Discussion about hot topics trending today

[Gatefan1976]

This is where what is apparently a lost art among you youngsters comes into play. Don't pay attention to what they're SAYING, pay attention to what they're DOING and figure out what their intent is.

You assume intent.
You want me to "pay attention"?
Why is there no hue and cry from republicans over overstays from WHITE countries who come in by plane, but plenty about "Mexicans and Hispanics" coming in via the border?

Have the Democrats put forth ANY effective proposal to stop illegal immigration? No

Have Republicans?

Have the Democrats opposed every plan put forth by anyone that will effectively stop it? Yes.

No, they have not. They have opposed stupid plans like walls, the only option republicans have put forward in almost 40 years.

Do the Democrats think they stand to gain politically from increased or continuing illegal immigration? Yes.

Back that up, with facts or shut up.

Do business owners benefit from a high level of illegal (and to a lesser extent legal) immigration? Yes.

Dunno, ask Trump who employed tons of them. Oops.

There are other points as well, but this should be sufficient.

Please, go on, I like destroying your "points"

Now, without any babbling bubble-headed bleach-blond talking head getting on the TV and telling you what to think, think about that and draw your own conclusion on their intent. Remember, don't pay attention to what they say, pay attention to what they do.

What is there to think about?
Parties use immigration when it is convenient, and neither offer any real solution. This should not be a left or right issue, simply because it's a non unique issue.

[Gatefan1976]

Absolutely. I don't care where someone comes from, either come up to the front door, knock politely and apply for admittance, or stay the hell out.

Haven't I said in the past that "proper immigration reform" begins with rounding up and deporting anyone in the country illegally back to their point of entry into the US. After that, what they do is their problem. They would then be free to re-apply for legal entry, but of course, their record of sneaking in or overstaying, or whatever other means they used to be here illegally would be considered in evaluating that application.

The law ought to be applied uniformly, across the board, no special enforcement or exceptions for anyone, regardless of their origin.

Your party would disagree.
You and I can agree it's a good idea, but your party never would.
It's that simple.

[aretood2]

This is where what is apparently a lost art among you youngsters comes into play. Don't pay attention to what they're SAYING, pay attention to what they're DOING and figure out what their intent is.

Are you sure you want to open that can of worms? Because if judging intent based on actions (which doesn't work that way because by definition intent is not an action but the purpose behind an action irregardless of intended or unintended consequences said action may hold).

Have the Democrats put forth ANY effective proposal to stop illegal immigration? No

Yes. Increased security measures, more funding for the court system to get more judges and so on, programs to nip it in the bud (like helping deal with the source of the issues). Just because you don't like intelligent responses doesn't mean that they are not effective. Your feelings have no bearing on the facts.

Have the Democrats opposed every plan put forth by anyone that will effectively stop it? Yes.

No. They only oppose making a wall and copying draconian immigration policies from the worst regimes in the world...and Australia. Apparently.

Do the Democrats think they stand to gain politically from increased or continuing illegal immigration? Yes.

Again with this racist "scary brown people" conspiracy theory....no. Hispanics are more socially conservative than whites, many have fled socialist/communist regimes that makes them hostile to that ideology and many more would prefer fiscal conservatism and small government. It's just hard to vote for the political party whose actions betray racist intent (see what I did there?).

Do business owners benefit from a high level of illegal (and to a lesser extent legal) immigration? Yes.

No. Considering very few industries hire them. Not everyone is like Trump willing to hire illegals.

There are other points as well, but this should be sufficient.

All you proved is that you don't know what you are talking about.

Now, without any babbling bubble-headed bleach-blond talking head getting on the TV and telling you what to think, think about that and draw your own conclusion on their intent. Remember, don't pay attention to what they say, pay attention to what they do.

I can paint a buttload of republicans, especially Trump, as racists just by looking at actions. I can paint the entire police force in the US and justice system as white supremacist. Just look at incarceration rates. Black people are way overrepresented (Similar with other minorities) while white people are underrepresented. Ergo, police hate minorities and are pursuing a policy of being white race warriors.

Denying this makes you a hypocrite, because I am just looking at the actions alone and not taking any other facts into consideration to discern intent.

Absolutely. I don't care where someone comes from, either come up to the front door, knock politely and apply for admittance, or stay the hell out.

Then why do you complain about legal immigration and wish to limit it? Think about your response and then ask yourself it those are the same exact arguments you use about illegal immigrants. Your actions thus betray your true intent. You don't want them brown scary people....I'm just using your logic here.

Haven't I said in the past that "proper immigration reform" begins with rounding up and deporting anyone in the country illegally back to their point of entry into the US. After that, what they do is their problem. They would then be free to re-apply for legal entry, but of course, their record of sneaking in or overstaying, or whatever other means they used to be here illegally would be considered in evaluating that application.

That's not reform...that's not what the word "reform" means at all. It means to change something so it works better....you just want to keep using the same old broken system.

The law ought to be applied uniformly, across the board, no special enforcement or exceptions for anyone, regardless of their origin.

Except that is not the case. Do you really honestly think that an ICE agent would question your citizenship status instead of my citizenship status every time? If you do, then you sir are most naive. There are plenty of news stories of non-white citizens getting deported even those with no foreign accents, I've yet to see that with a white citizen, especially one with no foreign accent. So, if I just use their actions to discern intent, then I must conclude that they never intend to deport white people irregardless of their status.

[jelgate]

I like to walk/run around the block this time of year for exercise. My neighbor had this in their yard

Spoiler:

[Annoyed]

I like to walk/run around the block this time of year for exercise. My neighbor had this in their yard

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

Make America Smart Again ?
Hmm.. So, instead of MAGA, you want MASA.
I guess that's not so far from "massa" as "master" is sometimes pronounced.

[Gatefan1976]

You want a republic of dumb sheep.
History shows they always fail.
It's actually funny, you WANT conservatism, yet learning from the past is something you seem utterly incapable of grasping.
Principle's?
Chuck them out.
Conservation of political ideology?
Chuck it out.
All that matters to you is that "someone else did what I think is a crime, so DONE!!"
It in NO WAY validates the crimes of your chosen "hero", but you don't care. I say investigate Hillary (cause she is still your golden goose), but you say "let it go" when it comes to trump.

Pathetic, truly, pathetic.

Now, run off to YOUR version of the MSM and find something equally stupid to deflect, cause that's ALL you do.

[jelgate]

I think GF earned some hypocrisy bacon

[Annoyed]

He's welcome to all the 'roo bacon he can stomach.

[Gatefan1976]

He's welcome to all the 'roo bacon he can stomach.

You can have some stupid if you want, you have earned it.

[Chaka-Z0]

Cartoonist let go from N.B. newspapers days after Trump image goes viral

[Annoyed]

Cartoonist let go from N.B. newspapers days after Trump image goes viral

Yes, I agree, that cartoon was in extremely bad taste, but I don't know if firing him was justified. Maybe they should have let the audience reaction to it play out? If enough people were upset about it, their readership would drop, and that would justify letting him go. But it seems to been a knee-jerk reaction from the publisher.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending the cartoon. Not only was it in very bad taste, it was just bad. Like all coverage of the event, it completely ignores that fact that the guy and his kid drowned trying to sneak into the US. If he hadn't done so, he would be alive today. That's the proper lesson to be learned from this tragic event. But no, the author just takes the "blame trump" path.

[Chaka-Z0]

Yes, I agree, that cartoon was in extremely bad taste, but I don't know if firing him was justified. Maybe they should have let the audience reaction to it play out? If enough people were upset about it, their readership would drop, and that would justify letting him go. But it seems to been a knee-jerk reaction from the publisher.

The cartoon went viral, the audience reaction was very polarized, then he got fired like a day after that or so.

That's what a caricature is supposed to do. There's always a little bit of truth in them which is then blown out of proportion to cause reactions. Very sad that nowadays media outlets are afraid of speaking out against Trump for fear of reprisal, either by being hipshot at on Twitter or else.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending the cartoon. Not only was it in very bad taste, it was just bad. Like all coverage of the event, it completely ignores that fact that the guy and his kid drowned trying to sneak into the US. If he hadn't done so, he would be alive today. That's the proper lesson to be learned from this tragic event. But no, the author just takes the "blame trump" path.

Victim blaming again... You're also assuming the intentions of the artist. Fact is Trump is playing golf every weekend while people die trying to cross, now the judgment you make of this cartoon is of your own. You don't care about your President literally spending 1/3 of his week playing golf, well personally I think he's unworthy of this title. Remember the website that keeps stats of all (your) money spent for his little trips to his favorite golf resorts? And you complain about paying a little bit more for immigrants, lol.

[Falcon Horus]

Y...it completely ignores that fact that the guy and his kid drowned trying to sneak into the US. If he hadn't done so, he would be alive today. That's the proper lesson to be learned from this tragic event. But no, the author just takes the "blame trump" path.

Too bad, you seem to ignore the part where he actually already made it across, went back for his wife and then his little girl jumped in after him. He drowned while he was trying to safe her life, and ended up killing them both.

How ****IN' desperate does a person have to be to take a little girl that young across a dangerous river? Or across the Mediterranean?

Nope, continue to victim blame... I'm sure it'll make you sleep better at night.

So, what's your thought on the southern border concentration camps? I hear, kids being treated like animals is the new rage in the US.

[aretood2]

Yes, I agree, that cartoon was in extremely bad taste, but I don't know if firing him was justified. Maybe they should have let the audience reaction to it play out? If enough people were upset about it, their readership would drop, and that would justify letting him go. But it seems to been a knee-jerk reaction from the publisher.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending the cartoon. Not only was it in very bad taste, it was just bad. Like all coverage of the event, it completely ignores that fact that the guy and his kid drowned trying to sneak into the US. If he hadn't done so, he would be alive today. That's the proper lesson to be learned from this tragic event. But no, the author just takes the "blame trump" path.

Probably he and would still be dead and the hands of gangsters, the kid would be in some Pedophile's basement and the mother in some brothel somewhere in the world due to kidnapping sex trafficking. These are the reasons they are deciding to leave. Not because they figured that they were going to make it big. They just wanted to live and don't feel that Mexico is safe. That's it. There's no secret conspiracy and they aren't deviants (well not all of them, at least not in the way your messiah paints them out to be).

Honestly, you fit that cartoon too. You simply don't care about them anymore than Trump is being depicted in the cartoon, and that's exactly the message the Cartoonist sent. That Trump couldn't care less.

[Annoyed]

Too bad, you seem to ignore the part where he actually already made it across, went back for his wife and then his little girl jumped in after him. He drowned while he was trying to safe her life, and ended up killing them both.

How ****IN' desperate does a person have to be to take a little girl that young across a dangerous river? Or across the Mediterranean?

Nope, continue to victim blame... I'm sure it'll make you sleep better at night.

So, what's your thought on the southern border concentration camps? I hear, kids being treated like animals is the new rage in the US.

Same thought. If these people hadn't been trying to sneak into the country or trying to gain entry by making false asylum claims, they wouldn't be in those camps, would they? Ultimately, every single person in those camps are responsible for their situation because they or their parents made the bad decision to try to come to the US illegally. If a criminal is killed trying to break into a home/business, whose fault is that? The crooks? Or are you blaming the crook's "victim"?

Where is it written that the US must expend unlimited resources to accommodate a never ending stream of illegals and false asylum seekers? Or that we should just release them into the US so they can start drawing on social services?

No one seems to note that these people left their home country and crossed into Mexico, not the US, apparently with Mexico's permission as Mexico did not stop them at their southern border. No one seems to expect Mexico to pick up the tab for their food, housing, medical care, etc. Nope, just pass them and the bill to the U.S.

We are NOT the world's welfare office, and I'm sick and damned tired of everyone having the attitude that we are. In case you haven't noticed, we have plenty of our own citizens that our society can't properly accommodate, and everyone wants us to pick up the tab for those from other countries as well?

There's a number of liberal / lefties that are pushing for us to defund the camps completely. But those people don't seem to include any idea of what to do with those people if those camps are shut down. Their idea is apparently just to let them in and allow them to go where they want.

If you're so generously minded, why don't you talk to whoever is running the show in Belgium and have them send ships to South America to pick these people up and provide transportation to your country, and then you guys can pick up the tab.

No? Then what right do you have to insist that we pick up the tab?