 7 on January 16, 2018, 11:26:31 AM
Post by: renocat on January 16, 2018, 11:40:10 AM
He's saying republican politicians don't care about abortion, they just pretend to so they can get votes from emotional rubes. Making abortion illegal is not in their political interestSadly true. Both parties in Congress say big stuff they really don't mean. Not so bad until it affects the lives of Americans. Shutting down the government is not good. DACA/immigration deal was there, but Durbin had to spout off. If he kept quiet, shi*hole comment would have been not known and no controversy. The bill passed and spending bill approved. Durbin thought it was more important to destroy Trump and help frame his as a racist. If you want milk from a cow you treat her nice. You don't beat her, yell at her, try to kill her or shock her with a hotshot. Democrats either don't care about their constituents' welfare or are stupid.
Post by: LickNeckey on January 16, 2018, 11:51:21 AM
So with the deal blown up a frustrated Durbin repeated the President's toxic remarks.
Post by: star seed 7 on January 16, 2018, 12:00:54 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on January 16, 2018, 01:36:58 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 16, 2018, 02:01:27 PM
Durbin shared Trump's words because he backtracked on his willingness to do the deal. Durbin and Graham put forth a bi-partisan agreement that Trumps had supported. By the time the meeting took place Miller and others had rallied conservative immigration hawks to sway the President's stance.
So with the deal blown up a frustrated Durbin repeated the President's toxic remarks.
I’m not sure it’s accurate to say Trump ever “supported” the deal that Senator Grahamnesty hatched with his buddies. He indicated a willingness to compromise, but the deal was a wall and reforms to our immigration policy in exchange for DACA. He was pretty clear about that (as clear as Trump can be).
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 16, 2018, 02:04:31 PM
He's saying republican politicians don't care about abortion, they just pretend to so they can get votes from emotional rubes. Making abortion illegal is not in their political interest
Right, but that doesn’t really make sense. Pub politicians pass abortion restrictions all the time. Some states have even attempted to outright ban it. Some of the restrictions are upheld by the courts. Some are knocked down by the courts. So saying it’s not in their political interest to outlaw abortion is belied by the facts that pub politicians try all the time to restrict or eliminate abortion.
So again, it all comes down to the courts and, specifically, the Supreme Court.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 16, 2018, 02:07:58 PM
People outing our president's racist comments is definitely a huge concern
It’s not racist to call certain countries shitholes, or to want to reduce immigration from those countries. It is pretty inappropriate, and not negotiating in good faith, to blab to the media about words spoken in a private meeting.
Post by: catastrophe on January 16, 2018, 02:22:52 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 16, 2018, 02:28:56 PM
It’s not racist to call certain countries shitholes. It is racist to call basically every predominantly black country a shithole.
First, he didn’t say that. Second, you are inferring that calling a country or countries shitholes was based upon the skin color of their inhabitants. Its kinda racist, in my opinion, to make that inference.
Post by: The Big Train on January 16, 2018, 02:35:49 PM
It’s not racist to call certain countries shitholes. It is racist to call basically every predominantly black country a shithole.
First, he didn’t say that. Second, you are inferring that calling a country or countries shitholes was based upon the skin color of their inhabitants. Its kinda racist, in my opinion, to make that inference.
First, you didn’t even quote this post in its entirety. Secondly why are you defending our racist president over this?
Post by: MakeItRain on January 16, 2018, 02:40:32 PM
It’s not racist to call certain countries shitholes. It is racist to call predominantly black and brown countries shitholes when contrasted to predominantly white countries.
He not only contrasted those countries with a predominantly white country, but he called for more immigrants from that white country. Which means he doesn't have a problem with immigration, he has a problem with darked skinned immigrants.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 16, 2018, 02:56:03 PM
It’s not racist to call certain countries shitholes. It is racist to call basically every predominantly black country a shithole.
First, he didn’t say that. Second, you are inferring that calling a country or countries shitholes was based upon the skin color of their inhabitants. Its kinda racist, in my opinion, to make that inference.
First, you didn’t even quote this post in its entirety. Secondly why are you defending our racist president over this?
I quoted what was posted at the time, which has now evidently been revised. And the revised quote doesn't change my response. Assuming Trump was comparing Haiti to Norway, liberals immediately jumped to skin color as the reason for Trump's disparate treatment.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 16, 2018, 03:01:02 PM
It’s not racist to call certain countries shitholes. It is racist to call predominantly black and brown countries shitholes when contrasted to predominantly white countries.
He not only contrasted those countries with a predominantly white country, but he called for more immigrants from that white country. Which means he doesn't have a problem with immigration, he has a problem with darked skinned immigrants.
MIR's post is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. Trump said nothing about skin color - not even Durbin says Trump said anything about skin color - but liberals automatically assume that the distinguishing factor for Trump between, say, Haiti and Norway was skin color. The real difference is that one country is a shithole, and the other is a country that liberals to this day are whining we should model ourselves after.
So, I pose a question. If you really believe it is racist to contrast Norway with Haiti, are liberals racist when they constantly argue we should be more like [insert predominantly white, Scandinavian country] but never say we should be more like [insert predominantly black country]? Or maybe, just maybe, there are factors other than skin color at play.
Post by: renocat on January 16, 2018, 03:32:28 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/12/politics/isaac-newton-farris-martin-luther-king-donald-trump/index.htmlIt’s not racist to call certain countries shitholes. It is racist to call basically every predominantly black country a shithole.
First, he didn’t say that. Second, you are inferring that calling a country or countries shitholes was based upon the skin color of their inhabitants. Its kinda racist, in my opinion, to make that inference.
CNN) Isaac Newton Farris Jr., Martin Luther King Jr.'s nephew, told CNN on Friday that while he does not believe President Donald Trump is a "racist in the traditional sense," he does think the President is "racially ignorant and racially uninformed."
Post by: star seed 7 on January 16, 2018, 03:40:05 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 16, 2018, 04:01:42 PM
So now DACA will be fought in the courts (trump will win, guaranteed, once it’s clear of the batty ninth circuit)
I was wrong. Taking it straight to the Supremes (if they'll allow it). This liberal activist in a robe should have his ass handed to him much more expediently, now.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5276441/DOJ-appeal-DACA-ruling-directly-Supreme-Court.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5276441/DOJ-appeal-DACA-ruling-directly-Supreme-Court.html)
Post by: catastrophe on January 16, 2018, 04:24:14 PM
It’s not racist to call certain countries shitholes. It is racist to call basically every predominantly black country a shithole.
First, he didn’t say that. Second, you are inferring that calling a country or countries shitholes was based upon the skin color of their inhabitants. Its kinda racist, in my opinion, to make that inference.
First, you didn’t even quote this post in its entirety. Secondly why are you defending our racist president over this?
I quoted what was posted at the time, which has now evidently been revised. And the revised quote doesn't change my response. Assuming Trump was comparing Haiti to Norway, liberals immediately jumped to skin color as the reason for Trump's disparate treatment.
Confirmed. Stylistic revisions after I looked up the consensus about what Trump actually said.
Back on topic, whether a comment is racist will almost always require an inference. That is especially true when the comment itself is a euphemism. Still, I think it’s disingenuous to call it a liberal “jump” when every country lumped in as a shithole is non-white while the only positive example(s) are super white countries.
I mean, I’m happy to hear the objective data to differentiate the countries if it’s available, but I’ve never heard conservatives speak so glowingly of Norway (especially during Bernie Sanders’ campaign) until Trump’s comment.
Post by: catastrophe on January 16, 2018, 04:27:34 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on January 16, 2018, 04:51:18 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 16, 2018, 05:56:35 PM
It’s not racist to call certain countries shitholes. It is racist to call basically every predominantly black country a shithole.
First, he didn’t say that. Second, you are inferring that calling a country or countries shitholes was based upon the skin color of their inhabitants. Its kinda racist, in my opinion, to make that inference.
First, you didn’t even quote this post in its entirety. Secondly why are you defending our racist president over this?
I quoted what was posted at the time, which has now evidently been revised. And the revised quote doesn't change my response. Assuming Trump was comparing Haiti to Norway, liberals immediately jumped to skin color as the reason for Trump's disparate treatment.
Confirmed. Stylistic revisions after I looked up the consensus about what Trump actually said.
Back on topic, whether a comment is racist will almost always require an inference. That is especially true when the comment itself is a euphemism. Still, I think it’s disingenuous to call it a liberal “jump” when every country lumped in as a shithole is non-white while the only positive example(s) are super white countries.
I mean, I’m happy to hear the objective data to differentiate the countries if it’s available, but I’ve never heard conservatives speak so glowingly of Norway (especially during Bernie Sanders’ campaign) until Trump’s comment.
Ok, so now we’re “inferring racism.” And by that token, I can again only infer that liberals are just as racist for always saying we should be more like predominantly white Scandinavian countries instead of predominantly black countries. Both are stupid inferences.
Post by: catastrophe on January 16, 2018, 09:47:48 PM
2. See my second response above. It’s easy to disassociate race from country when you are talking about modeling a government. Not so easy when you are saying you don’t want people from those countries coming into your country.
Post by: renocat on January 16, 2018, 11:37:02 PM
You can put pretty much any word in front of "ignorant" and it would apply to trumpI laughed my butt off with this retort of yours. Funny, very funny
Post by: Kat Kid on January 17, 2018, 02:25:21 PM
wait a second. Republicans control all three branches of government. why would there be a government shutdown?
They need a 60% vote.
That isn't how the House of Representatives works.
Quote
“Based on the number of ‘no’ and undecided votes, there [are] not enough votes for a Republican-only bill,” says Rep. Mark Meadows.
Post by: Phil Titola on January 17, 2018, 05:23:12 PM
It’s not racist to call certain countries shitholes. It is racist to call basically every predominantly black country a shithole.
First, he didn’t say that. Second, you are inferring that calling a country or countries shitholes was based upon the skin color of their inhabitants. Its kinda racist, in my opinion, to make that inference.
First, you didn’t even quote this post in its entirety. Secondly why are you defending our racist president over this?
I quoted what was posted at the time, which has now evidently been revised. And the revised quote doesn't change my response. Assuming Trump was comparing Haiti to Norway, liberals immediately jumped to skin color as the reason for Trump's disparate treatment.
Confirmed. Stylistic revisions after I looked up the consensus about what Trump actually said.
Back on topic, whether a comment is racist will almost always require an inference. That is especially true when the comment itself is a euphemism. Still, I think it’s disingenuous to call it a liberal “jump” when every country lumped in as a shithole is non-white while the only positive example(s) are super white countries.
I mean, I’m happy to hear the objective data to differentiate the countries if it’s available, but I’ve never heard conservatives speak so glowingly of Norway (especially during Bernie Sanders’ campaign) until Trump’s comment.
Ok, so now we’re “inferring racism.” And by that token, I can again only infer that liberals are just as racist for always saying we should be more like predominantly white Scandinavian countries instead of predominantly black countries. Both are stupid inferences.
see a lot of non-white non-scandinavian countries on this map we could be more like regarding healthcare.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/06/heres-a-map-of-the-countries-that-provide-universal-health-care-americas-still-not-on-it/259153/
Post by: MakeItRain on January 17, 2018, 10:48:22 PM
It’s not racist to call certain countries shitholes. It is racist to call predominantly black and brown countries shitholes when contrasted to predominantly white countries.
He not only contrasted those countries with a predominantly white country, but he called for more immigrants from that white country. Which means he doesn't have a problem with immigration, he has a problem with darked skinned immigrants.
MIR's post is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. Trump said nothing about skin color - not even Durbin says Trump said anything about skin color - but liberals automatically assume that the distinguishing factor for Trump between, say, Haiti and Norway was skin color. The real difference is that one country is a shithole, and the other is a country that liberals to this day are whining we should model ourselves after.
So, I pose a question. If you really believe it is racist to contrast Norway with Haiti, are liberals racist when they constantly argue we should be more like [insert predominantly white, Scandinavian country] but never say we should be more like [insert predominantly black country]? Or maybe, just maybe, there are factors other than skin color at play.
Yes, what Trump said is absolutely racist. When I go to Norway next summer, I'm not racist because I will never visit Haiti. Body of work matters, Trump gets no benefit of the doubt. Your Bernie Sanders illustration is rough ridin' dumb, but I'll still play along. Bernie Sanders marched with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. The fat rough ridin' cheeto cares so much about race relations and his image when it comes to race that his fat rough ridin' ass did nothing but play golf on MLK Day, didn't participate in one damn event, didn't perform a single speech; this while in the midst of a racial firestorm. He's a goddamned racist and doesn't really care who knows. Minorities, skinheads, and the klan are united in affirming Trump a racist, those are three elite sources on what racism is.
Post by: puniraptor on January 18, 2018, 12:04:15 AM
Post by: sys on January 18, 2018, 12:34:07 AM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 18, 2018, 10:17:38 AM
It’s not racist to call certain countries shitholes. It is racist to call predominantly black and brown countries shitholes when contrasted to predominantly white countries.
He not only contrasted those countries with a predominantly white country, but he called for more immigrants from that white country. Which means he doesn't have a problem with immigration, he has a problem with darked skinned immigrants.
MIR's post is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. Trump said nothing about skin color - not even Durbin says Trump said anything about skin color - but liberals automatically assume that the distinguishing factor for Trump between, say, Haiti and Norway was skin color. The real difference is that one country is a shithole, and the other is a country that liberals to this day are whining we should model ourselves after.
So, I pose a question. If you really believe it is racist to contrast Norway with Haiti, are liberals racist when they constantly argue we should be more like [insert predominantly white, Scandinavian country] but never say we should be more like [insert predominantly black country]? Or maybe, just maybe, there are factors other than skin color at play.
Yes, what Trump said is absolutely racist. When I go to Norway next summer, I'm not racist because I will never visit Haiti. Body of work matters, Trump gets no benefit of the doubt. Your Bernie Sanders illustration is rough ridin' dumb, but I'll still play along. Bernie Sanders marched with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. The fat rough ridin' cheeto cares so much about race relations and his image when it comes to race that his fat rough ridin' ass did nothing but play golf on MLK Day, didn't participate in one damn event, didn't perform a single speech; this while in the midst of a racial firestorm. He's a goddamned racist and doesn't really care who knows. Minorities, skinheads, and the klan are united in affirming Trump a racist, those are three elite sources on what racism is.
MIR is a goEMAW treasure. Also just outed himself as a massive racist for admitting he has visited Norway but will never visit Haiti because black people. So racist.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 18, 2018, 10:22:02 AM
it is racist to believe that where someone comes from could disqualify them from being an american
Refresher on definition of racism....
Quote
rac·ism
/?r??siz?m/
noun
prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.
Racism is a prejudice based upon race. Not country of origin. You're still conflating the two. They are not the same.
People of good faith can have an debate about whether our immigration policies should favor people from more developed countries or shitholes, but only after you drop the racist claptrap.
Post by: gatoveintisiet on January 18, 2018, 10:22:43 AM
Post by: MakeItRain on January 18, 2018, 11:07:19 AM
It’s not racist to call certain countries shitholes. It is racist to call predominantly black and brown countries shitholes when contrasted to predominantly white countries.
He not only contrasted those countries with a predominantly white country, but he called for more immigrants from that white country. Which means he doesn't have a problem with immigration, he has a problem with darked skinned immigrants.
MIR's post is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. Trump said nothing about skin color - not even Durbin says Trump said anything about skin color - but liberals automatically assume that the distinguishing factor for Trump between, say, Haiti and Norway was skin color. The real difference is that one country is a shithole, and the other is a country that liberals to this day are whining we should model ourselves after.
So, I pose a question. If you really believe it is racist to contrast Norway with Haiti, are liberals racist when they constantly argue we should be more like [insert predominantly white, Scandinavian country] but never say we should be more like [insert predominantly black country]? Or maybe, just maybe, there are factors other than skin color at play.
Yes, what Trump said is absolutely racist. When I go to Norway next summer, I'm not racist because I will never visit Haiti. Body of work matters, Trump gets no benefit of the doubt. Your Bernie Sanders illustration is rough ridin' dumb, but I'll still play along. Bernie Sanders marched with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. The fat rough ridin' cheeto cares so much about race relations and his image when it comes to race that his fat rough ridin' ass did nothing but play golf on MLK Day, didn't participate in one damn event, didn't perform a single speech; this while in the midst of a racial firestorm. He's a goddamned racist and doesn't really care who knows. Minorities, skinheads, and the klan are united in affirming Trump a racist, those are three elite sources on what racism is.
MIR is a goEMAW treasure. Also just outed himself as a massive racist for admitting he has visited Norway but will never visit Haiti because black people. So racist.
Hahahaha, you got me. BTW I know what you tried to do, it's not going to work because you aren't smart enough to know what's actually clever.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 18, 2018, 11:36:40 AM
It’s not racist to call certain countries shitholes. It is racist to call predominantly black and brown countries shitholes when contrasted to predominantly white countries.
He not only contrasted those countries with a predominantly white country, but he called for more immigrants from that white country. Which means he doesn't have a problem with immigration, he has a problem with darked skinned immigrants.
MIR's post is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. Trump said nothing about skin color - not even Durbin says Trump said anything about skin color - but liberals automatically assume that the distinguishing factor for Trump between, say, Haiti and Norway was skin color. The real difference is that one country is a shithole, and the other is a country that liberals to this day are whining we should model ourselves after.
So, I pose a question. If you really believe it is racist to contrast Norway with Haiti, are liberals racist when they constantly argue we should be more like [insert predominantly white, Scandinavian country] but never say we should be more like [insert predominantly black country]? Or maybe, just maybe, there are factors other than skin color at play.
Yes, what Trump said is absolutely racist. When I go to Norway next summer, I'm not racist because I will never visit Haiti. Body of work matters, Trump gets no benefit of the doubt. Your Bernie Sanders illustration is rough ridin' dumb, but I'll still play along. Bernie Sanders marched with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. The fat rough ridin' cheeto cares so much about race relations and his image when it comes to race that his fat rough ridin' ass did nothing but play golf on MLK Day, didn't participate in one damn event, didn't perform a single speech; this while in the midst of a racial firestorm. He's a goddamned racist and doesn't really care who knows. Minorities, skinheads, and the klan are united in affirming Trump a racist, those are three elite sources on what racism is.
MIR is a goEMAW treasure. Also just outed himself as a massive racist for admitting he has visited Norway but will never visit Haiti because black people. So racist.
Hahahaha, you got me. BTW I know what you tried to do, it's not going to work because you aren't smart enough to know what's actually clever.
Hey I just call a racist when I see one. We've all got to do our part. goEMAW shouldn't tolerate the opinions of bigots like you. Sorry all the black people in Haiti make you so uncomfortable. Go back to Norway.
Post by: ChiComCat on January 18, 2018, 11:50:30 AM
Post by: treysolid on January 18, 2018, 12:41:20 PM
Post by: renocat on January 18, 2018, 02:34:04 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on January 18, 2018, 02:35:31 PM
Post by: renocat on January 18, 2018, 02:44:10 PM
I know a Haitian immigrant that lives in Topeka, reno, does she have to move?No, I would imagine most are dang good citizens, and enough people are leaving Kansas. A better thought is to use California as a orientation stop. They keep all of the loafer knotheads and doper and send the productive citizen candidates to the plains to repopulate small towns. In the 18oos there was a push to annex Haiti. Most are Christian. Africans need to be sent through Norway then old Trump would have the starch boiled out of gruns.
https://www.loc.gov/resource/lcrbmrp.t2607/
Post by: catastrophe on January 18, 2018, 02:52:05 PM
it is racist to believe that where someone comes from could disqualify them from being an american
Refresher on definition of racism....Quoterac·ism
/?r??siz?m/
noun
prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.
Racism is a prejudice based upon race. Not country of origin. You're still conflating the two. They are not the same.
People of good faith can have an debate about whether our immigration policies should favor people from more developed countries or shitholes, but only after you drop the racist claptrap.
Yea, race and country of origin aren't the same, but they're pretty damn closely related. I mean, can you even think of a "race" whose name is not tied to a geographic location?
Regardless, it sounds like you are agreeing that Trump's stance on immigration is prejudiced, so I don't care all that much about parsing out whether that prejudice is based on race rather than country of origin. I really don't understand why you think prejudice based on country is really all that much better than based on race--especially when the countries Trump seems prejudiced against have overwhelmingly black populations.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 18, 2018, 04:09:52 PM
it is racist to believe that where someone comes from could disqualify them from being an american
Refresher on definition of racism....Quoterac·ism
/?r??siz?m/
noun
prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.
Racism is a prejudice based upon race. Not country of origin. You're still conflating the two. They are not the same.
People of good faith can have an debate about whether our immigration policies should favor people from more developed countries or shitholes, but only after you drop the racist claptrap.
Yea, race and country of origin aren't the same, but they're pretty damn closely related. I mean, can you even think of a "race" whose name is not tied to a geographic location?
Regardless, it sounds like you are agreeing that Trump's stance on immigration is prejudiced, so I don't care all that much about parsing out whether that prejudice is based on race rather than country of origin. I really don't understand why you think prejudice based on country is really all that much better than based on race--especially when the countries Trump seems prejudiced against have overwhelmingly black populations.
I'm sure you are aware of the phrase that "America is a melting pot." What this means is that, ideally, immigrants assimilate into American culture, bringing some of their own culture with them. But there are two potential problems with our melting pot. First, we don't want more of certain cultures added to our pot - namely the culture of corruption and abuse of women and children pervasive in many shithole nations. Second, particularly due to the modern expansion of our welfare state, we should be cautious about the number and origin of immigrants to ensure that assimilation actually occurs. Europeans are discovering both these issues belatedly after years of lax immigration policies. None of that makes me a racist, because it has nothing to do with race. It is realism and concern for America. This is also not to says that we should take no immigrants from shithole countries, or that there aren't good people there who will become good Americans. But we can certainly stand to be a bit more selective.
Give this a read. http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/01/what_i_learned_in_peace_corps_in_africa_trump_is_right.html (http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/01/what_i_learned_in_peace_corps_in_africa_trump_is_right.html)
Post by: puniraptor on January 18, 2018, 05:00:16 PM
Post by: puniraptor on January 18, 2018, 05:01:13 PM
test 1: do you think you can tell where someone comes from by looking at them?
(the president does)
Post by: catastrophe on January 18, 2018, 05:41:04 PM
Post by: puniraptor on January 18, 2018, 05:42:46 PM
Post by: Institutional Control on January 18, 2018, 05:50:53 PM
Japanese people can tell whether a white person is American or Australian just by looking at themBecause the Australians are arrogant racists?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 18, 2018, 06:41:17 PM
Again, if you are admitting that you and the President are prejudiced against people from various other predominantly black countries, I do not really care about the debate over whether either of you are racist.
So again, you just keep injecting skin color into the issue. You just did it again above! You and other liberals are the ones making race an issue. Which in all seriousness is kinda racist. This isn’t about race. It’s about the sort of things discussed in the article I posted above.
But I guess it’s sorta making progress that you’re willing to admit I’m not being racist. I guess you just think I’m a xenophobe. That’s ok. I think I’ve made my point and you’re free to disagree but it would be nice to not automatically stoop to name calling.
Post by: puniraptor on January 18, 2018, 07:03:11 PM
Post by: wetwillie on January 18, 2018, 07:13:14 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on January 18, 2018, 07:25:46 PM
do you think the president is aware that, as a demographic, Nigerians (Nigeria is an s-hole) are an extremely successful immigrant population?
I pointed that out and pointed out Nigeria's high GDP but KSUW still insisted it was a shithole because he knows a Nigerian, yeah right, who has to get water from a well.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on January 18, 2018, 07:49:36 PM
I may agree that tax payers shouldn’t fund the net for people who don’t also put in to pay for that net, but is that even a huge problem?
I think Trump and his folks biggest issue is the Muslim communities who set up their own system in Minneapolis and Detroit, but law enforcement should handle that.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 18, 2018, 09:15:41 PM
do you think the president is aware that, as a demographic, Nigerians (Nigeria is an s-hole) are an extremely successful immigrant population?
I pointed that out and pointed out Nigeria's high GDP but KSUW still insisted it was a shithole because he knows a Nigerian, yeah right, who has to get water from a well.
I’m still not sure what you’re trying to prove by arguing that Nigeria has the 139th highest GDP per capita in the world. That’s a pretty shitty average, even shittier when you consider that much of the wealth, highly dependent on oil production, is concentrated in the hands of a few while over half the population subsists on less than a dollar a day. What are you getting at?
Post by: Kat Kid on January 18, 2018, 09:55:02 PM
Post by: catastrophe on January 18, 2018, 10:14:41 PM
Again, if you are admitting that you and the President are prejudiced against people from various other predominantly black countries, I do not really care about the debate over whether either of you are racist.
So again, you just keep injecting skin color into the issue. You just did it again above! You and other liberals are the ones making race an issue. Which in all seriousness is kinda racist. This isn’t about race. It’s about the sort of things discussed in the article I posted above.
But I guess it’s sorta making progress that you’re willing to admit I’m not being racist. I guess you just think I’m a xenophobe. That’s ok. I think I’ve made my point and you’re free to disagree but it would be nice to not automatically stoop to name calling.
The pivoting here is out of control. If an employer of a large company went around saying "we're just really not looking to hire anyone whose parents are Africans," are you seriously trying to say the EEOC would be "injecting" race into the issue if they got involved?
And since you seem to be the only person on this board who even remotely understands Trump's thinking, I seriously need an explanation why prejudice based on national origin is better than prejudice based on race. Or is it you were never concerned about being a bigot, just that the media is reporting incorrectly the type of bigot you are?
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on January 19, 2018, 08:56:52 AM
Japanese people can tell whether a white person is American or Australian just by looking at them
Can they tell the difference between an Aussie and a Kiwi?
Post by: star seed 7 on January 19, 2018, 09:21:12 AM
Post by: ChiComCat on January 19, 2018, 10:02:55 AM
Again, if you are admitting that you and the President are prejudiced against people from various other predominantly black countries, I do not really care about the debate over whether either of you are racist.
So again, you just keep injecting skin color into the issue. You just did it again above! You and other liberals are the ones making race an issue. Which in all seriousness is kinda racist. This isn’t about race. It’s about the sort of things discussed in the article I posted above.
But I guess it’s sorta making progress that you’re willing to admit I’m not being racist. I guess you just think I’m a xenophobe. That’s ok. I think I’ve made my point and you’re free to disagree but it would be nice to not automatically stoop to name calling.
The article you posted above is a bunch of bullshit railing against an argument nobody has made
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 19, 2018, 10:15:39 AM
Well getting back to the shutdown, I think we can all agree it is the Democrat's fault that the Republicans can't muster a majority of their own caucus to pass a Continuing Resolution.
KK, this has been explained. The CR has to pass the House and Senate. It already passed the House yesterday. It needs 60 votes in the Senate. The Dems are refusing to continue funding the government unless they get DACA amnesty. Ultimately I think they will cave because it would be politically disastrous - even with a friendly media running interference - to shut down the government over illegal immigration.
Post by: MakeItRain on January 19, 2018, 11:12:44 AM
Well getting back to the shutdown, I think we can all agree it is the Democrat's fault that the Republicans can't muster a majority of their own caucus to pass a Continuing Resolution.
KK, this has been explained. The CR has to pass the House and Senate. It already passed the House yesterday. It needs 60 votes in the Senate. The Dems are refusing to continue funding the government unless they get DACA amnesty. Ultimately I think they will cave because it would be politically disastrous - even with a friendly media running interference - to shut down the government over illegal immigration.
The constituency wants protection for dreamers. Gerrymandering has allowed house republicans to work in an echo chamber and not act in the best interest of the American people, senators don't have this luxury. Any Democrat that allows March 6th to arrive without clean DACA legislation to pass is mumped, will of the people.
Let's also not forget we had a deal but the cheeto colored bipolar shitholer mumped it up.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 19, 2018, 11:25:26 AM
Now Plan B for the Dems is to shut the government down if a spending bill doesn’t include the DACA Amnesty.
This one is entirely on the Dems, both in refusing the initial compromise and now in holding government funding hostage. Which strikes me as both terrible policy and politics, but the Dem base is soooper crazy. You don’t have to take my word for it that Dems are responsible for this. Here is NBC....
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/01/18/nbcs_kasie_hunt_dems_poised_to_kill_cr_in_senate_progressives_say_we_dont_care_we_want_to_shut_this_down.html (https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/01/18/nbcs_kasie_hunt_dems_poised_to_kill_cr_in_senate_progressives_say_we_dont_care_we_want_to_shut_this_down.html)
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on January 19, 2018, 11:34:24 AM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 19, 2018, 11:36:57 AM
If I told you I wouldn't cut off your right hand if you let me cut of your left hand, would you agree to this compromise?
You're comparing an offer to trade amnesty to a million illegal immigrants for stronger border security and reforms to immigration law to.... lopping off limbs? Can you take a step back and consider how completely unhinged that sounds?
Post by: Institutional Control on January 19, 2018, 11:43:12 AM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 19, 2018, 11:51:44 AM
Um, that'st the deal the Democrats agreed to and Trump blew up in his "shithole" meeting.
No it isn’t. Look it up. And it was Durbin, once he realized he wasn’t going to get the deal the Dems wanted, who chose to blow up the negotiations by leaking an alleged comment from a private meeting.
Post by: Kat Kid on January 19, 2018, 11:52:34 AM
https://twitter.com/maggieNYT/status/954404678816731136
Post by: wetwillie on January 19, 2018, 11:56:26 AM
Post by: Institutional Control on January 19, 2018, 12:02:06 PM
Um, that'st the deal the Democrats agreed to and Trump blew up in his "shithole" meeting.
No it isn’t. Look it up. And it was Durbin, once he realized he wasn’t going to get the deal the Dems wanted, who chose to blow up the negotiations by leaking an alleged comment from a private meeting.
They are public officials, no meetings should have the guarantee of privacy unless classified information is being discussed. And the story that CNN has said is that the story was out there and Durbin confirmed it. Why would he bother to "leak" it only to publicly confirm it?
I guess don't know where to "look it up" where there won't be a spin from one side or the other. But Lindsey Graham said they had a deal that involved all the things you mentioned and Trump changed his mind.
Post by: Cire on January 19, 2018, 12:04:31 PM
something like 8-9 out of ten people support DACA without strings attached.
split the difference.
70% of Americans would call KSW an effing racist.
Post by: The Big Train on January 19, 2018, 12:35:13 PM
Post by: catastrophe on January 19, 2018, 12:52:21 PM
So Trump pressuring congress to address DACA, Illegals, etc. is bad because....
I don't mind that Trump said this is something congress needs to work out.
However, I think most people would blame Trump because he said he'd sign any bipartisan agreement and then said he didn't like the agreement they made because he didn't get enough funding to let him build a wall long enough to make him feel better about the size of his manhood.
Post by: Yard Dog on January 19, 2018, 01:35:12 PM
Why do Republicans hate daca so much?
My understanding it is because daca was meant to be temporary and wasn't voted on by congress. They'd rather have something more concrete on the books and set as law.
Post by: star seed 7 on January 19, 2018, 01:37:09 PM
Post by: Institutional Control on January 19, 2018, 01:50:22 PM
Then do it?
They need to wait until they have control of both houses and the White House.
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on January 19, 2018, 08:11:10 PM
If I told you I wouldn't cut off your right hand if you let me cut of your left hand, would you agree to this compromise?
You're comparing an offer to trade amnesty to a million illegal immigrants for stronger border security and reforms to immigration law to.... lopping off limbs? Can you take a step back and consider how completely unhinged that sounds?
Senator Hirono just made the exact same analogy, so.....I guess she reads gE.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on January 19, 2018, 09:08:32 PM
1. what do democrats have against c.h.i.p. ? ( that’s for you lib )
2. Democrats are incredibly dumb, they should do whatever DACA deal they get offered. Our immigration problem is at least 50% caused by this country not enforcing laws that are already on the books, the democrats should be fine with whatever law Trump comes up with because they won’t enforce Trumps laws either. Now if The new law said these amnesty folks and their lineage could never vote then the D’s would have to take their stand.
Post by: bucket on January 19, 2018, 09:21:39 PM
2 things.....
1. what do democrats have against c.h.i.p. ? ( that’s for you lib )
2. Democrats are incredibly dumb, they should do whatever DACA deal they get offered. Our immigration problem is at least 50% caused by this country not enforcing laws that are already on the books, the democrats should be fine with whatever law Trump comes up with because they won’t enforce Trumps laws either. Now if The new law said these amnesty folks and their lineage could never vote then the D’s would have to take their stand.
1. CHIP is a bipartisan initiative. Therefore, giving it to the Dems isn't really giving them much of anything in "a deal."
2. Getting DACA taken care of now would mean Republicans can't dangle it in front of them for any other talks in the future.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on January 19, 2018, 09:38:33 PM
Post by: bucket on January 19, 2018, 09:53:47 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on January 19, 2018, 10:06:54 PM
You are a dandy.......
Post by: Kat Kid on January 19, 2018, 10:29:40 PM
Post by: puniraptor on January 19, 2018, 10:51:43 PM
Dems are not voting for chip, DACA, and border security and you think this is blowing up in ‘pub faces?
You are a dandy.......
Pubs control Congress and the White House. If you don't believe that they will take the hit for a shutdown, then you are just lying to yourself. Dems have every incentive to let this shutdown go down.
Post by: gatoveintisiet on January 19, 2018, 10:58:00 PM
hold on, so 4 republicans voted against?
10 yes votes short
Post by: gatoveintisiete on January 19, 2018, 11:01:17 PM
Dems are not voting for chip, DACA, and border security and you think this is blowing up in ‘pub faces?
You are a dandy.......
Pubs control Congress and the White House. If you don't believe that they will take the hit for a shutdown, then you are just lying to yourself. Dems have every incentive to let this shutdown go down.
Maybe if there were 61 pub senators ( if you are counting McCain)
Post by: catastrophe on January 20, 2018, 07:32:38 AM
All that said, Democrats are playing the game right. The worse this gets the less favorably history will look on Trump and the Republican controlled congress. I think something like 80% of Americans want some form of DACA on the books? Democrats have a good argument for forcing action on this one.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 20, 2018, 08:21:57 AM
hold on, so 4 republicans voted against?
Because they want a budget instead of a CR. Even if all 51 pubs had supported the CR, it never would have passed in the face of unified Dem opposition (a few red state Dems were permitted to break ranks, but only after it was assured the vote couldn’t pass).
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 20, 2018, 08:26:38 AM
Dems are not voting for chip, DACA, and border security and you think this is blowing up in ‘pub faces?
You are a dandy.......
Pubs control Congress and the White House. If you don't believe that they will take the hit for a shutdown, then you are just lying to yourself. Dems have every incentive to let this shutdown go down.
Maybe. But you’re basically banking on the Dem/Media complex successfully misleading the American people to believe this is the pubs’ fault, facts be damned. This is actually quite similar to banking on the Dem/Media complex successfully misleading a majority of Americans to believe they won’t get a tax cut, facts be damned.
What does that say about Dem politics when it is based on deceiving people?
The facts are that the CR could never pass because the Dems chose to not support it, and they chose not to support it because they didn’t get their demand for amnesty for illegal immigrants.
Post by: star seed 7 on January 20, 2018, 09:54:02 AM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 22, 2018, 12:05:23 PM
Amnesty to DACA recipients in exchange for allocating $20bil over 10 years to build the wall and beef up border security, and abolish visa lottery and chain immigration. That's something everyone here would agree to, right? I don't think we'd need until Feb 8 to hammer that out.
Post by: star seed 7 on January 22, 2018, 12:06:51 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on January 22, 2018, 12:17:02 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on January 22, 2018, 12:57:01 PM
Post by: Phil Titola on January 22, 2018, 12:57:27 PM
Ok, so now that the "hugely embarrassing failure of leadership that is totally going to blow up in Trump's face" ended with Dems capitulating after a long weekend, let's get back to the immigration deal:
Amnesty to DACA recipients in exchange for allocating $20bil over 10 years to build the wall and beef up border security, and abolish visa lottery and chain immigration. That's something everyone here would agree to, right? I don't think we'd need until Feb 8 to hammer that out.
I don't care how much we charge Mexico for the wall. Seems dealer Trump could get a good deal for us and maybe they'd throw in cameras or drones or something.
Majority of people want the DACA kids to stay...you don't get to use that as the only point you are willing to concede.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 22, 2018, 12:58:05 PM
The wall is paid for nitwit
Well yes and no. Ultimately Mexico is going to pay for it once Trump seizes all the remitttances, so this would be more of a loan.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 22, 2018, 01:00:31 PM
Ok, so now that the "hugely embarrassing failure of leadership that is totally going to blow up in Trump's face" ended with Dems capitulating after a long weekend, let's get back to the immigration deal:
Amnesty to DACA recipients in exchange for allocating $20bil over 10 years to build the wall and beef up border security, and abolish visa lottery and chain immigration. That's something everyone here would agree to, right? I don't think we'd need until Feb 8 to hammer that out.
I don't care how much we charge Mexico for the wall. Seems dealer Trump could get a good deal for us and maybe they'd throw in cameras or drones or something.
Majority of people want the DACA kids to stay...you don't get to use that as the only point you are willing to concede.
A majority want amnesty without stronger border enforcement? I’m sure you can find some polls that were selectively worded and samples to get that result, but I doubt it’s true. Yes, I feel very comfortable requiring additional border security in exchange for amnesty. Otherwise it’s just like the last amnesties.
Post by: Phil Titola on January 22, 2018, 01:07:37 PM
Ok, so now that the "hugely embarrassing failure of leadership that is totally going to blow up in Trump's face" ended with Dems capitulating after a long weekend, let's get back to the immigration deal:
Amnesty to DACA recipients in exchange for allocating $20bil over 10 years to build the wall and beef up border security, and abolish visa lottery and chain immigration. That's something everyone here would agree to, right? I don't think we'd need until Feb 8 to hammer that out.
I don't care how much we charge Mexico for the wall. Seems dealer Trump could get a good deal for us and maybe they'd throw in cameras or drones or something.
Majority of people want the DACA kids to stay...you don't get to use that as the only point you are willing to concede.
A majority want amnesty without stronger border enforcement? I’m sure you can find some polls that were selectively worded and samples to get that result, but I doubt it’s true. Yes, I feel very comfortable requiring additional border security in exchange for amnesty. Otherwise it’s just like the last amnesties.
So you want to give in on the one point everybody wants (DACA kids get to stay) and in exchange you got 20B of taxpayer money to build a structure that won't work and eliminate anybody being able to bring their families to America and end a lottery program of already vetted immigrants.
You are as good of a dealer as Trump and really living those American values that allowed your ancestors to come here.
Post by: star seed 7 on January 22, 2018, 01:08:53 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 22, 2018, 01:19:43 PM
Ok, so now that the "hugely embarrassing failure of leadership that is totally going to blow up in Trump's face" ended with Dems capitulating after a long weekend, let's get back to the immigration deal:
Amnesty to DACA recipients in exchange for allocating $20bil over 10 years to build the wall and beef up border security, and abolish visa lottery and chain immigration. That's something everyone here would agree to, right? I don't think we'd need until Feb 8 to hammer that out.
I don't care how much we charge Mexico for the wall. Seems dealer Trump could get a good deal for us and maybe they'd throw in cameras or drones or something.
Majority of people want the DACA kids to stay...you don't get to use that as the only point you are willing to concede.
A majority want amnesty without stronger border enforcement? I’m sure you can find some polls that were selectively worded and samples to get that result, but I doubt it’s true. Yes, I feel very comfortable requiring additional border security in exchange for amnesty. Otherwise it’s just like the last amnesties.
So you want to give in on the one point everybody wants (DACA kids get to stay) and in exchange you got 20B of taxpayer money to build a structure that won't work and eliminate anybody being able to bring their families to America and end a lottery program of already vetted immigrants.
You are as good of a dealer as Trump and really living those American values that allowed your ancestors to come here.
So the point you keep missing is that DACA amnesty is not something “everybody wants.” It’s something the Dems and some coastal Pubs want, and something most other Pubs would agree to but only in exchange for better border security and immigration reform.
You keep ignoring that second part, and you don’t seem to think better border enforcement is a reasonable precondition to granting amnesty to illegal immigrants. We’ll just to have agree to disagree on that.
But it is extremely disingenuous to take Pubs’ willingness to negotiate on DACA as “hey, everybody wants amnesty without any compromise.” That’s not the case. Far from it.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 22, 2018, 01:21:18 PM
So if I had to guess, instead of a deal we’re going to see a string of CRs and a crap ton of finger pointing the rest of this year. :sad:
Post by: Phil Titola on January 22, 2018, 01:24:13 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on January 22, 2018, 01:24:35 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 22, 2018, 01:45:01 PM
CBS news poll says 87% of Americans says dreamers should be allowed to stay.
I would be part of that 87%. But I only want amnesty if border security is enhanced. You’ll notice CBS didn’t ask that question or explore that distinction. Interestingly, CBS did ask whether DACA amnesty was worth shutting down the government over 46% said yes, 48% said no. That’s closer than I expected, but I haven’t read the poll internals. I wonder how the poll sampled by party affiliation?
Post by: MakeItRain on January 22, 2018, 02:42:48 PM
CBS news poll says 87% of Americans says dreamers should be allowed to stay.
LOL!
Bet CBS news polls still show HRC winning the election.
Leftists believe man made climate change is fact and basic biology is unsettled.
Do you know how polls work you dumb bitch? Also this constitutes the first time I've seen CBS News referred to as leftist. I guess I shouldn't be surprised by the state of idiots these days, anyway eat this
https://twitter.com/FoxNews/status/955237577019314176
Post by: Dugout DickStone on January 22, 2018, 02:55:02 PM
The wall is paid for nitwit
Well yes and no. Ultimately Mexico is going to pay for it once Trump seizes all the remitttances, so this would be more of a loan.
Loaning Trump money is a SUPER bad idea.
Post by: star seed 7 on January 22, 2018, 02:59:06 PM
Post by: catastrophe on January 22, 2018, 03:14:20 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 22, 2018, 03:15:44 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 22, 2018, 03:18:56 PM
Well ask your friend if he has seen any polls indicating a majority of Americans do not want dreamers to stay in the USA. Cause if so, I'll bet the questioned was framed pretty poorly.
I would like to know the results of a poll that asks something like "Would you prefer for current DACA recipients to receive permanent legal status (a) unconditionally, (b) not at all, or (c) only in exchange for stricter immigration enforcement?
Anybody know of any poll like that?
Update: That didn't take much googling... http://www.langerresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/1191a4DACAandImmigration.pdf (http://www.langerresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/1191a4DACAandImmigration.pdf)
Poll commissioned by ABC finds 86% favor legal status for DACA recipients, and 65% would support a compromise of DACA amnesty for stronger border enforcement. The two questions were:
Quote
23. Do you support or oppose a program that allows undocumented immigrants to stay in the United States if they arrived here as a child, completed high school or military service and have not been convicted of a serious crime?
24. Would you support or oppose a law that combined this proposal for undocumented immigrants with increased funding for border security programs?
It's unclear how much of the 86% would support unilateral amnesty without stronger border enforcement because ABC didn't provide that possible choice. And that's why you have to take polls worth a grain of salt - the results depend upon how questions are worded and what options are presented (not to mention sampling). But I think it's reasonable to assume that not even close to 86% would prefer unilateral amnesty over an amnesty + enforcement option.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on January 22, 2018, 04:30:01 PM
Post by: catastrophe on January 22, 2018, 04:35:00 PM
Well ask your friend if he has seen any polls indicating a majority of Americans do not want dreamers to stay in the USA. Cause if so, I'll bet the questioned was framed pretty poorly.
I would like to know the results of a poll that asks something like "Would you prefer for current DACA recipients to receive permanent legal status (a) unconditionally, (b) not at all, or (c) only in exchange for stricter immigration enforcement?
Anybody know of any poll like that?
Update: That didn't take much googling... http://www.langerresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/1191a4DACAandImmigration.pdf (http://www.langerresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/1191a4DACAandImmigration.pdf)
Poll commissioned by ABC finds 86% favor legal status for DACA recipients, and 65% would support a compromise of DACA amnesty for stronger border enforcement. The two questions were:Quote23. Do you support or oppose a program that allows undocumented immigrants to stay in the United States if they arrived here as a child, completed high school or military service and have not been convicted of a serious crime?
24. Would you support or oppose a law that combined this proposal for undocumented immigrants with increased funding for border security programs?
It's unclear how much of the 86% would support unilateral amnesty without stronger border enforcement because ABC didn't provide that possible choice. And that's why you have to take polls worth a grain of salt - the results depend upon how questions are worded and what options are presented (not to mention sampling). But I think it's reasonable to assume that not even close to 86% would prefer unilateral amnesty over an amnesty + enforcement option.
Well the first question just summarizes what DACA is and always has been, so from that question it sounds like 86% of those polled support DACA... I agree you can't necessarily extrapolate what specific legislation people would prefer, but it sure as hell sounds like 86% of people are in favor of a bill memorializing DACA in its current form. DACA has never been tied to border security until the Republicans decided they had some kind of leverage since Democrats have bigger issues with deporting an entire generation of low risk, educated folks who consider themselves Americans.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 22, 2018, 07:18:54 PM
Well the first question just summarizes what DACA is and always has been, so from that question it sounds like 86% of those polled support DACA... I agree you can't necessarily extrapolate what specific legislation people would prefer, but it sure as hell sounds like 86% of people are in favor of a bill memorializing DACA in its current form. DACA has never been tied to border security until the Republicans decided they had some kind of leverage since Democrats have bigger issues with deporting an entire generation of low risk, educated folks who consider themselves Americans.
“What DACA is and always has been.” “DACA has never been tied to border security.”
So I think it bears reminding at this point that DACA was created only a couple of years ago by Barrack Obama’s constitutionally questionable executive order refusing to execute existing immigration law with respect to a million people. You’re speaking of DACA as if it is some sacrosanct law of the land instead of the shakiest of usurpations of executive authority. One might feel fortunate that Trump and the Pubs are even willing to consider working with Dems to codify the DACA amnesty. So again, it is perfectly reasonable to expect other immigration reforms in exchange for granting an amnesty.
Post by: MakeItRain on January 22, 2018, 08:46:31 PM
Pro-tip: There are some liberals on this BBS who are worth arguing with. MIR is not one of those. He ducks in occasionally to call people names (usually "racist" or "bigot") and that's about the extent of his work.
Why do you constantly blame other people for your racism? Don't get mad at me bub, change your ways, explore the world, brown people aren't so bad, we won't harm you.
Post by: catastrophe on January 22, 2018, 08:51:37 PM
“What DACA is and always has been.” “DACA has never been tied to border security.”
So I think it bears reminding at this point that DACA was created only a couple of years ago by Barrack Obama’s constitutionally questionable executive order refusing to execute existing immigration law with respect to a million people. You’re speaking of DACA as if it is some sacrosanct law of the land instead of the shakiest of usurpations of executive authority. One might feel fortunate that Trump and the Pubs are even willing to consider working with Dems to codify the DACA amnesty. So again, it is perfectly reasonable to expect other immigration reforms in exchange for granting an amnesty.
It's remarkable how dense you are willing to act in order to avoid conceding a point. The question was simply "do you support or oppose DACA?" 86% said they supported it. That means 86% of people favored the program instituted under Obama. That means 86% of people would be in favor of Trump reinstating the same thing. That means 86% of people are in favor of legislation that does the same thing.
65% of people want both DACA legislation AND border security legislation.
I'm not sure how you can justify reading any more into the numbers than that.
Post by: Phil Titola on January 22, 2018, 08:57:31 PM
Post by: catastrophe on January 22, 2018, 09:45:55 PM
Trump should be begging for a DACA only bill to hang the 2nd win on the rafters....it's something everybody wants....easy peasy.
Well Trump already publicly said he wanted a clean DACA bill at one point.
Post by: puniraptor on January 22, 2018, 10:47:22 PM
truly an unthinkable scenario
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on January 22, 2018, 10:48:32 PM
The dems relied heavily on Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) polling that said 86% of people supported whatever the eff daca is, and are now suffering the consequences of that foolishness.
Post by: puniraptor on January 22, 2018, 10:58:59 PM
The overwhelming majority of people polled think the dems got their crap pushed in by trump in this idiotic ordeal.
The dems relied heavily on Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) polling that said 86% of people supported whatever the eff daca is, and are now suffering the consequences of that foolishness.
both of these things can be true. the people support wtf data and think the dems lost
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 23, 2018, 09:09:53 AM
“What DACA is and always has been.” “DACA has never been tied to border security.”
So I think it bears reminding at this point that DACA was created only a couple of years ago by Barrack Obama’s constitutionally questionable executive order refusing to execute existing immigration law with respect to a million people. You’re speaking of DACA as if it is some sacrosanct law of the land instead of the shakiest of usurpations of executive authority. One might feel fortunate that Trump and the Pubs are even willing to consider working with Dems to codify the DACA amnesty. So again, it is perfectly reasonable to expect other immigration reforms in exchange for granting an amnesty.
It's remarkable how dense you are willing to act in order to avoid conceding a point. The question was simply "do you support or oppose DACA?" 86% said they supported it. That means 86% of people favored the program instituted under Obama. That means 86% of people would be in favor of Trump reinstating the same thing. That means 86% of people are in favor of legislation that does the same thing.
65% of people want both DACA legislation AND border security legislation.
I'm not sure how you can justify reading any more into the numbers than that.
So you dodged my point and returned to the polling. I already addressed the polling. Read back a page. You are assuming that the vast majority of people would prefer a "clean" amnesty over an exchange of amnesty for other immigration reforms, but the poll didn't ask that question. To the contrary, in the question that asked about amnesty and tighter border enforcement, 65% supported it.
Now back to my point, it is perfectly reasonable to expect tighter immigration enforcement in exchange for codifying an amnesty for illegal immigrants.
Post by: ChiComCat on January 23, 2018, 09:19:03 AM
Post by: Cire on January 23, 2018, 09:23:56 AM
Watch ronald reagan call KSW a racist from the grave
Post by: catastrophe on January 23, 2018, 09:28:58 AM
Now back to my point, it is perfectly reasonable to expect tighter immigration enforcement in exchange for codifying an amnesty for illegal immigrants.
I don’t know what reason has to do with it. Legislation isn’t passed based on what makes logical sense. If it was, we wouldn’t be staring at a $1.5 trillion hole for tax cuts passed when our economy is strong and unemployment is low.
Post by: sys on January 23, 2018, 09:45:20 AM
would trade building a pointless wall for a natl employment id and enforcement of labor laws on employers, no-visa tourist entry for mexicans and rationalization (increase) in temporary no path to citizenship work visas.
Post by: star seed 7 on January 23, 2018, 10:03:22 AM
don't offer the pubs crap for daca. if they want to unilaterally deport 800k sympathetic young english-speaking immigrants, let them.
would trade building a pointless wall for a natl employment id and enforcement of labor laws on employers, no-visa tourist entry for mexicans and rationalization (increase) in temporary no path to citizenship work visas.
Sys, it's like we have the same brain
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 23, 2018, 10:14:16 AM
The poll asked about tighter border enforcement, not a 20 billion dollar wall. I don't think I know anyone who works for Rasmussen, so take this with a grain of salt, but I would guess 65% wouldn't support that boondoggle.
Exactly. You really can't read into polls anything more than the exact question that is asked. Everything else is guessing. I'd guess that some people would support DACA amnesty unilaterally, some would only support it in exchange for a complete wall, and some would support it in exchange for other immigration reforms. Which is probably what you'd find if you just asked any random group of people. People's opinions vary widely about immigration, and there is a lot of nuance. Screaming that 86% of people support unilateral DACA amnesty based on one question that doesn't drill down into the issue is, frankly, silly.
Post by: LickNeckey on January 23, 2018, 10:33:56 AM
Post by: bucket on January 24, 2018, 08:11:42 PM
Post by: catastrophe on January 24, 2018, 08:29:11 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on January 24, 2018, 09:43:33 PM
don't offer the pubs crap for daca. if they want to unilaterally deport 800k sympathetic young english-speaking immigrants, let them.
would trade building a pointless wall for a natl employment id and enforcement of labor laws on employers, no-visa tourist entry for mexicans and rationalization (increase) in temporary no path to citizenship work visas.
Sys, it's like we have the same brain
I don’t have a problem with this either, tri-partisanship :cheers:
Post by: Dugout DickStone on January 25, 2018, 08:10:28 AM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 25, 2018, 08:32:16 AM
Trump folding? :Wha:
Trump doing what he does - bringing people to the table. He has expressed support for both a DACA amnesty and stronger border enforcement and immigration reforms. You can't focus on just one statement and forget the other. Ultimately, it is the legislature that will have to find the compromise.
The Clintons' favored pollster says Americans want all of the above. I think he is right. http://thehill.com/opinion/immigration/370440-american-public-backs-immigration-deal-with-daca-and-border-security (http://thehill.com/opinion/immigration/370440-american-public-backs-immigration-deal-with-daca-and-border-security)
But I still think a deal is highly unlikely because: (1) Democrats are strongly opposed to giving Trump another signature legislative accomplishment before the midterms unless it is basically 100% on their terms, and (2) Democrats are strongly opposed to meaningful border enforcement or immigration reforms that focus on merit.
The one thing that might get the Democrats over the hump is granting not just legal status for DACA, but a pathway to citizenship. The lure of all those newly minted Democratic voters might be enough for them to give Trump a win on a wall and other immigration reforms. Maybe. And those reforms would have to be good enough to get House conservatives on board with a pathway to citizenship.
Post by: star seed 7 on January 25, 2018, 08:47:16 AM
Post by: cfbandyman on January 25, 2018, 06:11:09 PM
Having gone through all the legal path with my gf on getting green cards, the system is slow, costly, and racked with landmines if you don't have a lawyer, it's kinda no brainer why there are so many "illegals" it's goddamn hard to do it legitly.
Post by: renocat on January 25, 2018, 06:25:08 PM
If I was president, no wall. Landmines.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 25, 2018, 06:33:47 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 25, 2018, 06:37:46 PM
WSJ: Trump Proposes Citizenship in Exchange For Wall, Other Concessions (https://www.wsj.com/articles/democrats-try-to-narrow-focus-of-an-immigration-deal-1516903971)
Post by: MakeItRain on January 25, 2018, 07:41:21 PM
“The Wall is terrible for the environment.” Love it.
Forget about the environment, do you think the wall is practical? How much of the border do you actually think we'll get walled for 50 billion, 125 miles?, and how long do you think it would take to get it built? If this wall happens, no rough ridin' chance, there's no way Trump would be alive to see it.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on January 25, 2018, 07:55:15 PM
Post by: treysolid on January 25, 2018, 07:58:37 PM
Post by: cfbandyman on January 25, 2018, 09:11:10 PM
Post by: cfbandyman on January 25, 2018, 09:11:48 PM
“The Wall is terrible for the environment.” Love it.
Forget about the environment, do you think the wall is practical? How much of the border do you actually think we'll get walled for 50 billion, 125 miles?, and how long do you think it would take to get it built? If this wall happens, no rough ridin' chance, there's no way Drumpf would be alive to see it.
I know right? That's what galled him the most.
Post by: cfbandyman on January 25, 2018, 09:13:02 PM
the wall - a better or worse idea than bioethanol? serious question. like, it would probably just be better to set that money on fire.
I think he would be ok with a trench filled with flaming cash if it meant stopping like a handful of them
Post by: catastrophe on January 25, 2018, 09:50:51 PM
Having gone through all the legal path with my gf on getting green cards, the system is slow, costly, and racked with landmines if you don't have a lawyer, it's kinda no brainer why there are so many "illegals" it's goddamn hard to do it legitly.
Helping someone with the same thing has definitely affected my perspective on immigration. It would be comical if it wasn't so sad/frustrating how many people view "illegal immigrants" as a uniform group of Mexicans who get in by sneaking across the U.S. boarder. Many of them come by airplane because they had temporary visas which expired. It is difficult to even get in to the U.S. legally, and incredibly difficult to legally stay for an extended amount of time.
If you want to fix the problems associated with illegal immigration, start with what sys said. Make it easy for people to legally work in the U.S. and put systems in place to make sure the process has been followed. I have no sympathy for people who complain about extra competition for their jobs. If you're worried about someone from another country doing your job for less, you should be getting better or lobbying to raise the minimum wage.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on January 26, 2018, 08:13:01 AM
“The Wall is terrible for the environment.” Love it.
Forget about the environment, do you think the wall is practical? How much of the border do you actually think we'll get walled for 50 billion, 125 miles?, and how long do you think it would take to get it built? If this wall happens, no rough ridin' chance, there's no way Drumpf would be alive to see it.
I know right? That's what galled him the most.
The environmental issues really are the worst aspect of the wall, though. Without them, we would just be throwing billions of dollars away to achieve nothing. With those issues, we are spending billions of dollars to make things worse than they currently are.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on January 26, 2018, 09:09:05 AM
Post by: catastrophe on January 26, 2018, 09:41:58 AM
Post by: ChiComCat on January 26, 2018, 09:49:24 AM
Yeah, it's great...unless your black with lower skill set.
https://cis.org/Testimony/Immigration-and-Black-Americans-Assessing-Impact
Can tell you from experience at my employer. About 10 years ago, we had around 30 African American employees. Most were lower skilled and young men (warehouse and some manual assembly) Our company decided to sub-contract this work to a temp agency(no benefits). Today, we have 3 African American employees. Guess it's okay that they lost their jobs, the sense of decency of providing, their pride of working in Joco vs hangin in KCMO. Maybe, (hopefully) they can increase their skill set and get better jobs. But making things harder for someone and then blaming them for their inability to compete seems to be cruel.
But I guess the purpose of a government is no longer working for the betterment of it's citizens.
Are there illegal immigrants in this story?
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 26, 2018, 12:23:16 PM
Quote
All Americans are rightly disturbed by the large numbers of illegal aliens entering our country. The jobs they hold might otherwise be held by citizens or legal immigrants. The public services they use impose burdens on our taxpayers.
Quote
When I see Mexican flags waving at pro-immigration demonstrations, I sometimes feel a flush of patriotic resentment. When I’m forced to use a translator to communicate with the guy fixing my car, I feel a certain frustration.
Bravo Mr. President.
Post by: star seed 7 on January 26, 2018, 12:25:18 PM
What a miserable piece of crap
Post by: DQ12 on January 26, 2018, 12:32:38 PM
Post by: Phil Titola on January 26, 2018, 02:14:51 PM
Post by: wetwillie on January 26, 2018, 02:53:09 PM
Post by: 8manpick on January 26, 2018, 04:03:08 PM
I have never crossed the border into Mexico, but can't anyone who holds a valid passport (generally, I'm sure there are exceptions) come into the United States by car, plane, or whatever? Just book a RT flight to LA, tell the DHS agent that you are here to go to Disney World and have a return flight in a week. Once they are across the border, if they want to find a way to disappear and stay in the country permanently, couldn't they do that just as effectively as anyone who had walked across into the New Mexican desert? What exactly is the wall going to stop?
Post by: star seed 7 on January 26, 2018, 04:10:34 PM
Mexicans need a visa or entry permit
Post by: 8manpick on January 26, 2018, 04:24:04 PM
Post by: Phil Titola on January 26, 2018, 05:34:23 PM
The rules regarding Americans going into Mexico and Mexicans going into US are very different
Mexicans need a visa or entry permit
Wonder if we'll start seeing more countries requiring visas if US citizens want to enter their country due to Trump's dumbassery...can't say I know why a country requires visitors to get visas except to vet them and ensure they leave.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on January 26, 2018, 05:47:32 PM
All Americans, not only in the States most heavily affected but in every place in this country, are rightly disturbed by the large numbers of illegal aliens entering our country. The jobs they hold might otherwise be held by citizens or legal immigrants. The public service they use impose burdens on our taxpayers. That's why our administration has moved aggressively to secure our borders more by hiring a record number of new border guards, by deporting twice as many criminal aliens as ever before, by cracking down on illegal hiring, by barring welfare benefits to illegal aliens. In the budget I will present to you, we will try to do more to speed the deportation of illegal aliens who are arrested for crimes, to better identify illegal aliens in the workplace as recommended by the commission headed by former Congresswoman Barbara Jordan. We are a nation of immigrants. But we are also a nation of laws. It is wrong and ultimately self-defeating for a nation of immigrants to permit the kind of abuse of our immigration laws we have seen in recent years, and we must do more to stop it.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on January 26, 2018, 05:49:43 PM
We have to send a clear message, just because your child gets across the border, that doesn’t mean the child gets to stay,” the former secretary of state said. “So, we don’t want to send a message that is contrary to our laws or will encourage more children to make that dangerous journey.”
Post by: star seed 7 on January 26, 2018, 05:50:31 PM
Interesting, how about Canadians?
canada, australia, and EU countries have reciprocal visa waivers with the US
Post by: sonofdaxjones on January 26, 2018, 05:53:07 PM
"I voted numerous times when I was a senator to spend money to build a barrier to try to prevent illegal immigrants from coming in. And I do think you have to control your borders."
Post by: wetwillie on January 26, 2018, 05:56:26 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on January 26, 2018, 05:56:46 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on January 26, 2018, 05:58:50 PM
We’ve got to do several things and I am, you know, adamantly against illegal immigrants.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on January 26, 2018, 06:02:55 PM
Instead of reversing that architecture and disavowing that plan, President Obama turbocharged it. To pay for the ballooning enforcement-first approach, the budget for immigration enforcement grew 300 percent from the resources given at the time of its founding under Bush to $18 billion annually, more than all other federal law-enforcement agencies’ budget combined.
https://www.thenation.com/article/the-deportation-machine-obama-built-for-president-trump/
Post by: bucket on January 26, 2018, 06:46:36 PM
Post by: Institutional Control on January 26, 2018, 07:46:26 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: CHONGS on January 26, 2018, 08:26:49 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on January 26, 2018, 08:30:36 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 26, 2018, 09:54:05 PM
Pres delivered a marvelous speech on immigration. Some excerpts....QuoteAll Americans are rightly disturbed by the large numbers of illegal aliens entering our country. The jobs they hold might otherwise be held by citizens or legal immigrants. The public services they use impose burdens on our taxpayers.QuoteWhen I see Mexican flags waving at pro-immigration demonstrations, I sometimes feel a flush of patriotic resentment. When I’m forced to use a translator to communicate with the guy fixing my car, I feel a certain frustration.
Bravo Mr. President.
He didn't seriously say that did he?
What a miserable piece of crap
I find it hard to believe the President has had to personally get his car fixed at any point in the last 3 decades.
Sorry, I should have been more clear. That was presidents Clinton and Obama.
Post by: steve dave on January 26, 2018, 09:57:36 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on January 26, 2018, 10:32:51 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on January 27, 2018, 12:14:03 AM
Post by: catastrophe on January 27, 2018, 07:08:50 AM
Sorry, I should have been more clear. That was presidents Clinton and Obama.
lol, nice try but I think I found your source (http://www.nationalreview.com/article/455772/democrats-immigration-beliefs-sign-increased-extremism) and it looks like the Bill Clinton quote was from FAKE NEWS CNN.
And Dlew's comment literally applies to any president, although it looks like Obama wrote that second quote before he was actually president, so it makes more sense. Either way, it's a bit disingenuous not to mention Obama wrote that first line in order to make a point that such "patriotic resentment" does not justify denial of rights and opportunities to immigrants (the opposite of what Trump wants to do).
Post by: catastrophe on January 27, 2018, 09:16:50 AM
I still don’t understand why you guys think liberals (or even independents like me) need to defend statements like this. Bill Clinton deserved a lot of criticism for several policies put in place during his administration. I don’t think Trump has had any original ideas since his campaign, so it’s no surprise Trump’s policy toward immigration is influenced by what the rhetoric was in 1995.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 27, 2018, 12:31:38 PM
Thank you for posting a legit source, JAG. Of course you understand my hesitation to believe the previous one.
I still don’t understand why you guys think liberals (or even independents like me) need to defend statements like this. Bill Clinton deserved a lot of criticism for several policies put in place during his administration. I don’t think Trump has had any original ideas since his campaign, so it’s no surprise Trump’s policy toward immigration is influenced by what the rhetoric was in 1995.
Lighten up. Just having a little fun.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on January 27, 2018, 12:35:27 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on January 27, 2018, 12:54:54 PM
The Clinton quotes really do a good job of showing that the republicans are about 20 years behind on social issues.
Yet it was Obama who put deportation on steroids, in a series of maneuvers and policy decisions that were as contrary as his eff'd up foreign policy.
Post by: The Big Train on January 27, 2018, 12:56:25 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on January 27, 2018, 06:31:49 PM
The Clinton quotes really do a good job of showing that the republicans are about 20 years behind on social issues.
Yet it was Obama who put deportation on steroids, in a series of maneuvers and policy decisions that were as contrary as his eff'd up foreign policy.
I remember I made this point once and you said his deportation stats were hollow. You guys playing both sides of this fence/wall is amusing. Speaking of the wall, I see every trumpite ITT punted on my question about the practicality of the wall. I remember when Republicans were vehemently against government waste. Now we're looking at the biggest waste project in the history of the world and you're all YOLOing this bitch up.
Post by: treysolid on January 27, 2018, 11:05:24 PM
Post by: The Big Train on January 28, 2018, 07:47:51 AM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 28, 2018, 09:37:44 AM
I think additional physical barriers will make it significantly harder and more expensive to cross illegally. And I think Democrats think so, too. Hence the push back.
So we’ve got “waste of money” and “harmful to the environment.” I’m enjoying this. What else?
Post by: Dugout DickStone on January 28, 2018, 09:50:50 AM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 28, 2018, 10:28:52 AM
It’s not waste if the US doesn’t pay for it you rubes
Still an environmental catastrophe. :bawl:
Post by: Institutional Control on January 28, 2018, 10:47:36 AM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Phil Titola on January 28, 2018, 10:55:19 AM
Waste?So because Democrats like federal.soending you are good with this waste of money? Strange.Maybe Trump should call it a “stimulus wall” or “new deal wall.” Dems have never cared about wasteful government spending unless it involves the military or border security. Go figure.
I think additional physical barriers will make it significantly harder and more expensive to cross illegally. And I think Democrats think so, too. Hence the push back.
So we’ve got “waste of money” and “harmful to the environment.” I’m enjoying this. What else?
Post by: Dugout DickStone on January 28, 2018, 11:04:39 AM
It’s not waste if the US doesn’t pay for it you rubes
Still an environmental catastrophe. :bawl:
So we agree Mexico is still paying for this thing or it’s a major lie to the voters right?
Post by: Dugout DickStone on January 28, 2018, 11:06:34 AM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 28, 2018, 11:52:13 AM
Waste?So because Democrats like federal.soending you are good with this waste of money? Strange.
I think additional physical barriers will make it significantly harder and more expensive to cross illegally. And I think Democrats think so, too. Hence the push back.
So we’ve got “waste of money” and “harmful to the environment.” I’m enjoying this. What else?
I don’t think it’s a waste. I do think Dems are very much pro government spending for pretty much everything else. So only one of us is being hypocritical.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on January 28, 2018, 12:22:07 PM
Pres delivered a marvelous speech on immigration. Some excerpts....QuoteAll Americans are rightly disturbed by the large numbers of illegal aliens entering our country. The jobs they hold might otherwise be held by citizens or legal immigrants. The public services they use impose burdens on our taxpayers.QuoteWhen I see Mexican flags waving at pro-immigration demonstrations, I sometimes feel a flush of patriotic resentment. When I’m forced to use a translator to communicate with the guy fixing my car, I feel a certain frustration.
Bravo Mr. President.He didn't seriously say that did he?
What a miserable piece of crapI find it hard to believe the President has had to personally get his car fixed at any point in the last 3 decades.
Sorry, I should have been more clear. That was presidents Clinton and Obama.
AMAZE
Post by: Phil Titola on January 28, 2018, 02:40:59 PM
The only thing a physical wall will stop are the poor migrant workers that keep your produce prices low. That is a waste of money.Waste?So because Democrats like federal.soending you are good with this waste of money? Strange.
I think additional physical barriers will make it significantly harder and more expensive to cross illegally. And I think Democrats think so, too. Hence the push back.
So we’ve got “waste of money” and “harmful to the environment.” I’m enjoying this. What else?
I don’t think it’s a waste. I do think Dems are very much pro government spending for pretty much everything else. So only one of us is being hypocritical.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 28, 2018, 03:48:21 PM
The only thing a physical wall will stop are the poor migrant workers that keep your produce prices low. That is a waste of money.Waste?So because Democrats like federal.soending you are good with this waste of money? Strange.
I think additional physical barriers will make it significantly harder and more expensive to cross illegally. And I think Democrats think so, too. Hence the push back.
So we’ve got “waste of money” and “harmful to the environment.” I’m enjoying this. What else?
I don’t think it’s a waste. I do think Dems are very much pro government spending for pretty much everything else. So only one of us is being hypocritical.
I’ll mark you down in the “wall will reduce illegal immigration” column.
Post by: Phil Titola on January 28, 2018, 05:00:37 PM
Post by: wetwillie on January 28, 2018, 05:17:45 PM
Post by: Phil Titola on January 28, 2018, 05:21:24 PM
hes going to get some kind of wall funded so it's probably best to just accept that and move on
:buh-bye:
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 28, 2018, 07:30:27 PM
Drugs will continue is to pour in. Trump is doing fine enough job of scaring everybody away from America....the wall isn't needed.
Because submarines, guys.
Seriously though, just like this will increase the price of human trafficking, it will likewise increase the price of drugs. Which is a good thing.
But never forget, #environmentaldisaster.
Post by: Phil Titola on January 28, 2018, 08:51:41 PM
Drugs will continue is to pour in. Trump is doing fine enough job of scaring everybody away from America....the wall isn't needed.
Because submarines, guys.
Seriously though, just like this will increase the price of human trafficking, it will likewise increase the price of drugs. Which is a good thing.
But never forget, #environmentaldisaster.
no it won't. Drug guys aren't running drugs across 50 lbs. at a time.
We get it...Trump is your guy and you can't go against him but this is dumb unless you are the concrete guy who gets this bid.
Post by: treysolid on January 28, 2018, 11:33:45 PM
Drugs will continue is to pour in. Trump is doing fine enough job of scaring everybody away from America....the wall isn't needed.
Because submarines, guys.
Seriously though, just like this will increase the price of human trafficking, it will likewise increase the price of drugs. Which is a good thing.
But never forget, #environmentaldisaster.
you don't really understand economics, do you? if the current drug trafficking routes won't be affected by the construction of a border wall, why would that wall's existence cause their price to increase?
Post by: renocat on January 28, 2018, 11:45:23 PM
Appears Democat and Republicans hate Trump's immigration reform plan. Might be okay if everyone dislikes it.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 29, 2018, 09:18:17 AM
Drugs will continue is to pour in. Trump is doing fine enough job of scaring everybody away from America....the wall isn't needed.
Because submarines, guys.
Seriously though, just like this will increase the price of human trafficking, it will likewise increase the price of drugs. Which is a good thing.
But never forget, #environmentaldisaster.
no it won't. Drug guys aren't running drugs across 50 lbs. at a time.
We get it...Trump is your guy and you can't go against him but this is dumb unless you are the concrete guy who gets this bid.
It stands to reason that a wall would further limit the ability to drive drugs across the border, allowing border security to provide greater focus at checkpoints. A border wall will not stop all drug and human trafficking, but it should make both harder. Harder = more expensive. Look, if you want to argue that the wall is still a waste of money, that's ok. You could be right, and we won't really know until it happens. But to argue that it will no effect on drug or human trafficking is a little over the top.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on January 29, 2018, 09:19:23 AM
Drugs will continue is to pour in. Trump is doing fine enough job of scaring everybody away from America....the wall isn't needed.
Because submarines, guys.
Seriously though, just like this will increase the price of human trafficking, it will likewise increase the price of drugs. Which is a good thing.
But never forget, #environmentaldisaster.
no it won't. Drug guys aren't running drugs across 50 lbs. at a time.
We get it...Trump is your guy and you can't go against him but this is dumb unless you are the concrete guy who gets this bid.
It stands to reason that a wall would further limit the ability to drive drugs across the border, allowing border security to provide greater focus at checkpoints. A border wall will not stop all drug and human trafficking, but it should make both harder. Harder = more expensive. Look, if you want to argue that the wall is still a waste of money, that's ok. You could be right, and we won't really know until it happens. But to argue that it will no effect on drug or human trafficking is a little over the top.
It really doesn't stand to reason. Have you ever driven across the US/Mexico border?
Post by: wetwillie on January 29, 2018, 09:23:05 AM
Post by: Phil Titola on January 29, 2018, 09:24:32 AM
Want money to secure borders with technology and manpower? I can get down with that even though I think we have bigger problems to spend our money on...it's the physical wall structure that this dolt ran on in his campaign that he thinks he has to deliver.Drugs will continue is to pour in. Trump is doing fine enough job of scaring everybody away from America....the wall isn't needed.
Because submarines, guys.
Seriously though, just like this will increase the price of human trafficking, it will likewise increase the price of drugs. Which is a good thing.
But never forget, #environmentaldisaster.
no it won't. Drug guys aren't running drugs across 50 lbs. at a time.
We get it...Trump is your guy and you can't go against him but this is dumb unless you are the concrete guy who gets this bid.
It stands to reason that a wall would further limit the ability to drive drugs across the border, allowing border security to provide greater focus at checkpoints. A border wall will not stop all drug and human trafficking, but it should make both harder. Harder = more expensive. Look, if you want to argue that the wall is still a waste of money, that's ok. You could be right, and we won't really know until it happens. But to argue that it will no effect on drug or human trafficking is a little over the top.
It's an easy fix ...."after studying a wall we have found more effective methods to secure our border with technology". You satisfy campaign promise, you use my money intelligently to the biggest extent possible, and you show ability to bargin and pivot on ideas....but no.
Insane.
Post by: star seed 7 on January 29, 2018, 09:33:04 AM
Post by: LickNeckey on January 29, 2018, 11:56:30 AM
Drugs will continue is to pour in. Trump is doing fine enough job of scaring everybody away from America....the wall isn't needed.
Because submarines, guys.
Seriously though, just like this will increase the price of human trafficking, it will likewise increase the price of drugs. Which is a good thing.
But never forget, #environmentaldisaster.
it seems to me that higher priced drugs would actually lead to more suppliers seeking to enter the market and higher stakes / more violence in terms of maintaining markets and distribution networks.
Post by: MakeItRain on January 30, 2018, 01:43:29 AM
I also agree that wall will reduce illegal immigration.
1. Makes it physically more difficult to cross by foot.
2. A higher % of current illegals will either return or begin legal process to live in the country.
3. Coyotes will charge more, so fewer immigrants will be able to afford.
4. Mexico will resume enforcing their southern border because they don't want Honduran, Nicaraguan, etc. refugees settling in Mexico.
For 10 goddamned percent of the border, 10 percent! How are you and your cuck brother okay with that? Do you want actual border protection or not? If you actually want the wall and think money is no object you should be furious over the half-assed nature of this thing.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on January 30, 2018, 07:45:15 AM
Post by: catastrophe on January 30, 2018, 09:41:32 AM
Post by: gatoveintisiet on January 30, 2018, 09:59:36 AM
Post by: catastrophe on January 30, 2018, 10:01:52 AM
Post by: Trim on January 30, 2018, 10:07:28 AM
For 10 goddamned percent of the border, 10 percent! How are you and your cuck brother okay with that? Do you want actual border protection or not? If you actually want the wall and think money is no object you should be furious over the half-assed nature of this thing.
(https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/6NDc8Ph11k238Ciri-MBPdkZ29A=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/9332169/beas.JPG)
Post by: catastrophe on January 30, 2018, 10:35:43 AM
Post by: bucket on January 30, 2018, 01:41:50 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on January 30, 2018, 01:45:46 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 30, 2018, 03:10:27 PM
I thought I read that trump was having one as a guest too :dunno:
I was hoping Trump would invite one. But I think it would fine to just address the illegal immigrants that the Dems invite. "(Buhleeve me) I have proposed an immigration bill that will grant you a pathway to citizenship in exchange for stronger border enforcement and other much needed reforms. I hope the Democrats will join us in allowing you to finally come out of the shadows." #owningthelibs
Post by: mocat on January 30, 2018, 03:23:53 PM
Post by: mocat on January 30, 2018, 03:24:09 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on January 30, 2018, 03:51:27 PM
The area known as the Mariposa Wash is a hilly region in Arizona straddling the U.S.-Mexico border. It's cut in two, in some areas, by a sturdy, rusted metal fence with heavy gates. When the area floods during monsoon season, debris left behind by would-be border crossers is washed up against the fence in drifts of refuse. Water bottles, clothing, all the detritus of desperation is left clinging to the barrier.
Law enforcement officers patrol the area as far as the road allows. But where the road runs out, so too does the metal fence. Stretching off into the distance goes a ramshackle, stick-and-wire barrier of sorts, easily breached with a wire cutters or a simple leap. Beyond the road, it's this flimsy frontier, backed up by a sprinkling of technology, that maintains border security. It's areas like this that President Trump would like to see walled up.
Border and customs agents play cat-and-mouse with people trying to cross into America. They watch each other's movements, each trying to gain an advantage.
Border Patrol Agent Daniel Hernandez is part of a team that patrols a line in the sand from the Yuma county line all the way to the New Mexico state line, close to 400 miles of frontier. He points out a swath of land in the middle the size of Connecticut. It's the Tohon O'odham Nation reservation, through which a large portion of Arizona's smuggling traffic passes.
In many areas on the reservation the border is little more than a flimsy, ill-maintained fence.
"It's very sparsely populated. There are 11 or 12 villages and they're very small and spread apart, so the criminal element always tries to exploit the people here," he says.
President Trump's proposed border wall would run right through it. But this 30,000-strong nation, recognized as sovereign by the federal government, has other ideas. Their identities are tightly bound to the land. "Tohono O'odham" means desert people, and they see themselves as custodians of the land they inhabit. "Every stick and stone is sacred," says Verlon Jose, the vice chairman of the Tohon O'odham tribal council.
He's firmly opposed to the wall.
"If I were to go into your home and say, 'You know what? Today I think I'm gonna build a wall right smack in the middle of your apartment or your home. And if you wanna get to the kitchen or to your restroom, you gotta ask me. And I have to give you permission to cross' -- how would you like that? That's what it means to our people."
Their nation is effectively split in two by the international boundary but its people go back and forth across it regularly to visit family and conduct tribal affairs, showing a tribal ID card at any official crossings they use. Large stretches of border, however, remain unfenced, meaning they can come and go as they please. A solid border wall would certainly curtail the abuse of their sacred lands by smugglers and illegal immigrants, but it would also threaten a way of life that is older than the United States.
This sets up an uneasy tension between federal law enforcement officials trying to enforce the law of the land, and the Tohono O'odham people, who believe they have ancestral rights to move freely across the modern border. Although there are plenty of places where illicit crossings can be made, official border crossings require all the trappings of officialdom every time: records, stamps, presentation of ID.
Ofela, a Tohono O'odham woman caught up at a border crossing, told us, "Where I live I drive 136 miles on the U.S. side to go get groceries. My father's community is only 15 miles on the south side of the border, and my mother's community is just a quarter of a mile and we have to go through this process every time. We want to be able to go visit our families on both sides of this border. What is the difficulty in that?"
What makes the tension trickier is that for the Tohono O'odham, it's not simply a matter of innocent grassroots culture. Some tribespeople are often found to be in cahoots with drug smugglers and cartels to stash or traffic drugs. The trade is simply too lucrative for some to ignore, which complicates matters.
For federal officials, the struggle is to balance respect for the nation's traditions with the need to secure a border against illegal activity.
"They want security and safety and we want the same thing. We have to tailor make our infrastructure and our technology to meet those demands, that is security and safety, while at the same time respecting their privacy, their sovereign land that is the reservation," Hernandez said.
In some areas, a wall is not necessarily the best solution. In a remote area, a technology tower may serve as well as a wall or a fence. In areas that are more heavily populated, a physical barrier becomes important. What actually gets built, and torn down at the same time, remains to be seen.
Post by: catastrophe on January 30, 2018, 03:51:57 PM
it is very nice of Trump to take away something that everyone likes, and only agree to give it back if the democrats agree to build a wall
To be fair, it would be a big win for for dreamers (and dems) if a bill gets passed that includes a clear path to citizenship for dreamers. A presidentially-enforced DACA could not do that. I honestly have no problem with Trump's move to force action from congress on it. I do have a problem with dems giving up totally unnecessary ground to try to pass something the vast majority of folks in the U.S. want to see passed.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on January 30, 2018, 04:59:30 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on January 30, 2018, 05:18:52 PM
Post by: puniraptor on January 31, 2018, 09:46:28 PM
WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE??
source: state of the union address
Post by: catastrophe on January 31, 2018, 10:46:34 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on January 31, 2018, 10:55:51 PM
Post by: catastrophe on February 01, 2018, 06:52:56 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on February 01, 2018, 07:14:13 AM
Post by: catastrophe on February 01, 2018, 08:56:32 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on February 01, 2018, 09:05:23 AM
Post by: ChiComCat on February 01, 2018, 09:06:57 AM
A Liberal and I decide we want to get a drink at Kites
I order $3 beer and throw $2 to the waitress as tip.
Lib is hungry, orders some dinner and a pitcher of beer.
We start talking and solving the worlds problems when Lib notices a friend at another table
Lib orders a few rounds for their party and any of their friends. What started out as 8 people is suddenly 50.
When we finally leave, our tab is $2000.
Lib demands $1000 for half the bill.
Lib didn't like the wait staff, so I need to cover the mandatory %20 gratuity for parties of 10 or more.
Lib agrees the wait staff did a great job, but one of the bartenders had an American flag shirt and therefore was a racist.
Libs card was declined, I have pay an additional $1000.
We do have a thread just for terrible facebook posts
Post by: star seed 7 on February 01, 2018, 09:07:34 AM
Post by: Trim on February 01, 2018, 09:14:29 AM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on February 01, 2018, 09:20:17 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on February 01, 2018, 09:51:20 AM
Unlike democrats, republicans are actually willing to compromise. 1.8 million democrat voters for a border wall and immigration reform. That was always a non-starter for obama. without the wall, we go through this all again after another 30 years of declining wages for the poor. Democrats love the poor, and want to keep them that way.
Folding on immigration to own the libs
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 01, 2018, 10:40:47 AM
Is and "undocumented immigrant" the same or different from an "illegal alien"??? What about a "dreamer" is that also an "illegal alien" or something different???
I prefer "undocumented American." They're all the same thing - just different levels of virtue. I think the Dems have a pocket guide to all this stuff and it would helpful for them to share it.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 01, 2018, 11:04:59 AM
Post by: Cire on February 01, 2018, 11:43:24 AM
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on February 01, 2018, 03:38:35 PM
Unlike democrats, republicans are actually willing to compromise. 1.8 million democrat voters for a border wall and immigration reform. That was always a non-starter for obama. without the wall, we go through this all again after another 30 years of declining wages for the poor. Democrats love the poor, and want to keep them that way.
Folding on immigration to own the libs
It's the will of the people
Post by: Phil Titola on February 01, 2018, 04:29:10 PM
Post by: I_have_purplewood on February 01, 2018, 08:50:06 PM
Americans are dreamers FSD...didn't you listen to dear leader?
Are they not? Should their dreams be less of someone who doesn't live here? Why is this so hard for people to fathom? offs
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on February 01, 2018, 09:04:07 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on February 01, 2018, 09:04:45 PM
Post by: Phil Titola on February 01, 2018, 09:40:30 PM
Americans are dreamers FSD...didn't you listen to dear leader?
Are they not? Should their dreams be less of someone who doesn't live here? Why is this so hard for people to fathom? offs
I know...seems FSD missed that part of the speech
What about a "dreamer" is that also an "illegal alien" or something different???
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 02, 2018, 08:05:58 AM
Americans are dreamers FSD...didn't you listen to dear leader?
Are they not? Should their dreams be less of someone who doesn't live here? Why is this so hard for people to fathom? offs
The people born here absolutely should get their path to citizenship easier than immigrants. Good point, purplewood.
Post by: LickNeckey on February 02, 2018, 11:38:24 AM
Unlike democrats, republicans are actually willing to compromise. 1.8 million democrat voters for a border wall and immigration reform. That was always a non-starter for obama. without the wall, we go through this all again after another 30 years of declining wages for the poor. Democrats love the poor, and want to keep them that way.
"The discord highlights the challenge GOP leaders face in trying to forge a deal on immigration. In the House, conservatives have demanded a hard-line bill, with some arguing that the White House plan is too lenient on a path to citizenship. Rep. Mark Meadows (N.C.), the chairman of the hard-right House Freedom Caucus, said that conservatives remained opposed to any bill that provided dreamers with a “special pathway” to citizenship — including one based on the Trump framework."
doesn't have the support of the house.
Post by: wetwillie on February 02, 2018, 11:53:39 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on February 02, 2018, 12:00:33 PM
Post by: sys on February 02, 2018, 12:54:58 PM
So do we let non citizens fight in the armed forces?
yes, of course.
Post by: wetwillie on February 02, 2018, 01:08:21 PM
So do we let non citizens fight in the armed forces?
yes, of course.
Looks like around 8k annually but you have to have a green card. I guess you can get fast tracked for citizenship by serving.
Post by: LickNeckey on February 02, 2018, 01:33:54 PM
Post by: wetwillie on February 02, 2018, 01:43:44 PM
or deployed and deported
It's a really bad look for sure
Post by: bucket on February 02, 2018, 04:27:47 PM
So do we let non citizens fight in the armed forces?
yes, of course.
I guess you can get fast tracked for citizenship by serving.
Not fast enough according to the deported veteran.
Post by: renocat on February 05, 2018, 06:32:58 AM
Post by: puniraptor on February 05, 2018, 08:12:25 PM
dreamer amnesty + nuclear bomb border
Post by: puniraptor on February 05, 2018, 10:18:30 PM
Post by: sys on February 07, 2018, 01:17:24 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on February 07, 2018, 01:40:40 PM
Post by: Gooch on February 07, 2018, 01:42:33 PM
I wonder how many people who oppose the wall have fenced in backyards and vice versaStrong comparison there.
Post by: I_have_purplewood on February 07, 2018, 01:46:38 PM
I wonder how many people who oppose the wall have fenced in backyards and vice versaStrong comparison there.
yeah, that was bad.
Post by: Phil Titola on February 07, 2018, 01:47:10 PM
I wonder how many people who oppose the wall have fenced in backyards and vice versaBut how many who oppose the wall also were born May 5th? Makes you think.
Post by: LickNeckey on February 07, 2018, 02:06:34 PM
I wonder how many people who oppose the wall have fenced in backyards and vice versa
:clap:
Post by: Institutional Control on February 07, 2018, 02:15:03 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on February 07, 2018, 02:40:03 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 07, 2018, 02:47:36 PM
good job, senate.
Yes. If there’s one area Pubs and Dems can still find bipartisan agreement, it’s spending us further into debt. Bipartisanship!!
Post by: Yard Dog on February 07, 2018, 03:11:48 PM
I wonder how many people ITT who support a border wall have ever enjoyed a margarita.
Dude, checkmate, La Fiesta margarita mondays are unequaled and a wall would eliminate that Manhattan treasure. #NOWALLMORETEQUILA
Post by: sys on February 07, 2018, 03:13:33 PM
good job, senate.
Yes. If there’s one area Pubs and Dems can still find bipartisan agreement, it’s spending us further into debt. Bipartisanship!!
:lol:
Post by: Gooch on February 07, 2018, 03:15:41 PM
I have a fence to keep my dog in :Wha:You sure that fence is not to keep other dogs out?
Post by: Phil Titola on February 07, 2018, 03:26:55 PM
What if the dog did math good and wasn't Chihuahua? Then could that dog come into your yard?I have a fence to keep my dog in :Wha:You sure that fence is not to keep other dogs out?
Post by: Phil Titola on February 07, 2018, 03:31:13 PM
You may just be insane.good job, senate.
Yes. If there’s one area Pubs and Dems can still find bipartisan agreement, it’s spending us further into debt. Bipartisanship!!
Post by: star seed 7 on February 07, 2018, 04:00:29 PM
Post by: Phil Titola on February 07, 2018, 04:07:51 PM
Other dogs are welcome to hop the fence if they wantEven from your shithole neighbors?
Post by: star seed 7 on February 07, 2018, 04:15:02 PM
Post by: Phil Titola on February 07, 2018, 04:16:07 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on February 07, 2018, 04:20:04 PM
Post by: Phil Titola on February 07, 2018, 04:25:06 PM
Post by: Gooch on February 07, 2018, 04:43:01 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on February 07, 2018, 10:48:20 PM
I wonder how many people who oppose the wall have fenced in backyards and vice versa
:ROFL: you are incredibly stupid, I mean good god
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on February 08, 2018, 10:06:13 AM
I wonder how many people who oppose the wall have fenced in backyards and vice versa
I thought this might #trigger a few libtards, but :love:
Stay out of my yard, but not my country :shakesfist:
Post by: LickNeckey on February 08, 2018, 10:34:26 AM
i did use to own a fence building company to take money from racists tho
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on February 08, 2018, 11:18:55 AM
Good one
Post by: LickNeckey on February 08, 2018, 11:22:39 AM
Post by: sys on February 08, 2018, 02:42:49 PM
good job, senate.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/stancollender/2018/02/08/this-budget-deal-may-be-the-end-of-the-house-freedom-caucus/#5d1538466556
Post by: puniraptor on February 08, 2018, 05:48:37 PM
good job, senate.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/stancollender/2018/02/08/this-budget-deal-may-be-the-end-of-the-house-freedom-caucus/#5d1538466556
like k-s-u-w always says, nothing washes down a trillion dollar tax cut like a 300 billion dollar spending bill
Post by: catastrophe on February 09, 2018, 06:57:59 AM
I wonder how many people who oppose the wall have fenced in backyards and vice versa
I thought this might #trigger a few libtards, but :love:
Stay out of my yard, but not my country :shakesfist:
Have you stopped to think about how many people have fences between their neighbors’ yards but give their neighbors the keys to their house?
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 09, 2018, 12:56:25 PM
Seems to me he is either (a) doing this whole thing for show and expecting it to implode (unlikely), or (b) setting this up for a Gang of 8 style bill to pass the Senate, only to be rejected by the House (more likely). Both options seem like really terrible politics. I don’t see anything coming out of this process that even remotely resembles Trump’s proposal, or a proposal that could pass the House.
So what am I missing? Seriously, if anybody thinks they understand politics, let me know what’s going on here. Talking politics only at this point - not policy.
Post by: star seed 7 on February 09, 2018, 12:59:54 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 09, 2018, 01:10:26 PM
He is going to have an open debate for a week without any base bill. Then send everyone home for recess to face their constituents. He says “whoever gets to 60 votes wins.”
This strikes me as uncharacteristically generous to Democrats - all they need to get is a handful of open-borders Pubs to join them to send a Gang of 8 style bill to the House, placing the blame squarely on the GOP when the House rebels.
I’m just trying to understand the politics of it. I don’t think he’s a fool, and I can’t imagine he would intentionally be trying to sabotage Trump and the GOP by alienating their base heading into elections.
Anybody think they know what his strategy is?
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 09, 2018, 01:14:07 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 09, 2018, 01:18:42 PM
DACA amnesty without wall funding and meaningful immigration reforms would seriously alienate the base heading into midterms. The GOP would be better off doing nothing. That can’t be the play.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 09, 2018, 01:23:42 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 09, 2018, 01:31:33 PM
The biggest disaster scenario for the GOP would be deporting all of the DACA people. They may lose some of their base if they don't get wall funding, but deporting about 800,000 law-abiding people with jobs will not go well at all for them.
This isn’t a choice between amnesty and deportation. Let’s try a different tack: How is this current approach better for GOP politically than teeing up Trump’s bill and putting the onus on the Dems to either support it or filibuster it?
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 09, 2018, 01:38:58 PM
The biggest disaster scenario for the GOP would be deporting all of the DACA people. They may lose some of their base if they don't get wall funding, but deporting about 800,000 law-abiding people with jobs will not go well at all for them.
This isn’t a choice between amnesty and deportation. Let’s try a different tack: How is this current approach better for GOP politically than teeing up Trump’s bill and putting the onus on the Dems to either support it or filibuster it?
If the dems don't support that bill, the republicans might end up having to deport the DACA people.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 09, 2018, 01:54:44 PM
The biggest disaster scenario for the GOP would be deporting all of the DACA people. They may lose some of their base if they don't get wall funding, but deporting about 800,000 law-abiding people with jobs will not go well at all for them.
This isn’t a choice between amnesty and deportation. Let’s try a different tack: How is this current approach better for GOP politically than teeing up Trump’s bill and putting the onus on the Dems to either support it or filibuster it?
If the dems don't support that bill, the republicans might end up having to deport the DACA people.
First, DACA expiring does not necessarily mean deportation. Second, I think your scenario would be far more damaging for the Dems. Tightening immigration and DACA amnesty are both popular. If the Dems opposes a bill that did both, it would demonstrate that the Dems cared more about preserving open borders than they do about the Dreamers. Trump’s proposal put the Dems in a box. McConnell’s approach seems to let them out of it and either puts the blame on the GOP when it fails or alienates the GOP base when it passes.
I’m not trying to be argumentative, and I’m not trying to argue policy. I’m trying to understand what McConnell is doing politically.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 09, 2018, 01:58:29 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 09, 2018, 02:09:03 PM
After the campaign that Trump ran to get elected, there is absolutely no way that anyone would be able to convince the typical voting American that deportations were actually the democrats' fault. It makes a lot of sense for the republicans to fix this before it comes to that.
Juat can’t see it, politically. Trump had the Dems right where he wanted them with his proposed compromise. His approval rating jumped after the SOTU, and his immigration plan was a centerpiece of it. I’m not trying to be argumentative, but you’re not presenting a compelling explanation as to why McConnell’s approach is better politically.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 09, 2018, 02:25:42 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on February 09, 2018, 02:49:09 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 09, 2018, 02:52:09 PM
So maybe he’s taking a calculated risk that he can keep the promise he made to Chucky (he promised them this open debate in exchange for them giving up their gov shutdown) without that debate resulting in 60 votes for a Gang of 8 style bill. He then sends everyone home to be screamed at, and then after recess says “we had an open debate, we listened to our constituents, and here is the compromise.” Puts Trump plan on the table and Dems back in a bind.
That kinda maybe makes sense.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on February 09, 2018, 03:02:55 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 09, 2018, 03:36:39 PM
Post by: catastrophe on February 09, 2018, 03:46:29 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on February 09, 2018, 05:53:00 PM
Deporting daca kids is worst case scenario for Republicans. The pr hit will be massive. Only hardcore racists are in favor of it, so not surprising that kdub thinks no one will blame Republicans
The Republican party lost its last true moderate leader the day of Obama's inauguration. The direction of the party isn't one where being blamed for deporting 800,000 people matters at all. We're seeing it now with ICE detaining and deporting academics and working professionals who have been here for generations, people don't care, there's no consequence for anyone.
I really don't think we'll see any bill at all. Also keeping the dreamers here without a path to citizenship doesn't make a bit of sense.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 12, 2018, 06:50:09 AM
Post by: sys on April 02, 2018, 04:47:55 PM
Quote
Twenty-five years ago, the United States gave Mexico an enormous gift: the North American Free Trade Agreement. The deal enriched Mexico, but impoverished the United States. Even worse, Mexico is repaying that generosity by sending massive flows of both drugs and people—and not their best people, mind you—over the border into the United States. Mexico could control the border with the U.S., but it refuses to do so. Now is the time for the U.S. to use the leverage it gained with NAFTA and stop that, by forcing Mexico to pay for a wall along the border.
Inextricably tied into this is Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. That policy is good, in that it allows good people brought to the U.S. as children to stay, but also bad, because it encourages large flows of people to the United States seeking to take advantage of it. On the one hand, Democrats are to blame for blocking the law, and the Senate needs to invoke the nuclear option and lower the threshold for all bills to 50 votes, but on the other hand, it’s too late now and DACA is over.
Post by: bucket on April 02, 2018, 07:23:01 PM
QuoteTwenty-five years ago, the United States gave Mexico an enormous gift: the North American Free Trade Agreement. The deal enriched Mexico, but impoverished the United States. Even worse, Mexico is repaying that generosity by sending massive flows of both drugs and people—and not their best people, mind you—over the border into the United States. Mexico could control the border with the U.S., but it refuses to do so. Now is the time for the U.S. to use the leverage it gained with NAFTA and stop that, by forcing Mexico to pay for a wall along the border.
Inextricably tied into this is Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. That policy is good, in that it allows good people brought to the U.S. as children to stay, but also bad, because it encourages large flows of people to the United States seeking to take advantage of it. On the one hand, Democrats are to blame for blocking the law, and the Senate needs to invoke the nuclear option and lower the threshold for all bills to 50 votes, but on the other hand, it’s too late now and DACA is over.
Are you on the Trump campaign mailing list, Sys?
Post by: renocat on April 02, 2018, 10:29:06 PM
Post by: Institutional Control on April 03, 2018, 07:31:16 AM
Democrats are to blame for this mess
lol
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on April 03, 2018, 12:38:10 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on April 17, 2018, 10:02:59 PM
:ohno:
Post by: sys on June 14, 2018, 08:56:57 AM
this seems to me to have become a moral imperative.
Post by: sys on June 14, 2018, 10:00:20 AM
insane.
Post by: sys on June 17, 2018, 04:09:10 AM
Quote
Economists have estimated that a world of open borders would double world GDP.
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/10/get-rid-borders-completely/409501/
Post by: sys on June 20, 2018, 11:13:46 AM
Post by: catastrophe on June 20, 2018, 11:44:43 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 20, 2018, 11:50:12 AM
That said, we need real immigration reform and an easier pathway to citizenship, but open borders is national suicide in a Post 911 world.
Even the EU is starting to realize this.
Post by: sys on June 20, 2018, 11:52:23 AM
Link? That sounds crazy and maybe not legal.
link to what? there is a link to the nyt story in the tweet.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 20, 2018, 11:52:34 AM
https://twitter.com/m_clem/status/1009076585230749696
Estimates? We're relying on government estimates?
Yep, no peril in that.
Say, how are those "estimates" working out on that train project in California?
Post by: catastrophe on June 20, 2018, 11:53:43 AM
Link? That sounds crazy and maybe not legal.
link to what? there is a link to the nyt story in the tweet.
Didn’t see it on my phone.
Post by: catastrophe on June 20, 2018, 11:56:55 AM
Post by: sys on June 29, 2018, 09:26:31 AM
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/06/27/this-is-bull-inside-the-gops-immigration-meltdown-680106
Post by: sys on June 29, 2018, 11:23:43 AM
Post by: ChiComCat on June 29, 2018, 02:42:47 PM
https://twitter.com/m_clem/status/1009076585230749696
Estimates? We're relying on government estimates?
Yep, no peril in that.
Say, how are those "estimates" working out on that train project in California?
If one estimate is wrong, clearly they all are :rollseyes:
A much better way is to operate on gut feelings and fear mongering
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on June 29, 2018, 04:38:58 PM
http://thehill.com/latino/394782-protests-against-trump-immigration-policy-expected-nationwide (http://thehill.com/latino/394782-protests-against-trump-immigration-policy-expected-nationwide)
Post by: sys on June 29, 2018, 07:02:31 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on June 29, 2018, 07:06:27 PM
Post by: sys on June 30, 2018, 09:00:53 PM
Post by: sys on July 01, 2018, 12:28:53 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/national/wp/2018/06/30/feature/are-you-alone-now-after-raid-immigrant-families-are-separated-in-the-american-heartland/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.20c1b040db28
Post by: sys on July 03, 2018, 05:04:49 PM
Post by: sys on July 03, 2018, 05:34:54 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 03, 2018, 06:28:03 PM
https://twitter.com/bpolitics/status/1013765455616663552
:facepalm:
Post by: sys on July 04, 2018, 11:24:28 AM
Post by: sys on July 05, 2018, 08:14:53 PM
https://twitter.com/AP/status/1014995091591753728
Post by: star seed 7 on July 05, 2018, 09:06:06 PM
Post by: catastrophe on July 06, 2018, 07:25:42 AM
Post by: sys on July 06, 2018, 08:48:40 AM
Post by: 8manpick on July 06, 2018, 09:58:22 AM
it's amazing how much we hate immigrants.Turns out it was actually 40 people who failed background checks, not some vast conspiracy to get rid of immigrants (which may still exist, just not here).
https://twitter.com/AP/status/1014995091591753728
Post by: sys on July 06, 2018, 10:07:45 AM
Turns out it was actually 40 people who failed background checks, not some vast conspiracy to get rid of immigrants (which may still exist, just not here).
it's not a system-wide purge of all immigrants, but i haven't seen anything to indicate it is a good faith effort to remove people with genuine personal failings, as you seem to be alleging. some of the people removed are suing, indicating that they, at least, don't accept that they were denied access in good faith. others allege they were considered security risks for no reason other than their country of origin.
i'll be interested to see additional reporting on this story.
Post by: sys on July 06, 2018, 10:28:38 AM
Post by: sys on July 06, 2018, 11:05:35 AM
Post by: Kat Kid on July 06, 2018, 11:19:18 AM
https://twitter.com/AP_Europe/status/1015124849931452416
Post by: sys on July 06, 2018, 11:25:53 AM
unfortunately, it was lib hero FDR Democrats who did the bad things.
wow. i wonder what the lybocrites will say now?
Post by: 8manpick on July 06, 2018, 03:01:44 PM
@sys thread here is the best I’ve seen as far as reporting goesTurns out it was actually 40 people who failed background checks, not some vast conspiracy to get rid of immigrants (which may still exist, just not here).
it's not a system-wide purge of all immigrants, but i haven't seen anything to indicate it is a good faith effort to remove people with genuine personal failings, as you seem to be alleging. some of the people removed are suing, indicating that they, at least, don't accept that they were denied access in good faith. others allege they were considered security risks for no reason other than their country of origin.
i'll be interested to see additional reporting on this story.
https://twitter.com/noonanjo/status/1015218303416127488?s=21
Post by: Kat Kid on July 06, 2018, 03:28:24 PM
@sys thread here is the best I’ve seen as far as reporting goesTurns out it was actually 40 people who failed background checks, not some vast conspiracy to get rid of immigrants (which may still exist, just not here).
it's not a system-wide purge of all immigrants, but i haven't seen anything to indicate it is a good faith effort to remove people with genuine personal failings, as you seem to be alleging. some of the people removed are suing, indicating that they, at least, don't accept that they were denied access in good faith. others allege they were considered security risks for no reason other than their country of origin.
i'll be interested to see additional reporting on this story.
https://twitter.com/noonanjo/status/1015218303416127488?s=21
Weird that an aide to Senator Tom Cotton would have a long thread that never actually directly challenges any of the reporting in the piece but leaves people with the impression that "of course we all love the troops nothing to see here."
Post by: sys on July 06, 2018, 03:54:26 PM
@sys thread here is the best I’ve seen as far as reporting goes
yeah, i saw that. the horton thread i linked is more convincing.
Post by: sys on July 06, 2018, 08:54:48 PM
Post by: sys on July 06, 2018, 09:05:52 PM
Post by: sys on July 09, 2018, 09:42:49 AM
Post by: sys on July 09, 2018, 11:24:42 AM
Post by: sys on July 09, 2018, 11:27:56 AM
Post by: sys on July 09, 2018, 11:33:07 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on July 09, 2018, 11:44:24 AM
But, that was during a period of New New NeoCons being concerned about U.S. Hegemony.
In other news Glen Greenwald is going deep on the NewNeoCons being the new McCarthyites and the New McCarthyites/NeoCons are just not having it.
LibBot nation has down a total 180 in about decade. amaze.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 09, 2018, 11:49:17 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on July 09, 2018, 11:54:45 AM
Yeah, thinking this guy with a PhD who volunteered to risk his life for America should get the citizenship he was promised is just a complete 180 for the libbots. Meanwhile, the conservatives haven't changed their stance at all. They planned on screwing this guy over from day one.
Again, lot of whining by libs back during the Bush administration about the expediting of foreign nationals into the U.S. military and U.S. citizenship to go fight "Bush's wars of aggression and Oil".
But, in the age of Anti-Trump, those days are long forgotten.
Post by: DaBigTrain on July 09, 2018, 12:43:07 PM
Yeah, thinking this guy with a PhD who volunteered to risk his life for America should get the citizenship he was promised is just a complete 180 for the libbots. Meanwhile, the conservatives haven't changed their stance at all. They planned on screwing this guy over from day one.
Again, lot of whining by libs back during the Bush administration about the expediting of foreign nationals into the U.S. military and U.S. citizenship to go fight "Bush's wars of aggression and Oil".
But, in the age of Anti-Trump, those days are long forgotten.
Again, most of us weren’t already of voting age for 30 years when this happened like you.
Post by: star seed 7 on July 09, 2018, 02:45:27 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on July 09, 2018, 02:47:14 PM
Post by: DaBigTrain on July 09, 2018, 02:59:11 PM
Post by: sys on July 10, 2018, 08:48:59 AM
Post by: sys on July 10, 2018, 08:49:56 PM
Post by: sys on July 16, 2018, 08:48:07 AM
Post by: sys on July 18, 2018, 02:38:24 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on July 18, 2018, 02:50:32 PM
While immigration enforcement receives the most attention, it only accounts for a third of ICE’s budget, according to Saldana. “If you do abolish ICE, you’re abolishing the United States’ representation in immigration court, you’re abolishing the extraordinary work that investigative agents do on the Homeland Security Investigations side,” she said. “That’s the half of ICE that does investigative work, which is human trafficking, child exploitation, international crime, military-arms proliferation—all of that is under ICE.”
https://newrepublic.com/article/149945/ok-abolish-ice-then
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 18, 2018, 02:56:50 PM
Post by: Kat Kid on July 18, 2018, 02:59:07 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 18, 2018, 03:00:53 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on July 18, 2018, 03:06:56 PM
But this is not political.
When Dems controlled the WH, and Congress they really didn't do a whole lot, did they? But the government deported a lot of people and separated a lot of families during that time.
Post by: DaBigTrain on July 18, 2018, 03:37:17 PM
Post by: Kat Kid on July 18, 2018, 03:39:52 PM
Also strippers rubbing their boobies in peoples faces
Yeah, I pretty drastically understated the problem.
Post by: catastrophe on July 18, 2018, 03:42:17 PM
Sarah Saldana, who served as ICE’s director from 2014 to January 2017, told me that abolishing the agency would be “nonsensical.” She took issue with the idea of approaching immigration in a piecemeal manner instead of addressing it as a whole. “This is not a question of the agency and its people, it’s a question of enforcement and how you go about it,” Saldana said. “The answer still is comprehensive immigration reform, but nobody has had to respond to the fact that it’s been years now that Congress has ignored a very important issue.”[/u]
Interested on your thoughts as to whose fault this is. Last I heard majority leadership was refusing to allow debate over immigration legislation.
Post by: sys on July 18, 2018, 03:47:43 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on July 18, 2018, 03:52:35 PM
i think everyone in the "abolish ice" camp would be overjoyed to just take interior immigration enforcement out of their hands and let them go about their business on everything else.
Catch and release, no interior immigration enforcement . . . beep, bop open borders.
Grats sys
Post by: 8manpick on July 18, 2018, 08:43:42 PM
Post by: sys on July 19, 2018, 11:34:08 AM
https://twitter.com/misstessowen/status/1019974244711784453
Post by: sys on July 20, 2018, 09:02:53 AM
Post by: sys on July 21, 2018, 01:15:51 AM
Post by: sys on July 24, 2018, 08:21:41 PM
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-07-24/making-life-awful-for-skilled-immigrants-is-a-mistake
Post by: sys on July 27, 2018, 01:18:18 PM
Post by: sys on July 29, 2018, 05:39:58 PM
Post by: sys on July 29, 2018, 09:50:48 PM
Post by: sys on August 04, 2018, 09:33:56 PM
Post by: sys on August 07, 2018, 06:49:57 AM
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/09/trump-ice/565772/
Post by: mocat on August 07, 2018, 09:42:01 AM
incredibly good article. abolish ice.
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/09/trump-ice/565772/
wow
Post by: sys on August 07, 2018, 10:06:02 AM
Post by: sys on August 08, 2018, 05:01:17 PM
Post by: Phil Titola on August 09, 2018, 10:18:17 PM
https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1027655905226121216?s=19
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on August 09, 2018, 10:25:11 PM
https://twitter.com/jessesingal/status/1026825697040449536
"Popular Welfare Programs"
lol, good grief what is wrong with these morons
Post by: DaBigTrain on August 09, 2018, 10:27:09 PM
Chain migration strikes again....
https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1027655905226121216?s=19
She's clean, so go ahead and let any and every family member in. Also there won't be any objection from any Trumper on this board.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on August 09, 2018, 10:30:35 PM
Post by: sys on August 12, 2018, 03:01:40 PM
Post by: sys on August 13, 2018, 10:43:48 AM
Post by: sys on August 14, 2018, 07:06:15 PM
Post by: sys on August 16, 2018, 08:30:06 PM
Post by: sys on August 18, 2018, 12:29:15 PM
Post by: sys on August 20, 2018, 10:17:26 PM
Post by: 8manpick on August 21, 2018, 07:58:56 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 21, 2018, 08:45:40 AM
Horrendous. It won’t make up for it, but he should get a 6-7 figure payout.
I'd bet on it being closer to 4 figures, if anything at all.
Post by: sys on August 21, 2018, 10:00:45 AM
Post by: sys on August 21, 2018, 10:11:25 AM
Post by: sys on August 22, 2018, 11:38:14 AM
Quote
But the unnamed interviewer, who acknowledged in the report that he or she was “not a medical professional,” nonetheless concluded from the student’s failure to laugh at a joke that he probably had autism.
https://twitter.com/BillKristol/status/1032219206786330624
Post by: ChiComCat on August 22, 2018, 12:28:58 PM
Post by: CHONGS on August 22, 2018, 12:34:12 PM
Post by: ChiComCat on August 22, 2018, 12:56:32 PM
Knock Knock
Who's there? :ohno:
Post by: CHONGS on August 22, 2018, 12:57:00 PM
Wooden shoeKnock Knock
Who's there?
Post by: ChiComCat on August 22, 2018, 12:57:31 PM
Wooden shoe who?Wooden shoeKnock Knock
Who's there?
Post by: CHONGS on August 22, 2018, 12:58:15 PM
You have autismWooden shoe who?Wooden shoeKnock Knock
Who's there?
Post by: ChiComCat on August 22, 2018, 12:59:50 PM
Post by: sys on August 24, 2018, 09:46:33 AM
https://twitter.com/timelfrinkmia/status/1032603023376347136
Post by: sys on August 29, 2018, 11:52:49 PM
Post by: sys on August 30, 2018, 01:05:58 AM
https://twitter.com/willwilkinson/status/1034923817410482177
Post by: sys on August 31, 2018, 09:46:32 PM
https://twitter.com/DLind/status/1035626615047380993
but also this.
https://twitter.com/chrislhayes/status/1035630880977547265
Post by: sys on September 05, 2018, 10:48:37 AM
https://twitter.com/Noahpinion/status/1037144086329716736
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on September 05, 2018, 11:03:09 AM
Post by: 8manpick on September 05, 2018, 12:26:11 PM
I refuse to support string/thread tweeting.As discussedin the "talking sports" thread, it's destroying message boarding
Post by: chum1 on November 08, 2018, 12:40:48 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 08, 2018, 12:43:37 PM
Post by: sys on November 16, 2018, 10:24:20 AM
https://twitter.com/Noahpinion/status/1063154919614513152
Post by: sys on January 26, 2019, 04:52:08 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on January 26, 2019, 08:24:58 PM
Pubs offered a deal: in exchange for DACA Amnesty, give us funding for the wall and reforms to chain migration and visa lottery. A very reasonable compromise, but Dems said no, proving it is more important to them to keep the borders open than to help DACA recipients.
Now Plan B for the Dems is to shut the government down if a spending bill doesn’t include the DACA Amnesty.
This one is entirely on the Dems, both in refusing the initial compromise and now in holding government funding hostage. Which strikes me as both terrible policy and politics, but the Dem base is soooper crazy. You don’t have to take my word for it that Dems are responsible for this. Here is NBC....
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/01/18/nbcs_kasie_hunt_dems_poised_to_kill_cr_in_senate_progressives_say_we_dont_care_we_want_to_shut_this_down.html (https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/01/18/nbcs_kasie_hunt_dems_poised_to_kill_cr_in_senate_progressives_say_we_dont_care_we_want_to_shut_this_down.html)
Post by: sys on January 26, 2019, 08:44:54 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on January 26, 2019, 08:57:11 PM
what ksuw is describing as a deal is the replacement offer that democrats found unacceptable, after miller and kelly convinced trump to pull the original deal that he and schumer had agreed upon.
why didn't they counter?
Post by: sys on January 26, 2019, 09:28:57 PM
why didn't they counter?
if you read the article i linked in the other thread, it stated that negotiations were ongoing after trump backed out.
Post by: sys on January 28, 2019, 07:56:49 PM
https://twitter.com/NickRiccardi/status/1089950604342874112