Page 27 of 667 FirstFirst ... 172324252627282930313777127527 ... LastLast
Results 391 to 405 of 10005
  1. #391
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    19,966

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JCAll View Post
    So apparently the ACLU is gearing up for war with armed vigilante groups patrolling the border for migrants, after they *checks notes* kidnapped hundreds of people and held them unlawfully at gunpoint and uploaded the videos to the internet.

    Classy.
    The ACLU? Where's the FBI?!

  2. #392
    Silver Sentinel BeastieRunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    West Coast, USA
    Posts
    15,262

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ed2962 View Post
    The ACLU? Where's the FBI?!
    I second this notion. Is this even true? Because ...

    UGH!

    I don't want to know but need to now ...
    "Always listen to the crazy scientist with a weird van or armful of blueprints and diagrams." -- Vibranium

  3. #393
    Horrific Experiment JCAll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    4,976

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BeastieRunner View Post
    I second this notion. Is this even true? Because ...

    UGH!

    I don't want to know but need to now ...
    I read it on their Twitter, but did a Google and found an actual news link.
    https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/19/us/bo...nts/index.html
    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/united-...mexico-border/
    https://www.wkyc.com/article/news/na...1-7fc485b646e7
    Last edited by JCAll; 04-19-2019 at 04:27 PM.

  4. #394
    Silver Sentinel BeastieRunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    West Coast, USA
    Posts
    15,262

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JCAll View Post
    I looked it up shortly after posting.

    Disgusting doesn't even begin to cover it.
    "Always listen to the crazy scientist with a weird van or armful of blueprints and diagrams." -- Vibranium

  5. #395
    Invincible Member numberthirty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    24,858

    Default

    So...

    If it looks like the report runs counter to that Buzzfeed claim from a while back, what in the heck were the documents that one of their journalists claimed to have seen?

    Surely the investigation could not have just missed something like that?

    Edit:

    Huh. Seems like said sources thought that it might have been the case. Now, Buzzfeed are saying that their boss did not. Seems like they also put in a pair of FOIA requests.
    Last edited by numberthirty; 04-19-2019 at 05:30 PM.

  6. #396
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    10,741

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JCAll View Post
    So apparently the ACLU is gearing up for war with armed vigilante groups patrolling the border for migrants, after they *checks notes* kidnapped hundreds of people and held them unlawfully at gunpoint and uploaded the videos to the internet.

    Classy.

    "The pernicious myth of “open borders”: Trump is obsessed with a wild mischaracterization of the status quo that fuels extremism."

    Donald Trump’s White House is obsessed with “open borders,” a pie-in-the-sky utopian vision of a world of unlimited free movement in which to move from Haiti or Havana to Houston would be about as easy as moving from San Antonio to San Francisco.

    This idea, while fun to think about and, in my view, at least somewhat attractive as a kind of aspirational future vision of the world, obviously does not have any mainstream adherents in practical American politics. But the Trump administration suggests that the open borders lobby is, in fact, massive and powerful and that essentially all critics of its approach to immigration policy are open borders fanatics. Trump himself is a little less into the jargon but similarly paints a portrait of an extremely stark choice.

    “We’ve got to have borders,” is a staple of his campaign rhetoric, because “if you don’t have borders, you don’t have a country.”

    And this notion that the alternative to an immigration crackdown is some notion of borderlessness isn’t limited to Trump himself. David Frum, both a leading immigration hawk and a leading Trump critic, wrote earlier this week to exhort fellow Trump opponents to be meaner to Central American asylum seekers, arguing that “like so many human institutions, borders are both arbitrary and indispensable. Without them, there are no nations. Without nations, there can be no democracy and no liberalism.”

    This is all, in truth, total nonsense. The United States of America as it exists today is, in fact, a country, and it has borders. Our borders are not currently open, nor were they open under George W. Bush. It is not the case that open borders is the only alternative to Trump’s immigration crackdown, nor is it remotely true that harsher immigration laws are required to avoid a situation of borderlessness.

    The fact that this kind of rhetoric has become normalized, including in elite circles, is itself a kind of insanity... The true purpose of “open borders” rhetoric is to try to exempt the topic of border security and immigration enforcement from the normal political process in which we consider the trade-offs and choices involved: if even a single opportunity for a person to break immigration law and get away with it is reframed as an existential threat to the existence of the nation, then suddenly all kinds of things — from a multibillion-dollar border wall to mass incarceration of children — suddenly seem reasonable.

    But none of it is true."

    https://www.vox.com/2018/6/22/174882...n-borders-myth
    Last edited by aja_christopher; 04-19-2019 at 05:53 PM.

  7. #397
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    3,426

    Default

    Just another reason why the Dems need to get the Senate back.

  8. #398
    Ultimate Member Mister Mets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    18,910

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aja_christopher View Post
    Of course, it's not a problem to you -- the divisiveness helps your party win the election.

    Realistically speaking, if you were that concerned about honesty in politics, you wouldn't be a Republican.

    In fact, you seem to be more concerned about a t-shirt than the recent confirmation that Russians interfered with our elections on behalf of your party.

    When I say that you echo Trump, it's not an exaggeration.
    It obviously isn't a problem for Republicans when Democrats are arguing between one another, and saying things that are true but unhelpful.

    It is divisive, but we shouldn't encourage to not speak the truth. I get the argument that there are ways to speak inconvenient truths in a careful manner that doesn't lend ammunition to the other side, but that argument should be made openly, so that the people who want to say things that true but unhelpful understand when it's okay to speak, and when they should keep silent about serious concerns.

    Quote Originally Posted by aja_christopher View Post

    "The pernicious myth of “open borders”: Trump is obsessed with a wild mischaracterization of the status quo that fuels extremism."

    Donald Trump’s White House is obsessed with “open borders,” a pie-in-the-sky utopian vision of a world of unlimited free movement in which to move from Haiti or Havana to Houston would be about as easy as moving from San Antonio to San Francisco.

    This idea, while fun to think about and, in my view, at least somewhat attractive as a kind of aspirational future vision of the world, obviously does not have any mainstream adherents in practical American politics. But the Trump administration suggests that the open borders lobby is, in fact, massive and powerful and that essentially all critics of its approach to immigration policy are open borders fanatics. Trump himself is a little less into the jargon but similarly paints a portrait of an extremely stark choice.

    “We’ve got to have borders,” is a staple of his campaign rhetoric, because “if you don’t have borders, you don’t have a country.”

    And this notion that the alternative to an immigration crackdown is some notion of borderlessness isn’t limited to Trump himself. David Frum, both a leading immigration hawk and a leading Trump critic, wrote earlier this week to exhort fellow Trump opponents to be meaner to Central American asylum seekers, arguing that “like so many human institutions, borders are both arbitrary and indispensable. Without them, there are no nations. Without nations, there can be no democracy and no liberalism.”

    This is all, in truth, total nonsense. The United States of America as it exists today is, in fact, a country, and it has borders. Our borders are not currently open, nor were they open under George W. Bush. It is not the case that open borders is the only alternative to Trump’s immigration crackdown, nor is it remotely true that harsher immigration laws are required to avoid a situation of borderlessness.

    The fact that this kind of rhetoric has become normalized, including in elite circles, is itself a kind of insanity... The true purpose of “open borders” rhetoric is to try to exempt the topic of border security and immigration enforcement from the normal political process in which we consider the trade-offs and choices involved: if even a single opportunity for a person to break immigration law and get away with it is reframed as an existential threat to the existence of the nation, then suddenly all kinds of things — from a multibillion-dollar border wall to mass incarceration of children — suddenly seem reasonable.

    But none of it is true."

    https://www.vox.com/2018/6/22/174882...n-borders-myth
    Democrats could always offer a clear alternative to Trump's legal immigration policy, or say that the legal immigration policy is fine as is, and the disagreements are purely about amnesty and enforcement measures.

    Quote Originally Posted by aja_christopher View Post
    That's because it's your goal in the argument to "frame" things on your own terms -- like claiming that "inferred open borders based on a t-shirt" are more problematic and indicative of general party policy than separating "brown" families at the border (under the leadership of a lying, corrupt, racist, Islamophobic, homophobic, fiscally irresponsible Republican president) for legally seeking asylum in America.

    It's a ridiculous way to "debate" an issue, Mets and I'm not going to waste my time doing so, especially when you won't even admit that your argument is misleading at best and racist fearmongering at worst.

    Which -- as I continue to point out -- is par for course for your party.
    This isn't really countering the sense that when you're pissed off you go broad, going with big-picture conclusions, which is the opposite of arguing on facts.

    It also seems there's a logical fallacy with a criticism. It would be impossible to admit my argument is one thing at best and another at worst, because I would know exactly what it is.

    I obviously disagree with the notion that it is "misleading at best" (to say nothing of what you think it is at the worst) because I haven't said anything untrue. My comments would be misleading if there weren't intelligent well-informed people on this forum who appear to be liberals who are under the impression Democrats don't want any upper limit on immigration, and that this is a good thing, if Keith Ellison did not receive the unanimous vote of the DNC to be Vice Chair, if his shirt did not say what it was translated as saying, if there was some alternate explanation for why he wore it, if Democrats have proposed clear limits on legal immigration, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by Things Fall Apart View Post
    Were they equally concerned about the black churches that were set on fire? Or did they dismiss them as hoaxes like Mets?
    I missed this post earlier, but that's an inaccurate summary of what I said. Prior to the arrest, I said that these things often had other explanations (which were not always hoaxes.) That was true, and did not suggest that a hate crime was impossible.
    Sincerely,
    Thomas Mets

  9. #399
    Astonishing Member jetengine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    2,990

    Default

    Your obsession with this shirt is bordering on farcical Mets. In a similar vein I could say "Trump held up a Rainbow Flag, so he clearly supports LGBTQ" even when realistically we know he doesnt. So if I was you and people kept saying to me "The transgender ban is an attack on the LGBTQ community" my only response would be "But he held up a flag !"

  10. #400
    Extraordinary Member PaulBullion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    8,388

    Default

    This is stomach turning:

    CLAYTON • Harry Hamm, a longtime KMOX-AM radio broadcaster and entertainment editor, was charged Friday with child pornography possession and child sex abuse.

    Harry J. Hamm, 77, of the 700 block of Treeside Court in Chesterfield, was charged with second-degree statutory sodomy, incest and possession of child pornography, all felonies. A booking photo of Hamm was not immediately available.

    Court documents say that on Wednesday, Hamm had "deviate sexual intercourse" with a relative younger than 17.
    https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...1e3be86b5.html

    Especially reading his online bio, deleted quickly by CBS, but still cached by google:

    Harry has provided interviews on KMOX with some of the brightest and biggest names in the world of show business. Paul McCartney, Harrison Ford, Paul Newman, Julia Roberts, Richard Gere, John Candy, George C. Scott, Red Skelton, Julie Andrews and Gene Hackman are just some of the names. Harry is a founding member of The Theater Circle in St. Louis that annually honors the finest in locally produced stage productions. For over 10 years, Harry was the movie reviewer for CBS stations WWJ in Detroit and KCBS in San Francisco. During that period, he also had a CBS Radio Network feature called “In the Spotlight.”

    After serving in the United States Navy, Harry was the founder and first President of the Development Board of St. Louis Children’s Hospital. He has been active in many other local charitable and community groups, including Wings of Hope, the Heart Association and the Humane Society. Harry holds a Commercial Pilot’s license and has accumulated over 6,000 hours of flying time in a wide variety of piston and jet aircraft.

    Harry was recently awarded the annual Children’s Champion Award by St. Louis Children’s Hospital. The award is given each year to someone in the community that has made significant and successful efforts toward the financial betterment & growth of the Hospital. Currently he is also active in causes on behalf of Cardinal Glennon Hospital. Additionally, Harry is on the Board of the Safety House Foundation.

    In the realm of public service, Harry is a Specialist with the West County EMS & Fire Protection District and is a Commissioner of The Local Emergency Planning Commission in St. Louis County.

    A native St. Louisan, Harry lives in Chesterfield. He has two daughters, Katie and Laura, and a Grandson, Aidan.
    https://webcache.googleusercontent.c...&ct=clnk&gl=ch
    "How does the Green Goblin have anything to do with Herpes?" - The Dying Detective

    Hillary was right!

  11. #401
    Old school comic book fan WestPhillyPunisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    31,188

    Default

    Trump Calls Some Statements In Mueller Report ‘Total Bulls**t’

    The president is quoted in the report complaining about note-taking during a meeting with former White House counsel Don McGahn. Keep it classy, Donnie. I'm sure all you Trump fans on the board must be plenty proud of YOUR president.

    **********

    Elizabeth Warren Calls For Donald Trump Impeachment Hearings

    The 2020 candidate set herself apart from many of her own party’s leaders after the release of the Mueller report. Short and sweet: that's a road to nowhere. Even if the measure passes the House, it'll die a painful death in the Senate where Republicans continue operating under the party wide mandate to protect Trump at all costs. Forget it, Liz, it's a waste of time, so move on.

    **********

    Former Fox News Host: ‘Racist’ Network Was Founded To Demonize ‘The Other’

    “Fox has a reputation for being bigoted and racist, all for very good reason,” Eboni K. Williams told “The Breakfast Club” radio show. Took you that long to figure that out?

    **********

    Another Trump Supporter Arrested After Death Threats Against 3 Democratic Lawmakers

    The calls threatening Cory Booker, Eric Swalwell and Rashida Tlaib came days after Trump posted an attack tweet showing Rep. Ilhan Omar and 9/11 footage. The more Trump incites his unstable followers with his rhetoric, the greater the chances someone might get hurt, or worse on HIS watch.

    **********

    Virginia Officers Fired Over Ties To White Supremacist Groups

    Virginia Capitol Police Sgt. Robert A. Stamm and school resource officer Daniel Morley lost their jobs after anti-fascists connected them to racist groups. Real nice guys, right?
    Avatar: Here's to the late, great Steve Dillon. Best. Punisher. Artist. EVER!

  12. #402
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    10,741

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Mets View Post
    This isn't really countering the sense that when you're pissed off you go broad, going with big-picture conclusions, which is the opposite of arguing on facts.
    I've repeatedly supported my arguments with links and fact-checks, so just stop lying -- I even started out this discussion by labeling the "facts" as they were presented in order to clarify "subjective vs. objective" since you chose to "infer" things based on things like t-shirts rather than actual legislative policy and documented facts about both the Democratic and Republican parties.

    No one is "pissed" here Mets -- if anything, I'm just bored (yet unsurprised) by your dishonesty, which I why I said I'm done wasting time arguing this nonsense: that you have the hypocritical audacity to claim that I'm the one making non-factual "broad based conclusions" on the one hand while simultaneously arguing that one Democrat's t-shirt means that party as a whole supports "open borders" on the other just further proves the ridiculous futility of expecting an honest "debate" with you on the subject.

    If you want to continue to argue that one Democrat wearing an open borders t-shirt somehow justifies caging children and separating families, that's your right, but no one with any sense -- or "morality" -- is going to agree with you.

    That said, if you'd like to move on to the facts that support my classification of the Republican party -- and President -- as "lying, racist, corrupt, homophobic, Islamophobic, and fiscally irresponsible" just let me know and I'll provide plenty of links supporting said facts, just as I've done in the past.

    -----
    "The reaction is now predictable: Argue for treating undocumented immigrants humanely on American soil and you’ll find yourself accused of believing in “open borders.” As if it’s a binary, either/or position. You either believe in building Trump’s “Great Wal.l” You believe in separating children from their parents at the U.S. border. You believe in removing undocumented immigrants from the country who have lived here for decades. Or you believe in “open borders.”

    It’s a blunt rhetorical trick. It’s crass. But it works. So it’s employed by everyone from the current president down to the many supporters and trolls who carry his water on social media.

    Fear mongering, of course, lies at the heart of this accusation. The implication being that critics of Trump’s policies, Democrats in particular, don’t care about safety. They don’t mind who comes into the country. And in turn, that accusation comes coupled with insinuations that those immigrants sneaking across our borders are scary, violent people.

    In fact, the vast majority of Americans—including most Democrats—don’t believe in so-called “open borders.” That’s not to say that no one believes in open borders. Certainly, there are people who do. But most don’t. And open borders is not a policy the Democratic party supports; it’s not part of their platform.

    Regardless of how many times Trump and his supporters may claim otherwise.

    Trump repeatedly claims that Democrats “want open borders.” But nobody in leadership on the left promotes open borders. Nobody. Let’s clarify: not one or two people. Zero percent of the elected leadership of Democrats or independents have suggested the U.S. should have open borders. And there’s certainly no policy of open borders embraced by the Democratic Party.

    Barack Obama certainly didn’t believe in open borders. By 2015, President Obama had deported some 2.5 million people with time remaining in office. That was already half a million more than George W. Bush deported his entire time as president. Some human rights groups referred to Obama as “The Deporter in Chief.” True, those higher numbers can partly be attributed to a change at the time in how we defined a “deportation.” Still, that’s hardly an administration characterized by open borders.

    In 2010, Obama signed a bill designating $600 million to fund 1,500 new Border Patrol agents, customs inspectors, and law enforcement officials along our border with Mexico. He ordered 1,200 National Guard troops to the border. And he oversaw the development of a virtual fence, utilizing surveillance sensors, radar, cameras, and drones, which would span 1,300 miles of our border at a projected cost of almost $7 billion. The Department of Homeland Security ended that effort after $1 billion was spent and the results deemed ineffective and too expensive.

    These are hardly the actions of an “open borders” president...

    And while running in 2016, Clinton’s policy was explicitly to maintain border security. She even remarked that both she and Bernie Sanders supported border fencing in contrast to Trump’s proposed “wall.” She also highlighted the fact that “we have the most secure border we have ever had.” She then pivoted to immigration reform. At no time did she suggest that we should embrace “open borders.”

    Politifact, a bipartisan nonprofit, concluded that Trump’s attempts to paint Clinton’s position as one of open borders “mostly false.”

    https://medium.com/s/story/few-ameri...d-dba12884c133
    Last edited by aja_christopher; 04-20-2019 at 04:36 AM.

  13. #403
    Extraordinary Member PaulBullion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    8,388

    Default

    I would like a conservative who actually adds to the discourse here on a regular basis.

    But I guess conservatism would have to stop being an insane death cult for that to happen.
    "How does the Green Goblin have anything to do with Herpes?" - The Dying Detective

    Hillary was right!

  14. #404
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    10,741

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PaulBullion View Post
    I would like a conservative who actually adds to the discourse here on a regular basis.

    But I guess conservatism would have to stop being an insane death cult for that to happen.
    Notice he's spent nearly a week trying to argue about a t-shirt instead of discussing the Mueller Report and the fact that Democrats have repeatedly proposed strengthening the border.

    Gaslight. Obstruct. Project -- it's really all they know how to do at this point.

    -----
    "Donald Trump declared a national emergency to secure his “Great Wall.” He could have compromised. Depending on your perspective, lately, he has either attempted to compromise (without losing face) or simply moved the goalposts to redefine his wall as pretty much whatever actually ends up getting built.

    The Democrats could compromise by signing onto fence repairs and possible additions to the existing fence where needed. In fact, that’s exactly what they did in their bill with the Republicans, which finally passed. And Trump signed it.

    Unfortunately, however, Trump’s wall has become a metaphor, a metonym for something well beyond any sensible border policy for the U.S.—something more to do with Trump’s towering ego and his irrational, fearful, and punitive immigration policy.

    So Trump will keep complaining that the Democrats won’t support his wall and [and Mets will argue] that they “want open borders,” even as they enact legislation providing border protection.

    Yes, it’s disingenuous of Trump [and Mets]. You might even say, he’s lying.

    No doubt, however, he’ll continue to do it."

    https://medium.com/s/story/few-ameri...d-dba12884c133
    Last edited by aja_christopher; 04-20-2019 at 03:00 AM.

  15. #405
    Ultimate Member Tendrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    14,330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aja_christopher View Post
    If you want to continue to argue that one Democrat wearing an open borders t-shirt somehow justifies caging children and separating families, that's your right, but no one with any sense -- or "morality" -- is going to agree with you.
    One democrat in a highish position wearing a t-shirt means the entire party is for open borders, while a daily profile rooted in things said and done on the extreme nature of Republican politicians on many of the things you've mentioned is an unfair characterization of its elected officials.

    According to someone around here, anyway.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •