WilsonFletcher

Scarcely Lethal Noob
lmao yall know how much it cost to get into this country and with citizian ship and all that shit, it's not exactly a few "peso's" to get in here ya know, mexico is a poor country, they can't educate themselves about this or anything really. if they did we would not have this illegal problem now would we? -- either way now in the end,in however or whichever way you to want see it like, america is becoming full of bad types of people, that's something we can all agree on. so in the end it's better off illegally coming somewhere else BESIDES this country, since america wants to push out all these minium wage workers and some crimials here and there, familys here and there, and there there's nothing we can do to stop them really, better off avoiding the problem right? not the smart thing, but the wise thing here. -- ( this thread should be locked, talking about this stuff never end's good, there's always one guy willing to go to the death to defend his side only. )
 

Antamania

Australian Skial God
Contributor
I see we have moved on the whataboutism stage. I guess I will play along.

1. Farrakhan is trash. I denounce him and his beliefs. So do most democrats. We don't support hate.
2. What public office does Farrakhan hold? What policies are being put in place by him?
3. Keith Ellison has publicly denounced Farrakhan. If he really does secretly hold the same beliefs then he is trash and I will denounce him as well.
4. I have no idea about Maxine Waters, I have never heard any reports of antisemitism from her. I don't think that we should start turning a public hug into an endorsement of someone else's every single belief.
gettyimages-84316778_0-h2016.jpg



Now that that's out of the way, let's be clear on what we are talking about. We have the border situation that is getting compared to Nazism because of the policies that are being set forth. Children being taken away from parents, and people being held in detention camps, all Latino people. Cruel policies being leveraged against ethnically similar people. Then we have avowed neo-Nazis that are anti-Semitic but also have seemingly popped up in the last year in record numbers to run for public office. I wonder why that could be.

You brought up Farrakhan and I denounce his beliefs and policies of hate.

But you are defending Trump and his policies of hate.

VDK5SHf.jpg

The issue wasn't whataboutism. My point is, both sides have relationships with extremists. There is at least a fair enough amount of evidence about Ellison meeting with Farrakhan to at the very least suggest a friendship.

We weren't having a disagreement about those in office. The link you provided mentioned a candidate. What office does he currently hold? He won a primary in an area where there is literally no chance in hell of him actually getting into office.

The issue is that if we're comparing neo-nazis and extremist beliefs, there are those on both sides that do. I must again stress that I am a moderate, not a Republican. I said it is a stupid thing to name the whole party as Nazis because they have loons in the party. There are loons in both parties, that was my point. Maxine Waters openly calls for harassment of her political opponents. I don't judge all Democrats by that idiot, and you shouldn't judge all Republicans by this idiot.

I'm not defending Trump's stats. I am decrying the use of hyperbole and nazism to attack political opponents. Donald Trump does not want to kill Jews. Trump, if anything while in office has been a much more steadfast friend of Israel than any president before him. It is an insult to everyone who was murdered in the camps to constantly compare your political opponents to Nazis. You can find parallels in any meteoric rise in politics to any other leader you want to link them to. This doesn't mean he is a Nazi.

I am a moderate, who has been pushed into Trump support because of unfair attacks on him. I do not believe in open borders. I do not believe illegals should have a path to citizenship. I do not believe in assaulting and harassing people I disagree with politically. These are the reasons I can no longer consider myself a Democrat. Does Trump approve of some abhorrent things? Absolutely. But I'm reminded of a president who condoned BLM right after a BLM member murdered a police officer in cold blood in Texas.

Stick to logical, reasoned complaints. Nobody other than an echo chamber is going to care about your hyperbole. You won't win over people by calling them idiots, assaulting them, or comparing parties they somewhat agree with to nazism. It's stupid, it's little, and it's unfair.

Addendum: if a Public hug isn't enough, how about ol Mad Maxine attending a convention where Farrakhan spoke and defended suicide bombing (http://dailycaller.com/2018/02/17/maxine-waters-nation-of-islam-louis-farrakhan/)

My point is, there's enough hate already. You want to win over new hearts, try new arguments. Don't just point your finger and reeee. You may feel satisfied "I got Drumpf I called him a nazi hahahaha" but ultimately, nobody other than an echo chamber is going to care about this. Rage all you like about him and his policies, but it's silly to infer that every single Republican is a Nazi or nazi supporter.

To address your other arguments: This was a temporary measure, and it was in policy in Obama-era. The reason this policy was made was that they had to verify the children were not coming with smugglers, and were in fact, their actual family. Let's not forget, the photo of the children in cages that was being passed around was actually during Obama's tenure. Media just didn't give a shit because they were too busy sucking him off to actually do investigation. Let's also not forget, before this policy was a thing, Obama had placed children with actual smugglers (https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/did-obama-administration-children-human-traffickers/). This is not a new issue, it's just newsworthy now because they're doing everything they can to attack Trump. I don't know the solution to how to settle this issue if I did, I'd be in office. Nobody quite has an answer to it, because illegals have been a huge problem, even back when Bill Clinton was in office (
).

As for rando neo-nazis and neo-nazi groups praising Trump, let's not forget that Hillary had a similar issue with the KKK (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wo...leader-who-says-he-backs-Hillary-Clinton.html) I don't think this reflects badly on Hillary at all in the slightest, just like I don't think the above is Trump's problem. Any idiot can say "OH I SUPPORT so and so".

But, I will say, I am happy to have a reasoned debate with you, I am happy to provide sources for my claims, as you seem to be as well. But the next time you are uncivil to me and refer to me a Nazi simply because we have a difference of opinion, I'm going to simply block you and end this discussion. I have been respectful to you, I would expect you to be at the very least, the same to me.
 

chuckwagon

Legendary Skial King
Contributor
I'm not defending Trump's stats. I am decrying the use of hyperbole and nazism to attack political opponents. Donald Trump does not want to kill Jews. Trump, if anything while in office has been a much more steadfast friend of Israel than any president before him. It is an insult to everyone who was murdered in the camps to constantly compare your political opponents to Nazis. You can find parallels in any meteoric rise in politics to any other leader you want to link them to. This doesn't mean he is a Nazi.

I have been using Nazi as shorthand for White Nationalist. White Nationalism is on the rise since Trump took office. Jews are being attacked on social media with the code word "Globablist", Muslims were attacked with the Muslim ban, and now Latinos are being attacked. These people are not literally killing Jews, but they want to preserve America's 'whiteness' just as Nazis wanted to create their 'master race' THIS IS NOT HYPERBOLE I am not a wacko for pointing out the similarities, and all of the people just willing to go with it.

Here is former Republican Joe Scarborough making the same comparison- "I know children are being marched away to showers, marched away to showers. Being told they are — just like the Nazis said that they were taking people to the showers and then they never came back," Scarborough said. http://thehill.com/homenews/media/3...borough-for-comments-on-immigration-officials

Here is the former CIA Director- http://thehill.com/latino/392727-ha...zero-tolerance-border-policy-and-nazi-germany

Here is the Anne Frank Centre- https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...many-alarming-parallels-warning-a7884731.html

I am a moderate, who has been pushed into Trump support because of unfair attacks on him. I do not believe in open borders. I do not believe illegals should have a path to citizenship. I do not believe in assaulting and harassing people I disagree with politically. These are the reasons I can no longer consider myself a Democrat. Does Trump approve of some abhorrent things? Absolutely. But I'm reminded of a president who condoned BLM right after a BLM member murdered a police officer in cold blood in Texas.

Based on your beliefs, I would not classify you as a moderate.

If the BLM story you are speaking of is this https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/nat...niper-Black-Lives-Matter-NAACP-385997131.html, then you can read the title to see that this man was not a member of BLM and was condenmed by BLM and civil rights leaders. I fully support BLM too by the way.

To address your other arguments: This was a temporary measure, and it was in policy in Obama-era. The reason this policy was made was that they had to verify the children were not coming with smugglers, and were in fact, their actual family. Let's not forget, the photo of the children in cages that was being passed around was actually during Obama's tenure. Media just didn't give a shit because they were too busy sucking him off to actually do investigation. Let's also not forget, before this policy was a thing, Obama had placed children with actual smugglers (https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/did-obama-administration-children-human-traffickers/). This is not a new issue, it's just newsworthy now because they're doing everything they can to attack Trump. I don't know the solution to how to settle this issue if I did, I'd be in office. Nobody quite has an answer to it, because illegals have been a huge problem, even back when Bill Clinton was in office (
).

NO NO NO NO NO

This was never an Obama Policy. The refugee crisis began under the Obama administration, but they handled it quite differently. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...amilies-at-the-border/?utm_term=.41e07bb08cc4

"The Trump administration implemented this policy by choice and could end it by choice. No law or court ruling mandates family separations"

"The Central American refugee crisis developed during President Barack Obama’s administration and continues under Trump. The two administrations have taken different approaches. Obama prioritized the deportation of dangerous people. Once he took office, Trump issued an executive order rolling back much of the Obama-era framework.

Obama’s guidelines prioritized the deportation of gang members, those who posed a national security risk and those who had committed felonies. Trump’s January 2017 executive order does not include a priority list for deportations and refers only to “criminal offenses,” which is broad enough to encompass serious felonies as well as misdemeanors.

Then, in April 2018, Attorney General Jeff Sessions rolled out the zero-tolerance policy."

Not only has the Trump administration enacted this cruel policy, but by targeting families, it has taken up valuable resources that were being used to to stop violent criminals from getting in.

One of the pictures was from the Obama administration, when the facilities were used for unaccompanied minors. By all reports these facilities are similar.

Here is a current picture:
RFDXtBc.png



 

Antamania

Australian Skial God
Contributor
I have been using Nazi as shorthand for White Nationalist. White Nationalism is on the rise since Trump took office. Jews are being attacked on social media with the code word "Globablist", Muslims were attacked with the Muslim ban, and now Latinos are being attacked. These people are not literally killing Jews, but they want to preserve America's 'whiteness' just as Nazis wanted to create their 'master race' THIS IS NOT HYPERBOLE I am not a wacko for pointing out the similarities, and all of the people just willing to go with it.

Based on your beliefs, I would not classify you as a moderate.

I did tell you if you likened me to a nazi once more I was going to end this discussion, so I'm going to go ahead and do that.

My voting history classifies me as a moderate. I was a double Obama voter, into a Trump voter. I don't let one faction decide who I vote for. You don't know shit about my stances, only that I refuse to attack people via hyperbole, much like you're doing. But, this is all academic, I'm done with this, you can't be civil so there's no point in even wasting my time anymore. I hope you look back on this in a few years and realize how much you alienate anyone who doesn't climb in the echo chamber with you.
 

chuckwagon

Legendary Skial King
Contributor
I did tell you if you likened me to a nazi once more I was going to end this discussion, so I'm going to go ahead and do that.

My voting history classifies me as a moderate. I was a double Obama voter, into a Trump voter. I don't let one faction decide who I vote for. You don't know shit about my stances, only that I refuse to attack people via hyperbole, much like you're doing. But, this is all academic, I'm done with this, you can't be civil so there's no point in even wasting my time anymore. I hope you look back on this in a few years and realize how much you alienate anyone who doesn't climb in the echo chamber with you.


1. I never NEVER "likened you to a Nazi" in that post. I never referred to you once in that passage. I am blown away. If someone can point out how I was being uncivil, please do.
2. "You don't know shit about my stances" based on the beliefs you put forth in this thread... like this: "... I do not believe illegals should have a path to citizenship" etc. based off of that I would not classify you as a moderate.

You can classify yourself as you wish but...

Fox News Poll: 83 percent support pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 

Antamania

Australian Skial God
Contributor
1. I never NEVER "likened you to a Nazi" in that post. I never referred to you once in that passage. I am blown away. If someone can point out how I was being uncivil, please do.
2. "You don't know shit about my stances" based on the beliefs you put forth in this thread... like this: "... I do not believe illegals should have a path to citizenship" etc. based off of that I would not classify you as a moderate.

You can classify yourself as you wish but...

Fox News Poll: 83 percent support pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

A moderate is not defined by sharing beliefs with everyone. I believe in abortion, I believe in gay marriage, I believe in reining in healthcare. I don't believe in a path to citizenship. I don't see how that's hard to comprehend...one doesn't have to agree with every single stance from either side. A moderate is pretty much defined as someone who holds moderate views, and I think siding with the left on much of the social policies they want, and siding with the right on immigration is almost a dictionary definition of it.

As for the part where you're being uncivil, it's clear you're not acting in good faith, I need only point out your most recent snowflake comment to show that you have no respect for me. Who in the universe wants to waste time getting sources together for someone who isn't probably even going to click on the links, let alone call you a snowflake the second you have opposition to them. You have more in common with the right that you so despise than you know. But anyway, I'm done. Cheers.
 

chuckwagon

Legendary Skial King
Contributor
A moderate is not defined by sharing beliefs with everyone. I believe in abortion, I believe in gay marriage, I believe in reining in healthcare. I don't believe in a path to citizenship. I don't see how that's hard to comprehend...one doesn't have to agree with every single stance from either side. A moderate is pretty much defined as someone who holds moderate views, and I think siding with the left on much of the social policies they want, and siding with the right on immigration is almost a dictionary definition of it.

As for the part where you're being uncivil, it's clear you're not acting in good faith, I need only point out your most recent snowflake comment to show that you have no respect for me. Who in the universe wants to waste time getting sources together for someone who isn't probably even going to click on the links, let alone call you a snowflake the second you have opposition to them. You have more in common with the right that you so despise than you know. But anyway, I'm done. Cheers.
I thought the snowflake thing was funny. Oh well.

I thought I posted this earlier, but it must have deleted it by accident while I was editing.

Media-Bias-Chart_Version-3.1_Watermark-min-2.jpg


I try to stay in the green when I provide sources in my arguments. If I am acting in bad faith because I won't read Daily Caller propaganda, then so be it.
 

Chance

Australian Skial God
Contributor
I thought the snowflake thing was funny. Oh well.

I thought I posted this earlier, but it must have deleted it by accident while I was editing.

Media-Bias-Chart_Version-3.1_Watermark-min-2.jpg


I try to stay in the green when I provide sources in my arguments. If I am acting in bad faith because I won't read Daily Caller propaganda, then so be it.
Fabricated info on InfoWars? Surely you jest!
 

Antamania

Australian Skial God
Contributor
I thought the snowflake thing was funny. Oh well.

I thought I posted this earlier, but it must have deleted it by accident while I was editing.

Media-Bias-Chart_Version-3.1_Watermark-min-2.jpg


I try to stay in the green when I provide sources in my arguments. If I am acting in bad faith because I won't read Daily Caller propaganda, then so be it.

All I'll say on this topic before I ignore it is - if you're basing your journalism trust on a chart that thinks CNN is as fair in 2018 as Reuters, NPR, and Politico, you're getting bad information. The Daily Caller article was simply the first one that came up when I googled Maxine Waters going to that racist gathering. The article had sources, but again, from that it's clear you weren't clicking on anything I posted, I read everything you linked, so it's clear that only one of us was respecting the other person.
 
  • Like
Reactions: S_O_C_K_S

S_O_C_K_S

Truly Feared Pyro
Contributor
I see we have moved on the whataboutism stage. I guess I will play along.

1. Farrakhan is trash. I denounce him and his beliefs. So do most democrats. We don't support hate.
2. What public office does Farrakhan hold? What policies are being put in place by him?
3. Keith Ellison has publicly denounced Farrakhan. If he really does secretly hold the same beliefs then he is trash and I will denounce him as well.
4. I have no idea about Maxine Waters, I have never heard any reports of antisemitism from her. I don't think that we should start turning a public hug into an endorsement of someone else's every single belief.
gettyimages-84316778_0-h2016.jpg



Now that that's out of the way, let's be clear on what we are talking about. We have the border situation that is getting compared to Nazism because of the policies that are being set forth. Children being taken away from parents, and people being held in detention camps, all Latino people. Cruel policies being leveraged against ethnically similar people. Then we have avowed neo-Nazis that are anti-Semitic but also have seemingly popped up in the last year in record numbers to run for public office. I wonder why that could be.

You brought up Farrakhan and I denounce his beliefs and policies of hate.

But you are defending Trump and his policies of hate.

VDK5SHf.jpg
Epic...Just epic!
 

chuckwagon

Legendary Skial King
Contributor
All I'll say on this topic before I ignore it is - if you're basing your journalism trust on a chart that thinks CNN is as fair in 2018 as Reuters, NPR, and Politico, you're getting bad information. The Daily Caller article was simply the first one that came up when I googled Maxine Waters going to that racist gathering. The article had sources, but again, from that it's clear you weren't clicking on anything I posted, I read everything you linked, so it's clear that only one of us was respecting the other person.

I read everything but the Daily Caller article *shrug*

That chart has two axes.

I vetted all my sources to make sure they were not from propaganda websites from my own echo chamber, so its clear that only one of us was respecting the other person.
 

Metroidz

Australian Skial God
Contributor
I read everything but the Daily Caller article *shrug*

That chart has two axes.

I vetted all my sources to make sure they were not from propaganda websites from my own echo chamber, so its clear that only one of us was respecting the other person.

+1 for the proper use of axes.

Scrubs call it axises.
 

chuckwagon

Legendary Skial King
Contributor
All I'll say on this topic before I ignore it is - if you're basing your journalism trust on a chart that thinks CNN is as fair in 2018 as Reuters, NPR, and Politico, you're getting bad information. The Daily Caller article was simply the first one that came up when I googled Maxine Waters going to that racist gathering. The article had sources, but again, from that it's clear you weren't clicking on anything I posted, I read everything you linked, so it's clear that only one of us was respecting the other person.
Let's take a look at this article that you posted and I dutifully read.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wo...leader-who-says-he-backs-Hillary-Clinton.html

“We want Hillary Clinton to win,” Mr Quigg told The Telegraph. “She is telling everybody one thing, but she has a hidden agenda. She’s telling everybody what they want to hear so she can get elected, because she’s Bill Clinton’s wife, she’s close to the Bushes. [But] once she’s in the presidency, she’s going to come out and her true colours are going to show."

“Border policies are going to be put in place. Our second amendment rights [favouring gun ownership] that she’s saying she’s against now, she’s not against. She’s just our choice for the presidency.”

Mr Quigg’s declaration of allegiance to Mrs Clinton sounds unconvincing - and contradicts earlier statements.

Last year, he sent a tweet to Mr Trump reading: “@realDonaldTrump. You Sir are the only hope we have of getting WHITE AMERICA BACK! We all will be voting for you!”

C'mon man. Good faith?