Immigrants flown to Martha’s Vineyard

Author: IwantRooseveltagain

Posts

Total: 160
#121
Sidewalker
Sidewalker's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 2,674
3
2
5
Sidewalker's avatar
Sidewalker
3
2
5
-->
@Stephen
 I think you may be just looking at the next President of the USA in De Santis. 
That's what is so pathetic about DeSantis' human trafficing stunt, it was done specifically to appeal to segment of our country that will vote on that basis.  DeSantis is engaging in despicable stunts because it appeals to a despicable segment of the population.  Hopefully the country hasn't descended so far that that underbelly of American society is large enough to elect a president.  

I still can't believe the Republican party was morally bankrupt enough to allow white supremacists to gain control, but that is Trump's legacy, and DeSantis is just playing it for the money and the votes.
Topic's author
#122
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@Stephen
It matters not the pitch of his voice, my mate. It's if he acts on what he says or not, instead of the lip service we here in the Uk have been fed by consecutive governments.
Pip pip, I don’t think I want advice on politics from someone who lives in a country that still has a monarch. Unless it’s a butterfly.

#123
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,051
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
 It is a crying shame that you will learn nothing from my government's mistakes but instead will wait until your own country is turned into the shithole that sadly my country now is.

Yep, you can't teach an old Marxist new tricks.

#124
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,950
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@Lemming
Trump flubbed the border a fair bit, separating families, poor living conditions, 'but, a secure border 'is something I think 'should be valued.

Yeah, USSR tried a secure border wall as has Israel. 

You cant stop the ocean waves,  you cant stop people who want to communicate {networking } and you cant stop people who want be free. See Greek Spartan movie quote with M Douglas.

As an aside note, Michael Douglas made ' Spartacus   { 1960 }  via the writer who was black balled by McCarthy. See movie about it ' Trumbo ' great history drama and filmed by Stanley Kubrick
#125
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 3,363
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@ebuc
USSR border wall, was more about Russia attempting to subjugate/control Germany, I think but may be mistaken.

Israel's wall,
"The barrier was built by Israel following a wave of Palestinian political violence and incidents of terrorism inside Israel during the Second Intifada, which began in September 2000 and ended in February 2005.[7] The Israeli government cites a decreased number of suicide bombings carried out from the West Bank as evidence of its efficacy"

Which isn't to say there aren't arguments 'against the wall, as I glance down Wikipedia I see 'many,
Though it's not a subject I've thought on before.

. . .

Waves can be stopped,
For a time, though 'eventually time weathers us all away I think, we often value what time we can make.

Prisons imply that one 'can stop people from being free and communicating,
But I don't view a border wall as a prison myself,
If I wanted to stop being an American, I could renounce and leave, but I past and currently 'like being an American.

We can't do 'whatever we want, freedom is limited,
I may want to instantly flap my arms and fly,
But no, doesn't work, I have to buy or build a airplane to fly, which I can't do 'instantly.

. . .

The Persians wanted to be free to add Sparta to their empire, the Spartans 'denied that freedom.

#126
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,283
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@bmdrocks21
Does gun control not affect GOP voters? Free speech? Social media censorship? Religious rights? Taxes?
These are all bogeyman items that either have little to nothing to do with real world government policy or aren’t under actual threat.

No one is coming to take your guns.

Right wingers do not believe in free speech. They believe in the freedom to force others to give them a platform.

Social media censorship is just another bullshit talking point. Stop saying racist violent and dangerously false things and you won’t get “censored”.

No one is trying to take your religious freedom.

The vast majority of right wing voters do not make enough money to be impacted by the tax increases the left is proposing.

The party offended by damn near everything votes on what affects them and not what offends them?
Of the two major parties, remind me which one has an actual policy platform?
#127
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,105
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Double_R
--> @Shila
Trump’s handling of Covid and living in denial got him voted out.
Among everything else. COVID was just the point where many could no longer kid themselves into thinking he was a normal human being.
Calling it the China virus might have further reduced him to an idiot. Trump claimed only one case of China  virus was found in America before he called for travel ban to and from China. So the millions of Covid cases came from other countries and local spread and not from China.

#128
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
I guess this is the second MAGA Republican from Florida trying to get famous for trafficking people across state lines.

I love the outrage here though: how dare democrats band together for a bunch of immigrants arriving at their doorstep with no advance warning, organize and arrange food, water, clothing and shelter, treat them humanely with open arms, and then allow the government to step in to help properly house and support them a day or so later!

It’s like unless Kamala Harris personally houses every immigrant - democrats are all hypocrites.


It doesn’t matter that vulnerable people people were lied to, and used as a political prop - we’ve already established from families separation, and pretty much every conversation on immigration that illegal immigrants aren’t really people.




#129
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@Double_R
No one is coming to take your guns.
I never said they are going to be breaking into homes stealing guns. But outlawing magazines based on size? Did we not just recently have an assault weapons ban in the 90s? Maybe having a choice over how you defend yourself, your home, and your family matters to people.

Right wingers do not believe in free speech. They believe in the freedom to force others to give them a platform.

Again with the reductionist broad partisan statements. 35% of Democrats support the government being able to prevent people from saying things "offensive to minorities". Democrats are therefore much more likely to support government banning and punishment of speech. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/20/40-of-millennials-ok-with-limiting-speech-offensive-to-minorities/

Social media censorship is just another bullshit talking point. Stop saying racist violent and dangerously false things and you won’t get “censored”.

Saying that trans women aren't women isn't racist, violent, or dangerously false. Yet that'll get you censored real quick. But continue to bootlick Zuckerborg and the other tech overlords.

No one is trying to take your religious freedom.

Uh-huh, just trying to bankrupt Christian bakers with lawsuits for not supporting lifestyles contrary to their beliefs.

The vast majority of right wing voters do not make enough money to be impacted by the tax increases the left is proposing.

So? Maybe Republicans aren't as selfish as you and support policies despite not directly benefiting from them.

Of the two major parties, remind me which one has an actual policy platform?

How about you bless me with your unbiased, all knowing wisdom
Topic's author
#130
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@bmdrocks21
I have to object to you on religious grounds - I think your god awful.
#131
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
I have to object to you on religious grounds - I think your god awful
Knowing that I’m detested by your ilk is all the proof I need to know I’m supporting the right policies

#132
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,051
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@bmdrocks21
Imagine a party in power barely passing legislation on the slimmest of margins that directly grants massive subsidies to select corporate interests in the middle of an inflationary recession, pays for it with printed dollars, and then lies to you repeatedly about what the legislation does. 

That's a party that operates with zero fear of the consequences. 
#133
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,283
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@bmdrocks21
Again with the reductionist broad partisan statements.
This conversation is about broad partisanship. The one sentence that started this off was clearly not intended as an in depth analysis of every individual American.

I never said they are going to be breaking into homes stealing guns.
I didn’t say you did. But that is the core belief that has right wingers all over the country running to the voting booth. And it’s not just the uneducated sideline observers, you hear this in right wing punditry all the time. It is normally couched in slippery slope fallacies in an attempt to sound more intellectual, but is very clearly the major selling point on this issue.

With that said, of all the items you listed gun control is in my opinion the most valid, as there are real world proposals that could become law which many on the right oppose. But I doubt you can argue that banning extended magazines or expanding background checks is really what is driving opposition to democratic policies on this.

35% of Democrats support the government being able to prevent people from saying things "offensive to minorities". Democrats are therefore much more likely to support government banning and punishment of speech.
What is that supposed to prove? You’re talking about an issue that 60% of democrats oppose and is blatantly unconstitutional.

This is not a real world issue anyone on the left is actually talking about. It’s another right wing bogeyman.

Saying that trans women aren't women isn't racist, violent, or dangerously false. Yet that'll get you censored real quick.
I would tell you to show me examples of people who were band for saying only that, but that misses the point. Even if your premise is fully accurate… what is the solution driving right wing voters to the voting booth here? What will they do, pass laws telling tech companies that they’re not allowed to create and enforce their own terms of service? How is that not a violation of their sacred freedom of speech?

Uh-huh, just trying to bankrupt Christian bakers with lawsuits for not supporting lifestyles contrary to their beliefs.
Ah, so they want the freedom to discriminate. Ok, I suppose that’s a legitimate issue that affects them.

So? Maybe Republicans aren't as selfish as you and support policies despite not directly benefiting from them.
The premise you are refuting is that broadly, right wing voters do not primarily vote based on what impacts them.

How about you bless me with your unbiased, all knowing wisdom
“WHEREAS, The RNC enthusiastically supports President Trump and continues to reject the policy positions of the Obama-Biden Administration, as well as those espoused by the Democratic National Committee today; therefore, be it

RESOLVED, That the Republican Party has and will continue to enthusiastically support the President’s America-first agenda;

RESOLVED, That the 2020 Republican National Convention will adjourn without adopting a new platform until the 2024 Republican National Convention”
#134
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,051
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
 But I doubt you can argue that banning extended magazines or expanding background checks is really what is driving opposition to democratic policies on this.
What if it was and you are actually wrong? Could you learn after Nov elections? Democrats similarly didn't think unconstitutional vaccine mandates would drive people to the polls either. "nobigdeal" to an urban Democrat does not always resonate across the country.

RESOLVED, That the 2020 Republican National Convention will adjourn without adopting a NEW platform until the 2024 Republican National Convention”
If it aint broke.....
#135
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,051
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@bmdrocks21
I'm convinced that if the Democrats passed legislation that just directly funneled billions into their own pockets instead of going through the usual corporate money laundering, their supporters would be just fine with it, as long as it had a proper name like "inflation reduction act"

A name that hits the Amygdala just right to get that voter motivation!
#136
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,675
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@ILikePie5
Based Martha's Vineyard??
Topic's author
#137
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@bmdrocks21
Knowing that I’m detested by your ilk is all the proof I need to know I’m supporting the right policies
Right, The white supremacy poilicies.

#138
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Right, The white supremacy poilicies.

Are you capable of defining that term?
#139
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@Double_R
It is normally couched in slippery slope fallacies in an attempt to sound more intellectual, but is very clearly the major selling point on this issue.

With that said, of all the items you listed gun control is in my opinion the most valid, as there are real world proposals that could become law which many on the right oppose. But I doubt you can argue that banning extended magazines or expanding background checks is really what is driving opposition to democratic policies on this.

Well that's just the thing, the slippery slope fallacy really isn't a fallacy at all. It's used as a defense to hide the real endgame that isn't currently in the overton window. And what is an extended magazine? California (the most populous state in the nation) banned mags with over 10 capacity.

What is that supposed to prove? You’re talking about an issue that 60% of democrats oppose and is blatantly unconstitutional.

This is not a real world issue anyone on the left is actually talking about. It’s another right wing bogeyman.
So we're talking about the Democrat party becoming increasingly in favor of blatantly unconstituional positions. But why does it matter that it is unconstitutional? Short term, sure, it matters. However, the constitution is a piece of paper that can't hold any real relevance if enough people change their mind and amend the document. 

 What will they do, pass laws telling tech companies that they’re not allowed to create and enforce their own terms of service? How is that not a violation of their sacred freedom of speech?
Remove special Section 230 liability protection for censorship of legal speech. And we shall see if censoring speech will be a prevailing interpretation of a form of "freedom of speech", despite some recent cases.

Ah, so they want the freedom to discriminate. Ok, I suppose that’s a legitimate issue that affects them.

Do tell me your thoughts on racial discrimination against Whites for higher education enrollment. Surely if you think religious reasons related to lifestyle choices aren't good enough, then mere racial reasons should be even MORE unconstitutional, yes?

“WHEREAS, The RNC enthusiastically supports President Trump and continues to reject the policy positions of the Obama-Biden Administration, as well as those espoused by the Democratic National Committee today; therefore, be it

RESOLVED, That the Republican Party has and will continue to enthusiastically support the President’s America-first agenda;

RESOLVED, That the 2020 Republican National Convention will adjourn without adopting a new platform until the 2024 Republican National Convention”
Why must a  party change their platform every couple years? They have a platform, it just isn't new as of 2020 despite your comment of "Of the two major parties, remind me which one has an actual policy platform?"
Topic's author
#140
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@bmdrocks21
Are you capable of defining that term?
White supremacy policies? Yes, we used to call them Jim Crow laws. Laws that favor white people over black people, people of means over people with low income and assets, segregation, separate but equal court rulings, laws that disenfranchise blacks from voting and weaken their power in government such as racially inspired gerrymandering. Laws that end up underfunding drinking water in black neighborhoods and cities. There are even some Americans who think blacks are biologically inferior to whites.

#141
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
White supremacy policies? Yes, we used to call them Jim Crow laws. Laws that favor white people over black people, people of means over people with low income and assets, segregation, separate but equal court rulings, laws that disenfranchise blacks from voting and weaken their power in government such as racially inspired gerrymandering. Laws that end up underfunding drinking water in black neighborhoods and cities. There are even some Americans who think blacks are biologically inferior to whites.
Laws that favor white people over black people? So are laws that prohibit murder white supremacy policies?
#142
thett3
thett3's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,064
3
2
7
thett3's avatar
thett3
3
2
7
-->
@Ramshutu
It doesn’t matter that vulnerable people people were lied to, and used as a political prop - we’ve already established from families separation, and pretty much every conversation on immigration that illegal immigrants aren’t really people.
They are people, but they’re people almost nobody in the country wants to live around or spend enormous amounts of resources on. Republicans are willing to admit that. Democrats are not willing to admit this even though their actions show that they privately agree and if anything view this influx as a form punishment to republicans for being naughty. If enormous low skilled immigration is such a strength and diversity is something so valuable these places should have been paying border states to bring these people up in the first place. 

Now I could be wrong, and feel free to correct me if I am, but I haven’t seen you or anyone on the left railing about how Biden’s border disaster has led to horrific deaths such as the 50 that boiled to death in a trailer. Or the nearly 1000 who have drowned. Or the tens of thousands who have been robbed, raped, beaten, or otherwise exploited by the human trafficking rings that are flourishing due to the administrations policies. The only posts I’ve seen from you were basically mocking republicans last year for thinking there was a border crisis, and arguing that Trumps policies didn’t fix it (I disagree but still doesn’t absolve Biden for letting this go for 18 months.) Where’s your outrage over the fact that this is happening at all? 

Weird that your outrage about “trafficking” people comes only after a stunt that makes your side look unbelievably bad and hypocritical. “Trafficking” people across borders is okay when used as a bludgeon to punish your enemies, or it’s just something to sweep under the rug if your preferred administration doesn’t have the moral courage to protect the border. But if someone you don’t like does even a thousandth of what Biden has been doing for a year and a half you get angry. And that’s purely for moral reasons and has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with this being an extremely effective stunt. Just spare me the phony outrage. You don’t want these people any more than some redneck Texan does, but at least he has the moral courage to admit it and supports policies that keep them from trying to come in the first place. 
#143
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,051
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@thett3
Your post makes it clear that "getting Trump" is more important to the Democrat leadership than addressing illegal immigration. Which is basically admitting all the Democrats care about is wielding unrestricted power, and the welfare of Americans is a secondary concern.
#144
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,051
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Double_R
Topic's author
#145
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@bmdrocks21
Laws that favor white people over black people? So are laws that prohibit murder white supremacy policies?
If the laws only prohibit murder of white people.

#146
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,051
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@bmdrocks21
I don't think Roosie is a loyal follower of the systemic scam.
#147
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
If the laws only prohibit murder of white people.
Which isn’t the case. But arresting murderers disproportionately impacts black people. So why aren’t those laws white supremacist?

You said white supremacist laws favor white people over black people. Well whites are more likely to be murdered by blacks than the other way around. Ergo, anti-murder laws are white supremacist, yes?

Topic's author
#148
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@bmdrocks21
But arresting murderers disproportionately impacts black people
Oh really? Are you saying most murderers are black? Oh right, we already determined you are a racist.

#149
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,051
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@bmdrocks21
See, Roosie fails the loyalty test. Maybe he is coming here to build back street cred?
#150
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Oh really? Are you saying most murderers are black? Oh right, we already determined you are a racist
A little over 50% are, yes

But you didn’t answer my question. Are the laws white supremacist?

It seems to be the case from what you said that if most (>50%) murderers were black, then having laws outlawing murder would be white supremacist