The Republican Utopia

[teachercd]

Hmmmm, some good questions and some very interesting answers.

 

[JJ Husker]

Ask yourselves a few questions. Where would you feel safer walking down the street- In a small town in Nebraska or in some crime infested slum in an inner city?

Quick question on this scenario - what color is my skin?

Exactly. It is subjective and subject to many factors. I don't see where it discounts the point being made.

 

[Lil' Red]

Are the Syrians coming to America even immigrants? Or are they refugees? Because there's a distinction, and that would throw a wrench into the (weird) claim more Muslims immigrated to America than Christians.

I'd also, still, like to know why we're drawing a distinction between religions.

My question would be how do we know who they are if we don't have proper vetting procedures in place. How do we determine if they are an innocent displaced refugee or a person using that as cover to come here and do horrible things? I don't claim to know the answers of how we currently determine this or what procedures are undertaken but I'm sure not opposed to reviewing them and making the process more stringent if required.

Did you read QMany's post?

 

[JJ Husker]

I am simply saying that I think it is logical and good policy to review the procedures that are in place. Placing a TEMPORARY ban on immigration from these countries is not the end of the American way and not some total hair-brained move. I think it is wise to ascertain if our vetting is thorough enough and if there are reasonable safeguards in place.

Applying this logic to your business: I am going audit the books of your business. It's good practice and every company should do it. I am going to shut down your business while I ascertain whether or not your business and accounting practices follow acceptable and required methodologies.

My issue with your logic is you have made no effort to know the process in place under the previous administration. You assume that because Muslims from bad areas immigrate to this country that our process is NOT constantly reviewed, you also assume it must bad; and you assume this review requires a ban on immigration to determine its efficacy.

I think it's bad form and flawed on your part, as well as a disingenuous effort to remain ignorant on the situation.

I'm not making the assumption that it is not constantly reviewed. I'm sorry if I have not made the effort to know all the processes of all our federal government. Apparently you have from that position on your high horse. At least we all know where to come ask questions when knowledge of our federal government's inner workings are needed. Thanks for volunteering your infinite expertise in all areas.

I just did basic research that you seem unwilling to do on a topic that you consider to be important. I don't see the snarky sarcasm being necessary but that has become a common theme of yours lately when your ignorance is questioned.

Huh, imagine that, I got snarky when called ignorant. All I've done is try to provide another point of view and some reasonable insight into why some of these things appear somewhat logical from outside the bash everything Trump circle jerk. Have fun in your little echo chamber. I'm out.

 

[JJ Husker]

Are the Syrians coming to America even immigrants? Or are they refugees? Because there's a distinction, and that would throw a wrench into the (weird) claim more Muslims immigrated to America than Christians.

I'd also, still, like to know why we're drawing a distinction between religions.

My question would be how do we know who they are if we don't have proper vetting procedures in place. How do we determine if they are an innocent displaced refugee or a person using that as cover to come here and do horrible things? I don't claim to know the answers of how we currently determine this or what procedures are undertaken but I'm sure not opposed to reviewing them and making the process more stringent if required.

Did you read QMany's post?

No. I've been busy replying to all these other posts while also trying to get some actual work done.

I see it now and will read it.

 

[knapplc]

Huh, imagine that, I got snarky when called ignorant. All I've done is try to provide another point of view and some reasonable insight into why some of these things appear somewhat logical from outside the bash everything Trump circle jerk. Have fun in your little echo chamber. I'm out.

When were you called ignorant? I'm reasonably certain a good case could be made that you were being snarky before that. And don't worry, we all get snarky sometimes, even zoogs on rare occasions.

 

[ColoNoCoHusker]

I am simply saying that I think it is logical and good policy to review the procedures that are in place. Placing a TEMPORARY ban on immigration from these countries is not the end of the American way and not some total hair-brained move. I think it is wise to ascertain if our vetting is thorough enough and if there are reasonable safeguards in place.

Applying this logic to your business: I am going audit the books of your business. It's good practice and every company should do it. I am going to shut down your business while I ascertain whether or not your business and accounting practices follow acceptable and required methodologies.

My issue with your logic is you have made no effort to know the process in place under the previous administration. You assume that because Muslims from bad areas immigrate to this country that our process is NOT constantly reviewed, you also assume it must bad; and you assume this review requires a ban on immigration to determine its efficacy.

I think it's bad form and flawed on your part, as well as a disingenuous effort to remain ignorant on the situation.

I'm not making the assumption that it is not constantly reviewed. I'm sorry if I have not made the effort to know all the processes of all our federal government. Apparently you have from that position on your high horse. At least we all know where to come ask questions when knowledge of our federal government's inner workings are needed. Thanks for volunteering your infinite expertise in all areas.

I just did basic research that you seem unwilling to do on a topic that you consider to be important. I don't see the snarky sarcasm being necessary but that has become a common theme of yours lately when your ignorance is questioned.

Huh, imagine that, I got snarky when called ignorant. All I've done is try to provide another point of view and some reasonable insight into why some of these things appear somewhat logical from outside the bash everything Trump circle jerk. Have fun in your little echo chamber. I'm out.

You asked questions, they were answered with references provided, you ignored the information and then throw a Trumper tantrum when called out in the least degree. Sounds like I'm not the one in the echo chamber. Thank you again for confirming that while you feign otherwise, you'd rather deal in "alternative facts" than discuss possible truths. Enjoy your bliss...

 

[commando]

can any trump supporters explain how this would work out for me? i want to build a new fence around my yard and have my neighbor pay for it. do i have to send them the bill or does my contractor send it to them?

 

[zoogs]

'snarky' is my middle name

can any trump supporters explain how this would work out for me? i want to build a new fence around my yard and have my neighbor pay for it. do i have to send them the bill or does my contractor send it to them?

You bully and extort them. Get your own. Our new motto.

 

[Lil' Red]

can any trump supporters explain how this would work out for me? i want to build a new fence around my yard and have my neighbor pay for it. do i have to send them the bill or does my contractor send it to them?

Trump provided a blueprint for how to do that as well:

President-elect Donald J. Trump has already built a wall — not on the border with Mexico, but on the border of his exclusive golf course in northeastern Scotland, blocking the sea view of local residents who refused to sell their homes.

And then he sent them the bill.

David and Moira Milne had already been threatened with legal action by Mr. Trump’s lawyers, who claimed that a corner of their garage belonged to him, when they came home from work one day to find his staff building a fence around their garden. Two rows of grown trees went up next, blocking the view. Their water and electricity lines were temporarily cut. And then a bill for about $3,500 arrived in the mail, which, Mr. Milne said, went straight into the trash.

Link

 

[knapplc]

^^^^

Yeah, but emails.

 

[NM11046]

Trying to build on the street walking/airport security scenarios. I'm sure this isn't a perfect analogy, but go with it:

Let's say you're boarding a plane from Ireland. You are one of many pastey, white guys/gals boarding a plane. All are getting the same attention (or lack of attention). Should you be worried as a third of Irishmen are members of the IRA, a known paramilitary republic who has been know to target and kill with bombs and etc.? Should the US ban all immigrants of Irish descent from coming to the US? Are they less scary because they look like us? Because they practice a religion that we're familiar with?

The whole idea of blaming an entire religion or nationality for the acts of a few renegades sits sourly with me. We are better than this.

 

[Danny Bateman]

can any trump supporters explain how this would work out for me? i want to build a new fence around my yard and have my neighbor pay for it. do i have to send them the bill or does my contractor send it to them?

Trump provided a blueprint for how to do that as well:

President-elect Donald J. Trump has already built a wall — not on the border with Mexico, but on the border of his exclusive golf course in northeastern Scotland, blocking the sea view of local residents who refused to sell their homes.

And then he sent them the bill.

David and Moira Milne had already been threatened with legal action by Mr. Trump’s lawyers, who claimed that a corner of their garage belonged to him, when they came home from work one day to find his staff building a fence around their garden. Two rows of grown trees went up next, blocking the view. Their water and electricity lines were temporarily cut. And then a bill for about $3,500 arrived in the mail, which, Mr. Milne said, went straight into the trash.

Link

This has always been Trump's MO when it comes to his legal strategy.

Being born into such immense wealth makes it hard for others to challenge him. If he decides to pull crap like this, he can, because the people he's suing aren't going to have the resources to fight him in court. He could just bleed them dry.

If he does get caught with his hand in the cookie jar, like Trump University, he just winds up settling. Not because he WANTS to (as he claims), but because he's wrong. The money doesn't matter and it prevents the case from getting to discovery, which would probably destroy him

Here's hoping this Emoluments lawsuit or the defamation one from the Apprentice actress with Gloria Allred actually goes to trial. I'd like to see this guy finally exposed.

 

[Danny Bateman]

I think it is useful to examine how many folks wound up feeling the same way to Señor ED (still not used to you being JJ man!) does about immigration. JJ, I don't know your how your feelings on this subject evolved, so I'm not accusing you of falling for this by any stretch. But a heck of a lot of people did.

A "Big Lie" is a propaganda technique dating back, ironically, to Hitler himself in Main Kampf.

Basically, if you say something over and over and over again, people begin to think it's true. It doesn't matter if it's completely devoid of facts, and having a strong emotional component to what you're saying and a platform like Trump's helps.

He suckered a lot of people into believing this nonsense that "we have no way of vetting these people" or "our borders are open and people are just pouring in" or whatever else it is now. I understand the argument for tightening up immigration policies, though I disagree with it. But this guy got millions of people to believe we're in eminent dangerous from nonexistent vetting procedures, and he did it through a fear-laden lie.

 

[Landlord]

I am simply saying that I think it is logical and good policy to review the procedures that are in place. Placing a TEMPORARY ban on immigration from these countries is not the end of the American way and not some total hair-brained move. I think it is wise to ascertain if our vetting is thorough enough and if there are reasonable safeguards in place.

Generally, in the case of businesses or organizations, you only conduct self-review like that in response to a lack of efficiency or success. You don't really spend the energy to ascertain whether a certain policy could be operating better if that policy is already at ~99% success rate.

Out of the near 800,000 refugees we have taken in since 9/11, 3 have been charged with terrorist-related activities.

JJ, you're a reasonable person, but I don't think you're thinking this one through. If a temporary ban on Syrian immigration is a good idea in order to review our procedures, then why not temporary marshall law in Chicago and St. Louis, why not a temporary ban on handguns, temporary ban on Christian gatherings as right-wing religious extremists kill twice as many Americans as muslim terrorists?

“Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”