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

[visionary]

 

 

 

[No Excuses]

I can't wait until they roll out the Obamacare replacement. They can't even get this right, imagine the **** storm that will be healthcare reform. 

 

 

[skinny21]

5 minutes ago, tshile said:

Absolutely not.

 

For the first time my wife and I are concerned. Making plans on how to handle certain situations, etc.

 

 

Yep.  I'll mention that this is where the Trump vs Pence thing comes unglued.  Pence would be absolutely awful for social issues, but Trump is downright dangerous for the country.  

 

At this point, I'm just praying that the administration wakes the hell up.  Rachel Maddow pointed out that they've been caving under pressure so far, but less than two weeks in 'we've' kicked Mexico, threatened China, drawn serious concern from Europe (and elsewhere), potentially helped ISIS and other terror groups, drawn criticism from the Pope, and have people routinely marching in the street.... and that's almost sure to be the tip of the damned iceberg.  

 

Stunning isn't nearly a strong enough word to describe the incompetence and shortsightedness shown so far.  

[visionary]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 29, 2017 by visionary

[twa]

6 minutes ago, redskins59 said:

 

The question is, are they going to ban countries that have the ability to retaliate better? I am thinking Saudi Arabia (oil) and Pakistan(a nuclear power that shares Intelligence with us).

 

Folk seem to forget the Saudi's have been working closely with us against AQ and ISIS...and I am no fan of the Sauds

Pakistan to a lesser degree.

[tshile]

The Saudis need our weapons to continue their cultural cleansing mission in Yemen. I'm sure that alliance won't be strained at all.

[visionary]

 

[PeterMP]

12 minutes ago, No Excuses said:

I can't wait until they roll out the Obamacare replacement. They can't even get this right, imagine the **** storm that will be healthcare reform. 

 

 

 

There is a POV out there that they wanted this to go badly so that it would get notable publicity and energize his base more.

 

At some level, I think people (like Bang) have a point.  He got elected President.  I'm not sure they are completely incompetent.

 

The fact of the matter is the Muslim ban was very popular among Republican voters.  This is a way he can say he tried to institute a ban and blame the failure on the left and how unfair they are to him after Obama did the same in Iraq (a talking point that has been brought up in this thread and is very prevalent in social media right now) and make the claim of double standard.

 

(And realistically if he had actually done what Obama did with Iraqi for these 7 countries in an actual competent manner, the up roar would have been much less.  The (appearant) incompetence in executing it is making people (on the left) rally against it more, which energizes his base even more.)

Edited January 30, 2017 by PeterMP

[redskins59]

3 minutes ago, twa said:

 

Folk seem to forget the Saudi's have been working closely with us against AQ and ISIS...and I am no fan of the Sauds

Pakistan to a lesser degree.

True.

And I don't think they will ever ban Turkey either.

 

But what will Trump do if there is a terrorist attack in the future, and the perpetrators are from Saudi Arabia or Pakistan?  Will they ban those countries?  I have my doubts.

[PeterMP]

9 minutes ago, twa said:

 

Folk seem to forget the Saudi's have been working closely with us against AQ and ISIS...and I am no fan of the Sauds

Pakistan to a lesser degree.

 

And Iraq isn't?  I seem to recall their military actually attacking land that ISIS is holding.

[Skin'emAlive]

Trump will say, we need more proof. He doesn't even know turkey or Saudi Arabia. 

[FanboyOf91]

 

[Larry]

1 hour ago, PF Chang said:

I don't know all of the details on this, but it seems like an important distinction that Obama's refugee ban was in response to a specific incident (finding two Iraqi al-Qaeda members that came in as refugees).

 

Trump's ban isn't just refugees and even includes green card holders. 

 

I get that conservatives are sick of hearing "false equivalence!" about everything. But I really don't know what else to call it. 

 

"Alternate reality SOP"?  

 

 

 

[DogofWar1]

26 minutes ago, visionary said:

 

Excellent.

 

They will easily be able to battle all the way to the top on this matter, and fight on pretty much everything that comes down the pipe.

 

Trump is gonna get real tired of losing court battles real fast.

[Corcaigh]

1 hour ago, visionary said:

 

 

Apparently subscriptions for NYT and WaPO are up too. The NYT took in subscriptions since election day worth $30m more per annum thanks to Trump.

 

I wonder what my software company can do to piss off Trump.

 

 

Edited January 30, 2017 by Corcaigh

[Kilmer17]

So.  I owe an apology to B.  After rereading my comments, they came across as crass and petty bs.  It is not my intention to be that guy.  I appreciate your passion for the cause and I was wrong in my post. 

 

So. Going forward, I will do my honest best to NOT try and compare the lack of actions and response over the last 8 years to what is happening today. 

 

I REALLY wish it wasn't so serious so that I COULD play that game.  But it's not. It's unbelievably scary.  And my posts need to reflect that. 

 

So Burgold, I hope you will accept my apology and I hope the rest of the board will reign me in when I stray too far from the point. 

 

K17

[Burgold]

3 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

 

 

So Burgold, I hope you will accept my apology and I hope the rest of the board will reign me in when I stray too far from the point. 

 

K17

All good. There will be times where that kind of check or attempt to put things in perspective are needed. I know there are times I need to take a deep breath and look at a broader perspective.

 

What's going on here strikes at the very soul of America.

[Larry]

9 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said:

Excellent.

 

They will easily be able to battle all the way to the top on this matter, and fight on pretty much everything that comes down the pipe.

 

Trump is gonna get real tired of losing court battles real fast.

 

He gets to appoint a tie breaking SC justice.  

 

And based on the courage the GOP has shown towards his other, stellar quality, appointees, I could see them confirming Bannon.  

[dfitzo53]

14 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

So.  I owe an apology to B.  After rereading my comments, they came across as crass and petty bs.  It is not my intention to be that guy.  I appreciate your passion for the cause and I was wrong in my post. 

 

So. Going forward, I will do my honest best to NOT try and compare the lack of actions and response over the last 8 years to what is happening today. 

 

I REALLY wish it wasn't so serious so that I COULD play that game.  But it's not. It's unbelievably scary.  And my posts need to reflect that. 

 

So Burgold, I hope you will accept my apology and I hope the rest of the board will reign me in when I stray too far from the point. 

 

K17

Stand-up post, Kilmer.

 

I have long respected you as one of the conservative voices on this board that is intelligent, thoughtful, and consistent in his reasoning.  I often disagree with you, but I never doubt that your views come from an honest, good place.

 

The past few days I started to wonder if my assessment was off or if you had a bad bowl of soup or something.

[DogofWar1]

28 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

He gets to appoint a tie breaking SC justice.  

 

And based on the courage the GOP has shown towards his other, stellar quality, appointees, I could see them confirming Bannon.  

True, but this stuff is so blatantly ridiculous and unconstitutional that I'm hopeful Roberts or Kennedy will reach over the aisle.  I don't have much faith in Thomas or Alito, but I feel like there's a decent change that at least one of those two would sneak over and get us to 5.

[s0crates]

I cannot help but think the mainstream narrative about Trump's "Muslim ban" is missing some key points, so I'm including a bit of alternative media coverage for your consideration (linked instead of embedded due to some NSFW language).

 

Here's Jimmy Dore's take (from the left):

 

https://youtu.be/4FTFB9GDfls

 

And here's Stefan Molyneux's take (from the right):

 

https://youtu.be/9OVnqerWUHg

 

I wouldn't say I entirely agree with either of them, in particular I'm not impressed by Molyneux's apologetics about Trump, but I think they both make some good points. I'm especially persuaded by the argument that US foreign policy is the main reason we have so many Muslim refugees seeking asylum in the first place, and I agree that there is something hypocritical in defending Muslims now after ignoring the fact we've been bombing the hell out of the Muslim world for over a decade. 

Edited January 30, 2017 by s0crates

[Burgold]

5 minutes ago, s0crates said:

....that there is something hypocritical in defending Muslims now after ignoring the fact we've been bombing the hell out of the Muslim world for over a decade. 

Have we been bombing Muslims or terrorists and enemies of the US? Some would argue that there is an important distinction there.

[Larry]

9 minutes ago, s0crates said:

I cannot help but think the mainstream narrative about Trump's "Muslim ban" is missing some key points, so I'm including a bit of alternative media coverage for your consideration (linked instead of embedded due to some NSFW language).

 

Here's Jimmy Dore's take (from the left):

 

https://youtu.be/4FTFB9GDfls

 

And here's Stefan Molyneux's take (from the right):

 

https://youtu.be/9OVnqerWUHg

 

I wouldn't say I entirely agree with either of them, in particular I'm not impressed by Molyneux's apologetics about Trump, but I think they both make some good points. I'm especially persuaded by the argument that US foreign policy is the main reason we have so many Muslim refugees seeking asylum in the first place, and I agree that there is something hypocritical in defending Muslims now after ignoring the fact we've been bombing the hell out of the Muslim world for over a decade. 

 

And Trump's Ban is both Constitutional, and a solution for these problems you've stated, because . . . ?  

 

Or did you not actually have a point other than using this discussion as a venue in which to say that you think the US has been bad, in the past (while avoiding the topic being discussed entirely)?  

[Dan T.]

17 minutes ago, s0crates said:

I wouldn't say I entirely agree with either of them, in particular I'm not impressed by Molyneux's apologetics about Trump, but I think they both make some good points. I'm especially persuaded by the argument that US foreign policy is the main reason we have so many Muslim refugees seeking asylum in the first place, and I agree that there is something hypocritical in defending Muslims now after ignoring the fact we've been bombing the hell out of the Muslim world for over a decade. 

 

Another way to look at it is that our decision to start and continue wars in Iraq and Afghanistan has led to the very refugee diaspora that Trump is now forcing us to turn our backs on.  I don't know if hypocritical is the right word for that.  Cynical? Thoughtless? Evil?

Edited January 30, 2017 by Dan T.

[s0crates]

13 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

And Trump's Ban is both Constitutional, and a solution for these problems you've stated, because . . . ?  

 

Or did you not actually have a point other than using this discussion as a venue in which to say that you think the US has been bad, in the past (while avoiding the topic being discussed entirely)?  

 

1. I linked two videos about the topic being discussed. I assume you chose to ignore them. Anyway I think the point both videos make about "selective outrage" is fair and relevant.

 

2. I never said I agree with Trump's executive order. In fact my only other post today on this topic linked to the ACLU's website and applauded their efforts.

Edited January 30, 2017 by s0crates