Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'West Mall' started by ProdigalHorn, Dec 6, 2018.
which would I rather be in touch with, some wingnut outfit or Ms. Paltrow's vagina?
Let me think about that for a minute.
By the way, I have been trying to think of something nice about our new president and I finally hit on it: he beat Bernie the Commie and Trump the Whatever in the same year.
Ok, minute's up: It's Gwyneth's vagina
As a moderate/slightly liberal (I know most of you think I'm more liberal than Bernie Sanders) I have to call out the Dems on the immigration nonsense.
They want open borders, they just don't want to say "open borders". It's like the first rule of fight club.
Now Biden will say that he's going to increase border security. And it's true, I have no doubt the he will try to increase the # of CBP agents. He'll use that as cover to say "hey man I'm not an open borders guy because I increased the # of agents at the border!"
This really isn't about immigrants crossing the Rio Grande. On day #1 of Biden's administration, they won't have to do that anymore. They don't have to traverse the river, they don't have to travel the Arizona desert. All they have to do is walk up to a CBP agent at the border and claim asylum. Bingo, automatic admission to the USA while their case is pending. Of course that process takes 5+ years. And at the end of the day, the immigrants don't really care about asylum either. They know that if their case is denied, the chances of them getting deported are about 0% as long as they don't commit any violent crimes while in the United States.
Hell, some of the democratic senators like Robert Mendez are now on record stating that illegal aliens shouldn't be deported even for "minor" assault or multiple DUI cases.
Biden's advisor put out a press release saying that all of the immigration changes will take time and that recent arrivals can't expect to get immediate entry to the USA. But he's lying through his teeth. The immigrants know he's lying, and they are coming by the tens of thousands.
Now for a counterpoint -- it's not entirely obvious to me that open borders are the evil that republicans say that it is. Most of the USA's history was essentially "open borders" and the USA did pretty well during that period. Poor Irish farmers migrated by the millions to the USA with nothing more than a cursory health screening at Ellis Island and over time they built businesses and became great contributors to the American economy. Same thing for the Polish, Czechs, Chinese, Indians, etc.
Why would it be different for Central Americans and Mexicans? Are they uniquely unqualified compared to those other ethnic groups? Of course not, unless you are a racist.
Democrats need to stand up for what they believe and say YES WE BELIEVE OPEN IMMIGRATION/BORDERS IS GOOD FOR AMERICA. I don't understand their need to lie about it over and over again.
You realize it's only the smell of her vagina. It could be the scent of old tuna and no one would be the wiser.
Still want to join the group?
Enough! Back to the basement!
There's a lot to unpack here. When we say, "open borders," what exactly do we mean? Does that mean that the default position is to admit people into the United States unless we see a problem that is specific to that person? Or does it mean having no control over who enters? The term "open borders" often refers to both, but they're very different things.
You simplify the issue quite a bit. We've generally not been open borders. Very early on (late 18th century), we were pretty open to "free white persons of good character." That excludes a hell of a lot of people, and that's about as officially open as we've ever been, and that didn't last long. The reality is that we've mostly been cyclical on immigration. When labor demand spiked, we've been more open to immigration (and until the Hart-Cellar Act of 1965, we imposed strict quotas on who could emigrate from what countries). As demand softened (and wages stagnated) and as the public felt overwhelmed by large numbers of unassimilated immigrants, immigration usually tightened. The point is that we had control. It was not a free-for-all.
Where things really turned to **** in recent times was when the de facto immigration policy of the United States became wildly different from the official immigration policy. The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 was a compromise piece of legislation. We were going to grant amnesty to illegal immigrants, but we were going to crack down on the problem to keep it from getting worse and we were going to go after crooked employers. Well, from 1986 until Trump, we did the amnesty but mostly didn't do the rest. We mostly had an open southern border - not open by law but open in chaotic and criminal practice. That's going to piss people off and justifiably so. It's easy to play the race card on Mexican and other Latin Americans, but I have a hard time believing that huge numbers of Americans are racist toward them but totally cool with Indian immigrants (who are far more "foreign" than Mexicans). The big difference is that Indian immigrants mostly followed US immigration law to enter. Mexican immigrants at least to an extreme degree do not. That doesn't mean they can't be great assets to the country. Many of them are, but if you break the law, it shouldn't shock you that it will foster resentment by pretty much anybody who gives a crap about the rule of law.
Personally, I'm far more receptive to an open border concept (meaning generally letting people in) in a vacuum than in practice. You bring up earlier immigrants who were a great asset (and rightly so), but the system and culture were very different then. Those people followed the law. Furthermore, our system heavily favored assimilation, and we largely educated those people to be proud Americans. There's a reason why I speak more German, know more about German beer, and can cook a better schnitzel than most descendants of German immigrants to the United States.
The current system is a mishmash of legal immigration from most countries with a colossal mess of illegal immigration from Latin America, and we push assimilation far less and shame people who raise that as an issue as if there's something wrong with them. And of course, we teach them much more of a Howard Zinn approach to the United States (as we teach our own kids). All of that is going to trigger a much more toxic political climate on the issue.
It's also not per se racist to discriminate on the basis of national origin. It depends on why. There are economic and national security reasons to restrict immigration from some countries. For example, is it racist to put more scrutiny on a Chinese immigrant who wants to study nuclear physics in the United States than an immigrant from Israel or Croatia who wants to study the same thing? I don't think so. I think that's just being sane, and anyone who says that's racist is driving an agenda in bad faith and can basically **** off.
They lie about it for the same reason Republicans lied about it in the same way (just for different reasons) until about 10 minutes ago. They know the public thinks it's crazy.
Your path is wide open, with no competitors
We wish you good luck
And now that Trump is gone, who will you and the rest of the emotionally unstable malcontents worldwide blame all of your personal problems on?
Seriously, whose fault will it be now?
I cannot believe President Trump didn't continue the great tradition of presidential transitions in which your DOJ organizes spying and entrapment of people on the opposing side
What will "journalists" do now?
Their jobs just left in a helicopter
How many times can you ask which flavor of ice cream he likes best?
Which one of you will this be today?
We need to create a new video
I case you thought I was kidding
Anyone noticing a difference in the coverage?
In case you thought I was kidding
Get ready to puke a lot the next 4 years, if not longer.
Mr. Emhoff, does it bother you that you married what Willie Brown got tired of screwing?
OK liberal posters, which ones of you have already started dressing this way?
Dont try and deny it, we know some of you are probably wearing this outfit right now, this very moment
You are this generation's Obama pajama boy
Failure to learn from history is a huge problem with Libs like you. History is littered with immigration examples that failed miserably. I can give many examples, but I'll give you the most relevant one; In the early 19th century Americans settled in northern Mexico. They agreed to accept the religion, language, laws and citizenship of Mexico. They also served as a barrier against Indians that roamed the land raiding and killing relentlessly. Eventually, those immigrants banded together, revolted against the Mexican government, and joined the territory in which they settled to the United States. Welcome to Texas!
Your claim that a person must be racist if they do not see various cultures as equal when it comes to potential is also wildly ignorant of history. Of course, calling someone "racist" is the fallback for anyone that disagrees with a Lib like you. It is quite possible that folks against immigration object to your political agenda of using immigrants to oppose the values and traditions of their society.
Anti-immigrant feelings exist throughout the world. Libs, like you, wrongfully use those feelings to confirm your sense of moral superiority. Those feelings should serve as a warning that lax immigration laws, welfare benefits, and schemes to keep foreigner's culture are leading to explosive and dangerous situations. Hell, people might even storm the Capitol one day.
In these fluff pieces, they keep leaving out a pretty important chunk of Kamala Harris' timeline
Why is that?
Would you blow this guy repeatedly over years to become the vice president?
Saw comments on cbs knocking Trump as he left DC for testing snafus and other missteps regarding covid.
Testing? In What world would there be enough testing for a new virus when thousands of people were arriving in the US with the virus? CA has plenty of testing today and it’s not making a dent in their surge.
Nashhorn, do you have a question?
Not really ia, I just couldn’t follow your posting. My tiny intellect I’m certain, still too early for me today maybe.
Let's go with you're still too tired. The posting is, of course, replete with immaculate logic and facts.
And they would be inviting a horde of uneducated, misogynistic, homophobic Catholic men over. They are the exact opposite of feminism. So why the love affair? Because they are liars (Liberals). To invite uneducated people who will remain as they are is building a patronage and feudal complex. It's all about power. You have completely fallen for it.
If Mexico were Kentucky, the Left would have built the wall themselves. It is not racism. It is upholding the law for now and ensuring that we have absolute control over our borders in the future.
Do you live in South Texas? Do you have any idea what is happening? I have lived in South Texas since 1970. I know the people.
I wonder if the long parade of skanks who did the same thing Kamala did feel like they got cheated.
And people still think CNN isn't biased? That was one of the stupidest things I've seen yet. Talk about a taint licker.
Another trip down memory lane:
Police injured, more than 200 arrested at Trump inauguration protests in DC
No it wasn't anyone storming the Capitol but how easily people forget the pettiness and violence on the left just 4 years ago.
I would feel cheated before I ever got started
No honest person does
I guess I should amend to add that said person must also be sane