Neonmoon

You’ve never seen 4 girls with a dildo before?

If they lose Bussey, they would have a score 224.37 and ranked #28 assuming no other additions/subtractions

NC? Interesting

Fuck it. I‘ve been trying to help you in this thread because you DO agree on things as shown in this post below where you state more people can be let in and the Government funds the costs of doing so. It’s not a problem. We have the money. We can make a process. But you lack basic fucking reading comprehension skills It’s a manufactured crises because we control the fucking solution. If we wanted to fix it we could. Congress could pass legislation to implement new systems and allocate appropriate resources. Please list all the immigration reform bills submitted by party for the past 50 years? You’re going to be shocked by which party doesn’t submit any plans, or let bills out of committee, or on the floor for a vote. People are posting anyone who shows up should get in to shine light of the real problem, which you have a real hard time comprehending for some reason. Immigration is not bad. While illegal immigration is against the law, there wouldn’t be an illegal immigration issue if Congress would do their fucking jobs, which goes back to the original issues of who’s stopping immigration reform from passing.

My foray into this conversation is to illustrate that everyone in this fucking thread probably actually agrees on the entire issue once you get past the miscommunication, miscomprehension, posting styles, etc., which is likely a microcosm of most issues in this stupid world. People just love to bitch at each other without trying to understand the other person.

I agree with you. I was trying to help bridge the gap in understanding. Many times people talk past each other in posts, and reply back with little one line quips in a bread crumb trail posting format that is not conducive to promoting comprehension. To be sure, there are general comprehension issues on the other side. It would be much easier if people took the time to actually type out their thoughts more thoroughly like you do often For example Poster 1: Why not let them all in? Poster 2: We can’t handle that many people. Our resources are overwhelmed! Poster 1(actual): No one has suggest an actual problem for letting all immigrants in yet. Poster 1 (alternative): The United States has the resources to handle the current volume of immigrants at the southern border, and much more, yes even millions. These immigrants will not overwhelm cities and towns or ruin anything. They will not become part of the welfare state. They can work, in fact, many counties require proof of employment. Could the US implement a similar system? Yes. The United States needs more labor and these immigrants provide that. There are tons of cities and towns in the US that would be happy to receive new labor. The actual issue is the lack of political willpower to fix the current inefficient system and to allocate sufficient resources. Put systems in place to efficiently process applications, issues work permits, and let people contribute

I agree. I was speaking generally

This website is…amazing https://elonmusk.today/

The problem has been presented. Not enough resources to support the additional people. Now you keep saying it’s not a problem. Please explain why it’s not a problem in your opinion.

You posit that immigrants are overwhelmingly our resources. That is true Who controls our resources? Congress. The negative consequence of letting them all in could be fixed by fixing the system aka allocating more resources They’re saying the only real problem is Congress.

You don’t think overwhelming a system is a problem? It is in nature. You always believe there is a fix? Like, we can always make a bigger boat? What about individual rights? Meaning am I always morally obligated to add another person to my life raft if the next person tips it over?

In my opinion, some are their posts were not conducive to easy communication, but I replied with my opinion trying to breach the disconnect. I’m sorry if I offended you with my previous post, it was certainly not my intent. Your post does illuminate a common issue with communication and comprehension in general, which is only magnified by the format of anonymous message board posts Take the post “Why not let them all in?” In reference to the immigration issue. You read that post and presumably saw red. The idea of letting in all immigrants is beyond comprehension. In fact, in this thread you have used it as an example the CR is unreasonable. The post meant only one thing. It’s black and white. The issue, is that’s not true. Comprehension is entirely subjective When I read that post, however, I had a different comprehension entirely. thought about what the poster was trying to communicate. What would be the harm? What are the reasons we can’t? What is stopping us? Do we have the resources? Are immigrants unwanted for some reason? What point is he asking the question for? I don’t actually believe they want 50 million immigrants. I just believe they want to have a functioning immigration system. I also believe they were trying to point out that immigration isn’t a negative. (They probably could have used more words or been more direct). Is too much immigration a negative? That’s a valid question.

The current process by which legal immigration is determined, especially considering the realities of the southern border, is not working efficiently or effectively for immigrants, asylum seekers, or residents of the southern states. It is a problem. The process is determined by lawmakers in the United States, and thus it is in their purview to fix the problem. We can talk about solutions to the problem but they all devolve into the same rabbit hole of facts. The people responsible for fixing the problem have not. When any party has controlled the Presidency, House & Senate, zero immigration reform has passed. @Dbeasy is making the argument that too much immigration will lead to a snowball effect, which will overload US resources. There is some merit to examining resources, but any slippery slope argument originates in fallacy. @hobbes2702 is making the argument that immigration is not illegal, and with our economy currently needing more workers, what is the harm in having more immigrants? He is not advocating for illegal immigration, but fixing the current process to allow more immigration The resources argument might seem silly considering the billions we spend on [insert hot topic], but no one has unlimited resources, or more importantly the political might to win its approval. Here is why these topics get so twisted. People strip the layers of nuance down to simple talking points. The issue with boiling things down, is you lose a lot of the meaning 1. Following rules is good. 2. Sneaking across the border is illegal 3. 50,000 illegal crossings a day is too much 4. We don’t have a system to deal with that many people 5. We should correct this problem i agree with all those talking points. It doesn’t mean I want less immigration. I just want people to follow the rules. I don’t think 50,000 sneaking across the border is a good thing. But I also recognize the current system is not working. How do we fix that? Which comes back to the same problem. Congress

I will go read it. Okay, I just read the pages from this year. Here is the issue. No one is agreeing with your interpretation of the issue. That’s okay. That’s life. Either try to understand why they’re disagreeing with you, or don’t. I always lean towards trying to learn more If you think in that thread “the CR” is refusing to criticize the administration, I would posit maybe you’re not understanding everyone’s position correctly. That’s the nicest way I can say that

Because Biden represents the Blue Team and Trump represents the Red Team. Welcome to Politics I agree with you. Both are too old and neither should be allowed to run due to age limits. But we don’t live in King Neon’s land of rules

It keeps being explained to you but you are aren’t comprehending the answers

Respectfully I disagree. I know myself, and probably @Brisketexan often point out how fucking terrible the Democrats are at most simple acts of government, or not shitting their pants when handed an easy layup. Maybe I’m wrong, or biased, but I’d love to see some evidence to the contrary.

Mocking Biden as “shit for brains” could be construed as a criticism, right? And you just proved @Celery Man point again.

Shot Chaser Seriously: There is tons of valid criticism levied at Biden in the Dark Brandon thread. I know, I have levied it. You’re never going to escape the “but Trump/Obama/Bush/Clinton” discourse. Nature of the beast

Reddit’s format makes my eyes bleed

“righties” are not being crowdsourced. Pure made up bullshit The only posters that are crowdsourced are the same 2 trolls that have been banned like 40 times but keep weirdly coming back to a place they are not wanted like real sociopaths.

You can’t buy beer/wine at Liquor stores in NC Idiots everywhere