Politics

[GoIrish41]

Criticizing another person's opinion isn't the same as calling someone a dick every time they post. I wouldn't have said it in the same manner Bishop did there, but he kept it a level above what you did.

There's been plenty of meaningful/ useful stuff in this thread. Not all, but enough. People don't have to change their minds for the thread to be worthwhile.

And i'll pass on the piss off part because well, I'm not British.

Oh, so calling someone “intentionally idiotic,” “dishonest,” “stupid,” and “ridiculous” is ok, but calling the person who flung those insults a dick is out of bounds? Get real. 🙄

 

[Sea Turtle]

Because it’s a cult not a political party. Ik you guys love posting libs of twitter stuff but man some of the MAGA extremists are hard to believe. They think he’s some savior sent by god. It’s truly baffling how stupid some people are.

Half of the country isn't a cult. Now if you want to say cult of personality then that's fair. But Barrack Obama was as well.

 

[drayer54]

Because it’s a cult not a political party. Ik you guys love posting libs of twitter stuff but man some of the MAGA extremists are hard to believe. They think he’s some savior sent by god. It’s truly baffling how stupid some people are.

Libs of Twitter has no original content. It only exposes the left wing cult. Those that are pretending Joe does pushups and crosswords and Kamala is competent. The people who can’t say what a woman is.

 

[Irish#1]

I'm still wondering how wanting everyone to come through the immigration process is racial bigotry?

 

[Sea Turtle]

Sorry Guys, already sold out. $400.

 

[Armyirish47]

1) Read it again. I asked WHY some people don't even bother to ask how migrants from other continents ended up at our border, especially in the large numbers we've seen recently.

2) Cool.

3) Not sure what part of travel has gotten cheap, but it sure as hell isn't transcontinental airline tickets.

4) We will continue being the shining city on the hill, but some of our cities are (literally and by their admission) already out of funds and facilities for migrants.

1) Polish Leppy 22 said:
Don't any of you hard blue voters at least wonder HOW migrants from different continents arrived at our border?

I read it and copied it for you to enjoy as well. There is no why there, you asked HOW. You may have wanted to imply a WHY, and all that other stuff, but again, you asked HOW. I said it was boats.

2) Indeed!

3) You can fly from Guangzhou to Mexico City for under $900!!!! That seems like a steal for a better future. Just goofing around with some conversions looks like you could catch a boat from England in 1880 for today's equivalent of about $570. And that took way longer, ain't technology grand.

4) Indeed again, just as our cities were from the late 1800s to early 1900s.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

Oh, so calling someone “intentionally idiotic,” “dishonest,” “stupid,” and “ridiculous” is ok, but calling the person who flung those insults a dick is out of bounds? Get real. 🙄

I'm half your age and teaching you the difference between attacking a position/ opinion versus attacking a person. If someone called you a dick every time you posted you would roll your eyes, so your posts garner the same reaction.

 

[Irish#1]

Sorry Guys, already sold out. $400.

As soon as Trump kicks the bucket, they'll probably see for $1,000 - $1,200 on EBay. lol

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

So what are the differences in policies? I don’t know what you’re pointing to when you say it was better back then.

I’m literally not saying that at all. It’s exactly why I pointed to how people called Italians and Irish different names. It’s specifically to point out how people bemoaning about immigration now would be the exact same people calling Italians wops back then. The whole point of learning about history is to not let bad things happen again. Maybe you should rewatch those movies to learn about how not to think of immigrants.

My narrative is not to treat immigrants poorly. We both know that the immigrants were treated terribly back then, one of us doesn’t think that should happen again.

The lines of tens/ hundreds of thousands at Ellis Island versus what we've seen at our border recently? Not even arguable.

You were trying to paint the picture of people being anti illegal immigration as racist against brown people. I pointed out that every immigrant group who's ever come here has faced discrimination, and I wasn't advocating that notion either. Just reminding you of that reality.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

1) Polish Leppy 22 said:
Don't any of you hard blue voters at least wonder HOW migrants from different continents arrived at our border?

I read it and copied it for you to enjoy as well. There is no why there, you asked HOW. You may have wanted to imply a WHY, and all that other stuff, but again, you asked HOW. I said it was boats.

2) Indeed!

3) You can fly from Guangzhou to Mexico City for under $900!!!! That seems like a steal for a better future. Just goofing around with some conversions looks like you could catch a boat from England in 1880 for today's equivalent of about $570. And that took way longer, ain't technology grand.

4) Indeed again, just as our cities were from the late 1800s to early 1900s.

1) So no one on the left side of the aisle wonders how some of the poorest people on earth are traveling en masse across continents to the US. Got it.

2) Yay.

3) $900 I guess is doable if you save up over enough time. Now multiply it by 4 or 5 if you have a family. Gotta pay off your mules too once you get to Mexico.

4) That doesn't solve the current financial crisis being felt by NYC, Chicago, Denver, etc., all of whom have Dem led local and state officials basically wave the white flag.

 

[Irish#1]

1) Polish Leppy 22 said:
Don't any of you hard blue voters at least wonder HOW migrants from different continents arrived at our border?

I read it and copied it for you to enjoy as well. There is no why there, you asked HOW. You may have wanted to imply a WHY, and all that other stuff, but again, you asked HOW. I said it was boats.

2) Indeed!

3) You can fly from Guangzhou to Mexico City for under $900!!!! That seems like a steal for a better future. Just goofing around with some conversions looks like you could catch a boat from England in 1880 for today's equivalent of about $570. And that took way longer, ain't technology grand.

4) Indeed again, just as our cities were from the late 1800s to early 1900s.

$900 isn't a lot to you or me, but unless you're one of those the Chinese government has deemed worthy of being wealthy, $900 is a large sum just for one person. If you are, why leave? The U.N. assists some seeking asylum. I don't know the numbers, but I doubt it is the hundreds of thousands trying to get into the U.S. Of course we help fund the U.N., so in a round about way I guess you could say we're helping fund this crisis. lol

 

[drayer54]

I'm still wondering how wanting everyone to come through the immigration process is racial bigotry?

if you oppose violent migrants—> racist
If you
Oppose Venezuelan gangs—> racist
Oppose Syrians in 5.11 gear crossing—> racist
Oppose Chinese nationals flooding the CA border—> racist
Oppose letting Chinese migrants influence US elections—> racist

 

[Armyirish47]

1) So no one on the left side of the aisle wonders how some of the poorest people on earth are traveling en masse across continents to the US. Got it.

2) Yay.

3) $900 I guess is doable if you save up over enough time. Now multiply it by 4 or 5 if you have a family. Gotta pay off your mules too once you get to Mexico.

4) That doesn't solve the current financial crisis being felt by NYC, Chicago, Denver, etc., all of whom have Dem led local and state officials basically wave the white flag.

1) I can't speak for the left, but I'll again say they mostly do it the old fashioned way via boats and for this wave of immigration lots of walking. Do you not accept those are the methods used by the poorest people on earth trying to get to America for centuries en masse?

2) Feels good right.

3) Just as doable as saving up in 1880 to hop on a steamer ship. Keep in mind what the demographics of immigration encounters at the southern border are as well. For example in December last year 54% of border encounters were single. 47K from Venezuela, 56K from Mexico and only 6K from China. So obviously immigration would have been far more intercontinental in previous waves.

4) It doesn't solve it today but we can all hope this wave of immigrants overstuffing our cities led by officials of all political stripes can problem solve and legislate together so that someday cities and individuals can achieve the same prosperity as the immigrant waves that overstuffed and financially crisised our cities from the late 1800s into the early 1900s.

 

[PerthDomer]

1) I can't speak for the left, but I'll again say they mostly do it the old fashioned way via boats and for this wave of immigration lots of walking. Do you not accept those are the methods used by the poorest people on earth trying to get to America for centuries en masse?

2) Feels good right.

3) Just as doable as saving up in 1880 to hop on a steamer ship. Keep in mind what the demographics of immigration encounters at the southern border are as well. For example in December last year 54% of border encounters were single. 47K from Venezuela, 56K from Mexico and only 6K from China. So obviously immigration would have been far more intercontinental in previous waves.

4) It doesn't solve it today but we can all hope this wave of immigrants overstuffing our cities led by officials of all political stripes can problem solve and legislate together so that someday cities and individuals can achieve the same prosperity as the immigrant waves that overstuffed and financially crisised our cities from the late 1800s into the early 1900s.

Immigration didn't overstuff or financial crisis our cities in the 1880s to 1900s. They powered American industrialization and farm production. They're why we became a superpower in the early 1900s.

 

[Armyirish47]

Immigration didn't overstuff or financial crisis our cities in the 1880s to 1900s. They powered American industrialization and farm production. They're why we became a superpower in the early 1900s.

I would argue they did both. And we need a healthy amount of immigrants doing the same today to maintain our status as superpower.

 

[GoIrish41]

I'm half your age and teaching you the difference between attacking a position/ opinion versus attacking a person. If someone called you a dick every time you posted you would roll your eyes, so your posts garner the same reaction.

I think you position is stupid, obtuse, self-righteous, hypocritical hogwash that should be flushed like the shit posts Bishop makes on the regular. Am I doing it right?

 

[TorontoGold]

The lines of tens/ hundreds of thousands at Ellis Island versus what we've seen at our border recently? Not even arguable.

You were trying to paint the picture of people being anti illegal immigration as racist against brown people. I pointed out that every immigrant group who's ever come here has faced discrimination, and I wasn't advocating that notion either. Just reminding you of that reality.

You were saying the policies were better back then. Which policies would you like to take from then and apply to now?

I "painted the picture" because you were saying the immigration system was better back then, when from my understand it was less restrictive. So if you want to argue for immigration policies to go back to the old days it seems like it doesn't matter on the polices, it matters on the people coming through.

 

[PerthDomer]

I would argue they did both. And we need a healthy amount of immigrants doing the same today to maintain our status as superpower.

We had financial crises because of how our banking system was set up back then. In fact the great depression happened about a decade after we shut off immigration.

Also adjusted for population illegal plus legal immigration is less than half where it was from the Civil War to 1920 adjusted for population.

The ironic thing about Ellis Island is it was built relatively late. Most people just showed up and started working somewhere without checking in.

 

[Armyirish47]

We had financial crises because of how our banking system was set up back then. In fact the great depression happened about a decade after we shut off immigration.

Also adjusted for population illegal plus legal immigration is less than half where it was from the Civil War to 1920 adjusted for population.

The ironic thing about Ellis Island is it was built relatively late. Most people just showed up and started working somewhere without checking in.

We also had cities trying to handle the massive numbers of people flowing in without adequate housing, infrastructure, medical care, etc. and doing so with various levels of success. Who doesn't love a good tenement!?!?!?

And now we get what I assume is a cool museum I hope to visit someday.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

I think you position is stupid, obtuse, self-righteous, hypocritical hogwash that should be flushed like the shit posts Bishop makes on the regular. Am I doing it right?

Yes, you are. Big step for you. Congrats.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

You were saying the policies were better back then. Which policies would you like to take from then and apply to now?

I "painted the picture" because you were saying the immigration system was better back then, when from my understand it was less restrictive. So if you want to argue for immigration policies to go back to the old days it seems like it doesn't matter on the polices, it matters on the people coming through.

Let's start with the basic principle that the federal government should enforce the immigration laws currently on the book. That isn't happening right now. And anyone can correct me if I'm wrong on this, but I don't recall the feds 100 years ago filing lawsuits against states (Texas) for trying to enforce the immigration laws in place.

I'll add that if you're here illegally and convicted of a crime in the US, you're going home today.

You actually didn't say immigration was less restrictive. You said all anyone had to do was make their mark when they came off the boat and they were let in, and the vortex continues to spin. Bottom line is what's happening at our border recently isn't immigration, it's unsustainable, and it's the role of the feds to protect the borders and enforce the law.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

Immigration didn't overstuff or financial crisis our cities in the 1880s to 1900s. They powered American industrialization and farm production. They're why we became a superpower in the early 1900s.

Immigrants are one reason we saw the roaring 20's, but not the only reason. And you're 100% wrong to say the immigration waves didn't bring other issues. If you observed only NYC, there were huge families living in 1-2 bedroom apartments. Disease and sickness were rampant. Not saying it was a plague, but it was near inhumane conditions that many immigrant groups endured when they got to NY due to overcrowding.

 

[TorontoGold]

Let's start with the basic principle that the federal government should enforce the immigration laws currently on the book. That isn't happening right now. And anyone can correct me if I'm wrong on this, but I don't recall the feds 100 years ago filing lawsuits against states (Texas) for trying to enforce the immigration laws in place.

I'll add that if you're here illegally and convicted of a crime in the US, you're going home today.

You actually didn't say immigration was less restrictive. You said all anyone had to do was make their mark when they came off the boat and they were let in, and the vortex continues to spin. Bottom line is what's happening at our border recently isn't immigration, it's unsustainable, and it's the role of the feds to protect the borders and enforce the law.

So the government's immigration laws 100 years ago - would you like those to be enforced? You haven't said what was so effective back then, and now are saying it's an enforcement issue? So - if 100 years immigration was better, what would you like to see from then applied now?

You were saying the policies were better back then. Which policies would you like to take from then and apply to now?

I "painted the picture" because you were saying the immigration system was better back then, when from my understanding it was less restrictive. So if you want to argue for immigration policies to go back to the old days it seems like it doesn't matter on the polices, it matters on the people coming through.

I did say it was less restrictive? What lmao?

You don't need to stoop to the "OmG VoRteX" level, just let me know what policies from 100 years ago that you think should be enforced today. You haven't said why immigration laws were better back then.

 

[Jiggafini19Deux]

Alabama Supreme Court continuing with the "Women, just don't vote for us at all" strategy.

 

[drayer54]

So the government's immigration laws 100 years ago - would you like those to be enforced? You haven't said what was so effective back then, and now are saying it's an enforcement issue? So - if 100 years immigration was better, what would you like to see from then applied now?

Reinstate the refugee cap in place when Biden took office—eliminated by executive order.
Reinstate the restrictions on people from hostile countries that were in place when Biden took office—eliminated by exec order.
Eliminate the Biden Executive Order eliminating deportations- Executive Order on the Revision of Civil Immigration Enforcement Policies and Priorities- We have to deport as many as we can from hostile nations to undo Biden's recklessness.
Bring back Remain in Mexico, which kept bad people on the other side that was in place when Biden took office—eliminated by exec order.
Eliminate the braindead Executive Order on Restoring Faith in Our Legal Immigration Systems and Strengthening Integration and Inclusion Efforts for New Americans.
Building better border walls and security measures, including razor wire, is needed as well.

I would also start deportations from non-Sanctuary cities and states to direct the traffic out of sane cities and states first, as the dumb cities and states get further overloaded- participation should grow.

That would slow down the insanity Biden is willingly driving right now. All could be corrected (again) by Exec order today.

 

[TorontoGold]

Reinstate the refugee cap in place when Biden took office—eliminated by executive order.
Reinstate the restrictions on people from hostile countries that were in place when Biden took office—eliminated by exec order.
Eliminate the Biden Executive Order eliminating deportations- Executive Order on the Revision of Civil Immigration Enforcement Policies and Priorities- We have to deport as many as we can from hostile nations to undo Biden's recklessness.
Bring back Remain in Mexico, which kept bad people on the other side that was in place when Biden took office—eliminated by exec order.
Eliminate the braindead Executive Order on Restoring Faith in Our Legal Immigration Systems and Strengthening Integration and Inclusion Efforts for New Americans.
Building better border walls and security measures, including razor wire, is needed as well.

I would also start deportations from non-Sanctuary cities and states to direct the traffic out of sane cities and states first, as the dumb cities and states get further overloaded- participation should grow.

That would slow down the insanity Biden is willingly driving right now. All could be corrected (again) by Exec order today.

Did you read what I posted or just straight into your talking points?

I asked him what immigration policies from 100 years ago that he liked that should be in place today.

 

[drayer54]

Did you read what I posted or just straight into your talking points?

I asked him what immigration policies from 100 years ago that he liked that should be in place today.

You don't need to go back 100 to fix this mess. 100 years ago is irrelevant.

 

[Sea Turtle]

Did you read what I posted or just straight into your talking points?

I asked him what immigration policies from 100 years ago that he liked that should be in place today.

I like the 6 month quarantine for anybody who may have been exposed to TB, smallpox, etc.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

So the government's immigration laws 100 years ago - would you like those to be enforced? You haven't said what was so effective back then, and now are saying it's an enforcement issue? So - if 100 years immigration was better, what would you like to see from then applied now?



I did say it was less restrictive? What lmao?

You don't need to stoop to the "OmG VoRteX" level, just let me know what policies from 100 years ago that you think should be enforced today. You haven't said why immigration laws were better back then.

I will reiterate the basics, again:

1) Feds need to enforce the laws in place.
2) Feds should not be bringing lawsuits against states trying to take action to enforce said laws the feds cannot/ will not enforce.

 

[TorontoGold]

I will reiterate the basics, again:

1) Feds need to enforce the laws in place.
2) Feds should not be bringing lawsuits against states trying to take action to enforce said laws the feds cannot/ will not enforce.

So, to close the loop on your initial position that things were better 100 years ago was false?

Yes or no.