Author Topic: Small Daily Acts of Political Discussion  (Read 22684 times)

Snake P. Jenga

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7471
  • Location: Washington DC
  • Cake or Death?
Re: Small Daily Acts of Political Discussion
« Reply #200 on: May 16, 2018, 03:43:53 PM »
Hey Wexler - feel free to post over in the action items thread: http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/off-topic/small-daily-acts-of-political-resistance/new/#new

jordanread

  • Guest
Re: Small Daily Acts of Political Discussion
« Reply #201 on: May 16, 2018, 03:57:58 PM »
I'm not sure I understand this response, but I apologize if I violated the thread rules, and please feel free to report or delete if so.

You didn't violate any rules (especially here), and if what I said made you feel like I was saying that, I apologize.

We discuss things here. MJ is right in that actual actions you take should be posted in the 'Actions' thread. I believe she was applauding your comment. Post here (or at https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/off-topic/small-daily-acts-of-political-resistance/)

More importantly,

We are a bit more lax here as far as propriety goes. So long as one is willing to backup their viewpoints, or are be willing to discuss their views, we welcome you.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2018, 03:20:07 AM by jordanread »

MasterStache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1762
Re: Small Daily Acts of Political Discussion
« Reply #202 on: May 16, 2018, 07:25:32 PM »
First you should understand that in order to pay into the social security system, you need a social security number, and illegal immigrants cannot legally obtain that.  This means every illegal immigrant contributing to the social security system has committed identity fraud/theft.

Just because illegal immigrants are ineligible for social safety net programs doesn't mean that none are on them.

You are correct. However, many undocumented immigrants use either a fake SS number, stolen SS number, a previously valid SS number, or an ITIN (as discussed above) which allow them to pay federal taxes and into social security. The IRA rarely pursues offenders hiring these folks because the penalty is a measly $50 per SS mismatch and it's just not worth the resources.

I am still waiting for you to provide those numbers. Looking more and more like you were just trolling.

Which numbers do you mean?

Feel free to peruse the previous post. Not going to repeat myself. It's not a long thread ( :

I disagree with almost everything @TornWonder has said, but still like to understand. This one, I'm with him. I looked. I even jumped to your profile and posts contributed to*. The closest thing I thought is below.



I am curious what specifically you mean by " significant." That's a very broad statement to quantify support of open borders.

Can you provide factual data showing immigration plays a significant role in " wealth redistribution." ( Not really sure what you mean by that either).

I don't think that @TornWonder was saying that immigration plays a role in wealth redistribution. I think what was being said is that in a society with some social safety nets, immigration needs to be controlled or the system gets overwhelmed, based on more people taking advantage of it. Or at least that's how I read it.

Correct.

The question is still viable. Weather you call it "wealth redistribution" or social programs. I see you didn't answer the question though. I assume (possibly incorrectly) that you have come to the conclusion you did based on some sort of figures, statistics, actual evidence. So we still sit at "significant" without any specific quantification as to what that means financially.

Is this the number you were referring to?


*You are ballsier than I am. I love a good chunk of your posts. You are awesome!!

I'll report someone breaking the law if I think there will be any possible action taken.  I'm not going to call in every speeder on the street because it would be basically impossible for the police to do anything about it and would simply tie up resources that could be helping to save a life somewhere else.  If someone is obviously driving recklessly/drunk I will call the police and report it.

One could argue against what you (and ICE) are doing by the same logic.

Sure, and it would be a valid argument if ICE didn't exist for the exact purpose that they are being used for.  If you don't think immigration laws should be enforced, that means you don't think immigration laws should exist, and that's what you should be arguing about.

If you don't think speeding laws should be enforced, that means you don't think speeding laws should exist, and that's what you should be arguing about.

TornWonder has already explained that reporting someone for speeding leads down a road to nowhere, there is no proof. It's not a matter of whether speeding laws should be enforced, but that they cannot be enforced in this manner.

Sure or worse case scenario it leads to the person getting a ticket. Worse case scenario of reporting folks to ICE is they are deported back into the life they so desperately were trying to escape. That often means torture, abuse, even death, etc. Perhaps for a large percentage of us, morality and the sanctity of human life are far more important than country of origin.

The job of ICE is to enforce immigration laws. It's not the job of TornWonder. In reality helping police catch speeders is arguably more humane, than helping ICE send folks back into often terrible situations. Personally I have no problems reporting obvious speeders, drunk drivers, etc. I see it as helping to serve the public safety and possibly saving a life (lives). But I have no ideal the nature of an immigrants background or situation that led to their desire to escape from it. It's not up to me to determine their fate nor do I see it as serving any sort of public good and could in fact be endangering a life (lives).

I was just responding to an illogical statement, and yes, in very obvious cases of speeding or reckless driving it may be worth reporting but we're getting away from the point of the analogy. Instead of continuing down that path I have another question for @TornWonder:

You state that you report illegals because they are breaking the law but I'm curious, is this the only reason you report them? I don't know your personal stance on the current laws, are you in agreement with them?
What other reason would I have to report them?

As for the current laws, I think if you have significant government social programs/wealth redistribution you need immigration control, otherwise the financial burden on the country is too great.  I would prefer open borders, but don't see the US moving away from government dependency anytime soon.

I am curious what specifically you mean by " significant." That's a very broad statement to quantify support of open borders.

Can you provide factual data showing immigration plays a significant role in " wealth redistribution." ( Not really sure what you mean by that either).

jordanread

  • Guest
Re: Small Daily Acts of Political Discussion
« Reply #203 on: May 17, 2018, 04:05:21 AM »
That is super hard to read. I think I get it though.


I am curious what specifically you mean by " significant." That's a very broad statement to quantify support of open borders.

Can you provide factual data showing immigration plays a significant role in " wealth redistribution." ( Not really sure what you mean by that either).

Is this what you meant?

MasterStache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1762
Re: Small Daily Acts of Political Discussion
« Reply #204 on: May 17, 2018, 05:10:35 AM »
That is super hard to read. I think I get it though.


I am curious what specifically you mean by " significant." That's a very broad statement to quantify support of open borders.

Can you provide factual data showing immigration plays a significant role in " wealth redistribution." ( Not really sure what you mean by that either).

Is this what you meant?

Yep, just forgot to include the questions marks. Poor grammar on my part ( :

DarkandStormy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1142
  • Age: 29
  • Location: Midwest, USA
Re: Small Daily Acts of Political Discussion
« Reply #205 on: May 17, 2018, 07:24:15 AM »
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/05/federal-judge-accused-ice-of-making-up-evidence-to-prove-that-dreamer-was-gang-affiliated.html

Quote
On Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Ricardo S. Martinez shot down the federal government’s efforts to strip Daniel Ramirez Medina of his DACA status. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement had arrested and detained Ramirez last year, then falsely claimed that he was affiliated with a gang and attempted to deport him. He filed suit, alleging that ICE had violated his due process rights. Martinez agreed. His order barred the federal government from voiding Ramirez’s DACA status, safeguarding his ability to live and work in the United States legally for the foreseeable future. What may be most remarkable about Martinez’s decision, though, is its blunt repudiation of ICE’s main claim—that Ramirez is “gang-affiliated.” The judge did not simply rule against ICE. He accused the agency of lying to a court of law.

TornWonder

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 57
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Re: Small Daily Acts of Political Discussion
« Reply #206 on: May 17, 2018, 10:28:59 AM »
That is super hard to read. I think I get it though.


I am curious what specifically you mean by " significant." That's a very broad statement to quantify support of open borders.

Can you provide factual data showing immigration plays a significant role in " wealth redistribution." ( Not really sure what you mean by that either).

Is this what you meant?

Yep, just forgot to include the questions marks. Poor grammar on my part ( :

I didn't say that immigration plays a significant role in wealth redistribution.  I said you either need strict immigration laws or minimized government social programs, otherwise there's only one eventuality, and it's not good.  If you'd like an example, look at the fall of the Roman Empire.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 12250
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Small Daily Acts of Political Discussion
« Reply #207 on: May 17, 2018, 11:00:35 AM »
That is super hard to read. I think I get it though.


I am curious what specifically you mean by " significant." That's a very broad statement to quantify support of open borders.

Can you provide factual data showing immigration plays a significant role in " wealth redistribution." ( Not really sure what you mean by that either).

Is this what you meant?

Yep, just forgot to include the questions marks. Poor grammar on my part ( :

I didn't say that immigration plays a significant role in wealth redistribution.  I said you either need strict immigration laws or minimized government social programs, otherwise there's only one eventuality, and it's not good.  If you'd like an example, look at the fall of the Roman Empire.

Yep.  It was totally the social programs.  Not the invasions, civil war, destabilizing impact of the adoption of Christianity, inflation, loss of technological leadership, political corruption, urban decay, excessive military spending, etc.  C'mon man, that's a kinda goofy argument don't you think?

Poundwise

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1177
Re: Small Daily Acts of Political Discussion
« Reply #208 on: May 25, 2018, 08:19:52 AM »
Yesterday I read about the following reports of horrific abuse of immigrant children by the United States Custom and Border Patrol. Such treatment is Wrong. Bad. Evil.

"Denied detained children permission to stand or move freely for days and threatened children who stood up with transfer to solitary confinement in a small, freezing room
Denied a pregnant minor medical attention when she reported pain, which preceded a stillbirth
Subjected a 16-year-old girl to a search in which they “forcefully spread her legs and touched her private parts so hard that she screamed”
Left a 4-pound premature baby and her minor mother in an overcrowded and dirty cell full of sick people, against medical advice
Threw out a child’s birth certificate and threatened him with sexual abuse by an adult male detainee."

https://www.gq.com/story/trump-on-immigrant-children
I went to the original report here, though I haven't finished reading it yet. The abuses listed on page 10 onward are too upsetting to take in all at once.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/lplnnufjbwci0xn/CBP%20Report%20ACLU_IHRC%205.23%20FINAL.pdf?dl=0

There is no crime a child can commit that warrants such treatment. And lest this be dismissed as partisan lies, these abuses happened under multiple administrations, including Bush and Obama.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 12250
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Small Daily Acts of Political Discussion
« Reply #209 on: May 25, 2018, 09:04:43 AM »
Yesterday I read about the following reports of horrific abuse of immigrant children by the United States Custom and Border Patrol. Such treatment is Wrong. Bad. Evil.

"Denied detained children permission to stand or move freely for days and threatened children who stood up with transfer to solitary confinement in a small, freezing room
Denied a pregnant minor medical attention when she reported pain, which preceded a stillbirth
Subjected a 16-year-old girl to a search in which they “forcefully spread her legs and touched her private parts so hard that she screamed”
Left a 4-pound premature baby and her minor mother in an overcrowded and dirty cell full of sick people, against medical advice
Threw out a child’s birth certificate and threatened him with sexual abuse by an adult male detainee."

https://www.gq.com/story/trump-on-immigrant-children
I went to the original report here, though I haven't finished reading it yet. The abuses listed on page 10 onward are too upsetting to take in all at once.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/lplnnufjbwci0xn/CBP%20Report%20ACLU_IHRC%205.23%20FINAL.pdf?dl=0

There is no crime a child can commit that warrants such treatment. And lest this be dismissed as partisan lies, these abuses happened under multiple administrations, including Bush and Obama.

This is all normal behaviour (as per American Guantanamo Bay style rules).  Detainees aren't white, and therefore aren't people.  Since they aren't people you're free to do whatever you want . . . threats, denigration, torture, murder, rape, it's all OK.  Since they're not people they don't need legal council.  They don't need a trial.  There doesn't need to be proof of a crime.  You'll never be held accountable for your actions by anyone in power, because Americans simply don't care.

DarkandStormy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1142
  • Age: 29
  • Location: Midwest, USA
Re: Small Daily Acts of Political Discussion
« Reply #210 on: May 25, 2018, 09:32:21 AM »
https://amp.azcentral.com/amp/631627002?__twitter_impression=true

Quote
The Trump administration recently announced a new, get-tough policy that will separate parents from their children if the family is caught crossing the border illegally.

It was a big news story. So big it overshadowed the fact that the federal government has lost – yes, lost – 1,475 migrant children in its custody.

Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen told Congress that within 48 hours of being taken into custody the children are transferred to the Department of Health and Human Services, which finds places for them to stay.

The U.S. government has lost almost 1,500 migrant kids.

former player

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3728
  • Location: Avalon
Re: Small Daily Acts of Political Discussion
« Reply #211 on: May 25, 2018, 09:49:44 AM »
https://amp.azcentral.com/amp/631627002?__twitter_impression=true

Quote
The Trump administration recently announced a new, get-tough policy that will separate parents from their children if the family is caught crossing the border illegally.

It was a big news story. So big it overshadowed the fact that the federal government has lost – yes, lost – 1,475 migrant children in its custody.

Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen told Congress that within 48 hours of being taken into custody the children are transferred to the Department of Health and Human Services, which finds places for them to stay.

The U.S. government has lost almost 1,500 migrant kids.
High likelihood of those kids having been trafficked for illegal purposes - forced prostitution, modern day slavery and drug cultivation and selling.

Poundwise

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1177
Re: Small Daily Acts of Political Discussion
« Reply #212 on: May 25, 2018, 10:10:15 AM »
https://amp.azcentral.com/amp/631627002?__twitter_impression=true

Quote
The Trump administration recently announced a new, get-tough policy that will separate parents from their children if the family is caught crossing the border illegally.

It was a big news story. So big it overshadowed the fact that the federal government has lost – yes, lost – 1,475 migrant children in its custody.

Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen told Congress that within 48 hours of being taken into custody the children are transferred to the Department of Health and Human Services, which finds places for them to stay.

The U.S. government has lost almost 1,500 migrant kids.
High likelihood of those kids having been trafficked for illegal purposes - forced prostitution, modern day slavery and drug cultivation and selling.

This breaks my heart. My heart is breaking every day. We don't live in the country I thought we lived in.

Poundwise

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1177
Re: Small Daily Acts of Political Discussion
« Reply #213 on: June 06, 2018, 02:08:12 PM »
My upset with our treatment of immigrants continues, as does my deep dive into the immigrant question.

A libertarian view of immigration that I agree with:
https://reason.com/blog/2018/06/06/nothing-to-see-here-oh-wait-feds-raid-oh

An in-depth discussion of refugees and immigrants in Europe.  I'd almost forgotten about all the refugees drowning on rafts. 
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/jun/05/five-myths-about-the-refugee-crisis

A friend of mine has been working with refugee camps in Greece-- they're still there, still caught in limbo. Another friend has been working on rebuilding Haiti. 

The number of people on the move worldwide is just overwhelming. To solve this, we'd have to stop climate change? Stop greed? Stop overpopulation? Are any of these possible?

I guess we return to my previous conclusion that we can't save everyone, but at least we could find a way to do better than we are doing now.  And certainly caging children of asylum seekers is doing worse.

TexasRunner

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 805
  • Location: Somewhere in Tejas
Re: Small Daily Acts of Political Discussion
« Reply #214 on: June 22, 2018, 10:07:55 AM »
- Upped my NRA membership to Life.
- Joined the Texas Nationalist Movement.
- Emailed Lance Gooden about Term Limits (He supports them and said we would sign the legislator list supporting them)
- Emailed Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton asking if his department could prepare a report on the representation and results of illegal immigrants detained in Texas, as well as their average length-of-stay and average cost to deport.

Been a busy morning.  :)

Please move to either the discussion thread or start a conservative actions thread.

Big ups on term limits though!

TR, what are you looking to determine with the final bullet? I'm curious about similar things. Please respond in the discussion thread if you're open to it.

@MonkeyJenga, I don't mind and will respond over here.  Didn't find this discussion at first since it hasn't been used quite as much.

Firstly:  Doesn't not allowing "Conservative Actions" posted in the 'Small Daily Acts of Political Resistance' thread feed into the echo chamber that (I swear I remember) the Left swore off after being astonished that Trump won?  Shouldn't 'not' allowing a simple post such as mine be posted feed into that echo chamber?  I'm completely serious.  There were dozens (if not hundreds) of posts to the effect of "We have to listen to the other side's conversation" after Trump won?  Has that all gone out the window?

On the final bullet above, I recognize that this a potential issue (and one that clearly existed under Bush and Obama), but I want to know what the current quantities of persons crossing the border at a non-entry point (which is what this is about) in Texas and how much taxpayer dollars are going to detain and deport those persons.  Then it is a simple cost analysis to see if spending more on reinforcing the border is worth it financially.

Also, I would like to point out that 'family separations' do not happen if you pass the border at a legal point of entry.  The policy to criminally sanction persons only applies to those who illegally cross the border.  Combine that with the fact that minors cannot legally be held in criminal facilities, and you have the conundrum presented.

I also want to know how illegal immigration hasn't been a problem (IE: those on the left pretend it doesn't exist) until now with the family separations.  Does that mean we are all finally going to admit that illegal immigration occurs and in large enough quantities to be an issue?

Thanks for any discussion that may occur.


Proof that this was an issue under Obama:  http://dailycaller.com/2018/06/19/photos-obama-immigration-detention-facilities/

Proof that there is definitely double-speak on immigration from the left:  Obama speaking about securing the border.

Proof that this has been an issue before:  CNN article and that Catch and Release policies have been an issue for several years, resulting in the No-Tolerance Policy.

Nicholas Carter

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 110
Re: Small Daily Acts of Political Discussion
« Reply #215 on: June 25, 2018, 11:08:01 AM »
Firstly:  Doesn't not allowing "Conservative Actions" posted in the 'Small Daily Acts of Political Resistance' thread feed into the echo chamber that (I swear I remember) the Left swore off after being astonished that Trump won?  Shouldn't 'not' allowing a simple post such as mine be posted feed into that echo chamber?  I'm completely serious.  There were dozens (if not hundreds) of posts to the effect of "We have to listen to the other side's conversation" after Trump won?  Has that all gone out the window?
So, do you remember in 2008 when the Republican Right decided that Obama represented a sea change and they needed to embrace a more tolerant, multi-ethnic movement if they ever wanted to win an election again? And how that died on the rocks of hell-or-high-water resistance from below, and general insufferableness from their political opponents from above? This is that, played in reverse. Liberals were open-minded and listening right up until Republican voices on the internet called for things like dropping nuclear bombs on random cities in the Middle East  and using attack helicopters to mow down illegal immigrants with machine gun fire.

Also, I would like to point out that 'family separations' do not happen if you pass the border at a legal point of entry.  The policy to criminally sanction persons only applies to those who illegally cross the border.  Combine that with the fact that minors cannot legally be held in criminal facilities, and you have the conundrum presented.
aclu.org/cases/ms-l-v-ice
This is the fire point for a bunch of Liberals. We think that legal immigrants who followed the law to enter the country are being treated like criminals. We have proof that it's happening in at least some cases, and the administration hasn't done much work to change this conviction.

I also want to know how illegal immigration hasn't been a problem (IE: those on the left pretend it doesn't exist) until now with the family separations.  Does that mean we are all finally going to admit that illegal immigration occurs and in large enough quantities to be an issue?
The Democratic coalition's take has been a split of "Illegal immigration is what you get when your immigration system is broken, if we fix (typically read as broaden) the immigration system, illegal immigration will just go away." and "We disagree with the previous, but don't believe in fighting in front of company." Democrats are big on keeping internal divisions private. Probably the third biggest part of Trump Derangement Syndrome (after a genuine clash of values and classism) is the fact that the coalition is currently exposing some deep rifts, and resisting Trump is the only thing that everybody agrees on.

DarkandStormy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1142
  • Age: 29
  • Location: Midwest, USA
Re: Small Daily Acts of Political Discussion
« Reply #216 on: June 25, 2018, 01:15:38 PM »
Proof that this was an issue under Obama:  http://dailycaller.com/2018/06/19/photos-obama-immigration-detention-facilities/

This is such a half-assed, bad faith argument.  Cite me the source showing where families were separated at the border as a blanket policy.  That's the heart of this thing.  There was an influx of UNACCOMPANIED minors in 2014, so they had to "house" them until they figured out what to do with them (send them home, find their family in the U.S., foster care, etc.).  They were housing them in order to figure out where the safest place was to send them, not as a punishment or deterrent as Trump was doing.

This is also a lazy "whataboutism."  Because Obama did something doesn't excuse Trump's WORSE policy.


Proof that there is definitely double-speak on immigration from the left:  Obama speaking about securing the border.

How is it double speak?  "Securing the border" is vague and can mean different things to different people.  I have yet to see a Democrat call for open borders.  Please cite if otherwise.

Proof that this has been an issue before:  CNN article and that Catch and Release policies have been an issue for several years, resulting in the No-Tolerance Policy.

What?  I'm not following here.

Here's an easier, lest costly, and more humane way to deal with it - https://www.immigrantjustice.org/sites/default/files/content-type/research-item/documents/2018-06/The%20Real%20Alternatives%20to%20Detention%20FINAL%2006.17.pdf

https://www.vox.com/2018/6/22/17483230/family-separation-immigration-alternatives-immigrant-detention-centers

Quote
Immigrants monitored with ankle bracelets showed up to 99.6% of their mandated court appearances. The program cost the government $4.50 per day.

plainjane

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1622
Re: Small Daily Acts of Political Discussion
« Reply #217 on: June 27, 2018, 04:37:52 AM »
I promised myself I wouldn't post in this thread. Anyways. My understanding from the last couple of weeks is the following. Please feel free to correct me or to add to my list.

Civil behaviour includes:
calling the police on young POC for selling water on the sidewalk in front of their home
calling the police on POC for being in a Starbucks and not ordering
calling the police on POC for going to a university campus tour
not hiring someone because they kneel during the national anthem
calling everyone from a certain country murderers and rapists
saying everyone from certain countries should be vetted before entry into a country, and then not actually having a fair vetting process (and probably have spent the last 12 months saying 'all lives matter' and 'not all men/white people')
going to a march and displaying Nazi paraphernalia and firearms
going to a march where others are displaying Nazi paraphernalia and firearms and beat up POC and kill someone with a car and being ok with that
refusing to bake a cake to celebrate completion of a legal ceremony
joking about committing sexual assault
yelling at women getting medical procedures in regions where affordable medical coverage is difficult to access
making it legal to run down peaceful protesters in the street

Uncivil behaviour includes:
asking someone to leave a restaurant because they have previously made very public statements that support government discrimination against groups that the staff identify as
kneeling during the national anthem
making a joke about someone's heavy eyeshadow
calling someone a c*nt
calling a group of people who march with those displaying Nazi paraphernalia, or otherwise make positive self affiliation comments about such people, Nazis
asking the police to review current policy & training which is leading to a disproportionate number of innocent POC being killed

Just want to make sure I'm clear. Because I've always tried to be a good girl and not make trouble. My mom even said so at my wedding. (That made trouble, my little sister was quite put out at the implication that she was a difficult child. The irony escaped her.)

(I think heckling people in public and running loud speakers outside them home is uncivil. I suspect the folks who do it also think it is uncivil, but have given up on civility reaching those people, and think a bit of discomfort and shaming is fair turnabout for people who have inflicted so much on others. I'm pretty sure constant noise is against the Geneva Convention. Would be nice if everyone involved followed that.)

plainjane

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1622
Re: Small Daily Acts of Political Discussion
« Reply #218 on: June 27, 2018, 04:54:44 AM »
There were dozens (if not hundreds) of posts to the effect of "We have to listen to the other side's conversation" after Trump won?  Has that all gone out the window?

Actually yes. I feel like I'm being asked to go high when the other group goes low. Go high over and over again. Listen carefully as voters are disenfranchised. Be empathetic about gerrymandering.

You know what else I hate? The story _The Giving Tree_. Empathy and giving all the time. Until all that is left is a stump.

LG89

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 24
Re: Small Daily Acts of Political Discussion
« Reply #219 on: July 07, 2018, 09:16:27 AM »
There were dozens (if not hundreds) of posts to the effect of "We have to listen to the other side's conversation" after Trump won?  Has that all gone out the window?

Actually yes. I feel like I'm being asked to go high when the other group goes low. Go high over and over again. Listen carefully as voters are disenfranchised. Be empathetic about gerrymandering.

You know what else I hate? The story _The Giving Tree_. Empathy and giving all the time. Until all that is left is a stump.

Funny how this never seems to be reciprocated by conservatives. You never hear any trumper saying that they should listen and try to understand differing viewpoints. It's time to stop listening to people who think it's ok to separate children from their families.

Poundwise

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1177
Re: Small Daily Acts of Political Discussion
« Reply #220 on: July 11, 2018, 10:07:21 PM »
Just adding to the immigration discussion. 

"In the first nine months of this fiscal year, 68,560 families and 37,450 unaccompanied children were apprehended at our southern border. That’s not a “flood.” It’s one football stadium of people. We can afford that level of compassion in this country."

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/11/opinion/asylum-immigration-trump.html

Also, guess how many Syrian refugees have entered the U.S. this year.

MasterStache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1762
Re: Small Daily Acts of Political Discussion
« Reply #221 on: July 12, 2018, 05:48:47 AM »
There were dozens (if not hundreds) of posts to the effect of "We have to listen to the other side's conversation" after Trump won?  Has that all gone out the window?

Actually yes. I feel like I'm being asked to go high when the other group goes low. Go high over and over again. Listen carefully as voters are disenfranchised. Be empathetic about gerrymandering.

You know what else I hate? The story _The Giving Tree_. Empathy and giving all the time. Until all that is left is a stump.

Funny how this never seems to be reciprocated by conservatives. You never hear any trumper saying that they should listen and try to understand differing viewpoints. It's time to stop listening to people who think it's ok to separate children from their families.

Yeah I pretty much drew the line at watching them defend racism, bigotry, intolerance and bullying. Committing human rights abuses and either defending (by completely misrepresenting what happened under Obama) or just straight up being mum about it is just simply icing on the cake.

By the River

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 131
Re: Small Daily Acts of Political Discussion
« Reply #222 on: July 12, 2018, 09:06:13 AM »
... Please feel free to correct me or to add to my list.

Civil behaviour includes:
calling the police on young POC for selling water on the sidewalk in front of their home ...

Is it civil or uncivil to call police on young white kids selling lemonade in front of their home?  https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/stapleton-neighbor-calls-police-on-boys-memorial-day-weekend-lemonade-stand among many examples

I don't ascribe racist intent on these calls, I just think many people are assholes.  However, if you google search the two incidents, the first was published on ABC, NBC, Fox News(!), CNN, NY Post, Washington Post, The Sun (UK), and many others, and the second was published by thedenverchannel.com, KGUN, WXYZ, the Miami Herald, Brietbart and a few others. I wonder what accounts for the difference in coverage?

plainjane

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1622
Re: Small Daily Acts of Political Discussion
« Reply #223 on: July 12, 2018, 10:40:50 AM »
... Please feel free to correct me or to add to my list.
Civil behaviour includes:
calling the police on young POC for selling water on the sidewalk in front of their home ...
Is it civil or uncivil to call police on young white kids selling lemonade in front of their home?  https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/stapleton-neighbor-calls-police-on-boys-memorial-day-weekend-lemonade-stand among many examples

I feel is generally uncivil to call the cops on any kids selling lemonade. I used to walk around my neighbourhood knocking on doors to sell Girl Guide cookies, and I think it's great training for kids to have some sales experience while they're still cute and the sales are easier to get.

However, it is also a fact that POC kids have a _much higher_ likelihood of being killed or hurt by cops than white kids. So calling the cops on a black kid has a degree of potential negative outcome that calling the cops on a white kid does not. And pretending that is not the case and that they are equal acts with equal likelihood of a negative outcome is disingenuous in this day and age.

And racist _intent_ isn't required. The person didn't think "oh, I think I'll be extra racist today", or "I haven't engaged in racist behaviour for a while, oops, better fill my quota". Instead they saw something and felt uncomfortable. 'Those folks don't belong'. 'Why is that person doing that thing?' 'I feel unsafe', 'what do those kids think they're doing?'. 'Obviously that person is a threat'. Why do they feel that person is a threat? Why do they feel that person does not belong? They don't look at that feeling and interrogate it and notice it was racist. That lack of intent doesn't mean it wasn't coming from a racist place.

If 10 black kids get called on and 1 white kid gets called on, then everyone doing the calling is being an asshole. But one group is getting called on disproportionately. And there is a systemic reason for that in our society which has a name.
« Last Edit: July 12, 2018, 10:48:10 AM by plainjane »

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 12250
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Small Daily Acts of Political Discussion
« Reply #224 on: July 12, 2018, 11:45:46 AM »
... Please feel free to correct me or to add to my list.
Civil behaviour includes:
calling the police on young POC for selling water on the sidewalk in front of their home ...
Is it civil or uncivil to call police on young white kids selling lemonade in front of their home?  https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/stapleton-neighbor-calls-police-on-boys-memorial-day-weekend-lemonade-stand among many examples

I feel is generally uncivil to call the cops on any kids selling lemonade. I used to walk around my neighbourhood knocking on doors to sell Girl Guide cookies, and I think it's great training for kids to have some sales experience while they're still cute and the sales are easier to get.

However, it is also a fact that POC kids have a _much higher_ likelihood of being killed or hurt by cops than white kids. So calling the cops on a black kid has a degree of potential negative outcome that calling the cops on a white kid does not. And pretending that is not the case and that they are equal acts with equal likelihood of a negative outcome is disingenuous in this day and age.

And racist _intent_ isn't required. The person didn't think "oh, I think I'll be extra racist today", or "I haven't engaged in racist behaviour for a while, oops, better fill my quota". Instead they saw something and felt uncomfortable. 'Those folks don't belong'. 'Why is that person doing that thing?' 'I feel unsafe', 'what do those kids think they're doing?'. 'Obviously that person is a threat'. Why do they feel that person is a threat? Why do they feel that person does not belong? They don't look at that feeling and interrogate it and notice it was racist. That lack of intent doesn't mean it wasn't coming from a racist place.

If 10 black kids get called on and 1 white kid gets called on, then everyone doing the calling is being an asshole. But one group is getting called on disproportionately. And there is a systemic reason for that in our society which has a name.

Well put.