Politically charged altercations at Whataburger

[RandomIdoit 655]

5 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

libs with their shitty, "America should be a good nation" bullshit, am I right?

 I guess it depends on your definition of good. Enforcing our immigration laws does not make us a bad nation. Asking people to follow the rules and immigrate legally does not make us a bad nation. Separating families as a deterrent/punishment does make us a bad nation but most rational people do not support this policy.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

11 minutes ago, RandomIdoit said:

 I guess it depends on your definition of good. Enforcing our immigration laws does not make us a bad nation. Asking people to follow the rules and immigrate legally does not make us a bad nation. Separating families as a deterrent/punishment does make us a bad nation but most rational people do not support this policy.

Does murdering people on sight trying to illegally cross the border make us a bad nation?

because this “enforcing the law” shtick has a slippery slope when you start jailing babies in the name of national security.

Edited July 11, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[RandomIdoit 655]

7 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Does murdering people on sight trying to illegally cross the border make us a bad nation?

because this “enforcing the law” shtick has a slippery slope when you start jailing babies in the name of national security.

Is anyone on here advocating to set up machine gun nests along the border to gun down people? I think most people want immigrants to wait their turn like so many people have to do. I think most people would like to see the asylum cases heard in a reasonable amount of time, say 30 days, not 2+ years. Determine if they are eligible for asylum, then either welcome them in or send them home. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

3 minutes ago, RandomIdoit said:

anyone on here advocating to set up machine gun nests along the border to gun down people?

No one was advocating separating families or jailing kids but it happened.  There still has yet to be any consequences.  

Who is going to stop the administration from going full genocide, you know, if they happen to decide to because deterrence. 

Edited July 11, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[RandomIdoit 655]

19 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

No one was advocating separating families or jailing kids but it happened.  There still has yet to be any consequences.  

Who is going to stop the administration from going full genocide, you know, if they happen to decide to because deterrence. 

How would they "go full genocide"? Is Trump going to issue an executive order to kill all immigrants? 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

1 hour ago, RandomIdoit said:

How would they "go full genocide"? Is Trump going to issue an executive order to kill all immigrants? 

Well, to determine how they would do it, let’s first examine how they did what is going on now:

(From @juddlegum)

 

1. This has been happening in slow motion but it’s worth reviewing how 3000 children were separated from their families and why nearly all of them remain separated 

 

It’s an absolute atrocity.

 

2. Some months ago, Trump adopted a “zero tolerance policy” advocated by hardliners. We started incarcerating people indefinitely for misdemeanors, even if they had kids.

 

3. When word first got out, Trump blamed a “law” passed by “Democrats.”

 

This was a lie.

 

4. Then Secretary Nielsen claimed that there was actually no family separation policy

 

This was also a lie.

 

As criticism mounted Trump signed an executive order that he claimed “ended” family separation 

 

This was also a lie.

 

The order replaced family separation with indefinite family detention, which is illegal

 

The executive order also did nothing to reunite the thousands of kids who were already separated from their families.

 

Congress promised to act to fix the problem.

 

Paul Ryan promised a vote on a “fix” on June 21.

 

No vote was ever held

 

Meanwhile, the ACLU sued and a judge ordered the kids to be reunited with their families.

 

The deadline for the kids under five was today. For the other kids, it’s later this month.

 

So far the Trump administration has been able to reunite no more than a couple of dozen kids

 

Through the lawsuit, we learned the Trump administration lost track of some of the parents. Others were deported without their kids.

 

In the meantime, another court confirmed that indefinite family detention is illegal.

 

So where does that leave us?

 

The administration is unwilling or unable to reunite the kids who have already been separated from their parents.

 

They have no workable solution moving forward. They are insisting on “zero tolerance” and have no way to do it w/o separating families.

 

Trump has continued his hardline rhetoric 

 

Congress is doing nothing and hasn’t even held a hearing.

 

The tragedy continues. It gets worse every day. /end

 

 

 

Seems like the blueprint for egregious state sponsored human rights violations has already been well established.

[Guest]

Clutch to your hate, bro.

[RandomIdoit 655]

10 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Well, to determine how they would do it, let’s first examine how they did what is going on now:

(From @juddlegum)

 

1. This has been happening in slow motion but it’s worth reviewing how 3000 children were separated from their families and why nearly all of them remain separated 

 

It’s an absolute atrocity.

 

2. Some months ago, Trump adopted a “zero tolerance policy” advocated by hardliners. We started incarcerating people indefinitely for misdemeanors, even if they had kids.

 

3. When word first got out, Trump blamed a “law” passed by “Democrats.”

 

This was a lie.

 

4. Then Secretary Nielsen claimed that there was actually no family separation policy

 

This was also a lie.

 

As criticism mounted Trump signed an executive order that he claimed “ended” family separation 

 

This was also a lie.

 

The order replaced family separation with indefinite family detention, which is illegal

 

The executive order also did nothing to reunite the thousands of kids who were already separated from their families.

 

Congress promised to act to fix the problem.

 

Paul Ryan promised a vote on a “fix” on June 21.

 

No vote was ever held

 

Meanwhile, the ACLU sued and a judge ordered the kids to be reunited with their families.

 

The deadline for the kids under five was today. For the other kids, it’s later this month.

 

So far the Trump administration has been able to reunite no more than a couple of dozen kids

 

Through the lawsuit, we learned the Trump administration lost track of some of the parents. Others were deported without their kids.

 

In the meantime, another court confirmed that indefinite family detention is illegal.

 

So where does that leave us?

 

The administration is unwilling or unable to reunite the kids who have already been separated from their parents.

 

They have no workable solution moving forward. They are insisting on “zero tolerance” and have no way to do it w/o separating families.

 

Trump has continued his hardline rhetoric 

 

Congress is doing nothing and hasn’t even held a hearing.

 

The tragedy continues. It gets worse every day. /end

 

 

 

Seems like the blueprint for egregious state sponsored human rights violations has already been well established.

Would you expect Congress and SCOTUS to sit idle if there was an actual genocidal executive order? 

[Guest]

16 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

Yeah, I provided you a list of "left-ish" and "not so left-ish" issues just a few hours ago.  Crickets.

I think it would probably be better to let this drop, because dislike for posters (as opposed to what's being said) is cluttering everything up.

Disagreeing on politics has never equalled disliking someone on a personal level for me.

 

I just get a kick out of the denial of left leaning posts/ ideas.  You own yours above, so my apologies for the call out.

 

Huck thinks he’s some objective middle of the roader.  He ain’t.  He might be the n the middle of our populace here, but it is 75-80% lefties here.

 

There’s zero doubt that most of us could meet for a Surly HH or a ballgame and have a blast and talk shit as friends.  Having different views is the spice of life,or the “anti-boring.”

 

 

[jimmyjazz 45,962]

If Huckleberry has an ethos, it's "rational thought above all else".  (At least it's an ethos.)  I sometimes think he's an algorithm. 

To place him anywhere left of center is lunacy.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

8 minutes ago, RandomIdoit said:

Would you expect Congress and SCOTUS to sit idle if there was an actual genocidal executive order? 

There was no executive order to separate families or put kids in detention facilities across the country, yet they did it under the guise of a “zero tolerance” policy.

Cameras are still not allowed in the detention centers our tax dollars are paying for.  They are brazenly concealing truth from the American people RIGHT NOW. 

It’s absurd to think there would be some executive order to commit genocide.  

Edited July 11, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[jimmyjazz 45,962]

The optimist in me thinks "no way would our military carry out such an order", and I'm probably right.

But our paramilitary would.  It would be trivial to find or enlist plenty of hard right bigots who would happily shoot whatever target they were ordered to shoot.  This is where we are now, and there is no safeguard.  None whatsoever.

[RandomIdoit 655]

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

There was no executive order to separate families or put kids in detention facilities across the country.

Cameras are still not allowed in the detention centers our tax dollars are paying for.  They are brazenly concealing truth from the American people RIGHT NOW. 

It’s absurd to think there would be some executive order to commit genocide.

So how would the "administration going full genocide" as you said earlier work then? Trump just calls up some peeps and is like "hey, shoot any brown person you see, okay?" and then they are like "sure thing boss." And everyone in the country just sits by idly while it happens? 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

35 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

The optimist in me thinks "no way would our military carry out such an order", and I'm probably right.

But our paramilitary would.  It would be trivial to find or enlist plenty of hard right bigots who would happily shoot whatever target they were ordered to shoot.  This is where we are now, and there is no safeguard.  None whatsoever.

The free press and public outrage are the only safeguard and they are under attack from this administration as well.

Edited July 11, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Kilgorehorn 308]

1 minute ago, RandomIdoit said:

So how would the "administration going full genocide" as you said earlier work then? Trump just calls up some peeps and is like "hey, shoot any brown person you see, okay?" and then they are like "sure thing boss." And everyone in the country just sits by idly while it happens?  

Unfortunately, this doesn't seem so outlandish anymore.

[Anastasis 23,473]

Just now, jimmyjazz said:

The optimist in me thinks "no way would our military carry out such an order", and I'm probably right.

 But our paramilitary would.  It would be trivial to find or enlist plenty of hard right bigots who would happily shoot whatever target they were ordered to shoot.  This is where we are now, and there is no safeguard.  None whatsoever.

Jimmy, I'd like to introduce you to the law enforcement community... 

[RandomIdoit 655]

11 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

The optimist in me thinks "no way would our military carry out such an order", and I'm probably right.

But our paramilitary would.  It would be trivial to find or enlist plenty of hard right bigots who would happily shoot whatever target they were ordered to shoot.  This is where we are now, and there is no safeguard.  None whatsoever.

What would the number of bigots be versus the number of non-bigots that would defend them?

[jimmyjazz 45,962]

4 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Jimmy, I'd like to introduce you to the law enforcement community... 

Sure, that's a big part of the "paramilitary" I referred to.  But it's also ICE, weekend warriors just itching to get a shot off, etc.  In the end, it could happen.  And the right would scowl and be concerned, and talk about "well, they were entering illegally, and the Dems are impeding our attempts to build the wall, so unfortunately this is what has to happen".

[jimmyjazz 45,962]

3 minutes ago, RandomIdoit said:

What would the number of bigots be versus the number of non-bigots that would defend them?

If the non-bigots aren't there what does it matter?  Do you think it would be difficult to modify the way border security personnel are deployed?  It's the fucking wild west.  It's literally almost 2,000 miles in Texas alone.  We aren't talking about a bridge with a toll booth.

Edited July 11, 2018 by jimmyjazz

[Brian Fantana 6,689]

19 minutes ago, RandomIdoit said:

So how would the "administration going full genocide" as you said earlier work then? Trump just calls up some peeps and is like "hey, shoot any brown person you see, okay?" and then they are like "sure thing boss." And everyone in the country just sits by idly while it happens? 

Uhhh yeah

That's generally how these things happen 

[FondrenRoad 4,378]

6 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

If the non-bigots aren't there what does it matter?  Do you think it would be difficult to modify the way border security personnel are deployed?  It's the fucking wild west.  It's literally almost 2,000 miles in Texas alone.  We aren't talking about a bridge with a toll booth.

A genocide would not need to be ordered. LEOs would just slip down the slippery slope. 

Thin blue line happens with every LEO agency. There aren't that many actual bad apples. The problem is that the supposed good apples cover for the bad ones.  If PDs cover up murders, why wouldn't CBP or ICE.  

Plus, you're talking about an agency who has employees who will take a nursing baby from his mother, tell her that he is going to get a bath, and then never bring him back. You have to be a special kind of sick to be able to sleep at night after doing that. 

[Chrispy 132]

Genocide huh? This is exactly why I read the political forum, keep it coming guys. 

[jimmyjazz 45,962]

1 minute ago, Chrispy said:

Genocide huh? This is exactly why I read the political forum, keep it coming guys. 

How many dead browns would be too many?

[RandomIdoit 655]

5 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

How many dead browns would be too many?

Sane people do not want them dead. They want them to enter legally and to have their cases heard and ruled on in a timely fashion without letting them run around the country before they are approved for asylum. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

1 minute ago, RandomIdoit said:

Sane people do not want them dead. They want them to enter legally and to have their cases heard and ruled on in a timely fashion without letting them run around the country before they are approved for asylum. 

Sane people aren’t in control of the government.

In fact, the guy at the top publicly advocated for killing the families of terrorists, including the women and children.

[Anastasis 23,473]

13 minutes ago, Chrispy said:

Genocide huh? This is exactly why I read the political forum, keep it coming guys. 

 

Edited July 11, 2018 by Anastasis

[Chrispy 132]

14 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

How many dead browns would be too many?

A lot more for a conversation about genocide to be taken seriously. 

[jimmyjazz 45,962]

2 minutes ago, Chrispy said:

A lot more for a conversation about genocide to be taken seriously. 

OK, let's change the conversation to "killing some browns".  Is that OK with you?

Don't answer you fucking toolbag.

[XR4ticlone 122]

11 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

It's quite stunning how ignorant you are of US law.

No...US law is very clear.

You cannot just come live here because you want to...which is pretty much exactly how every other country in the world operates as well. 

Walking here from bubblefuck and showing up at the US border doesn't change anything...

Having kids with you doesn't change that...

This is why a WALL is critical.  

Mexico's new Hugo Chavez clone is going to butt fuck them into socialist hell...and we need a wall soon.  Nothing good comes from having this dip shit in charge of Mexico...and the border is going to be over run.

A majority of Mexicans picked this dip shit...they now get to suffer.  Life is full of choices...the bad ones you get to pay for.   Me...I'm sick and tired of paying for other peoples fuck ups and stupidity.  Build the wall...let Darwinism sort the rest out. 

 

[jimmyjazz 45,962]

2 minutes ago, XR4ticlone said:

No...US law is very clear.

You cannot just come live here because you want to...which is pretty much exactly how every other country in the world operates as well. 

Walking here from bubblefuck and showing up at the US border doesn't change anything...

Having kids with you doesn't change that...

This is why a WALL is critical.  

Mexico's new Hugo Chavez clone is going to butt fuck them into socialist hell...and we need a wall soon.  Nothing good comes from having this dip shit in charge of Mexico...and the border is going to be over run.

A majority of Mexicans picked this dip shit...they now get to suffer.  Life is full of choices...the bad ones you get to pay for.   Me...I'm sick and tired of paying for other peoples fuck ups and stupidity.  Build the wall...let Darwinism sort the rest out. 

 

Yeah, so like I said, it's stunning how ignorant you are of US law.  But please, keep posting.  Rack 'em, even.

[Chrispy 132]

2 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

OK, let's change the conversation to "killing some browns".  Is that OK with you?

Don't answer you fucking toolbag.

It may be time for medication, Jimmy. 

[RandomIdoit 655]

Just now, XR4ticlone said:

This is why a WALL is critical.  

Just eliminate all the incentives that they have to come here illegally. If they cannot work, do not get birthright citizenship for their children, do not get government assistance for their children, and are deported immediately, there will be less incentive to come illegally. We can raise the amount of people we take in legally at the same time.

[hayden_horn 11,362]

1 hour ago, RandomIdoit said:

So how would the "administration going full genocide" as you said earlier work then? Trump just calls up some peeps and is like "hey, shoot any brown person you see, okay?" and then they are like "sure thing boss." And everyone in the country just sits by idly while it happens? 

let's replace genocide with "forcibly removing small children from their parents without due process and putting both in separate prisons thousands of miles from one another without proper paperwork or tracking as though we don't even care about their humanity." 

here we are. 

now how did that happen?

[jimmyjazz 45,962]

30 minutes ago, Chrispy said:

It may be time for medication, Jimmy. 

Do what you gotta do.

[hayden_horn 11,362]

29 minutes ago, RandomIdoit said:

Just eliminate all the incentives that they have to come here illegally. If they cannot work, do not get birthright citizenship for their children, do not get government assistance for their children, and are deported immediately, there will be less incentive to come illegally. We can raise the amount of people we take in legally at the same time.

or, i don't know, stay with me here, actually create a guest worker program so that they can come here legally, do the work legally, pay taxes, and go home when finished. or allow them to stay for a certain amount of time with a path to citizenship. i know, immigration is so complex. we better keep doing it he way we currently are. it works so well.

[RandomIdoit 655]

1 minute ago, hayden_horn said:

or, i don't know, stay with me here, actually create a guest worker program so that they can come here legally, do the work legally, pay taxes, and go home when finished. or allow them to stay for a certain amount of time with a path to citizenship. i know, immigration is so complex. we better keep doing it he way we currently are. it works so well.

That would be a legal avenue. But that still does not remove the incentives for people wanting to come illegally. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

2 minutes ago, RandomIdoit said:

That would be a legal avenue. But that still does not remove the incentives for people wanting to come illegally. 

You know what remove the incentive to come here illegally?  We become Russia or North Korea.

It’s a good thing people WANT to come here legally or illegally.

[hayden_horn 11,362]

6 minutes ago, RandomIdoit said:

That would be a legal avenue. But that still does not remove the incentives for people wanting to come illegally. 

well, except it does. what do you think the incentives for people wanting to come illegally are?

[David Dennison 18,860]

1 hour ago, Chrispy said:

Genocide huh? This is exactly why I read the political forum, keep it coming guys. 

We do have a history of it.

[David Dennison 18,860]

46 minutes ago, XR4ticlone said:

No...US law is very clear.

You cannot just come live here because you want to...which is pretty much exactly how every other country in the world operates as well. 

Walking here from bubblefuck and showing up at the US border doesn't change anything...

Having kids with you doesn't change that...

This is why a WALL is critical.  

Mexico's new Hugo Chavez clone is going to butt fuck them into socialist hell...and we need a wall soon.  Nothing good comes from having this dip shit in charge of Mexico...and the border is going to be over run.

A majority of Mexicans picked this dip shit...they now get to suffer.  Life is full of choices...the bad ones you get to pay for.   Me...I'm sick and tired of paying for other peoples fuck ups and stupidity.  Build the wall...let Darwinism sort the rest out. 

 

You're never going to get a wall. The logistics in Texas alone make it impossible.

[RandomIdoit 655]

4 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

let's replace genocide with "forcibly removing small children from their parents without due process and putting both in separate prisons thousands of miles from one another without proper paperwork or tracking as though we don't even care about their humanity." 

here we are. 

now how did that happen?

 

Not agreeing with it but you asked. This is how it happened as far as I could tell:

Trump did not want people released into the United States that had not been approved for asylum. Because of Reno vs. Flores, children could not be detained more than 20 days, so they had to be sent to centers where they could be housed in the mean time. His motivations were to punish and deter immigrants from coming here. Now he plans to make them waive their child’s right to release and be detained indefinitely as a family, or exercise their child’s right to release and be separated from your child once more.

[David Dennison 18,860]

1 minute ago, RandomIdoit said:

Not agreeing with it but you asked. This is how it happened as far as I could tell:

Trump did not want people released into the United States that had not been approved for asylum. Because of Reno vs. Flores, children could not be detained more than 20 days, so they had to be sent to centers where they could be housed in the mean time. His motivations were to punish and deter immigrants from coming here. Now he plans to make them waive their child’s right to release and be detained indefinitely as a family, or exercise their child’s right to release and be separated from your child once more.

"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

[RandomIdoit 655]

6 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

well, except it does. what do you think the incentives for people wanting to come illegally are?

Birthright citizenship and welfare and medical care for their children who will be born here. 

[RandomIdoit 655]

11 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

It’s a good thing people WANT to come here legally or illegally.

It is! But that doesn't mean it's a good thing when they do come here illegally and they should be allowed to.

[David Dennison 18,860]

Just now, RandomIdoit said:

Birthright citizenship and welfare and medical care for their children who will be born here. 

That darn 14th Amendment!

[jimmyjazz 45,962]

4 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

That darn 14th Amendment!

That's OK, Kavanaugh will kill it.  BAD birthright.  BAD due process.

[RandomIdoit 655]

4 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Emma Lazarus wrote that for a fundraiser and you act like it is the law of the land.

[RandomIdoit 655]

5 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

That darn 14th Amendment!

Is it not an incentive for them to come illegally?

[hayden_horn 11,362]

2 minutes ago, RandomIdoit said:

Birthright citizenship and welfare and medical care for their children who will be born here. 

i keep seeing welfare listed by people. i'm sure there are stats out there that compare the number of domestic citizens on some form of welfare to those illegals on some form of welfare.

and on citizenship: why is american citizenship so sacrosanct? i've started wondering that. i may start a topic on that or pose the question on the DACA thread. i love america. but i was a white kid who grew up in the dallas suburbs because i happened to be born to two american citizens who were successful people. i didn't do anything in particular to earn it.

and of course we should provide medical care for children born here. 

but once again, i return to the guest worker program. if we allow guest workers to come in, legally, get a worker card, work here with no issues for a year or two or three or whatever, then they can bring their family over. what's wrong with that? is that not the american fucking dream? if we had a sane immigration policy, it removes most or if not all of the negative illegal immigration. i feel like i'm taking crazy pills, the solution seems so easy. it's kind of like the drug war. oh, wait. maybe it's EXACTLY like the drug war in that we perpetuate a terrible policy for other reasons than those stated.

[Chrispy 132]

26 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Do what you gotta do.

Meh, enough of the insults. If you feel there’s a genocide upon us, I suppose there’s not much I can say to convince you otherwise.