Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.

5 (45.5%)

A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.

5 (45.5%)

A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.

0 (0%)

More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.

0 (0%)

A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.

1 (9.1%)

More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.

0 (0%)

DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.

0 (0%)

Huge disruption to the day.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM

[NeedsAdjustments]

https://twitter.com/michellemalkin/status/1117426629985230848

When Congress and our President signed a law that said that asylum seekers can legally apply for asylum within the border of the US they did not contend that this was a threat to our status as a "Sovereign Country."

This only started under Trump.  Hence, Malkin proves Emanuel's point.

I dont think Michelle and others have a problem with asylum seekers.

Don't watch much news, huh?  Then maybe best to do so and acquaint yourself with some facts rather than retweet the commentary of obviously biased individuals.

News?

Go ahead - tell me what I should watch.

We've had this conversation before, when you disputed the fact that the "caravan" was made up of asylum seekers, despite the fact that this is what was reported at the time, everywhere.

The idea of repeatedly hitting my head against a brick wall isn't appealing to me.  I would imagine you can understand why.  So you might also understand why I don't engage with the post above.

[josh]

https://twitter.com/michellemalkin/status/1117426629985230848

When Congress and our President signed a law that said that asylum seekers can legally apply for asylum within the border of the US they did not contend that this was a threat to our status as a "Sovereign Country."

This only started under Trump.  Hence, Malkin proves Emanuel's point.

I dont think Michelle and others have a problem with asylum seekers.

[kiidcarter8]

https://twitter.com/michellemalkin/status/1117426629985230848

When Congress and our President signed a law that said that asylum seekers can legally apply for asylum within the border of the US they did not contend that this was a threat to our status as a "Sovereign Country."

This only started under Trump.  Hence, Malkin proves Emanuel's point.

I dont think Michelle and others have a problem with asylum seekers.

Don't watch much news, huh?  Then maybe best to do so and acquaint yourself with some facts rather than retweet the commentary of obviously biased individuals.

News?

Go ahead - tell me what I should watch.

We've had this conversation before, when you disputed the fact that the "caravan" was made up of asylum seekers, despite the fact that this is what was reported at the time, everywhere.

I told you there were no asylum seekers in the caravan?

[barton]

Of course, Barr's role in covering up Bush Sr's role in Iran-Contra should be enough of a red flag.

  - N.A.

Good reminder that no one can really make sense of politics if they don't study a bit of history.  The public keeps proving George Santayana correct. 

[barton]

The reasoned immigration chat won't happen until we start looking at what our "empty land" does, what it can and can't support, and what stresses of rapid population growth our social infrastructure can handle.  Like Australia, our land area is deceptive in its size, suggesting a greater capacity than it has.  Some of it is desert, and we're already stretching things having so many people living there (Get out of there, Boz!), draining entire rivers, sucking aquifers dry, breaking up delicate topsoils, etc.  Some of our empty land has to grow food, or make oxygen (forests come to mind), or serve as wetlands that filter our freshwater supply, or provide wilderness that refreshes the minds and spirits of crowded urbanites.  Tony suggests Winnemucca, but that's desert and already straining its ecosystem. 

There are several ways overpopulation can be handled, as any biologist can tell you:  greater mortality, lesser fertility, and lesser in-migration.  Nature often takes the draconian solution, with mass die-offs and fertility dropping due to malnutriton of the survivors.  As animals that are capable of abstract thought, we can probably do better, and look at rewarding smaller family sizes and controlling in-migration.  If our survival depended on it, the whole welcoming huddled masses yearning to breathe free might be acid-washed off the statue and replaced with KEEP OUT.  Our welcoming stance was predicated on a vast and thinly populated continent that awaited the huddled masses.  As many experts on global warming and ecosystems have pointed out, the most powerful effect many people can have on the fate of the Earth is to stay in a fairly low-tech third world country where a person will have the lowest carbon footprint and overall demand on the planet's resources.  Just by moving here, many immigrants will increase their load on the Earth ten-fold or more.  They will then join us in the great enterprise of robbing our descendants of a habitable planet.  So our present sanctuary role will come with a big price, in the future. 

[josh]

Now.....

should the asylum process be altered?

Maybe.

And if it is you need to be OK with this - given that the proper process was followed.

Given that you and Ward and Bambi are not prepared to address the fact that the proper process has been screwed over repeatedly by this administration, including their peristent mistreatment of innocents - children - by intention, why on Earth would you say anybody else needs to be okay with anything?

However, you need to understand that for the "proper process" to be followed in changing the asylum process, it needs to be consistent with both our laws and our treaty obligations.

We are currently in violation of both laws and treaty. And having the President promise a pardon of the head of the CBP goes to jail for breaking the law (as directed to by the President) is not even close to "proper process."

And you need to admit that.

[NeedsAdjustments]

https://twitter.com/michellemalkin/status/1117426629985230848

When Congress and our President signed a law that said that asylum seekers can legally apply for asylum within the border of the US they did not contend that this was a threat to our status as a "Sovereign Country."

This only started under Trump.  Hence, Malkin proves Emanuel's point.

I dont think Michelle and others have a problem with asylum seekers.

Don't watch much news, huh?  Then maybe best to do so and acquaint yourself with some facts rather than retweet the commentary of obviously biased individuals.

News?

Go ahead - tell me what I should watch.

We've had this conversation before, when you disputed the fact that the "caravan" was made up of asylum seekers, despite the fact that this is what was reported at the time, everywhere.

I told you there were no asylum seekers in the caravan?

You disputed the characterization of them as asylum seekers as opposed to people attempting to violently force their way in in order to take over lakeside summer homes in Minnesota.  Part of the fevered caravan hysteria that is belied even now as most (as in a large majority of them) either wait in Mexico to apply, or have turned around and gone home after being refused entry.   

And no, that is not how this process was designed by law.  It’s how the Trump administration wants it as part of a policy that included family separation meant to discourage asylum seekers, and defended by Trumpers like Michelle Malkin.

[NeedsAdjustments]

As many experts on global warming and ecosystems have pointed out, the most powerful effect many people can have on the fate of the Earth is to stay in a fairly low-tech third world country where a person will have the lowest carbon footprint and overall demand on the planet's resources.  Just by moving here, many immigrants will increase their load on the Earth ten-fold or more.  They will then join us in the great enterprise of robbing our descendants of a habitable planet.  So our present sanctuary role will come with a big price, in the future.

I was almost with you on this, until this part.  If we are going to factor in the effects our changing planet and resulting limited resources have on our immigration policy, we need to understand that the increase in migration is caused at least in part by people fleeing those conditions in their current country.  See the article in the times just this weekend about how dying coffee crops are driving part of this. 

So if we don’t have the natural resources to handle in influx of immigrants and the alternative we advocate is for them to die in their native country, let’s be honest about what we are arguing about.  My point to kiidcarter8 is let’s not start the conversation by mischaracterizing current law, and saying the people who want current law to continue are anti-America.

[NeedsAdjustments]

And having the President promise a pardon of the head of the CBP goes to jail for breaking the law (as directed to by the President) is not even close to "proper process."

And also is, just to make the point, an obviously impeachable criminal offense that our current AG won't be looking into in any way.

[kiidcarter8]

https://twitter.com/michellemalkin/status/1117426629985230848

When Congress and our President signed a law that said that asylum seekers can legally apply for asylum within the border of the US they did not contend that this was a threat to our status as a "Sovereign Country."

This only started under Trump.  Hence, Malkin proves Emanuel's point.

I dont think Michelle and others have a problem with asylum seekers.

Don't watch much news, huh?  Then maybe best to do so and acquaint yourself with some facts rather than retweet the commentary of obviously biased individuals.

News?

Go ahead - tell me what I should watch.

We've had this conversation before, when you disputed the fact that the "caravan" was made up of asylum seekers, despite the fact that this is what was reported at the time, everywhere.

I told you there were no asylum seekers in the caravan?

You disputed the characterization of them as asylum seekers as opposed to people attempting to violently force their way in ....

Like most clear minded individuals, I thought there were both.

[kiidcarter8]

So again - what should I be watching?

[NeedsAdjustments]

https://twitter.com/michellemalkin/status/1117426629985230848

When Congress and our President signed a law that said that asylum seekers can legally apply for asylum within the border of the US they did not contend that this was a threat to our status as a "Sovereign Country."

This only started under Trump.  Hence, Malkin proves Emanuel's point.

I dont think Michelle and others have a problem with asylum seekers.

Don't watch much news, huh?  Then maybe best to do so and acquaint yourself with some facts rather than retweet the commentary of obviously biased individuals.

News?

Go ahead - tell me what I should watch.

We've had this conversation before, when you disputed the fact that the "caravan" was made up of asylum seekers, despite the fact that this is what was reported at the time, everywhere.

I told you there were no asylum seekers in the caravan?

You disputed the characterization of them as asylum seekers as opposed to people attempting to violently force their way in ....

Like most clear minded individuals, I thought there were both.

Nope.  Most clear minded individuals following the news, and not twitter feeds that reposted photos from 2014 of bloody border patrol agents and claiming they were current,  knew that the later was a smear.  And that has been proven out by events.

[FlyingVProd]

The Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris is burning, it likely will be a total loss.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-notre-dame-fire-paris-20190415-story.html

How was this allowed to happen? This should never have been allowed to happen. 

Salute,

Tony V.

[barton]

As many experts on global warming and ecosystems have pointed out, the most powerful effect many people can have on the fate of the Earth is to stay in a fairly low-tech third world country where a person will have the lowest carbon footprint and overall demand on the planet's resources.  Just by moving here, many immigrants will increase their load on the Earth ten-fold or more.  They will then join us in the great enterprise of robbing our descendants of a habitable planet.  So our present sanctuary role will come with a big price, in the future.

I was almost with you on this, until this part.  If we are going to factor in the effects our changing planet and resulting limited resources have on our immigration policy, we need to understand that the increase in migration is caused at least in part by people fleeing those conditions in their current country.  See the article in the times just this weekend about how dying coffee crops are driving part of this. 

So if we don’t have the natural resources to handle in influx of immigrants and the alternative we advocate is for them to die in their native country, let’s be honest about what we are arguing about.  My point to kiidcarter8 is let’s not start the conversation by mischaracterizing current law, and saying the people who want current law to continue are anti-America.

I was following your point to KC.  My comments were a tangent of sorts. I was thinking about how corporate colonialism is what makes some people have to flee those 3rd World nations -  if we figured out how to help those places have sustainable economies, and produce locally grown food instead of entertainment beverages for America or whatever, we would have a possible solution both to geopolitical woes and environmental ones.  Capitalism stripmines countries both literally, e.g. lithium, cobalt, etc, and figuratively, as in stripmining nutrients from tropical soils, or flattening rainforests.  Without vision and wisdom and moral guidance, capitalism in its multinational form especially, is an amoral system that reduces all value to productivity without questioning what is worth producing. 

[whiskeypriest]

The Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris is burning, it likely will be a total loss.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-notre-dame-fire-paris-20190415-story.html

How was this allowed to happen? This should never have been allowed to happen.

Salute,

Tony V.

"Watching online as an irreplaceable monument to human history goes up in flames while helpless to do anything about it is extremely 2019."

Found on my FB feed.