Who
believes this con, anyway?
Kirstjen
Nielsen says, "We do not have a policy of separating families at the
border. Period. Don’t believe the press.”
I’ll
tell you who believes that nasty woman shortly, but first a question.
How do authoritarian sociopaths create future sociopaths and criminals?
Traumatize children by taking them from their parents and locking them in cages.
Mission accomplished, you cold-blooded fascist Trumpists. This cannot turn out well. Not that they give a damn.
Traumatize children by taking them from their parents and locking them in cages.
Mission accomplished, you cold-blooded fascist Trumpists. This cannot turn out well. Not that they give a damn.
Decent
and humane people everywhere are condemning this unnecessary cruelty by the US government.
It is cruelty by choice. Cruelty is in season. We’re not even talking about
immigration restrictions, requirements, numbers, bans, or any policy save one.
This grotesque zero tolerance rule Trump and Sessions initiated. This is about
basic decency and human rights.
Many decent Republicans are appalled.
I stand with them.
Who do you stand with?
Have
you noticed how the far Right reacts when journalists, liberals, moderates, and
those less authoritarian, and saner Republicans condemn the Trump/Sessions zero
tolerance policy?
We’ve
seen the blizzards of resentments, the victim card playing, accusations, and
deflections. (See Dave Dubya’s Authoritarian Tactics and Rules of Discourse.)
They
react wildly of course, and actually accuse critics of wanting “open borders
for rapists and gangsters”.
“Open
borders”. What does that even mean? Not once have they defined what “open
borders is”. But they just know that’s what
we want. THAT they can define. They’re so dim-witted by authoritarian blindness
they see stupid liberals who don’t want ANY border security.
Then
they suggest the false choice between human rights or secure borders. Do they
realize illegal immigration is waaaaay down? No, but they all seem more
agitated than ever before. What changed? Authoritarian leadership has taken
over.
And
this takes us back to who believes Kirstjen Nielsen.
Falling
in line with these authoritarians is what separates the pro-torture people from
the rest of us. This is where the authoritarian personality emerges. How about
we waterboard those kids if they get out
of line? After all , they’re just a bunch of young gangsters anyway. Right?
We’ve
heard them insist their parents knew what was going to happen. (Right, they got
all their news from cable in the back of the truck on their way up here)
Cold.
In
contrast, even Melania offers a warmer heart.
“Mrs.
Trump hates to see children separated from their families and hopes both sides
of the aisle can finally come together to achieve successful immigration
reform," according to a statement from her spokeswoman. "She believes
we need to be a country that follows all laws, but also a country that governs
with heart."
Instead
her husband is the most hateful and heartless president in history.
Every
convicted child molester in prison, every gang member in prison, every rapist
in prison, and every murderer in prison has more rights than those parents and
children. Yes, THEY can get visitors.
Zero
tolerance won’t allow even that Basic. Human. Decency.
This
should be about Justice. It is not. It is injustice. It is cruel punishment for
innocent victims; many seeking asylum.
“I
live in a border state. I appreciate the need to enforce and protect our
international boundaries, but this zero-tolerance policy is cruel. It
is immoral. And it breaks my heart.” – Laura Bush
I
stand with Laura Bush.
I
ask again. Who do you stand with?
Sorry
if my question seems too difficult for some of you. You’ll find they are easier
to answer when you examine your conscience, and stop wildly reacting as if I’m
suggesting “Open Borders for Rapists and Gang Members”.
The
emotional strain and trauma for CHILDREN needlessly taken from their parents
arms and ruthlessly imprisoned is State Sponsored Child Abuse.
This
is exactly how these kids and parents see Trump America.
And
it ain’t great.
It
is State Sponsored Child Abuse.
Posts
187 comments:
Most egregious is that this is intentional state sponsored human rights abuse.
This is eerily how the Nazis started in the early 1930s. Small steps; "Kindergarten-steps", until everybody, or at least most, are onboard or at least looking the other way. Eventually, and that "eventually" doesn't mean it's far into the future, it's too late.
"First they came for the migrants and their children, but I wasn't a migrant..."
You get the picture.
Dave,
What part do the actions of the parents play in the separation?
"What part do the actions of the parents play in the separation?"
They are against it.
They can be held together. There is no need to inflict emotional abuse and cruel punishment on innocent children.
Trump is using children, as well as DACA, as hostages and bargaining chips for his damn wall.
I thought you cared for children?
But Dave, aside from your misunderstanding my question, the law does mandate that if you arrest an illegal immigrant with children, the children not be held in custody for longer than 20 days. The other choice is to release entire families. Furthermore, those who approach points of entry for asylum are not treated as illegal immigrants; they’re treated as asylum applicants.
Do the parents, in attempting to illegally enter the USA carry the responsibility for being separated from their family? Are you advocating the release of the entire family into the USA, who have broken the law by entering the USA illegally?
the law does mandate that if you arrest an illegal immigrant with children, the children not be held in custody for longer than 20 days.
Then Trump and Sessions are BREAKING THE LAW.
Lock them up!
Dave,
So you want to open our border to illegals and allow them to enter legally because they claim to be a family even if they are not asylum applicants? Sounds like globalist open or no borders to me. Is that what you are supporting Dave?
Is that what you are supporting Dave?
No. Go back and read what I wrote.
Are you advocating for Trump and Sessions to be above the law?
And Dave, here's something else to think about...after 20 days who do you release the minor to? Their parents? Can't cause it's against the law to house minors with adults in jail. Other family members? How can you be sure the "other family" members are
a. legally the minor's family
b. the "other family" is here legally
The solution is to change the law.
Build the wall.
"The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly." A. Lincoln
I am convinced that if the current law is continued to be enforced, the flow of those attempting to cross our border illegally will dry up.
A side note, the Mexican polls show the leading candidate for President is a socialistic of the likes of Sanders. If he wins the election Mexico will become a socialist paradise where no one will want to leave, be they Mexican citizens or illegals from further south, Mexico by this election could end our problem at our border. In fact Mexico may have to build their own wall to prevent the leftist and socialists in America from trying to get into the Socialist Paradise of Mexico. It will that great I'm sure.
So you are a globalist.
Ok, what is your solution since you don't like the current law.
But sanctuary cites are ok with you Dave?
Aren't they breaking the law
I love how when it's pointed out the separating children from their parents in this way is wrong and immoral, that's the same as completely opening borders for unchecked illegal immigration. That's quite the startling jump.
Whatever. What are morals anyways? I hope it's worth it for some people to cede their morality for political gains. It's really an abhorant situation for the actual human people that are caught in this game the President and his administration are playing.
TB3,
They live in a black and white world. Their way or the highway. With us or against us. etc.
It always comes back to false accusations against critics of Trump and Sessions. They react as if we are advocating “Open Borders for Rapists and Gangs”.
Now Is the Time, Congress — End Family Separation
Immigration
The Truth about Separating Kids
By Rich Lowry
May 28, 2018 10:37 PM
The latest furor over Trump immigration policy involves the separation of children from parents at the border.
As usual, the outrage obscures more than it illuminates, so it’s worth walking through what’s happening here.
For the longest time, illegal immigration was driven by single males from Mexico. Over the last decade, the flow has shifted to women, children, and family units from Central America. This poses challenges we haven’t confronted before and has made what once were relatively minor wrinkles in the law loom very large.
The Trump administration isn’t changing the rules that pertain to separating an adult from the child. Those remain the same. Separation happens only if officials find that the adult is falsely claiming to be the child’s parent, or is a threat to the child, or is PUT INTO CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS.
It’s the last that is operative here. The past practice had been to give a free pass to an adult who is part of a family unit. The new Trump policy is to prosecute all adults. The idea is to send a signal that we are serious about our laws and to create a deterrent against re-entry. (Illegal entry is a misdemeanor, illegal re-entry a felony.)
When a migrant is prosecuted for illegal entry, he or she is taken into custody by the U.S. Marshals. In no circumstance anywhere in the U.S. do the marshals care for the children of people they take into custody. The child is taken into the custody of HHS, who cares for them at temporary shelters.
The criminal proceedings are exceptionally short, assuming there is no aggravating factor such as a prior illegal entity or another crime. The migrants generally plead guilty, and they are then sentenced to time served, typically all in the same day, although practices vary along the border. After this, they are returned to the custody of ICE.
If the adult then wants to go home, in keeping with the expedited order of removal that is issued as a matter of course, it’s relatively simple. The adult should be reunited quickly with his or her child, and the family returned home as a unit. In this scenario, there’s only a very brief separation.
PART 2
Where it becomes much more of an issue is if the adult files an asylum claim. In that scenario, the adults are almost certainly going to be detained longer than the government is allowed to hold their children.
That’s because of something called the Flores Consent Decree from 1997. It says that unaccompanied children can be held only 20 days. A ruling by the Ninth Circuit extended this 20-day limit to children who come as part of family units. So even if we want to hold a family unit together, we are forbidden from doing so.
The clock ticking on the time the government can hold a child will almost always run out before an asylum claim is settled. The migrant is allowed ten days to seek an attorney, and there may be continuances or other complications.
This creates the choice of either releasing the adults and children together into the country pending the ajudication of the asylum claim, or holding the adults and releasing the children. If the adult is held, HHS places the child with a responsible party in the U.S., ideally a relative (migrants are likely to have family and friends here).
Four points to think about.
1) Family units can go home quickly. The option that both honors our laws and keeps family units together is a swift return home after prosecution.
2) There’s a better way to claim asylum.
3) There is a significant moral cost to not enforcing the border. There is obviously a moral cost to separating a parent from a child and almost everyone would prefer not to do it. But, under current policy and with the current resources, the only practical alternative is letting family units who show up at the border live in the country for the duration. Not only does this make a mockery of our laws, it creates an incentive for people to keep bringing children with them.
4) Congress can fix this.
Four Points:
1) Not if the current Trump Administration Policy is Zero Tolerance. That's kind of the point here. Zero Tolerance; Everyone is getting prosecuted, not politely turned around and sent back through the door.
2) There's a better way to do many things. This isn't a point. This is condescension.
3) The first sentence of this point is not supported by the subsequent words. What laws are mocked continuing to enforce the law in a more empathetic way? Throwing up your hands and saying that we have to split up families it's the law is a gross misrepresentation of the law.
4) So can the Trump administration. And the Administration can fix this, literally, with a memo. This is Executive Branch mechinations, not Legislative. Proven by the sheer fact that President Trump is using this unfortunate situation to some how blame Democrats... as if the Democrats had any power to do anything to stop the President from doing this. It's so obviously being used for some weird partisan politics that I'm surprised even Trump supporters can't see it.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2018/jun/06/what-you-need-know-about-trump-administrations-zer/
TB3,
Thank you for the link.
And many of those "CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS" are mere misdemeanors. When has it ever been necessary to remove and incarcerate children for a parent's misdemeanor?
It is State Sponsored Child Abuse. Period.
Trump and Sessions could easily rescind the zero tolerance policy. They won't.
It's so obviously being used for some weird partisan politics that I'm surprised even Trump supporters can't see it.
Of course it is partisan. Look at how rabid his base is behind this atrocity. And if the Trump supporters see it as partisan, they pretend to care, or don't care at all.
All glories to the Leader.
Majormajor has been told several times in the past to not copy and paste articles here.
Since doing so, he dumped several more loads of lies and youtube links crap.
Those dumps are now gone. And we know what that means.
It's crybaby time. It calls for another "victim card" about "censorship".
He'll have to whine at another blog.
And he assuredly will.
And right on cue....
Dave,
"Lies", Dave how about letting your readers determine for themselves if they are lies?
Either you are afraid they might have their eyes/mind opened or you think your readers are not smart enough to make up their own minds. Which one is it Dave?
For those of you who wonder what Dave removed, he removed links showing this all started under Obama,....yada, yada, yada.....
https://mail.google.com/mail/?shva=1#inbox/FMfcgxvwzcJRhFqfXFLLdKCPnRsbXVKp
That's our whiny wittow boy.
"He'll have to whine at another blog. And he assuredly will." ~~ Dave Dubya
Right on cue...
Trump's taking such extraordinary action to pander to his base.
Of course, he undoubtedly thinks, I'll have the children suffer if Congress and the American people don't give me my wall.
He was right...he said he'd have Mexico pay for it. What a total douche bag.
The unfortunate unintended consequence of United States military invasions and occupations created the refugee crisis in Europe.
CIA meddling did the same in the Central American nations of Honduras, Nicaragua and Guatemala.
Creating political turmoil, in order to install right-wing dictatorships, definitely began a domino effect.
American imperialism is the reason behind just about all of the world's migration to safer places.
As usual, the poorest of the poor, and the most destitute of the destitute, are the ones who initially suffer the most.
Our time is coming. We've forfeited our right to be called the beacon of the world.
So I guess it's safe to assume the Republicans have shelved their "Party of Family Values" meme?
Technically, they never said "whose families", I suppose.
Donald Trump has managed to turn a totally bought and corrupt political party into one that's also incredibly cruel and inhumane.
Don't ever forget how things started to tumble out of control in 1930s Germany.
Make sure to read How Democracies Die. We're not immune. Donald Trump is making sure of this.
Jeff:
I saw a protester last night on the news with a sign stating that "This is not pro-life" which it isn't. It's child abuse in its purest form. I've always believed that Republicons are pro-life and then you're born. After birth the Republicons are coming after you.
U.P. Tim, the Republican Party is full of aggressive war-mongers, and their wars of aggression are not only restricted to sovereign nations. They declared war against the poor and working-class long ago. Added to the list, more recently, has been the middle-class.
Now Trump conducted a blitzkrieg against the children of refugees, hoping...no, assuming, nobody would notice. He was wrong. He discovered not everybody is as morally bankrupt as he is -- or his deplorable base.
I've never thought for a minute that the Republican Party gave a rat's ass about abortion. It has always been grandstanding on false assumptions and catering to evangelical America. It has always been a political pawn to play when checked.
The Republican Party has never been empathetic toward any sort of life -- human or otherwise. Only money matters to that party and it's high-rolling wealthy doners. The other adherents are looked upon strictly as suckers and stupid chattel.
"The Elite"
“You ever notice they always call the other side ‘the elite.’ The elite! Why are they elite? I have a much better apartment than they do. I’m smarter than they are. I’m richer than they are. I became president and they didn’t.”
His cult cheered wildly.
Trump’s policy is not only Child Abuse, but it is also Kidnapping and Child Torture. These people, the ones instituting and running this policy, need to be in jail, not the families and children!
“I REALLY DON’T CARE, DO U?”
The new, "Let them eat cake!"
Jerry, Obama did the same exact thing, where were you then?
One more lie from MM.
So desperate for attention.
Not a lie, you and your readers know it. Plenty of photo evidence to support the question.
Where were you when this was happening in 2014?
MM,
Unsupported lie number two.
Put up or shut up. You're wasting space.
Dave, glad to put up, but what's your question?
Question of the day:
“I REALLY DON’T CARE, DO U?”
It's interesting how Melania Antoinette's jacket replied to my point:
"This cannot turn out well. Not that they give a damn."
“I REALLY DON’T CARE, DO U?”
I don't want to mean to the woman, but she's about as qualified to be a first lady as her husband is to be a president.
If there is any history to be preserved in a hundred years, these past couple years will be time when it all came unraveled and shredded. The country. The Constitution.
China and Russia are circling like vultures over the rotting republic of America.
Dave, you are confusing me..Are you asking "I put up" about my post regarding photos of the same thing happening at the border under Obama as it has been recently under President Trump?
Or are you asking I comment on the first ladies coat?
"His cult cheered wildly." ~~ Dave Dubya
Hitler's loyalists cheered him at his rallies. I wonder whether they continued to do so when the Gestapo dragged their neighbors away in the darkness of night? When, exactly, did their enthusiasm wane? When did the tide turn away from their Fuhrer, or was there still a formidable base as rationing turned to shortages turned to ...nothing?
Exactly when, if ever, was there a tipping-point that left Hitler isolated and surrounded only by his powerful inner circle?
The more important question is...will we, the United States, be placed in a position to answer all these questions firsthand?
"It's interesting how Melania Antoinette's jacket replied to my point:'This cannot turn out well. Not that they give a damn.'"
and...
"'I REALLY DON’T CARE, DO U?'" ~~ Message on back of Melania Trump's jacket as she visited refugee children's concentration camp in Texas, as quoted by Dave Dubya
To Chuck and any other Trumpist white supremacists reading this comment section: Nothing else need be said. If it's still not apparent what's happening, you're deaf, blind and stupid.
MM,
Yes people and minors were detained, but Obama didn't implement a zero tolerance policy that only caused more human suffering.
Would you like to comment on the coat?
Dave,
Several things, so Obama DID separate family's before President Trump did. And President Trump has order family's to no longer be separated and has order those family's separated to be reunited. And Obama didn't. Correct?
Zero Tolerance is nothing more than Globalist supported Open Boarders, or as I like to call it, a Future Democratic Voter Drive. Statistics show during the Obama catch an release days only 20% of those caught and released showed back up for their day in court. There is no legal tolerance in the way the law is currently written and the
Democrats have gone on record that they will not vote for any new immigration law. So what would you have President Trump and the GOP do?
Human suffering? By being held together in an AC facility with 3 squares a day and free medical care vs being crammed in a hot 55 foot trailer with 75 or more other illegals with no food or water going to who knows were and at the mercy of the human traffickers? The worse result currently for victims of Zero Tolerance is after they get to stay together in the facilities as I've described for their court date, is they will be deported out of the USA. The best is they get to LEGALLY stay! Some suffering!
Dave have you become a globalist?
(note: no C&P, or hate/racism speech was used in this post)
Dave
Jacket thing.
Little history. Do you recall the out roar over Melania Trump wearing stilettos to visit hurricane victims in Texas? Have your read the other comments made about her clothing choices in the past?
I believe since she didn't wear the coat while visiting the family's being detained, the message on the jacket was strictly for the leftist press. Simply put, she doesn't care about what they say about her clothing selection or style or for that matter, anything else about her. They will always trash her, her family, her husband. It's become old news.
Recent days have show that no matter what the Trump family does, or doesn't do, the left is so filled with hate for them to the point where washed up Peter Fonda can threaten the First Family. Sad. Can you imagine if James Wood had said this about either of Obama's kids?
Would I have wanted Melania to have written on the jacket, no. Do I understand her reasoning for doing so, yes.
After squeaky clean Obama was demonized for eight years and John Kerry was smeared and the Clintons investigated for years over nothing, now it's Trump's turn. And Trump is a bona fide mobbed-up crook! Maybe we'll actually get to see him in handcuffs. Lock him up!
Ed, I agree and hopefully we'll see him locked up along with his other mob members and justice served for the American people. Wasn't Melanoma Trump suppose to have a press conference to clear-up her immigration status and how she scammed the system? This was suppose to happen back during the campaign. Never happened, as they are nothing but a bunch of liars. Like noted earlier, she is unqualified to be first lady. Wonder how her "Be Best" campaign for the kids is going.Trump sure likes to use immigrants to make a buck when he can just look at how he screwed Polish constructions workers building Trump Tower and what he has been doing since at Mara-Lago. The only exception is that these immigrants are/were mostly white.
Dave,,
Sounds like "whataboutism" is creeping into your blog.
false.
https://www.facebook.com/MIchelle.Martin15/posts/1852738241454566
Prior administrations detained migrant families, but didn’t have a practice of forcibly separating parents from their children unless the adults were deemed unfit.https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1049751/download?utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery
you will note the ZT policy is expressly enacted in this document. note the date. the EO that trump has made is fixing JBS the 3rds fuckup, not the prior admins.
the democrats will sign immigration bills, you left out a key part of that sentence: they will not sign any bill with certain provisions written into them. that is a very different matter to "wont sign any bill at all, ever".
it is also worth noting that several times in the last few years there have been efforts on the democratic side to broker a bipartisan immigration bill, comprehensive or otherwise. one of the most recent came within a whisker of actually being voted on and then the republicans backed away from it suddenly at the last minute, under pressure from the WH who hated it. the rounds/king bill, which had 8 republican senators ready to vote on it along with the democratic ones. only three mor votes were needed. it certainly wasnt a perfect bill but the notion the democratic party is unwilling to vote on one is a nonsense.
that said i would like to see the administration operate under the terms of treaties the US have signed and agreed to abide by wrt the treatment of refugees and more particularly asylum seekers. seeking asylum is not a crime, and should not be treated as such.
last thing i would say is - how are you defining globalist?
MM,
the message on the jacket was strictly for the leftist press.
That's not what she said, is it?
I'm not saying it was intended for anyone, but the optics feed right into the Melania Antoinette image. It will be seen as the new "Let them eat cake".
Not a smart wardrobe choice.
Thanks for the rest of your disinformation and hate for our Constitutional free press. ;-)
Anon,
A "globalist" from MM is whatever the Trumpists define it as. Their propaganda technique has always depended on unilaterally redefining terms.
This is words have no firm meaning in post truth Trump Land.
"This is words have no firm meaning in post truth Trump Land."??
No, it's what I thought she was saying, I didn't want to be banned by C&P so I gave you my opinion. We are allowed to do that aren't we?
I agree with you about the optics, hence my saying I would not have done it.
Hate? Your gonna have to explain that one.
No, that's not true ANON and Dave. As I've said elsewhere, a globalist is one who puts the interests of other nations before their own nation's at their own country expense. IE: Open Borders and bad trade deals help others at the expense of the USA.
Today the leading candidate for the Mexican President called for mass immigration to the United States during a speech Tuesday declaring it a “human right” for all North Americans. Adding that immigrants “must leave their towns and find a life in the United States.” Does anyone on this blog support such a thing? If not, then how is it not supporting the same a Zero Tolerance?
Flying to Cleveland, later.
"No wonder communication is so difficult. The Right has invented their own language. ~~ Dave Dubya
As I mentioned to T. Paine on more than one occasion, finding common ground was virtually impossible due to the incredible seismic shifts the right created with their language and definition alterations.
I'm not sure where Chuck came up with his definition of "globalist". Pretty strange, for sure, but we know he's not exactly playing with a full deck.
Dave,
You are allowing c & p posts by Anon? You are now allowing hate speech by Jefferson Guardian?
You asked questions, you got answers that you really haven’t responded to.
"You are allowing c & p posts by Anon?" ~~ Anonymous (aka Chuck)
Tsk tsk, Chuck. Even while traveling to Cleveland to see Steely Dan with your daughter, you still can't let it go.
You're one consumed and obsessed m-f#@ker. [head shaking]
"You are now allowing hate speech by Jefferson Guardian?" ~~ Anonymous (aka obsessed Chuck)
No hate speech here, Chuck. "Stupid speech", yes, I'll admit to "stupid speech" about you.
Hey, enjoy the concert! Be sure you're obsessively thinking about me every minute you're there! LOLOL
You're a very sick man...
i asked regarding globalism since it has become a slur used by some in the vein mentioned over at the dailywire (https://www.dailywire.com/news/8024/why-trump-fans-keep-using-slur-globalist-ben-shapiro). in some circles it also seems to carry the additional connotation of the old one world government/jews are coming to rule the world slur. using the malleability of language to hide that sort of behaviour is exactly the sort of thing i expected, i just wondered if the author themselves had any clear idea of its meaning. it seems not.
in agreeance with JG/DD about the gulf created by wilful misuse of language. i suppose that after being told so often "you can have your own opinion but not your own facts" the movement has redefined and reordered words to validate their own facts. Hair Furor mentioned this himself when he defines fake news as anything negative to him and his administration, rather than "news that is untrue" (- and then floated the idea of revoking media credentials for producing 'fake news').
it is dangerous, and concerning. and even worse it is becoming a new american export, and cropping up elsewhere. i dont mind a proper debate of ideas; but its become harder and harder to do in this environment.
Anonymous, I have to apologize to Chuck for my last comment (at 10:35 PM). You're not him, obviously, although you are making every attempt to mimic Chuck through your intentional misuse of proper gramatical and punctuation standards, not to mention your atrocious word play (e.g., "Hair Furor" -- which I particularly found amusing).
Personally, my interpretation of "globalism" equates to another term that's probably less dated and more in line with the current era, which is neoliberalism.
Both major American political parties have been proponents of neoliberalism for several decades, with Trump seemingly veering off track with his supposed protectionism. The semantics may have changed, but in reality neoliberalism is still alive and well and a driving force behind, among other things, the huge disparity of wealth and income disparity in this country.
Yes, the redefining of commonly used and standardized words, ideas, concepts -- and history itself -- has been ongoing since time itself. This administration, and conservatism in general, has placed this evolutionary social task as a political priority. I believe in an earlier time this would have been called propaganda. In the Trump era, it's so easy to see it as outright lying.
Anonymous,
it is dangerous, and concerning. and even worse it is becoming a new american export
The irony is their Far Right white nationalism is becoming a dark new "globalism" in itself.
American propagandists Bannon and Luntz have been spreading their message and tactics in the UK, mainland Europe, and Australia.
Far Right White nationalism has risen as a new "Axis of Evil". It is an international threat to justice, stability and human rights.
The return of "Triumph of the Will" is at hand.
"The KINDERGULAG: State Sponsored Child Abuse" ~~ title of post, by Dave Dubya
The more I read and watch about this "zero-tolerance" policy, the more it's becoming very obvious.
At the very least, Trump has unveiled to the world the hideous face of America's white-washed history. Whether it be the slavery which took the labor aspect of free enterprise out of the equation, or the genocide and stealing of the lands of the indigenous tribes who lived here for thousands of years before the arrival of the Europeans.
Capitalism in America was build upon the backs of free labor and stolen land. Now monopolistic Fortune 500 transnational corporations have moved operations overseas and continue to thrive on almost zero-labor rates in Asia and the South Pacific. The last prong of the magic trifecta of land-labor-capital has finally been achieved with zero and near-zero interest rates and a psudo money-creating central bank. It's all a false portrayal of an economic system that can't survive as proponents of its theory want you to believe it does.
Capitalism in America is the mother of all welfare queens. It's time for a dramatic paradigm shift.
"Capitalism in America was build (s/p) upon the backs of free labor and stolen land."
Jg,
So your remedy is to do what with/to America?
Open borders provide a source of cheap labor and is supported by the Chamber of Commerce. Do you support open borders? Are you amazed as I am that people would risk everything including their lives to come to the American hell hole that you describe?
I wonder if the attraction would still exist if America was changed into what Democratic Socialists of America would like it to be.
"So your remedy is to do what with/to America?" ~~ Majormajor (aka, myopic Chuck)
I offer no specific remedy; only espousing the tragic and unsustainable lie that this country's economic system was built around. Nothing more, nothing less.
"Do you support open borders?" ~~ Majormajor (aka, only black and white Chuck)
No...do you support state-sanctioned child abuse?
"Are you amazed as I am that people would risk everything including their lives to come to the American hell hole that you describe?" ~~ Majormajor (aka, fantasy-believer Chuck)
"Hell hole"? Your words, not mine. Certainly not the bastion of wealth and prosperity as the American fable-tellers like to propagate. Well, for a select few, yes, but the countries they're escaping have their one-percenters too.
I believe people will do anything possible to escape unlivable conditions that were brought on by American foreign policy escapades. Absolutely! A life raft always looks better than open water, wouldn't you say?
"I wonder if the attraction would still exist if America was changed into what Democratic Socialists of America would like it to be." ~~ Majormajor (aka, wondering Chuck)
What, exactly, would "Democratic Socialists of America" want it to be? Educate me, because I really don't know.
Anyway, Chuck, there's no need to continue wondering. As long as American policy of intervention and imperialism exerts its control over third world countries, people will attempt to escape persecution from the rightwing zealots propped up by the US government.
We're not exempt from the ravages of totalitarian control, Chuck. Your racist president is doing everything he can to make sure of this. He's an authoritarian -- just like you.
My turn to ask the questions. So I take it you're in disagreement that American "free enterprise" was built upon the back of slave labor, and land-steals and genocide of native Americans?
Who, exactly, was this "free enterprise" benefiting? Any ideas?
As I said. It's time for a paradigm shift. Don't you agree?
Did "you support state-sanctioned child abuse", when Obama was President?
"I offer no specific remedy" Jg
And that, dear readers, sums up the entire message of the left.
Did "you support state-sanctioned child abuse", when Obama was President?
He couldn't answer honestly, of course. (He supports EVERYTHING Trump does and says.)
Instead, he shows examples of "Deflect" and "Distort" from the Authoritarian Rules and Tactics of Discourse.
And that, dear readers, sums up the entire message of the left.
And that, dear readers sums up a conservative's limited comprehension of of another viewpoint, and refusal to answer a simple question.
What a minute with the Deflect" and "Distort" line Dave. I asked Jg if he was for open borders, he didn't answer. So he was using the Deflect" and "Distort" line.
Jg refused, dear readers, to answer a simple question, and Dave jumped in to further Deflect for him. And that, dear readers, sums up the entire message of the left and their tactics.
MM,
You may want to stop digging your hole.
"Do you support open borders?" ~~ Majormajor (aka, only black and white Chuck)
No...do you support state-sanctioned child abuse?
Did you see it this time?
"I asked Jg if he was for open borders, he didn't answer." ~~ Majormajor (aka, blind Chuck)
Hey Chuck take off your blinders and put on your glasses. Reread what I wrote. I answered your question, "No..."
Dave, here are three more tactics to add to the list: Deaf, dumb and blind.
Now, Chuck, answer my questions and stop ignoring them. I've answered all of yours.
JG,
Deaf, dumb and blind to facts.
Douglas Adams understood the authoritarian mindset. "I don't care if you can prove it to me, I still won't believe you!"
John Oliver played a clip of Hannity boasting about his unwillingness to be swayed by new evidence.
“And by the way, if the media, if you have more proof that this is not a witch hunt, OK, I don’t believe you,” Hannity said.
They FEEEEEEEL they know the truth, so that's all they need.
And they wonder why we call them a cult?
"Deaf, dumb and blind to facts." ~~ Dave Dubya
That's the conservative modus operandi. Remember, they live in the "alternative facts" bubble. They make up their own reality. Just ask stupid-ass Kellyann Conway. She said it herself.
Yes, definitely a cult.
No, I would not support state supported child abuse.
"No, I would not support state supported child abuse." ~~ Majormajor (aka, untruthful Chuck)
Is that wouldn't or will not, as if it were not occurring now under the Trump administration?
If you support Trump, you're supporting state-sanctioned child abuse.
Kind of like the racism dilemma, isn't it Chuck?
If you supported Obama then you also supported state-sanctioned child abuse.
If you do not support open borders then you support zero tolerance.
If you support 'catch and release', then you support open borders.
Unless of course you have a solution, which you have admitted to not having.
The dilemma sir, is yours.
MM offers quite a disconnect from facts, logic and reason.
MM says, "If you supported Obama then you also supported state-sanctioned child abuse."
Because MM was demanding Obama release them? LOL!
Zero tolerance means more kids in cages. MM is supporting state-sanctioned child abuse.
We have an answer.
What are open borders? And who started "catch and release"?
MM wants to believe Trump’s lie that “catch and release” is a “Democrat law”.
“Border Patrol Agents are not allowed to properly do their job at the Border because of ridiculous liberal (Democrat) laws like Catch & Release."
Washington Post says: Fact Checker says:
“Catch and release” entered the political lexicon during the George W. Bush administration.
Immigration rose sharply from 2000 to 2010, as 14 million new legal and undocumented immigrants settled in the United States, according to census data. At the same time, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement did not have enough space to house all the undocumented immigrants being apprehended.
So the Bush administration would release many of these immigrants under their own recognizance — and many of them would then fail to report for their immigration hearings.
In 2014, the Obama administration issued deportation guidelines that prioritized gang members, felons and individuals who posed security threats.
Trump described catch and release as a liberal Democratic law. But the history shows it’s a collection of policies, court precedents, executive actions and federal statutes spanning more than 20 years, cobbled together throughout Democratic and Republican administrations, including his own.
The practice of releasing immigrants came to prominence while Bush was in the White House, not out of ideological conviction so much as practical necessity — there was no space to house all the people awaiting immigration hearings. That Democrats may support parts of catch and release is not evidence that they came up with these policies in the first place.
Obama DHS Sec. Jeh Johnson ‘Freely Admits’ They Detained Children, Families: ‘We Believed It Was Necessary’
It is also something for which the ACLU blasted President Obama years ago.
On Sunday, the former Secretary Johnson told Chris Wallace that they thought it was necessary at the time, and that it is still is.
So was it Obama who started zero tolerance and state supported child abuse?
So was it Obama who started zero tolerance and state supported child abuse?
If he did then, as a fan of zero tolerance, you would have praised him, correct?
"If you do not support open borders then you support zero tolerance." ~~ Majormajor (aka, "black & white" Chuck)
I'll quote from TB3 earlier in the comment thread: "I love how when it's pointed out the separating children from their parents in this way is wrong and immoral, that's the same as completely opening borders for unchecked illegal immigration. That's quite the startling jump."
In other words, Chuck, Trump's government either has to commit state-sponsored child abuse or submit to open borders? Are those the only two choices? That's it?
As for me, I support neither.
"If you support 'catch and release', then you support open borders." ~~ Majormajor (aka, "black & white" Chuck)
It's the same "black and white" issue for you, isn't it Chuck? It's one or the other, take your choice. Is that it, Chuck. Only two choices?
I can have either Coke or Pepsi? There's nothing else?
"Unless of course you have a solution, which you have admitted to not having." ~~ Majormajor (aka, misleading Chuck)
I admitted to not offering a specific solution to our corrupt and dying economic system, which is what you requested of me.
I never presupposed a specific solution to Trump's total f#@k-up.
Of course it's obvious to any rational person that if governments want to stop the influx of refugees, they need to stop creating the conditions that cause people to seek safety beyond their own borders.
Pretty simple, huh Chuck?
"The dilemma sir, is yours." ~~ Majormajor (aka, T. Paine's "Mini Me" Chuck)
No dilemmas for me, Chuck. Unlike you, I'm not restricted to only two options. It's too confining for me.
I don't want Coke or Pepsi.
Dave,
You are all the "fan" Obama will ever need, LOL.
The point of this thread I thought, was blaming President Trump for the separation of family's caught entering our country illegally. I have pointed out he was not the first president to do so BUT, he is the only president to issue an EO ordering the end to the practice.
The question I ask is what solution do the those who are blaming President Trump for following the law and practices of those Presidents before him, have to offer?
You Dave, seem rational unlike Jg who admits he has no solution, other than to blame the USA for this and all the worlds ills and of course "Trump's total f#@k-up". What do you think is the solution for our border issue?
"The question I ask is what solution do the those who are blaming President Trump for following the law and practices of those Presidents before him, have to offer?" ~~ Majormajor (aka misinformed Chuck)
Trump created a situation where babies and children were intentionally, by policy, separated from their parents and then incarcerated. Big difference. Thus, Trump is not only a racist, but he's also a kidnapper and a child abuser.
"...unlike Jg who admits he has no solution, other than to blame the USA for this and all the worlds [sp] ills and of course 'Trump's total f#@k-up'." ~~ Majormajor (aka "only treat the symptoms" Chuck)
You're lying, again. I actually offered the cure for the disease. Trump, and previous administrations, only offered to treat the symptoms.
Wouldn't you rather there be a cure for cancer, Chuck, rather than always just treating the symptoms causing it?
I would think you, of anyone, would be understanding of this metaphor.
"previous administrations," Does that include Obama's?
"Trump created a situation where babies and children were intentionally, by policy, separated from their parents and then incarcerated." That is not what Obama's DHS Sec. Jeh Johnson said and what photos from 2014 of children being separated and being held in chain link cages under Obama. Unless of course you have proof Obama did it unintentionally.
"Of course it's obvious to any rational person that if governments want to stop the influx of refugees, they need to stop creating the conditions that cause people to seek safety beyond their own borders."
Explain how you think the USA should do this?
What, in your words, is the "cure" President Trump should use to stop the mass invasion of our southern border?
Are you now re-thinking your position of you haven't the answer? Sounds like it.
How is the USA "creating the conditions that cause people to seek safety beyond their own borders"?
"What, in your words, is the 'cure' President Trump should use to stop the mass invasion of our southern border?" ~~ Majormajor (aka "can't see the forest for the trees" Chuck)
Putting the drug cartels out of business is step one. Next, ending the U.S. government's ongoing policy of propping up rightwing dictatorships in Central and South American countries. Combined, both would dramatically slow the exodus of persecuted refugees from those nations.
They're leaving their homes due to concerns for their safety -- not because they want to participate in the American "scheme".
Obama DHS Sec. Jeh Johnson ‘Freely Admits’ They Detained Children, Families:
Of course they did. The difference being they tried to keep families together rather than enforce MORE separations like Sessions/Trump.
HUGE difference, really. MM will ignore this fact.
Jeh Johnson also “freely admitted” to NP:
SIMON: So it's your position that children were not - certainly, not as a matter of policy, but in practice they were not separated from their parents under your watch?
JOHNSON: I can't say that it never happened. There may have been some exigent situation, some emergency. There may have been some doubt about whether the adult accompanying the child was in fact the parent of the child. I can't say it never happened but not as a matter of policy or practice. It's not something that I could ask our Border Patrol or our immigration enforcement personnel to do.
So no, Obama didn’t start zero tolerance. That is all Trump.
Too bad MM can’t “freely admit” that fact. ;-)
The “only president to issue an EO ordering the end to the practice” that he ORDERED in the first place. It’s like someone throwing a person overboard and claiming to be a hero by throwing a life preserver.
And it was NOT an order to “end the practice”. It allowed for exceptions, but also simply ordered them to be confined together. Non-violent parents and children ordered to jail with no bond or probation. THAT is what he ordered. And nothing was ordered to reunite the ones already separated.
We know it’s impossible for MM to be honest, because he is loyal to the most dishonest man ever to invite Russians into the Oval Office. Oh, right. He was the only president who loves Russians that much. They are his allies and base.
"We know it’s impossible for MM to be honest, because he is loyal to the most dishonest man ever to invite Russians into the Oval Office." ~~ Dave Dubya
Chuck's a pathological liar, like the president he adores. We've always known this about him.
A prime example, though there have been many, is the Jeh Johnson interview that he conveniently cherry-picked to try to back his flimsy position.
He's really a very dishonest person.
"I can't say it never happened"
"Obama didn’t start zero tolerance" He wanted open borders, he just ignored the law?
You guys are really grasping at straws.
"cherry picked", LOL.
"Liar", LOL.
"Russia", LOL.
"flimsy position" LOL
Just what problems has the USA not caused Jg?
It seems both of you want open borders and selective enforcement of our border laws.
You admit you don't have solutions but are so sure that President Trump and the USA are the source of the world's problems. What do you think Hillary would have done if she had been elected? She was opposed to open borders.
In your minds, Obama's crap doesn't stink, he did nothing wrong, it's all GWB and President Trump's fault, LOL. Talk about adoring someone, yet JG ADMITS he didn't vote for our first black president. Twice.
Sad. Neither of you have the ability or desire to have a discussion about this problem as you are too busy bashing Trump and the USA and me. Can playing the race card be far behind?
President Donald Trump’s zero-tolerance policy towards adult migrants who bring children with them has been temporarily stopped by a lack of resources, according to White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders. You two must have missed this.
Border officers are not referring migrants with children to the Justice Department for prosecution, she acknowledged June 25, adding:
This is a temporary solution … We’re not changing the policy. We’re simply out of resources. And at some point, Congress has to do what they were elected to do, and that is secure our border, that is stop the crime coming into our country. The country has made extremely clear that they don’t want open borders. And Democrats need to understand that, and they need to work with Republicans and find some solutions.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Kevin McAleenan told reporters Monday morning that his agency is not referring family migrants to the Department of Justice, even though Attorney General Jeff Sessions wishes to implement the zero-tolerance prosecution policy.
Officials have not said they are cutting back the enforcement of the zero-tolerance policy against adults.[…]
And you must have missed this, or is ti just cherry picking, LOL?
A growing number of migrants have been bringing children with them to exploit the Flores “catch-and-release” loophole. The New York Times reported:
“This is the reason I brought a minor with me,” said Guillermo T., 57, a construction worker who recently arrived in Arizona. Facing unemployment at home in Guatemala, he decided to head north; he had been told that bringing his 16-year-old daughter would assure passage. He asked that only his first named be used to avoid consequences with his immigration case.
“She was my passport,” he said of his daughter.
It’s time once again to play Authoritarian Tactics And Rules Of Discourse.
We thank MM for his generous offering.
"Obama didn’t start zero tolerance" (Truth from DD)
He wanted open borders, he just ignored the law?(Decieve, Deflect, Discredit, Lie))
You guys are really grasping at straws."cherry picked",(Projection) LOL."Liar", (Projection) LOL."Russia", LOL."flimsy position" LOL (Demean, Dismiss, Deride)
Just what problems has the USA not caused Jg? (Distract)
It seems both of you want open borders and selective enforcement of our border laws. (Obfuscation, Back to the “You want open borders for gangs and rapists” accusation.)
In your minds, Obama's crap doesn't stink, he did nothing wrong, it's all GWB and President Trump's fault, LOL. (Victim Card, Deride, Projection of Messianic Trumpism)
Talk about adoring someone, yet JG ADMITS he didn't vote for our first black president. Twice. (False Narrative. Redefine “Adoring”, In the conservative brain, NOT voting for Obama is “adoring Obama”)
Sad. Neither of you have the ability (demean)or desire to have a discussion about this problem (Projection) as you are too busy bashing Trump and the USA and me.(Distort, Victim Card, Questioning Patriotism)
So there's that.
I'm all for discussing the problem, but without lies and accusations.
Immigration and asylum are complicated issues and cannot be solved with a damn wall. The answer cannot be so simple it fits on a redneck's bumper sticker. That's all they got, and it aint gonna work.
Security and humane treatment are not mutually exclusive. It's not an either/or problem. It will require good faith discussion based on evidence, facts, and reason to reach more humane and secure policies. Treating mothers and toddlers like gangsters is always immoral and counterproductive.
"You admit you don't have solutions but are so sure that President Trump and the USA are the source of the world's problems." ~~ Majormajor (aka "always misrepresenting" Chuck)
I actually did tell you the solution. You chose to ignore it. Your ignoring it doesn't equate to my not offering a solution.
As far as Trump being the source of all the world's problems, he isn't -- yet. Give him time, though. He will be.
"What do you think Hillary would have done if she had been elected? She was opposed to open borders." ~~ Majormajor (aka "blaming the non-president, again" Chuck)
What do I care what Hillary Clinton would have done? She's not the president -- and never has been. Remember?
Sounds like more "whataboutism" on your part as you attempt to cover for Trump's major f#@k-up -- and it's a huge one.
"(...Redefine 'Adoring', In the conservative brain, NOT voting for Obama is 'adoring Obama') ~~ Dave Dubya, questioning the logic of Majormajor in his accusation that I adore Obama because I didn't vote for Obama
Must be more "conservative-speak", Dave.
Don't forget, conservatives live within a bubble not unsimilar to Superman's fabled "Bizarro World" -- up is down, down is up, black is white, white is black, hot is cold, cold is hot. You get the idea.
I suppose one then has to assume adoration is rejection, and rejection is adoration. LOLOL
You two remind me of a recent skit I saw on twitter done by Tracy Ullman.
Instead of a conversation about what the solution(s) for our southern border, which I've tried to start by asking for your solutions, it has become a hate fest against any policy, any person, any group not as leftist as the two of you. The two of you really feed off each other's hate.
Is it a distraction to ask Jg what problems haven't been started by the USA when he claims our border problem is being caused by the USA?
Is it deflection to point out the actions of presidents prior to President Trump that have not solved our border problem?
No solutions, just hate from the left.
Stay woke.
"Instead of a conversation about what the solution(s) for our southern border, which I've tried to start by asking for your solutions, it has become a hate fest against any policy, any person, any group not as leftist as the two of you. The two of you really feed off each other's hate." -- MM
A conversation is a two-way street. You asked and, I see with my open eyes and reading comprehension, that you received answers. So perhaps your definition or understanding of what a conversation needs to be re-evaluated.
"Is it a distraction to ask JG what problems haven't been started by the USA when he claims our border problem is being caused by the USA?" - MM
Yes, when it's distracting you and those you have a conversation with from the immediate topic being discussed.
"Is it deflection to point out the actions of presidents prior to President Trump that have not solved our border problem? " -- MM
Yes, quite literally the definition of deflection. You're deflecting with Whataboutism. By pointing this out, you're not actually addressing the situation. "WELL BILLY DID IT TOO" wasn't an appropriate tactic to take when you were 10 and in trouble with your parents for something, and it doesn't work as a defense now. It doesn't excuse the actions being taken now. I believe you're becoming self-aware now.
In fact, this entire response of yours is simply another attempt to avoid actually having the conversation you bemoan not being able to have. It's rather remarkable observing these conversations.
Fun with Authoritarian Tactics And Rules Of Discourse.
(DD again wishes to expresses thanks to MM for his generous contribution.)
Instead of a conversation about what the solution(s) for our southern border,.. (False Narrative.)
What was this, chopped liver?? "Immigration and asylum are complicated issues and cannot be solved with a damn wall. The answer cannot be so simple it fits on a redneck's bumper sticker. That's all they got, and it aint gonna work.
Security and humane treatment are not mutually exclusive. It will require good faith discussion based on evidence, facts, and reason to reach more humane and secure policies. Treating mothers and toddlers like gangsters is always immoral and counterproductive."
Seems a reasonably sound foundation for a conversation in Reality World.
...which I've tried to start by asking for your solutions,(To Dismiss) it has become a hate fest against any policy, any person, any group not as leftist as the two of you. (Because we disagree with Trump. Projection, Victim Card)
The two of you really feed off each other's hate. (Like a Trump rally? Projection. Accusation)
No solutions, just hate from the left. (Projection, Accusation, Victim Card)
Stay woke. (Deride, Demean)
In case we missed it, we are accused of “hate” three times in six sentences.
Now THAT’s the way to have a conversation, amirite?
TB3,
Yes, quite literally the definition of deflection. You're deflecting with Whataboutism.
I quite literally LOL! Excellent comedic Fun with Authoritarian Tactics And Rules Of Discourse
And for the comic clincher:
another attempt to avoid actually having the conversation you bemoan not being able to have.
This could be great sitcom or movie plotline.
Oh, how silly of me, history doesn't matter unless it shows anyone but a leftist at fault...
Today's topic boys and girls is how awful President Trump is for following the our border laws, something other presidents have not done. How bad he is because he is opposed to open borders, something prior presidents seem to have supported.
No, let's never ever talk about the past if in doing so it casts some guilt on Obama. That would be racist. The problem IS President Trump and the only solution is to remove him from office and of course, we must,
Stay Woke.
Leftist border solution is to send lots of money to the countries, whose citizens are crashing our borders, paying them to stay home. Drug cartel problem, leftist solution make all drugs legal and maybe even free.
That's the topic, that's the left's solution.
Stay Woke.
"Oh, how silly of me, history doesn't matter unless it shows anyone but a leftist at fault..." - MM
History matters. History does not matter when someone asks you 'So you support President Trump's Such-and-Such Plan to Do Such-and-Such?' and you answer 'BUT OBAMA DID IT TOO' History, in this context, isn't the question. Trump is our current President, not our past President. Now if you'd like to give context to your feelings about Trump's policies by saying how such-and-such during the Obama administration is something you agreed with and should be continued under the present administration, then fine. In fact, answering in the way you do instead condones or makes you complicit in the such-and-such going on the present. You present yourself as an adult, I know you can understand this concept. I do not know why you insist on being so obtuse.
"No, let's never ever talk about the past if in doing so it casts some guilt on Obama. That would be racist. The problem IS President Trump and the only solution is to remove him from office and of course, we must,
Stay Woke."
This is literally deflecting. Literally. Did you not read what I wrote before? This isn't a debate tactic. This is a strategy children use to avoid being grounded. No one is talking about Obama except you and you only bring up Obama to deflect the conversation into a direction you think will be more favorable to the argument that you wish you could be making. Again, rather than have the conversation you complained about not having, you dig your heels in and put up your shields and get all defensive.
"Leftist border solution is to send lots of money to the countries, whose citizens are crashing our borders, paying them to stay home. Drug cartel problem, leftist solution make all drugs legal and maybe even free."
This is over simplification, but at least it proves you read that DD and JG offered you up solutions to the question you posed them. Rather than deny that they even answered you, maybe you can discuss with them how this oversimplification is wrong? Or why it's wrong? No? Just want to point a finger and punctuate your debate by calling people you clearly disagree with "leftist"? Ok. Why do you even comment on DD's blog? Is it simply the boost in endorphins you get when you perpetuate arguments?
History matters? Tell that to leftist who think that President Trump is the one who started the separation of family's crossing our border.
"put up your shields and get all defensive" you mean I shouldn't defend myself when attacked? How ruthless of me to believe in self defense. Silly me.
"No one is talking about Obama". But but you said history matters!
It's funny.
I read:
"You two remind me of a recent skit I saw on twitter done by Tracy Ullman." - MM
I am more reminded of this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLlv_aZjHXc
"History matters? Tell that to leftist who think that President Trump is the one who started the separation of family's crossing our border." - MM
You are purposely and willfully being ignorant about this.
""put up your shields and get all defensive" you mean I shouldn't defend myself when attacked? How ruthless of me to believe in self defense. Silly me." - MM
Why do you feel defensive, MM? You come here by choice and start arguments and fights and purposely ignore things said to you to keep yourself on the defensive for a rational reason that eludes me. You're not fighting the good fight. You're not here to change DD's mind or any of his readers. You just spoil for a fight and say you're commenting in self-defense. You lob bricks at DD's windows and then complain about being under attack when he chases after you with a baseball bat. Yeah. I guess that is silly of you.
TB3
You are dense as a rock. So because I express a view different from others here, I have no right to defend myself? In fact because I do express views different from others I deserve being attacked? I thought liberals wanted diversity. Guess that is as much a lie as being told Obama Care will save everyone $2000.
Hey, isn't it going to be fun watching the left's heads explode with retirement of Justice Kennedy? Interesting times.
"And for the comic clincher: [You're making] another attempt to avoid actually having the conversation you bemoan not being able to have." ~~ Dave Dubya, quoting TB3, who offered up this very clear observation about Majormajor
and...
"This could be great sitcom or movie plotline." ~~ Dave Dubya
It's a Seinfeld episode. "That's a show!" LOL
HAHAHAHA Jg, President Trump gets another Supreme Court pick..
Watching the left will "be great sitcom or movie plotline(s/p).
"...Trump gets another Supreme Court pick.." ~~ Majormajor (aka, hopeful Chuck
Maybe...maybe not. Mr. Mueller could have a say in this. ;-)
Dems should pull out the old "It's too close to an election to fill the court stunt".
Except IOKIYAR.
HAHAHAH, only works when it's a Presidential election, LOL LOL LOL.
Getting popcorn ready for the lefts meltdown, it will "be great sitcom or movie plotline(s/p).
"You come here by choice and start arguments and fights and purposely ignore things said to you to keep yourself on the defensive for a rational reason that eludes me. You're not fighting the good fight. You're not here to change DD's mind or any of his readers. You just spoil for a fight and say you're commenting in self-defense. You lob bricks at DD's windows and then complain about being under attack when he chases after you with a baseball bat. Yeah. I guess that is silly of you." ~~ TB3
I guess it's safe to assume Chuck didn't like my supply-side option of stopping the flow of refugees into this country at the source.
Chuck would rather band-aid the symptoms. He's oblivious to the cause.
How much more aid should we send to Central America to convince their people to stay home?
2nd time for this question.
MM means court obstruction "only works on a black president". McConnell said "Let the people decide", and they did. A large majority voted for Hillary and Obama's choice for the court. Once again the Right defeats democracy.
To authoritarians, democracy doesn't make American great. They hate it. Corporations now own the Supreme Court. All the justice money can buy. Isn't that great?
"You are dense as a rock. So because I express a view different from others here, I have no right to defend myself?" - MM
Thank you. I chuckled at this. No, you are confused. Because you express a differing view of others you have the right to defend that point of view. The problem you seem to be having is indicative of the quoted statement. You don't need to defend yourself unless you make the conversation about yourself and not your ideas. You throw around slurs like "leftist" and complain that you're in-turn called a racist or a racist apologist or racist sympathizer.
Now, before you get defensive at me, I'm not calling you a racist. I think you have the willful obliviousness of a rabid sportsfan. Your team is the Republican Party and they can do no wrong. You act the cheerleader for whatever the (R) making the news is doing, regardless of the actual implications of what the (R) is doing (or racists in Charlottesville are doing, or racists "conservatives" trying to talk at Universities). The President could walk onto 5th Avenue and shoot a guy and it would not surprise me to see you defending the action and calling people snowflakes. Political reporting, purposely, began to be reported like it was a sporting event. The need for ratings, I guess. There's always a Team vs Team mentality to the reporting. You've picked a team. I simply wish folks like you could understand that it's ok to criticize your team rather than morph your opinions to meet what the team is doing. DD and JG seem to have no problem being critical of the side of the fence that they stick to, despite your willful inability to see that and continued blatherings about the "Black Messiah" that DD and JG expressly don't believe in.
"Getting popcorn ready for the lefts meltdown, it will "be great sitcom or movie plotline(s/p)" - MM
And there you have it. You delight in the prospect of the "Left" taking issue with the current Supreme Court situation. You're even going to bring popcorn. Sort of fits my sports analogy. All this delight, trolling and vindicitiveness for people who think slightly different than you. It's not about what's good for the nation and good for our society together, MM. You're in it for the points scored and the tit-for-tat.
"How much more aid should we send to Central America to convince their people to stay home?" ~~ Majormajor
I don't know. How much do we send now?...And of that "aid", how much do you think actually reaches the poverty-stricken people it's supposed to help? Or, is the aid sent and earmarked for military purposes, or even pocketed by corrupt government officials?
"2nd time for this question." ~~ Majormajor
When was the first time for this question? I'm sorry, I must have been taken aback when you went off and I guess I totally missed your question.
Besides, Chuck, it's probably a mute point. As long as drug cartels control the corrupt governments, who in partnership extort and threaten common citizens, there's always going to be an exodus toward countries promising more safety and better economic opportunities.
It's this country's history. Just about all immigrants of European ancestry were escaping some sort of persecution or other threat to their livelihood. Instead of from western and Asian nations, now those coming here are from third-world "southern" nations. Instead of Ellis Island, they're arriving across our southern border.
Immigrants are our heritage. They've made us who we are.
TB3,
Your sports analogy would be most accurate if this were a game. MM is a "team player" all the way. And politics is often seen as a game.
However, we should never lose sight of this reality. They are at war. They see our free press, and those who dissent against authoritarianism as their enemy. All who support democracy, equal voter rights, Constitutional regulation of commerce, taxing corporations and the rich, and providing for the general welfare are their enemies. If you are not loyal to Trump, you become the enemy, not an opponent.
While human lives and well-being are at stake, this is mere collateral damage in their efforts to see liberals, and democracy itself, lose. THAT is their joy.
They may, or may not, want to see children ripped from their mothers, or see poor kids lose healthcare and food stamps. It doesn't matter, anymore than the lives of civilians bombed in their other wars of choice.
It is their Triumph of the Will that means most to them. Hail victory!
TB3,
Ok, let's get back to the original theme of this post, "State Sponsored Child Abuse".
Did you support what Dave is calling State Sponsored Child Abuse when it occurred under Obama? Where were you when Obama was ripping children from their mothers? We know this happened based on first person testimony and photos from then.
So where was the leftist outrage now direct at President Trump that was so strangely absence when Obama did the same things? Remember we have proof that Obama did the same things, no matter how much Dave says that is a lie.
If my asking this question disqualifies me from being a team player, so be it. But is is a question honest people need to ask. Unless of course, the current outcry is nothing more than pure political drama.
Where were you when Obama was ripping children from their mothers? We know this happened based on first person testimony and photos from then.
NOT as policy. This is false. "Zero Tolerance" was a Trumpist tactic.
Remember we have proof that Obama did the same things,
False, as stated above.
a question honest people need to ask.
How would MM even know what an honest person would ask?
"Did you support what Dave is calling State Sponsored Child Abuse when it occurred under Obama? Where were you when Obama was ripping children from their mothers? We know this happened based on first person testimony and photos from then." -- MM
I was unaware of any child separations during the Obama Administration at the time. I have heard, watched and read where this had occurred in certain situations. I find such separations to be wrong.
"So where was the leftist outrage now direct at President Trump that was so strangely absence when Obama did the same things?"
Where was the outrage? What kind of question is that? How can someone react to something if that something is unknown? I can't retroactively be outraged about something in 2014 now that it's 2018. We're talking about something that is happening in 2018, remember the theme of this post? We know about this going on in 2018 and since we inhabit the present and not the past, we can outrage about what's going on the present. To outrage about 2014 is a waste of time, energy, and leads to nothing more than distracting you from what's going on now. It's a lot like that outcry of yours about the ridiculous Louis Ferrakahn stuff a few weeks back. A picture of Obama and Ferrakahn appeared and the Left is supposed to be retroactively angry in 2007 over it? We can't go back in the TARDIS or Delorean and tell ourselves then what we know now in 2018.
"Remember we have proof that Obama did the same things, no matter how much Dave says that is a lie." -MM
No. We have anecdotes that children became separated from their parents. We have proof the Trump Administration has an explicit policy mandating the separations. The Obama Administration had no such explicit policy mandating the separation of children from parents. This has been clearly explained in many news outlets. It's rather unlike Trump to want to emulate Obama and rather unlike his supporters to be so defensive over something they claim Obama did.
"If my asking this question disqualifies me from being a team player, so be it. But is is a question honest people need to ask. Unless of course, the current outcry is nothing more than pure political drama." -- MM
I have no idea what you're talking about here. Now, you know how I feel in 2018 about what happened in 2014. What happened in 2014 does not condone or make right what has occurred in 2018. Pointing the finger at Obama to excuse Trump's actions is a pretty pathetic defense. Obama's the Right's convenient scapegoat and he's used in any number of situations. Obama did this, so it is bad and must go away. Obama did that, so it justifies us doing something even more overt and harmful.
Obama's the Right's convenient scapegoat
The Black Guy is blamed for everything and anything, mostly for what he didn't do.
Those "2014 photos" are not children ripped from parents. They were unaccompanied minors.
But Trumpists have no need for truth, facts, and honesty, as long as their authoritarian leader dictates, "You look at the images from 2014, I was watching this morning and they were showing images from 2014 and they blow away what we’re doing today," Trump said. "I saw images that were horrible."
And that's all the "evidence" they need.
An honest person would ask, "Why do people believe a racist birther and pathological liar like Trump?" Hmmm. We have a notion or two, don't we?
"Those "2014 photos" are not children ripped from parents. They were unaccompanied minors." -- DD
I'm a little weak on those photos, honestly. I saw an interview with a former member of the Obama Administration, I forget who, who made statements along the lines of 'I can't say that it didn't happen in the Obama Administration, I'm saying we never had a policy mandating it.' and basically admitted, which is probably for the best, that the possibility existed for children separation and that it may have occurred in certain scenarios/situations. Reasonable. Trump explicitly wanted children separated from parents as an attempt at deterrance. We shouldn't have been surprised that this happened from a man who suggested that we "Take out their families" in regards to a different problem we are trying to address.
TB3,
Now we have an interesting development don't we. You were not EVEN AWARE of Obama's actions were you. But you are right on top of President's Trumps actions. Ever wonder why that is And yet the law being enforced now was in effect under Obama. Hence my question of supporting open borders and catch and release.
What's the result of my question? How do those in the tank for Obama respond? You can read for your self in the over 50 posts from DD and JG that followed. Deflect, discredit, mock and lie.
If you supported Obama then you also supported state-sanctioned child abuse.
If you do not support open borders then you support zero tolerance.
If you support 'catch and release', then you support open borders.
Unless of course you have a solution, which you have admitted to not having.
The dilemma sir, is yours.
JG,
Thanks for your answer RE: what the USA should do. My take on what you said is, there is nothing the USA can do and migration is a good thing. Sounds like open borders to me.
"Thanks for your answer RE: what the USA should do. My take on what you said is, there is nothing the USA can do and migration is a good thing. Sounds like open borders to me." ~~ Majormajor (aka misinterpreting Chuck)
It's really unfortunate, Chuck, that you would misconstrue my statement that we're a country built aound immigrants and equate that with favorability toward "open borders".
I in awe how you can always go from "A" to "Z" without consideration of all the letters in between. It's truly amazing!
I clearly expressed "what the problem is", yet obviously never presented a simplistic path as to how to solve it. Why? Because there isn't a simple solution.
As Dave Dubya already remarked, the solution is too complex and complicated, and certainly not concise and tidy enough to fit on a bumper sticker.
As far as "migration" (your word) being a "good thing", as you say, it certainly can be. It was a "good thing" for my grandparents. Wasn't it a "good thing" for people in your family at one point in time? I'm supposing it was.
Like I've expressed, Chuck, if the government truly is serious and wants to solve the problem, it'll take it to the source. If not, I don't believe the problem is solvable on an "A" to "B" level.
Projection is indeed an important tactic for Authoritarian discourse. "Deflect, discredit, mock and lie."
And ALWAYS blame the Black Guy. You were not EVEN AWARE of Obama's actions were you.
Never mind the fact Trump and his cult are not EVEN AWARE Obama didn't enforce a zero tolerance policy intent on separating parents from children.
MM supports child abuse and wants to blame the Black Guy. How white of him.
A Black woman made the mistake of condoning non-violent verbal protest against Trump Cartel members.
She was then insulted and threatened by the racist Trump. And he lied about her.
“Congresswoman Maxine Waters, an extraordinarily low IQ person, has become, together with Nancy Pelosi, the Face of the Democrat Party. She has just called for harm to supporters, of which there are many, of the Make America Great Again movement. Be careful what you wish for Max!”
He is a thug.
"As the President has continued to lie and falsely claim that I encouraged people to assault his supporters, while also offering a veiled threat that I should 'be careful', even more individuals are leaving (threatening) messages and sending hostile mail to my office," she said in a statement.
"There was one very serious death threat made against me on Monday from an individual in Texas which is why my planned speaking engagements in Texas and Alabama were cancelled this weekend," she continued. "This is just one in several very serious threats the United States Capitol Police are investigating in which individuals threatened to shoot, lynch, or cause me serious bodily harm."
A hateful “individual in Texas” brings someone here to mind. Hmmm. Just don’t call them racists. That would be “unfair”.
"Now we have an interesting development don't we. You were not EVEN AWARE of Obama's actions were you. But you are right on top of President's Trumps actions. Ever wonder why that is And yet the law being enforced now was in effect under Obama. Hence my question of supporting open borders and catch and release." - MM
Why are you trying to go out of your way to be non-sensicle? How is this interesting? No was was EVEN AWARE, not just me. I'm the dense one, but you're the one wondering where all the outrage was about a situation no was was EVEN AWARE of? People can be upset at the anecdotal separations from 4 years ago, but that's over. To expect equal outrage over that to the deliberate Trump Administration Policy of separating kids from parents as a deterrant is ludicrous. That's like griping about the reaction to yesterday's most recent mass shooting being more intense to the current outrage over the mass shooting at Columbine. Ridiculous.
"What's the result of my question? How do those in the tank for Obama respond? You can read for your self in the over 50 posts from DD and JG that followed. Deflect, discredit, mock and lie." - MM
Pot meet kettle.
"If you... then you..." x 3 -- MM
No. And you inability to see nuance, context and that life isn't a series of If-Then statements.
"Unless of course you have a solution, which you have admitted to not having." -- MM
I support state-sanctioned child abuse unless I have a solution? Nice deflection away from your current support of our President and his policy of separating children from their parents. I elect people to hold government office to come up with solutions. If they pick solutions I do not agree with, I vote them out when it's time to vote them out. While I wait to vote them out, I am allowed to voice my distaste and disagreement over their decisions.
"The dilemma sir, is yours." -- MM
No, MM. The dilemma is ours. Going back to my previous comment. This isn't Us vs Them. We're a society of people with differing points of view and thoughts on things. Even though with differ, we're all in this together, MM.
'IF you support one claim and jump to a false conclusion, then you are a conservative."
Tell that to the DNC's new leader, Maxine Waters.
Why would you need to tell Maxine Waters that? Furthermore, she's not the head or deputy head of the DNC. Another odd non sequitor? Are we back to that?
Liars must lie.
"Tell that to the DNC's new leader, Maxine Waters."
Sounds like someone from Texas who has made, or doesn't mind, death threats directed a Black woman. Hmmm.
The Department of Justice is crafting a plan that would prohibit any migrant convicted of crossing the border illegally from receiving asylum, Vox reported Friday.
What's your take on this idea Jg?
"Sounds like someone from Texas who has made, or doesn't mind, death threats directed a Black woman. Hmmm." Another odd non sequitor? Are we back to that, Dave?
The racist thug said: "Congresswoman Maxine Waters, an extraordinarily low IQ person...has just called for harm to supporters, of which there are many, of the Make America Great Again movement. Be careful what you wish for Max!”
Then came the death threats from someone in Texas who believes every word from Trump. We can safely say Majormajor is one of those fanatic true believers who agrees with the racist thug. He, or someone with the same cult mentality, lacks the moral grounding to admit Trump lied in his threatening, demeaning, and false accusation, of the Black woman.
MM supports Trump's racist lie and shares the same gleeful cruelty towards the Black woman.
And then MM responded with Authoritarian Rules and Tactics of Discourse: Demean, Deride, Dismiss, and Lie.
..."Tell that to the DNC's new leader, Maxine Waters."
So much hate.
"What's your take on this [new DOJ plan] Jg?" ~~ Majormajor (aka same ol' same ol' Chuck)
Sounds no different than the old plan, wouldn't you agree?
Dave believes every word the left says, right Dave?
Like:
A number of liberal Twitter users and journalists spread a conspiracy theory Thursday insisting a Department of Homeland Security document contained a secret Nazi code.
The words "We must secure" is a white supremacist slogan that goes "We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children."
New DHS press release is titled: "We Must Secure" The Border And Build The Wall To Make America Safe Again" ergo it's a Nazi code. It's just got to be, right Dave?
However, as for the press release beginning "we must secure," that phrase was used by DHS dating back to the Obama administration in relation to its duties to protect the border. It was even one of the "five responsibilities" espoused by Obama's first DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano.
"We must guard against terrorism; "we must secure" our borders;" NAZIS!!!!! Secret Nazi Code used in the Obama administration!!
This is just one example of how crazy the resist movement under the leadership of Maxine Waters has become the laughing stock of the majority of Americans, as shown in new Harvard-Harris Poll.
The poll found that 47% currently approve of Trump's handling of the presidency, which is two points better than last month and about where Rasmussen puts him (and nearly identical to Barack Obama's approval at the same point in his presidency, LOL by the way).
On the economy, a crucial indicator for midterms, the results are devastating for Democrats: 69% say the economy is either "very" or "somewhat" strong (just 31% disagree); 68% say their own financial situation is either improving or about the same (just 26% say it's "getting worse"); 58% approve of Trump's work on stimulating job creation, and about the same number, 57%, approve of his handling of the economy.
People vote their pocket books.
Some more high lights:
70% want stricter enforcement of immigration laws
63% agree with Trump's DACA compromise
73% agree with Trump's reversal of his separation policy
61% agree with Trump that our border security is "inadequate"
84% side with Trump against sanctuary city policies blocking notification of ICE
76% are against the leftist idea of "open borders,"
69% are against the notion of disbanding ICE
64% believe those who cross illegally should be sent home,
61% said even those with children should be sent home
55% want to hold illegal immigrants in custody (as opposed to 45% who agree with the Democrats' "catch and release" policy)
53% say illegal crossing families with children should be held (47% said they should be released)
88% believe parents and children should be held together
48% said illegal immigration reduces wages to workers
38% said immigration was the most important issue facing the country (the highest percentage of any issue)
The poll also found that 57% approve of Trump's handling of terrorism; nearly three-quarters approve of Trump meeting with Kim Jong Un.
Nearly 60% think the Robert Mueller investigation is hurting America, while majorities believe Obama politicized the FBI and members of the intelligence community should be investigated over the handling of the Hillary Clinton investigation.
And President Trump gets to appoint another Supreme Court Justice. How sweet it is!
Jg,
I don't think it is this way now, hence catch and release, and a promise to return to court for your trial at which time they get to apply.
More whataboutism and a Right leaning poll.
MM forgot to share these two items:
If the 2018 midterms were held today, would you vote for the Democratic or Republican candidate in your district?
Democratic candidate 45%
Republican candidate 36%
Other 4%
If a Democratically controlled House of Representatives would impeach President Trump, are you more likely to vote in the midterms for a Democrat, less likely, or would it have no effect on your vote?
More likely 38%
Would have no effect 35%
Less likely 27%
"Right leaning poll"?
Harvard-Harris oh, sure.
LOL
Whose left leaning pool did you quote?
"Whose left leaning pool did you quote?"
Last year's Harvard-Harris
LOL
Chuck, what is the name of the poll you're citing, date range when polling took place, and number of people polled?
Also, you're plagerizing again. [head shaking]
"I don't think it is this way now, hence catch and release, and a promise to return to court for your trial at which time they get to apply," ~~ Majormajor (aka misinterpreting Chuck)
I think it's exactly as it is now -- zero tolerence.
You continue to ignore the real reasons for the migration of refugees toward our southern border.
I've said it several times already. Until the motivation for the dominant drug cartels is quelled, and people's democratically governments are respected and recognized, than they're going to continue to come here to escape persecution and seek safety.
You'd do the same thing if the tables were turned -- and one day, in the not-too-distant future, they just may be.
That's democratically elected governments...
Jg,
If you don't know that name of the poll, (which I provided) how do you know I am "plagerizing (s/p) again"?
1."motivation for the dominant drug cartels is quelled" How and what would cause that?
2."people's democratically governments are respected and recognized" How does the USA bring that about?
I fail to see in both examples how it is the responsibility if the USA to fix the problems of the country's whose people are fleeing them. In 2015 the USA "approve a $750 million appropriations bill to provide assistance for the three governments of El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala — which make up what’s known as Central America’s “Northern Triangle” — to improve security, promote peace, and tackle gang violence."
(https://thinkprogress.org/experts-say-u-s-aid-package-to-central-america-is-backfiring-big-time-c0928534f91c/)
Human rights organizations said this plan COULD have the inverse effect of flat lining wages and aggravating the migration situation. Now that makes zero sense to me, maybe you can explain how that could be?
“The assistance to date has not helped abate the root causes, which most people recognize as being the extreme level of violence and the systemic economic problems with extremely high levels of poverty and few employment opportunities,” Alexander Main, the Senior Associate for International Policy at the Center for Economic and Policy, told ThinkProgress.
Do you have a solution in light of this?
"...how do you know I am 'plagiarizing again'?" ~~ Majormajor
Because all of a sudden you're grammatically correct, your spelling improves, and your sentence structure makes sense.
"How and what would cause that? ~~ Majormajor (aka "stuck in the box" Chuck)
Archaic drug usage laws in the U.S. and other nations.
"Now that makes zero sense to me, maybe you can explain how that could be?" ~~ Majormajor (aka "reading comprehension challenged" Chuck)
I could, but I haven't read the article. Do you remember when I told you a long time ago that I will not do your work for you? If you want me to read something, you'll have to provide the convenience of a hyperlink. I don't copy & paste for you.
"Do you have a solution in light of this?" ~~ Majormajor (aka "poor memory" Chuck)
I outlined the reasons for the immigrant situation previously (and several times), and also explained the solution to be very complex and so could not offer an easy out-out-the-box solution. Despite this, you ask me for one. Why?
Until there's an understanding of the causes, there can never be any solutions.
As I thought, you don't have a solution.
"As I thought, you don't have a solution."
Authoritarian Rules and Tactics of Discourse: Deride, Dismiss, Obfuscation and Lie.
We already suggested ending the drug cartels' influence by ending our damn war on drugs.
The ONLY solution the authoritarian mind can embrace is "Lock them up". The more punishment the better. Gotta be tough, since compassion and wisdom are out of the question.
Like their precious war on drugs, State sanctioned child abuse and cruelty is a failure. And make no mistake, racism is found at the source of theses policies.
But not everyone loses. Their corporate private prisons and beloved ICE get more money, literally profiting from human misery. MM and his Authoritarian Tribe celebrate with their leader a gleeful cruelty at their victory over the evil liberals, brown invaders, and MS-13 toddlers.
For them, winning is always accomplished by making the least of us losers. Medicaid and CHIP are slashed so the rich so get huge tax cuts. Stepping on the poor as they elevate the rich is just what Republican Jesus preaches.
It is what MM wants too. That is what sends the tingle up his leg.
I want to have a open discussion on this problem, and from the looks of things, that's not the reason for this post. LOL Dave, what's your solution to our southern border problem, or is it too complicated for you as well?
Send more $ like Obama to Central America’s “Northern Triangle"?
Legalize drugs?
Have no border?
Do away with ICE?
Is that your solution to our problem? Or do you have one? Or two? I think you don't want the problem to be solved. If I'm wrong say so and offer some solutions.
You claim it's racism, but it wasn't when Obama deported thousands of brown skinned illegals was it, and separated familys, was it? Of course not.
Come on DD enlighten us with solutions instead of playing the blame game for political advantage. Really care about the children at the border and give us the leftist solution instead of using them for political gain. REALLY care about these people Dave instead of trying to score points in your political game of "gotcha". I'm starting to think you care more for the fox family in your yard than the people at out border. Prove me wrong.
You are damned good at spouting your talking points but damned short on solutions.
^
Authoritarian Rules and Tactics of Discourse: Deride, Dismiss, Deflect, Obfuscation, Accusation, and Lie.
"Prove me wrong."
Again and again.
No solutions, just talking points, no discussion, just canned replies.
Again and again.
"As I thought, you don't have a solution." ~~ Majormajor (aka short memory Chuck)
Reread my comments, Chuck. I defined the problem. To come up with a comprehensive solution, and more importantly, to think it's an easy solution, shows you're uninformed about the complexity of the situation.
Hang in there, though, and keep listening to Dave and me and you'll figure it out eventually.
Keep working at it...
"I defined the problem" I'm happy for you, I really am. Now define the solution Jg, put it down in black and white, be brave!
I wonder what the left's beef is going to be now that President Trump's Justice Department lawyers said in the filing in U.S. District Court in California on Friday that they now have no choice but to hold children for as long as it takes to resolve their immigration cases, because of a preliminary injunction issued on Tuesday in a separate immigration case.
So now to comply with the court injunction, the government “will not separate families but detain families together during the pendency of immigration proceedings.” Cases can sometimes take months or years to resolve.
Is this the solution you and Dave are afraid to offer?
What would JG do (WWJGD)
What would DD do (WWDDD)
"What would JG do (WWJGD)" [no punctuation] ~~ Majormajor (aka "not getting it" Chuck)
I outlined the reasons for the immigrant situation previously (and several times), and also explained the solution to be very complex and so could not offer an easy out-of-the-box solution. Despite this, you ask me for one. Why?
Until there's an understanding of the causes, there can never be any solutions.
Do you agree with the causes?
"very complex" - JG
There's the real problem, it seems.
"There's the real problem, it seems." ~~ TB3
As you've mentioned to Chuck countless times, he lacks nuance and context and believes all the world's ills are solvable by throwing a single switch from "on" to "off" or by moving from "A" to "B".
The immigration issue is particularly complicated and I suspect is the reason it has been kicked like a can down the road by Congress for so long.
Trump rallied his base by promising a wall, which anyone with only a quarter of a brain would know would never work. Yet he continues to call for one. [head shaking]
Of course his "A" to "B" solution, which is typical Trumpist, doesn't take into account the "C" through "J" problems it creates, or the "K" through "Y" unknowns that are inherent in any mass exodus of people from one area to another.
It's a huge complicated mess.
Message for Chuck: Are you willing to acknowledge the causes for the refugee/immigration situation before moving on to discuss any sequence of possible or potential solutions?
So TB3, what's your solution to the problem on our southern border, or is it "too complex" for you to offer a solution. Or even start a conversation about what steps could be taken. How about just giving one part like part 'a'?
Once again the left is showing it is long on criticizing and short on solving our nations problems. No beef, just moo.
By the way, are you against keeping family's together while they wait their court date for illegally entering our country?
Funny how MM DEMANDS a solution, but he offers none himself.
Well, not funny, but authoritarian. He ignores anything we say about the problem. He wants nothing more than to declare anyone who is opposed to Trump's wall and "lock them up" mentality wants "open borders".
That's it.
He wants to paint dissent from Trump as treason, against his leader, not the country.
That is all he is about. Not discussion. Not assembling information about the underlying causes of the immigration surge.
He doesn't care! This is why all he needs to do is deflect, distort, demean, deride, accuse, blame, etc.
After all, playing that game is a lot easier than admitting you support state sanctioned child abuse. Or whatever Trump's whim of moment may be.
He revels in his gleeful cruelty. This is con-servatism.
THIRD REQUEST
Chuck, are you willing to acknowledge the causes for the refugee/immigration situation before moving on to discuss any sequence of possible or potential solutions?
The problem needs to be adequately defined before assuming any off-the-cuff solutions. Don't you agree?
DD,
As expected when confronted with a request for a solution to the problem you attack those who made the request, neatly avoiding having to provide a solution to the problem. Nor have I been asked for a solution. But because I am a support of President Trump I am made out to be the problem
If none of you have a solution because it is so "complex",(even if you have defined the problem), how do you know what President Trump is doing is not the solution? You can't say he is supporting "state sanctioned child abuse" because it is
a. the same thing Obama did
b. as of Friday 6/30 Trump's justice dept is no longer separating family's but instead holding them together until their court date.
What's your beef?
JD,
Define the problem.
It's millions of people entering the USA illegally.
What's your solution?
"Define the problem. It's millions of people entering the USA illegally." ~~ Majormajor (aka bass-acwards Chuck)
I disagree. I see the problem as people forced to leave their countries due to persecution and corruption -- which, by the way, is exactly where Trump intends to take our country.
Define the problem correctly and you're already halfway to the solution.
Define the problem as you did and no matter what you propose as a solution, is doomed to failure.
As expected when confronted with a request for a solution to the problem you attack those who made the request, (Victim card played when called out for not offering a solution.)
But because I am a support of President Trump I am made out to be the problem (Victim card played when called out for approving state sanctioned child abuse)
how do you know what President Trump is doing is not the solution? (Even Trump figured taking kids from mothers was not the solution. He backed off because it was not tolerated by most Americans and many of his own party too.)
You can't say he is supporting "state sanctioned child abuse" because it is
a. the same thing Obama did (A LIE. More deflection, obfuscation and blame for the Black guy)
as of Friday 6/30 Trump's justice dept is no longer separating family's but instead holding them together until their court date. (Because Trump caught flak for taking kids from mothers and was not tolerated by most Americans and many of his own party.)
Entering the country illegally is a misdemeanor. Locking up non-violent asylum seekers for a misdemeanor is a cruel failure. Here's a better solution. DON'T lock up families and give them due process.
Define the problem.
Trump and his corrupt authoritarian party.
Here's a solution. Deport and exile Trump and his criminal cartel, and welcome asylum seekers. THAT would make America greater than ever. ;-)
"I see the problem as people forced to leave their countries due to persecution and corruption --"
So what is the solution to this problem?
"Entering the country illegally is a misdemeanor. Locking up non-violent asylum seekers for a misdemeanor is a cruel failure."
So you want to overturn the results of a legal election and have open borders.
Ok, thanks for being honest.
"So what is the solution to this problem?" ~~ Majormajor (aka repeating Chuck)
I can only tell you that you're the problem to the solution.
"Here's a solution. Deport and exile Trump and his criminal cartel, and welcome asylum seekers. THAT would make America greater than ever." ~~ Dave Dubya
Yes!...that'll work! I second the motion! LOLOL
"Ok, thanks for being honest." ~~ Majormajor (aka "authoritarian tactics" Chuck)
Chuck, your habitual dishonesty will always be seen as totally you. Your reputation proceeds you.
Of course, you already knew this.
Sigh,
Once again the left has no solutions, just hate.
I'll check in once in a while to see if you three have found any real solutions to our nations problem with illegal immigration. Or to see if you have moved on to some other problem for which you have no solution.
In the mean time, STAY WOKE!!
:)
Confirmed.
"He ignores anything we say about the problem. He wants nothing more than to declare anyone who is opposed to Trump's wall and "lock them up" mentality wants "open borders".
That's it."
"So you want to overturn the results of a legal election and have open borders.
Bless his Manichaean little amygdala. And isn't it cute how he thinks he understands us?
FOURTH REQUEST
Chuck, please acknowledge the causes for the refugee/immigration situation, and I'll be more than accomodating to discuss with you any possible or potential solutions. Until that time it's futile.
Maybe if I put it into terms you can relate to it would help...
When you were diagnosed with cancer it was because you went to your medical practitioner and/or a specialist and explained specific symptoms. These could have been any number of things: fatigue, lack of appetite, bloody stool, abdominal pain, etc., etc. etc.
When you were eventually referred to an oncologist and it was verified you did, indeed, have cancer, did the oncologist and his or her team concentrate only to relieve the symptoms that led you to seek information from your medical practitioner originally? Or was the team's primary goal to seek out and destroy the cancer which was causing you the symptoms?...and which you knew would eventually take your life?
I suppose it's possible you chose the former, and you're still inhabited by your cancer. If so, I can see your inclination toward treating only the symptoms of immigration on our southern border and ignoring the causes of that immigration.
I somehow have a feeling you chose to destroy your cancer, Am I right?
"So TB3, what's your solution to the problem on our southern border, or is it "too complex" for you to offer a solution. Or even start a conversation about what steps could be taken. How about just giving one part like part 'a'?" - MM
What's it matter what my solution is? You're not interested or able to talk about the issue in a constructive manner. You've been given ideas for solutions by the others and you've either dismissed them, ignored them, or purposely misunderstood them
"Once again the left is showing it is long on criticizing and short on solving our nations problems. No beef, just moo." - MM
You really need to start looking at the world outside of slogans and bumper stickers. "The Left" is anyone who seems to disgree with your or anyone you disagree with? I'm not "The Left". And thoughts, ideas, and solutions are out there and offered up. Just because you refuse to listen, consider or acknowledge does not mean people ar "short on solving our nations problems". This is like talking to someone who's plugged their ears with their fingers.
"By the way, are you against keeping family's together while they wait their court date for illegally entering our country?" - MM
What I want to know is what other misdemeanors necessitate separating families for days?
"What I want to know is what other misdemeanors necessitate separating families for days?" ~~ TB3
I'm also waiting to see Chuck's response to this, TB3. Honestly, I can't think of any.
Of course, under Trumpism misdemeanors will become felonies, and non-violent felonies will become capital offenses. It's the only "rule of law" that Trump and his cronies will respect.
It's the advent of the next stage of American fascism.
Question for today:
Are all the families reunited yet?
How is it that if you arrive at JFK Airport from a foreign country without a passport, you are sent back to your place of origin, whereas if you cross the Rio Grande River without a passport, you are not sent back?
"How is it that if you arrive at JFK Airport from a foreign country without a passport..." - MM
The chances of an individual getting a boarding pass for an international flight to the United States without a passport is pretty low. The instances of something like this happening are anecdotally small. This is an improper, ill-thoughtout comparison.
"...whereas if you cross the Rio Grande River without a passport, you are not sent back?" ~~ Majormajor (aka "always asking; never answering" Chuck)
Outdated maritime laws?
Socialist(Cortez) who unseated Dem rep. Crowley wants to abolish ICE and guarantee “Safe Passage” to illegal aliens.
Even though polls show that 76% of Americans are against the leftist idea of "open borders," and 69% are against the notion of disbanding ICE.
Sounds like a winning platform to me. Run on it in Nov. 2018. Please.
Back to randomly changing the subject. Guess we're no longer interested in having a conversation anymore.
Can you, please, if you're going to cut and paste an article word for word, cite the freaking article? If you don't want to do that, can you do something we all learned in middle school and express the talking point you read in the Daily Wire in your own words?
Since DD brought up the wall in one of his posts, think about this.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) spent a total of $4 billion on improper food stamp payments in 2017 to those receiving benefits through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), the USDA confirmed with Breitbart News on Friday 6/30/18. That's just 6.3% of the SNAP budget. And no one starved because of this "over sight".
How much of the wall would have been built with the wasted money that didn't get food to the starving in America? How many "good paying, shovel ready jobs" would building the wall have created with the wasted $4 billion? How many family's would still be together in the soon to be socialist paradise IE Mexico, if the wall had been built?
I know, Russia Russia Russia.
TB3,
Be glad to when I do CNP.
BTW, the subject of no borders, catch and release, zero tolerance at the borders and asylum have been constant lines of discussion in this post, sorry you missed them.
I may have missed it but what is your solution to our border problem?
What the Democratic Socialist said was:
“We absolutely do need to make sure that our borders are secure,” Ocasio-Cortez said on CNN. “But what we need to realize and remember is that ICE was established in 2003 right at the same time as the Patriot Act, the AUMF, the Iraq War ― and we look back at a lot of that time and legislation as a mistake now. And I think that ICE is right there as a part of it.”
“Its extrajudicial nature is based into the structure of the agency,” Ocasio-Cortez said. “We can replace it with a humane agency that is directed toward safe passage instead of the direction of the criminalization.”
"Leftist idea of open borders". Only time I've heard of it was when mentioned by Rightists. So far it means nothing.
I'd add the DEA to ICE. Save a lot of money for better things. We got along fine without them before, and neither make us any safer.
I wouldn't make it a platform, but wasteful spending and human rights abuse need to be debated.
"BTW, the subject of no borders, catch and release, zero tolerance at the borders and asylum have been constant lines of discussion in this post, sorry you missed them." - MM
Right. And what does the opinion of one future Representative from a district you don't belong to and polling numbers from one poll about the generic abolition of ICE have anything to do with what has been spoken about here?
"I may have missed it but what is your solution to our border problem?" - MM
I did not offer you one. You're not actually asking out of intellectual curiosity. It's all about the endorphins.
MM is distracting and deflecting again.
First the facts from USDA. "The national SNAP benefit payment error rate – a measure of both overpayments and underpayments made by all states nationwide – in fiscal year 2017 was 6.3 percent."
In other words, there is no "wasted $4 billion".
MM is ignorant of the fact SNAP benefits the economy as well as the poor. Even the "wasted" part. They have to buy that food from someone.
A wall does nothing for the economy after the immediate construction contracts. Nothing. Even undocumented immigrants pay into Social Security. A wall doesn't do that either.
And how about we look at the waste in the military?
MM will get back to us on that, right?
Again, it is clear from their posts that the left wants open borders. That is their solution to illegal immigration, just make it legal. Just like drug problem, just make drugs legal.
If "A wall does nothing for the economy after the immediate construction contracts"*, then what did the billions spent to create "shovel ready jobs"** under Obama do?
For the record I am against ANY govt spending waste. That should end that.
* TB3, FYI I'm quoting Dave Dubya.
** TB3 I'm quoting Joe Biden
As long as we're deflecting: then what did the billions spent to create "shovel ready jobs"** under Obama do?
Paved my road. Paved roads for millions of Americans. Several Republican governors were grateful for the infrastructure improvements.
For the record I am against ANY govt spending waste. That should end that.
Excellent! We agree. MM and I are about to greatly reduce our deficits and debt. Here are a few ideas:
Let's end the costly, cruel, and futile war on drugs. Win/win. It's a medical issue, not criminal. Regulate like alcohol. (Sorry kids, no booze or weed for you. Come back when you're 18.) Hard drug (And alcohol) usage goes down with legalized weed. Win/win!
How about we end subsidies for oil and mining? No more "picking winners". Win for us!
How about we demand negotiation for pharmaceutical prices for Medicare and Medicaid? Win for the poor and elderly AND the taxpayers!
And how about we spend only as much as the next 5 countries do on the military? Win/win for us and for the planet.
https://www.nationalpriorities.org/campaigns/us-military-spending-vs-world/
The U.S. outpaces all other nations in military expenditures. World military spending totaled more than $1.6 trillion in 2015. The U.S. accounted for 37 percent of the total.
U.S. military expenditures are roughly the size of the next seven largest military budgets around the world, combined.
What about migrant farm workers? Without them food costs would soar. Let the immigrants have those jobs we don't want. Win/win! Keep Border Patrol and screening. Regulate immigration by giving probationary entrance. No more paying for locking people up for non-violent misdemeanors. No need for ICE. Win/win.
THIS is how to make America great again. And look at the savings!
Only a "tax and spend" conservative could disagree.
"For the record I am against ANY govt spending waste. That should end that." ~~ Majormajor (aka "speak with forked tongue" Chuck)
Except when Donald Trump spends millions of taxpayer dollars to travel back-and-forth between his golf resorts each weekend. ;-) Huh, Chuck?
You know who really advocates “open borders”? Republicans. Here is Ronald Reagan advocating for open borders. Listen @ 2:22
youtu.be/Ixi9_cciy8w
Jerry,
You know the left's reply to something that happened over 30 years ago, "it doesn't matter now."
DD, Explain how building the wall wouldn't do the same thing as Obama's shovel ready jobs.
I want to share with you something I just found that may help you understand why the left is losing. Sorry about them being links
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=327&v=51UGcghHZ
https://www.facebook.com/usminority/posts/501841880236782
I know why the Left is losing politically, although they are not losing morally or socially.
The Right needs to know this: The majority is NOT on your side.
Since you were too lazy to tell us, I'll tell you.
The Left is losing politically because democracy is losing.
First there is a money and power imbalance. Wall Street and other corporate elites have more Republicans in their pockets, corrupting public service into their private service. (Tax cuts for the rich, healthcare cuts for the poor.)
Also a significant over-representation of rural whites, who enjoy a greater proportion in the House and Senate. And of course by gerrymandering.
Then there's the electoral college.
If, or when, democracy is restored and the majority regain their fairly proportioned representation, the Left will be winning politically, morally, and socially again.
As Martin Luther King Jr. understood, "“The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice”.
So the only way for democracy to win is if the rich are prevented from keeping more of their money?
I really think Dave what you want to do to "allow" the left to win is to over turn our Constitution. Members of the U.S. House of Representatives each represent a portion of their state known as a Congressional District, which averages 700,000 people. Why do you think this rule gives rural whites more power in congress? 700,000 equals one congressman no matter if you're rural or urban.
So did you follow the link and watch it?
"...what you want to do to 'allow' the left to win is to over turn our Constitution." ~~ Majormajor (aka oblivious Chuck)
The Constitution was compromised long ago -- led by the GOP. Complicit, and lured by the big money, was the Democratic Party. The demagogue in the White House is adding the finishing touches.
I'm sure, Chuck, you're proud of your role in creating and sustaining the corporate state. Bully for you!
Chuck, are all the families reunited yet?
Jg, have you the solution for our border problems yet? Not the causes, but the solutions.
Majormajor is desperate to deflect and distract from the facts.
Majormajor is either too dense to comprehend this, or he opposes the Founders’ very purpose for independence. Personally I think it’s both.
In direct contradiction of the Founders’ ideal of “consent of the governed”, the very reason for the revolution, we have a system of government that allows the government to be unrepresentative of the popular vote.
Trump LOST the popular vote but won the election while crying it was “rigged” against him. Democracy lost.
Democrats also got more votes for the U.S. Senate than Republicans, and yet Republicans maintained their majority. Democracy lost.
In 2012, House Democrats won about 1 million more votes nationwide than Republicans, but that wasn't big enough to put them anywhere near retaking the chamber. Democracy lost.
To be conservative is to be against democracy. They reject the majority's legitimacy and moral right to use state power. They oppose the concept of consent of the governed and support a tyranny of the minority.
But we already know this.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
It's time for real Americans to take our country back from the minority tyranny of usurpers, the enemies of democracy.
"Majormajor is desperate to deflect and distract from the facts."
You're kidding Dave right, you can't be serious?
Explain how you support our Constitution like you claim to when you are against "Members of the U.S. House of Representatives each represent a portion of their state known as a Congressional District, which averages 700,000 people. Why do you think this rule gives rural whites more power in congress? 700,000 equals one congressman no matter if they are rural or urban." How is that unfair?
How can you claim to be an old fashion American and claim you support our Constitution when you oppose the current way our Senators are selected, (by the people who live in the State voting) and want to replace it with God knows what?
You believe our democracy is under attack, but based on your comments of today, I have to wonder if you understand what America is.
"A common definition of "republic" is, to quote the American Heritage Dictionary, "A political order in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who are entitled to vote for officers and representatives responsible to them" — we are that. A common definition of "democracy" is, "Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives" — we are that, too.
The United States is not a direct democracy, in the sense of a country in which laws (and other government decisions) are made predominantly by majority vote. Some lawmaking is done this way, on the state and local levels, but it's only a tiny fraction of all lawmaking. But we are a representative democracy, which is a form of democracy."
Eugene Volokh.
Honestly Dave, your comments today border on calling for the over throw of our government which is treason. You scare me.
Majorfacts,
Real Americans like the Founders, understood the Constitution needs amending for a "more perfect union".
Why do YOU hate democracy and consent of the governed?
"your comments today border on calling for the over throw of our government which is treason. You scare me." ~~ Just the Facts! (aka hypocritical Chuck)
As scared as you are of Trump's treasonous colluding with Russia to steal the 2016 presidential election?
By the way, the correct writing of "overthrow" is one word, not two -- as you've incorrectly written it twice in this comment thread.
Oh, I forgot, do you know when the families are going to be reunited? Does Trump's corrupt and incompetent administration have a solution for this yet?
SECOND REQUEST
Chuck, are you proud of your role in creating and sustaining the corporate state?
FIFTH REQUEST
Are you ready to agree to the cause of the exodus of refugees out of Central America and southern Mexico yet?
Remember, Chuck, a problem properly defined is halfway solved. Otherwise, you're just pissing in the wind.
That's right!...your president's very familiar with being pissed on. ;-) Can't wait for Putin to release the video! LOLOL
Chuck, did the example I offered relating your own discovery of cancer to your onset of symptoms, resonate with you when comparing the influx of immigrants/refugees with the causes of the migration?
I hope it helped.
While the Trumpists are busy distracting and deflecting, let’s get back to the causes of an immigration crisis.
Peter Marcuse is a professor emeritus of urban planning at Columbia University offers this view:
But the cause of our immigration problem remains, in fact, quite simple. The need to emigrate from one country to another arises out of our gross global inequality: inequalities in income and wealth, inequalities in power, unequal levels of individual security and dignity. At least the first step dealing with these fundamental causes of emigration might seem to be equally clear: These causes can ultimately, but the sooner the better, be dealt with at the international level.
After the end of the First World War, in a brief flurry of interest for collective global action, the nations of the world went so far as to adopt a Universal Declaration of Human Rights, with language on a par in its nobility with the language of the United States Declaration of Independence.
This declaration deserves to be as familiar: “Recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable right of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice, and peace in the world.”
Any quest for the solution to the problems of immigration should rest on this foundation.
"consent of the governed", the majority, why do you want the minority position to rule?
Sounds like no borders, globalist, one world government to me.
"Sounds like no borders, globalist, one world government to me." ~~ Majormajor (aka "always rightwing extremist" Chuck)
No, it doesn't "sound" that way to me at all.
Nobody here has advocated "no borders", "one-world", or a "globalist" anything. It's all in your Alt-Reich white supremacist mind.
Chuck, you're ignoring my questions. Why? Please reply, or I'll have to seriously consider not answering every one of your ridiculous stupid-ass questions.
You're afraid, aren't you Chuck? I can tell. 😄
Since "freighty cat Chuck" refuses to even acknowledge my questions --although I always answer his --
has anybody heard whether the kids kidnapped by Trump have been released and returned to their parents yet?
TREASON!
Happy Independence Day. I was hoping the shouts of treason would subside on this day, but alas.
Happy Independence Day, TB3, Dave and other readers who desire to preserve democracy, the rule of law and the intent of the Constitution.
May we be fortunate enough to celebrate a second one -- one from the tyranny of Donald Trump -- in the not too distant future.
Post a Comment