Such compassion on the right

[LotusBud]

It's amazing.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Jack]

 

[The Prowler]

It is not like you can just shoot them.

 

[Fantom]

It is not like you can just shoot them.

You sure about that?

 

[Admin.]

You sure about that?

I am sure that will come, after some false flag event.

 

[The Prowler]

I am sure that will come, after some false flag event.

So self-deporting might be the best idea.

 

[Lily]

I am sure that will come, after some false flag event.

What's more fun than shooting Latinos at the border? I dare you to find anything better to do.

 

[250910]

What's more fun than shooting Latinos at the border? I dare you to find anything better to do.

Walking around your neighbors' yards the night before a thunderstorm is predicted, dispensing shampoo into the grass so that when it rains, their lawns get all frothy and freak them out.

 

[Joe]

It's amazing.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Lol

 

[250910]

It's clear that the concept of 'birthright citizenship' requires reform. It should not extend to the children of unlawfully present foreign nationals. 'Birth tourism', as it's called, needs to stop.

 

[Joe]

So self-deporting might be the best idea.

I'm sure you'd like that Lex @The Prowler

I know your German cousins or ancestors would have

 

[Joe]

Itll be such a Fascist time in America & Lex @The Prowler will thoroughly enjoy that moment

 

[LotusBud]

Look, I know the US and Portugal are very different countries in many, many ways, but in spite of the differences in population, economics, etc., there is this underlying thread of simple human compassion that I believe should underly all law making everywhere. In Portugal, they have what's called the Family Reunification Act. Portugal believes in reuniting families instead of tearing them apart, and under this Act, all family members can acquire legal residency eventually if one family member is here legally. I just think basic compassion should be the starting point for all of this stuff, even in the late, great USofA.

 

[250910]

Look, I know the US and Portugal are very different countries in many, many ways, but in spite of the differences in population, economics, etc., there is this underlying thread of simple human compassion that I believe should underly all law making everywhere. In Portugal, they have what's called the Family Reunification Act. Portugal believes in reuniting families instead of tearing them apart, and under this Act, all family members can acquire legal residency eventually if one family member is here legally. I just think basic compassion should be the starting point for all of this stuff, even in the late, great USofA.

Sometimes the compassionate thing to do is to say no.

Short answer long: If their countries are so wrecked that they're fleeing, it's time for the fighting age men to have a revolution and fix those countries.

But unchecked economic migration isn't compassionate to those who are coming, or to those who are already here, many of whom followed the legitimate process to be here lawfully.

 

[LotusBud]

Sometimes the compassionate thing to do is to say no.

Short answer long: If their countries are so wrecked that they're fleeing, it's time for the fighting age men to have a revolution and fix those countries.

But unchecked economic migration isn't compassionate to those who are coming, or to those who are already here, many of whom followed the legitimate process to be here lawfully.

CONs always believe saying no is the compassionate thing to do. This is not an either/or question, though. But you CONs always knee jerk to NO, no matter what, because you are NOT compassionate in any way, shape or form. You are simply heartless and refuse to examine context, compromise, or compassion.

I never suggested unchecked economic migration was the answer. Not once.

The thing you always fail to examine is the very fact that a lot of economic chaos has been caused by US policies and interventions, and outright theft of natural resources and labor from other countries.

 

[250910]

CONs always believe saying no is the compassionate thing to do. This is not an either/or question, though. But you CONs always knee jerk to NO, no matter what, because you are NOT compassionate in any way, shape or form. You are simply heartless and refuse to examine context, compromise, or compassion.

I never suggested unchecked economic migration was the answer. Not once.

In order to avoid the 'unchecked' in 'unchecked economic migration', saying 'No' is required. And wanting people to fix their home countries isn't heartless; quite the opposite. It makes things better for them, for their countrymen unable to migrate, and for us.

 

[Lily]

In order to avoid the 'unchecked' in 'unchecked economic migration', saying 'No' is required. And wanting people to fix their home countries isn't heartless; quite the opposite. It makes things better for them, for their countrymen unable to migrate, and for us.

The fact is we've actively worked against our neighbors to the south when they were attempting to overthrow their oligarchs and dictators...so we could continue to extract resources from those countries.

How do you not know this?

 

[250910]

The fact is we've actively worked against our neighbors to the south when they were attempting to overthrow their oligarchs and dictators...so we could continue to extract resources from those countries.

We? I don't remember having any say in that, do you?

 

[Lily]

We? I don't remember having any say in that, do you?

We don't personally have a say in anything. That doesn't absolve us of anything as a nation.

 

[250910]

We don't personally have a say in anything. That doesn't absolve us of anything as a nation.

That's because we're not 'as a nation'. We're individuals. Sorting people into monolithic groups and applying guilt by association is how bigotry works.

I wouldn't have thought you'd do that.

 

[Lily]

That's because we're not 'as a nation'. We're individuals. Sorting people into monolithic groups and applying guilt by association is how bigotry works.

I wouldn't have thought you'd do that.

Don't bullshit me. Americans are responsible for what our representatives do...we put them there.

 

[Jack]

"
Sorting people into monolithic groups and applying guilt by association is how bigotry works."

Try explaining that to Holly.

 

[Lily]

"
Sorting people into monolithic groups and applying guilt by association is how bigotry works."

Try explaining that to Holly.

Lol, wrong thread indeed.

 

[250910]

Don't bullshit me. Americans are responsible for what our representatives do...we put them there.

And it's not as if they ever get swallowed up by the machine and start doing what it wants instead of what we want, right?

 

[Lily]

And it's not as if they ever get swallowed up by the machine and start doing what it wants instead of what we want, right?

It doesn't matter, we're still responsible...it's our country.

 

[250910]

It doesn't matter, we're still responsible...it's our country.

On paper, sure. Operationally, not since 1861.

 

[Lily]

On paper, sure. Operationally, not since 1861.

Oh, please.

If you believe that, GTFO.

But you won't because it's horseshit.

 

[250910]

Oh, please.

If you believe that, GTFO.

But you won't because it's horseshit.

It's well documented, and there's a video which goes through that history...

...but I already know you won't watch it, so there's no reason to post it.

 

[Lily]

It's well documented, and there's a video which goes through that history...

...but I already know you won't watch it, so there's no reason to post it.

Why would I watch a video by someone from the internet where misinformation runs rampant?

If I want background on US history, I turn to Heather Cox Richardson. An actual scholar that has done the work.

She's actually on youtube with hours of lectures...

 

[250910]

Why would I watch a video by someone from the internet where misinformation runs rampant?

If I want background on US history, I turn to Heather Cox Richardson. An actual scholar that has done the work.

She's actually on youtube with hours of lectures...

Then you're well-equipped to fact-check someone else who has perused all the same primary sources.

But I have no faith that you will, because, as you have well established by now: You prioritize claimant over claim. Every time.