Burgold

The immigration thread: American Melting Pot or Get off my Lawn

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

The stupidity of this is breath taking.

 

How long does he think it takes to get a visa from those countries now?

 

I suspect that tweet is directed toward his horde of red-hat wearing followers who don't even fathom such details...

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

The stupidity of this is breath taking.

 

How long does he think it takes to get a visa from those countries now?

 

He's obviously talking about the terrorists that passed the multi-year long vetting process, got approved to come to the US, but hadn't bothered to book their travel yet.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

by the way, i imagine people in the intelligence community spend a lot of time and effort collecting information, arguing in back rooms, coming up with ideas just to scrap them and start over, to try to craft policy that actually works to at least attempt to protect the rest of us (even if it ultimately ends up flawed in some way)

 

then this guy comes in and does this over the weekend.

 

didn't bother to ask for their opinions, didn't even tell them he was doing it.

 

i can only imagine how furious those people are.
 

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Riggo-toni said:

If we were objectively identifying countries that have been exporting terrorists, Belgium would have made this list before any of the other 7.

 

But Belgium,like many others. is actively assisting us against Jihadists.

And has been for some time.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let them thar Jews go to Israel if they go anywhere. Can't have them snatching up good American Christian children to grind up into matza bread for passover while they practice usury to finance a global takeover.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tshile said:

<edit>

 

Once you get past the outrage and start actually reading the analysis of what is in the EO, what it might or might not mean, and what motives may or may not be driving it, it gets really interesting... also confusing, for someone who's not real knowledgeable on law and legal process/procedures/etc.

 

  

 

I think of that, and the dangers of this playing into the "well, it's just the sore loser dems and they're gonna be like this, panicking over everything that we voted him in to do".....if, by fairly broad consensus (even within partisan groups) you get **** pile after **** pile in terms of policy roll out, or statement made, etc, do you respond with some energy as each arrive and "risk" losing a potential sympathetic ear by your constant caterwauling or do you play a sit back and choose a big target that "really matters" hoping your prior restraint gives your protest more cred. 

 

Right?

 

So think of the "opposition" we're referencing here---trumpland. Pragmatically, I suggest that at this point (and long before) you can write off over 90% of trump supporters and trumps admin  for ever developing a give-a-**** about the topical merits of what any opposition has to say, but will be affected by the size and the volume if sufficient. As for moderate gopers, a lot of voter noise is the one thing they're most likely respond to, too.

 

But you make a key point and it's a challenge---opposition to trump is best served by trying to get your own argument ducks in a row (keep seeking info even after your reaction and be ready to amend), and they will make that very hard with all kinds of information and message manipulations.

 

The R ex-cia congressman from TX (Will Hurd?) who slammed this roll out was asked if protesters keep fighting everything he does, won't they end up being dismissed as hysterical (as they already are, btw) and overreacting liberals...and he said it depends on if the thing they're fighting is a real thing...i think we all should strive to keep seeking info after we have our initial reactions and look for where we might be going off, but then i approach everything like that...and my call is that this admin will be presiding as they have to date, a steady stream of real things worth fighting...I hope to be very wrong about that and most things I'm concerned about indeed...no one will happier to eat crow than i in sch a case...time will tell..

 

 

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tshile said:

 

 

Or don't. But for the love of god please stop assigning my motives of being to support/defend trump. It's tiring and lazy.

 

  

 

To the degree I'm here, I am going to be attentive to monitoring that tiring and lazy nonsense you correctly indict (tho I have other **** i can bust you on heh heh) as well as another certain dynamic in these discussions, to be announced. :ph34r:

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, sacase said:

Can't trump just veto it

You think the GOP house will even lt it come to a vote?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Kilmer17 said:

You think the GOP house will even lt it come to a vote?

Nope. But i was just saying even if it got passed, he could just veto it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

You think the GOP house will even lt it come to a vote?

I'm having a hard time getting a finger on the GOP house..   many of them seem to SAY they oppose some of the moves the admin is making, but not many seem to be raising anything more than a word or a concerned look. (Some of them seem to be genuine in opposition. McCain comes to mind.. but how far will he take it? Even Rubio has raised his voice, but when it comes time, he gives his OK on whatever it is he's been on about.)

 

I almost wonder if many of them are guaging how much it could hurt them before they make the plunge and go against the President.

 

~Bang

Edited by Bang
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, sacase said:

Nope. But i was just saying even if it got passed, he could just veto it. 

 

The veto could be overridden. 

 

If our govt worked. But it doesn't, so this won't come to a vote.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Jumbo said:

  

...

do you respond with some energy as each arrive and "risk" losing a potential sympathetic ear by your constant caterwauling or do you play a sit back and choose a big target that "really matters" hoping your prior restraint gives your protest more cred. 

 

Right?

...

But you make a key point and it's a challenge---opposition to trump is best served by trying to get your own argument ducks in a row (keep seeking info even after your reaction and be ready to amend), and they will make that very hard with all kinds of information and message manipulations.

...

 

Well, I think there's a few things to note:

There is a segment of Trump's supporters you can never get through to. They have decided to dismiss criticism simple as fake. Whether it's the news, or a regular person. There's nothing you can do there, except not allow them to drag you down to their level.

 

There's a difference between criticizing a general group of people, and criticizing an argument, and doing both directed at the population vs doing it directed at a poster (or group of posters) on ES. I don't expect anyone on ES to extend the benefit of the doubt to the GOP or to the Right, certain not to Trump and his supporters. But I think many of us that have been active in the ES threads deserve a little bit of the benefit of the doubt (and I admit, I could extend some myself, I'm aware of that.) As much as my (and others) cries about being hysterical and hiding behind "false equivalency!" is annoying, so are the constant accusations of being a supporter (or even voter) of Trump and his methods every time someone challenges an idea.

 

This EO is confusing and hard to figure out for the people responsible for doing such. I think it's important to try to figure out what's going on before we (the people not responsible for figuring it out, the people who aren't constitutional scholars, the people who don't work in any of the various forms of immigration) start grabbing pitch forks and dismissing those that aren't ready to grab the pitch forks.

 

And by we - I mean posters on ES. If all we want is surface deep hysteria and talking points you can turn on any of the major news networks at any time and get that.

 

As for reaching the people that are more moderate, and either passively condone/accept trump or even defend it to a degree, I think they see a bunch of crying wolf and I don't think that helps. I think those people can be reached, but I think you have to be calm - let Trump's hysteria stand on it's own, don't add to it yourself.

 

I don't think people should lose their energy on the issue, I just think it should be directed a little more thoughtfully. With restraint in how it's done, not whether it's done at all. I think you, but definitely some others, have pointed out that Trump may not be dumb like myself and others think, in fact he may quite very well know what he's doing in terms of appealing to certain people. If that's the case, then I would imagine part of his tactic is to generate hysteria and use it to dismiss criticism wholesale. That seems to be what he's doing. He's publicly said his tactic in business was to make ridiculous demands as a starting point, so when it's done he gets what he wants.

 

So, don't give him that.

 

This sucks. It's not easy to sift through the nonsense and see what's going on. I'm thoroughly lost and confused right now about the direction of the country and I can't figure out if we actually have people in place with the balls to stand up and say enough is enough, when enough is finally actually enough.

 

The congress and senate are apparently pissed. Every major department involved is apparently pissed. The question now is - will there be any ramifications? Or is this just another bullet point on the list as we continue on...
 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Jumbo said:

  tho I have other **** i can bust you on heh heh

 

 

 

 

i know. i'm working on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, sacase said:

Can't trump just veto it

 

I doubt Dems think the law will get any traction.  Probably just want ammunition against Repubs in swing states.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, tshile said:

i know. i'm working on it.

 

  always the buzzkill

 

:silly:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

If it's the same poll I saw last night, it is dated January 5th-7th or something like that.  I think it is too early for a good poll since it was actually enacted.  Hopefully seeing how it was done will change people's opinion.

 

 

  It really is the way it was done that's the big story to me and should be what's most examined---we already knew about the discriminatory leanings of the admin.

 

This implies epic degrees of incompetency and and mental-case levels of malice, as execute. I see Bannon /Flynn/Sessions/others>trump in that stuff.  (yeah, i know flynn's ship is sailing, but his impact is part of the foundation and bannon still carries his water as long as it suits)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

If it's the same poll I saw last night, it is dated January 5th-7th or something like that.  I think it is too early for a good poll since it was actually enacted.  Hopefully seeing how it was done will change people's opinion.

 

In polls, the question is everything. If asked:

(1) do you support a temporary travel ban from regions where ISIS is in control, until DHS can validate the risk of the applicant?

(2) should everyone from the seven countries, including green card holders who have been through extensive background checks including FBI investigation, and visa-holding translators who have worked with the USA Army for a decade be banned?

 

Only a very small number would say yes to (2). Odds are that they are mostly white nationalists like Bannon.

 

I would think 48% at least would say yes to (1) but of course it's an entirely false premise because anyone applying for immigration from those areas already goes through extensive background checks.  

Edited by Corcaigh
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.